05:00 - To go one further on your room/chamber example, there are actually plenty of "doublets" in English where we inherited a Norman-French word, then later adopted the Parisian-French version of it to express some slightly different or nuanced meaning, i.e. convey/convoy, reward/regard, warden/guardian, warranty/guarantee, wile/guile. The 1200s were a fascinating time when a flood of French words replaced their Old English equivalents (which is why we say "letters" instead of "book-runes", "serve" instead of "herren", "grace" instead of "milch" and "marble" instead of "marmon-stone"), while some other Saxon words clung on in the face of this trend; we still say "axe", for instance, despite the best efforts of contemporary writers to replace it with the more faddish "gisarme". Plenty of Viking words which survived in English well into the Middle Ages also got lost around the same era, with the French "honour" replacing "mensk" and "scorn" replacing "hething," even though the latter comes from the same root as "hate", which survived to flourish in modern English alongside the French import "detest". I largely agree with you that mass-communication is liable to standardise and homogenise English in future, but the language still evolves wherever it comes into contact with other tongues, and if at some point we become an interplanetary species there's a fair chance you'll see linguistic divergences taking place on other planets as they once took place across oceans.
I feel like though, changes in languages are slowed down by widepread education: a large amount of changes over time in several languages came from words "badly" pronounced or badly used. The misuse sometimes came to replace the "correct" version (the "silent letters" are a frequent consequence). I'm not saying it's the main reason but since education emphasize the correct use of your language so much, I think changes will at least be a bit slower. Unless it's about adopting words from other languages.
A lot of Americans are fond of claiming their accent is closer to that of Shakespeare but in reality they were comparing it to modern English dialects (like estury or Essex accent) in the studies. Dialects like that of Shropshire, Coastal Suffolk and rural Dorset are MUCH closer.
When I moved from a School in Retford (Nottinghamshire) to a School down South in Wiltshire, I wondered why the local kids were speaking American...It was actually just the West Country accent
I have heard reconstructions of Shakespeare's accent and I agree with you completely! Certain present day English accents are closer to Shakespeare's than the general American accent.
It's a myth Americans repeat again and again even though it's been debunked. Why they do that I have no idea. And what's even funnier is that is not only them that do that, it's practically every former colony. It seems to be a trait shared between the former colonies of the UK, Portugal, Spain and France, as they all claim the same thing regarding their accents
Shakespeare was and is THE English writer, Connor. There's usually questions from at least one of his plays in every English exam in the UK - you have to study them as part of the course!
What I find fascinating is that because it was the Upper-Class who originally spoke French, words we consider more posh or formal are latin based while the opposite is true, more informal words come from the Lower-Class of Germanic Origin.
Since I understand English very well it also makes it easy to understand quite a lot of French. Also old english is closer to my mother tounge Norwegian. We have a lot of similar words.
I loved reading Chaucer in school back in the 1960s, for some unknown reason I found understanding it and writing essays really easy, I always finished way ahead of everyone else; the brain is fascinating!
It's weird when you hear Shakespeare original pronunciation, because you can hear so many different accents rolled into one. The most prominent to me sounds very west country, almost like pirate speech. But you can also hear (to my northern ears) Lancashire and Yorkshire in there. I suppose it depends on where you're from, it wouldn't surprise me if someone from Newcastle could hear Geordie in there. One accent that is completely vacant in original Shakespeare is Received Pronunciation, which is obviously how it is mainly heard today. The fact that there is so much rhoticity in original Shakespeare, I'm not surprised why Americans can hear their accent in there too, but when I first heard it, all I could think of was west country, not American.
Loved this video! The origin of 'They' has been contested fairly recently - it could have developed from one of the Old English pronouns ('ey' I think, but that could be wrong) but I hope it does turn out to be Scandinavian - it's very rare for basic grammar words and pronouns to be borrowed from another language so that would be very cool 😄Also, someone else said it but Shakespeare's accent being closer to American is hard to judge. I think the major reason people say it's more American is because he pronounced his R sounds after vowels (like the R in 'chair') but a significant proportion of British accents do this too! I love the language videos, thanks Connor! ❤
Although this video isn't incorrect, its highly simplified. Its exaggerations makes it sound like French loans and synonyms were somehow uncommon in other Germanic or European languages. But my small Germanic language alone uses thousands of French derived words and word stems. And as we kept much of the pronuncuation fairly intact and instead changed the spellings to fit our system (the opposite of English in that regard), some foreginers actually think we sound a bit French. Our historical lexicon (SAOB) currently has about 500 000 words listed, while the comprehensive Oxford dictionary sports about 650 000 words. Not a huge difference, given that English is spoken all over the world and our language only by about 11 000 000 people.
I agree that the possibility of English splitting into two new languages due to isolation is not possible anymore. In fact, I believe British and American (and Canadian, Australian etc) English are growing closer together. I'm in my 70s and my observation over several decades is that Americanisms are being absorbed into British English (through movies, TV, music, the internet etc) and particularly since the rise of the internet, I hear more British English words and constructions being used by Americans.
Some food for thought. Words and speech are still changing. If you consider RUclipsrs, And tiktoker, gamers and streamers they have added a whole list of words and phrases and pronunciations to the language. I still find myself looking up words
You are right about a smaller world. My youngest grandson, native of southern England, half Thai, half English, speaks with a mild American accent due to the internet.
Language change happens for more reasons than just isolation. We develop dialects for different communities too: the accent, vocabulary, and grammar you use depends on who you’re speaking with. This is done to show your identification with a particular culture or your recognition of a particular relationship with the listener. This code switching happens automatically even when both parties understand both dialects. British English dialects, for example, are undergoing a lot of change at the moment including one where the low register version (informal, here signalling similar rank) is losing the ‘th’ sound but the high register version isn’t. This sort of thing also happened in the Roman Empire leading to ‘v’ and ‘u’ becoming distinct in the low register (vulgate) dialect and staying the same in the high register (classical) one. I may have butcher some of that though. It’s been many years since I’ve studied diachronic language change. Unfortunately, once a linguist always a linguist. It’s our curse to never shut up about it. Fun current language change fact: there is some evidence that English is gaining a fourth - and fourth wall breaking - person (with the plural pronoun ‘chat’) to refer to observers watching but not involved in events.
Connor: This from the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC) ..... "The early modern English language was less than 100 years old in 1590 when Shakespeare was writing. No dictionaries had yet been written and most documents were still written in Latin. He contributed 1,700 words to the English language because he was the first author to write them down."
I don't know what you were trying to say Connor. The most obvious issues to me is how we borrow phrases from elsewhere. Recently the BBC has been using phrases like 'thrown under a bus' and 'double down', phrases nobody in Britain would have heard fifteen years ago as they are a recent import from America. Local accents, which are a separate issue, are starting to vanish through, I believe, university education here in Europe. Local accents are often viewed as a sign of ignorance or stupidity, which is a shame.
Melvyn Bragg's "History of the English language" is also excellent. He asserts that the West Country (South west England) retains a lot more of the Anglo Saxon English than anywhere in Britain.
Much as I like Melyyn Bragg, he is not a linguist, so I personally don't set much store by what he claims or asserts regarding English, especially when he talks about "Anglo Saxon English" which linguistically was never a thing.
There was a documentary called "Mongrel Nation"in three parts a few years ago on the English and the nation, presented by Eddie Izzard. Apparently, the nearest language to English is Frisian, spoken in the north-west of the Netherlands. In the programme, Eddie learns a few sentences of Old English and then goes over to West Friesland and finds that he can have a simple conversation with the locals there. There is a bit on RUclips, unfortunately the quality isn't that good?
The beauty of the mongrel nature of English is the ability to nuance; the particular sound of the word chosen to describe the same thing can give subtle (sometimes not so subtle) emphasis to the way we view what we're describing. I don't mind new words being adopted, what I don't like is when people become restricted to more modern idioms in their use of vocabulary - life is a complex process, & the more words we have to describe it the better. Gadzooks y'all.
Not just since the Normans, some French words continued to interweave until the 19th century at least, since it was the lengua Franca of European court.
I think you are right Connor that mass communication will probably consolidate the language with fewer and fewer separate dialects and accents. If you listen to the various English accents around the UK they are not as strong as they were. Old recordings of different accents from before World War II show how strong those accents were, especially country accents. BTW the accents from the late 1500s London and the South (Shakespeares time) were closer to various West Country accents.
@McJibbin If it hasn't already been suggested to you, you'd might like might like to react to a British sitcom called The Royle Family (and it's not about the actual Royal Family). It's about a family from Manchester, England (who basically sit around watching TV). Anyway keep up the great work. Mark, from Ireland 😊
Regarding your comments at the end about language not diverting anymore. I think the spread of modern communications will prevent an entirely new language between Britain and the USA but i dont think it will impact the divergence of dialects. As English becomes such a popular second language we might find that the use of English in countries where english isn't a first language will introduce different dialects and vocabulary and may also change speech patterns and grammar concepts, e.g. sentence structures may start to reflect the grammar of the country's first language. Consider the variatikns jn the German language. The German language we are taught at school is considered to be High German in German speaking nations, but in German speaking areas of Switzerland the everyday dialect is German but with a Swiss vocabulary, grammar and pronunciations- however High German is still understood and spoken there in more formal situations, but if I only knew High German I would not necessarily be able to understand an overheard conversation between two Swiss German speakers. It is that different.
We may find in 100+ years time that there is an equivalent of High German in English, a high English if you will, but each country, or region plays with and uses the language in different ways with different vocabulary, pronunciations and grammar. 'High' English becoming a more formal international communication concept than a the actual version of the language spoken in any one country. Who knows? Language is a living, evolving thing.
Old English isn't so difficult to get to grips with, after a little while. Old Icelandic is trickier but worth the effort to be able to read the sagas. And Connor thinks he's big geek...? 😊
Knife - in modern Danish kniv (pronounce all letters 😊) The British and the American English are different in so many ways, and the Australian version is something else. I don't think it will take a long time before the difference in language starts showing. East and West Germany were on the way to separate that way - so less than 50 years.
The Canterbury Tales quote is translated in two ways, thus; Whan that Aprille with his shoures soote, The droghte of March hath perced to the roote, And bathed every veyne in swich licóur Of which vertú engendred is the flour *TRANSLATION BY NEVILL COGHILL (1951)* When in April the sweet showers fall And pierce the drought of March to the root, and all The veins are bathed in liquor of such power As brings about the engendering of the flower *OR* *TRANSLATION BY A. S. KLINE (2007)* When that April with his showers sweet The drought of March has pierced root deep, And bathed each vein with liquor of such power That engendered from it is the flower,
I agree with the interconnectedness thing (if that’s a word) 😅 I’m from the south of Finland and speak the most common dialect (just going by numbers). Always love hearing other accents but I think that those may be eroding and certainly no new ones are being created. Hold on to your accents people!
I was at school in the 60s & 70s. We all studied Shakespeare's plays from age 11, and started learning Chaucer at 13- both help us have a wide vocabulary. For you to say that some words are redundant is ridiculous, So many similar words have a nuance that you need to understand- there's over 20 words for rain, for example.
He missed out how many English words are derived from Greek and Latin. Until relatively recently, all educated people were expected to learn these languages,
OE is Frisian. Frisian is still spoken in the Netherlands. Scots is based on Northumbrian dialect of OE. ME is based on the W Saxon dialect of OE. Danish speaking Vikings didn't understand OE either ... so they couldn't be processed by the Anglish customs house ;-)
I find alot of Americanisms are more common in the UK now. In like the 90s we had TV shows like friends and hollywood movies on VHS. Now in the 2000s we have the internet. Pretty much every single big tech company and social media site is run from the USA. The cultural influence of America has never been stronger. The UK used to be a world superpower that exported our version of English when we had an empire. But now its the USA who has the most influence id argue. Even as i type this. My web browser tries to correct my spelling to American English. heck, eve the spelling of sulfur was officially recognized and changed from the Sulphur spelling we previously used on periodic table back in maybe 2014?
It’s interesting to think about if William of Normandy wasn’t successful in conquering England, what modern English would sound and look like. It would likely have stayed predominantly Germanic, unlike modern English which is Germanic in origin but heavily influenced by Romance languages, and is effectively a hybrid.
Most of the American accent is a result of the general population of USA wasn't originally speaking English (they were German, Dutch, French, Polish, Italian etc etc). They were taught English in school once in America.. Claiming US English is closer to Shakespeare's English is redicolous.. What about the Australians.. They were actually British..
None of this is true, the English were the first nation to colonise the East coast of America and the thirteen colonies was a huge area that was speaking English, from Maine to Florida it was controlled by the English and the English people that came over from England all spoke their native tongue... English. Yes eventually their was other European settlers but the English people weren't speaking German or French that's ridiculous. I think it's more of you wishing this was true but none of what you said has any basis in reality. English settlers didn't have to learn their own language wtf are you on about??!!
11:45 're: word choice making it difficult to understand' - Yes but that was a dramatic piece of writing intended to be performed...not general spoken usage...of course it's different. People by that time would not have spoken like that either. If someone today spoke in rhyming couplets and iambic pentameter then that would sound weird now as well. That was a stupid thing to say.
One could only speculate on how English would have evolved if Harald Hardrada had won at Stamford Bridge and then defeated William or for that matter if Harold Godwinsson had won at Hastings. In both cases the vocabulary would probably be smaller as the French vocabulary would not have been introduced. In the first case English would probably have been more like the Scandinavian languages and in the second case more like the original Anglo-Saxon...
Yes, languages continually changed in the past, and they are still changing today. But it is not certain that this will still be the case in the future. What will for instance be the influence of artificial intelligence and extreme longevity of humans on language development?
The spread of English has meant a sort of cultural snobbery that I suspect the actual English started (because of Empire) and is now becoming a hindrance. You can see it in geopolitics. It might be worthwhile if you're American, but the 2nd biggest economy is China. And that is now a closed world to a lot of us simply because of language. There isn't the same connectivity that we have with other Germanic or Romantic languages. My girlfriend is Dutch-German and mad about Shakespeare (more than I am - but I think that's more to do with the class system, which regards him as something the elite might enjoy) and she knows and recites it, much better than I could. Despite the fact I've been in the UK nearly 51 years and she's been here for 2!
G'day mate, i often think what it would be like to come back in three or four hundred years for a few days to my home Country to meet my future family. I have sort of come to the conclusion that it would be very scary and confusing as i doubt i'd understand NEARLY NOTHING of what we were saying. If you understand what i'm typing Connor old mate. Duh. 😮😮😮😂😂😂
Re your opinion about language development being understandable because of communication - please look at new, emerging forms of English in Asia, driven by the internet and global business.
I seems that at the time many clever people knew that Shakespeare was outstanding, and he certainly added words to our vocabulary. But his contemporaries spoke something similar. Queen Elizabeth I spoke magnificently. The King James Version of the Bible also influenced us. Connor, I don't completely agree with you over whether English will continue to change. True, mass literacy means a language will change less rapidly. However, I am now a pensioner, and there have been differences. For example, when I was a boy, we didn't have the word 'hassle'. Some of the grammar has changed.
English people talk come out with French saying so now come out with a lot of French words and all what you could expect that because it's only an hour's crossing from each other
I'd disagree with your final comment about language development, for example, MLE (Multicultural London English) has only emerged during the last 30 years since the internet exists, you would have never heard it in the 80's and early 90's.
I disagree with the idea you put that english will not change as much. Your theory is mainly based on the concept of isolation vs the globalization that is happening now and such, but it is well known that it is not the case. Just look at the fact that english is being used more and more as a lingua franca by more and more people all over the world. Each of them coming from hundred of different languages and each bringing new words, grammar and semantics. Just look at the fact that most of the video was centered on the dynamic changes of clashing languages coming to england and how it affected it. Language also change with sub groups, communities and generations. Language is as much a way to create identity as it is a way to communicate. The english, several centuries in the future, will certainly be totally different from now. And it would be very bad if the language does not change. A static language is the sign of a dead culture.
I have a Masters degree on the English language and early and middle English, although fascinating, was very difficult to comprehend at times. We were taught that text messages.on the Internet would become part of a new language in time. Language is never static.as the dictionary adds.new words on a regular basis.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
05:00 - To go one further on your room/chamber example, there are actually plenty of "doublets" in English where we inherited a Norman-French word, then later adopted the Parisian-French version of it to express some slightly different or nuanced meaning, i.e. convey/convoy, reward/regard, warden/guardian, warranty/guarantee, wile/guile. The 1200s were a fascinating time when a flood of French words replaced their Old English equivalents (which is why we say "letters" instead of "book-runes", "serve" instead of "herren", "grace" instead of "milch" and "marble" instead of "marmon-stone"), while some other Saxon words clung on in the face of this trend; we still say "axe", for instance, despite the best efforts of contemporary writers to replace it with the more faddish "gisarme". Plenty of Viking words which survived in English well into the Middle Ages also got lost around the same era, with the French "honour" replacing "mensk" and "scorn" replacing "hething," even though the latter comes from the same root as "hate", which survived to flourish in modern English alongside the French import "detest".
I largely agree with you that mass-communication is liable to standardise and homogenise English in future, but the language still evolves wherever it comes into contact with other tongues, and if at some point we become an interplanetary species there's a fair chance you'll see linguistic divergences taking place on other planets as they once took place across oceans.
I feel like though, changes in languages are slowed down by widepread education: a large amount of changes over time in several languages came from words "badly" pronounced or badly used. The misuse sometimes came to replace the "correct" version (the "silent letters" are a frequent consequence). I'm not saying it's the main reason but since education emphasize the correct use of your language so much, I think changes will at least be a bit slower. Unless it's about adopting words from other languages.
A lot of Americans are fond of claiming their accent is closer to that of Shakespeare but in reality they were comparing it to modern English dialects (like estury or Essex accent) in the studies. Dialects like that of Shropshire, Coastal Suffolk and rural Dorset are MUCH closer.
When I moved from a School in Retford (Nottinghamshire) to a School down South in Wiltshire, I wondered why the local kids were speaking American...It was actually just the West Country accent
I have heard reconstructions of Shakespeare's accent and I agree with you completely! Certain present day English accents are closer to Shakespeare's than the general American accent.
Sounds like the West Country, England.
It's just rhoticity, that's it.
It's a myth Americans repeat again and again even though it's been debunked. Why they do that I have no idea.
And what's even funnier is that is not only them that do that, it's practically every former colony. It seems to be a trait shared between the former colonies of the UK, Portugal, Spain and France, as they all claim the same thing regarding their accents
Shakespeare was and is THE English writer, Connor. There's usually questions from at least one of his plays in every English exam in the UK - you have to study them as part of the course!
What I find fascinating is that because it was the Upper-Class who originally spoke French, words we consider more posh or formal are latin based while the opposite is true, more informal words come from the Lower-Class of Germanic Origin.
Since I understand English very well it also makes it easy to understand quite a lot of French. Also old english is closer to my mother tounge Norwegian. We have a lot of similar words.
With a bit of work you can get Chaucer ... we did Chaucer plays at school for exams. I think the one I did was The Knights Tale
I loved reading Chaucer in school back in the 1960s, for some unknown reason I found understanding it and writing essays really easy, I always finished way ahead of everyone else; the brain is fascinating!
I was the opposite. While I recognised every word, I could not understand the meaning of the sentence!
Geordie is like Chaucer
It's weird when you hear Shakespeare original pronunciation, because you can hear so many different accents rolled into one. The most prominent to me sounds very west country, almost like pirate speech. But you can also hear (to my northern ears) Lancashire and Yorkshire in there. I suppose it depends on where you're from, it wouldn't surprise me if someone from Newcastle could hear Geordie in there.
One accent that is completely vacant in original Shakespeare is Received Pronunciation, which is obviously how it is mainly heard today. The fact that there is so much rhoticity in original Shakespeare, I'm not surprised why Americans can hear their accent in there too, but when I first heard it, all I could think of was west country, not American.
Loved this video! The origin of 'They' has been contested fairly recently - it could have developed from one of the Old English pronouns ('ey' I think, but that could be wrong) but I hope it does turn out to be Scandinavian - it's very rare for basic grammar words and pronouns to be borrowed from another language so that would be very cool 😄Also, someone else said it but Shakespeare's accent being closer to American is hard to judge. I think the major reason people say it's more American is because he pronounced his R sounds after vowels (like the R in 'chair') but a significant proportion of British accents do this too! I love the language videos, thanks Connor! ❤
Although this video isn't incorrect, its highly simplified. Its exaggerations makes it sound like French loans and synonyms were somehow uncommon in other Germanic or European languages. But my small Germanic language alone uses thousands of French derived words and word stems. And as we kept much of the pronuncuation fairly intact and instead changed the spellings to fit our system (the opposite of English in that regard), some foreginers actually think we sound a bit French.
Our historical lexicon (SAOB) currently has about 500 000 words listed, while the comprehensive Oxford dictionary sports about 650 000 words. Not a huge difference, given that English is spoken all over the world and our language only by about 11 000 000 people.
Are you talking about Dutch, Swedish or Afrikaans? It's not terribly clear. M.
@@michaelconway8877 Sorry, Swedish in this case.
I agree that the possibility of English splitting into two new languages due to isolation is not possible anymore. In fact, I believe British and American (and Canadian, Australian etc) English are growing closer together. I'm in my 70s and my observation over several decades is that Americanisms are being absorbed into British English (through movies, TV, music, the internet etc) and particularly since the rise of the internet, I hear more British English words and constructions being used by Americans.
Shakespeare added many words to the english language himself.
Or he was just the first one to write them down, we will probably never know for sure
Some food for thought. Words and speech are still changing. If you consider RUclipsrs, And tiktoker, gamers and streamers they have added a whole list of words and phrases and pronunciations to the language. I still find myself looking up words
You are right about a smaller world.
My youngest grandson, native of southern England, half Thai, half English, speaks with a mild American accent due to the internet.
Language change happens for more reasons than just isolation. We develop dialects for different communities too: the accent, vocabulary, and grammar you use depends on who you’re speaking with. This is done to show your identification with a particular culture or your recognition of a particular relationship with the listener. This code switching happens automatically even when both parties understand both dialects. British English dialects, for example, are undergoing a lot of change at the moment including one where the low register version (informal, here signalling similar rank) is losing the ‘th’ sound but the high register version isn’t. This sort of thing also happened in the Roman Empire leading to ‘v’ and ‘u’ becoming distinct in the low register (vulgate) dialect and staying the same in the high register (classical) one.
I may have butcher some of that though. It’s been many years since I’ve studied diachronic language change. Unfortunately, once a linguist always a linguist. It’s our curse to never shut up about it.
Fun current language change fact: there is some evidence that English is gaining a fourth - and fourth wall breaking - person (with the plural pronoun ‘chat’) to refer to observers watching but not involved in events.
Connor: This from the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC) ..... "The early modern English language was less than 100 years old in 1590 when Shakespeare was writing. No dictionaries had yet been written and most documents were still written in Latin. He contributed 1,700 words to the English language because he was the first author to write them down."
I don't know what you were trying to say Connor.
The most obvious issues to me is how we borrow phrases from elsewhere. Recently the BBC has been using phrases like 'thrown under a bus' and 'double down', phrases nobody in Britain would have heard fifteen years ago as they are a recent import from America.
Local accents, which are a separate issue, are starting to vanish through, I believe, university education here in Europe. Local accents are often viewed as a sign of ignorance or stupidity, which is a shame.
Melvyn Bragg's "History of the English language" is also excellent. He asserts that the West Country (South west England) retains a lot more of the Anglo Saxon English than anywhere in Britain.
Much as I like Melyyn Bragg, he is not a linguist, so I personally don't set much store by what he claims or asserts regarding English, especially when he talks about "Anglo Saxon English" which linguistically was never a thing.
There was a documentary called "Mongrel Nation"in three parts a few years ago on the English and the nation, presented by Eddie Izzard. Apparently, the nearest language to English is Frisian, spoken in the north-west of the Netherlands. In the programme, Eddie learns a few sentences of Old English and then goes over to West Friesland and finds that he can have a simple conversation with the locals there. There is a bit on RUclips, unfortunately the quality isn't that good?
Well I mean, it's Eddie Izzard, the quality is bound to be bad
The beauty of the mongrel nature of English is the ability to nuance; the particular sound of the word chosen to describe the same thing can give subtle (sometimes not so subtle) emphasis to the way we view what we're describing. I don't mind new words being adopted, what I don't like is when people become restricted to more modern idioms in their use of vocabulary - life is a complex process, & the more words we have to describe it the better. Gadzooks y'all.
That's because sometimes I can't spell the answer right it comes in a different language
Not just since the Normans, some French words continued to interweave until the 19th century at least, since it was the lengua Franca of European court.
I think you are right Connor that mass communication will probably consolidate the language with fewer and fewer separate dialects and accents. If you listen to the various English accents around the UK they are not as strong as they were. Old recordings of different accents from before World War II show how strong those accents were, especially country accents. BTW the accents from the late 1500s London and the South (Shakespeares time) were closer to various West Country accents.
@McJibbin If it hasn't already been suggested to you, you'd might like might like to react to a British sitcom called The Royle Family (and it's not about the actual Royal Family). It's about a family from Manchester, England (who basically sit around watching TV).
Anyway keep up the great work.
Mark, from Ireland 😊
Regarding your comments at the end about language not diverting anymore. I think the spread of modern communications will prevent an entirely new language between Britain and the USA but i dont think it will impact the divergence of dialects. As English becomes such a popular second language we might find that the use of English in countries where english isn't a first language will introduce different dialects and vocabulary and may also change speech patterns and grammar concepts, e.g. sentence structures may start to reflect the grammar of the country's first language. Consider the variatikns jn the German language. The German language we are taught at school is considered to be High German in German speaking nations, but in German speaking areas of Switzerland the everyday dialect is German but with a Swiss vocabulary, grammar and pronunciations- however High German is still understood and spoken there in more formal situations, but if I only knew High German I would not necessarily be able to understand an overheard conversation between two Swiss German speakers. It is that different.
We may find in 100+ years time that there is an equivalent of High German in English, a high English if you will, but each country, or region plays with and uses the language in different ways with different vocabulary, pronunciations and grammar. 'High' English becoming a more formal international communication concept than a the actual version of the language spoken in any one country. Who knows? Language is a living, evolving thing.
Old English isn't so difficult to get to grips with, after a little while. Old Icelandic is trickier but worth the effort to be able to read the sagas. And Connor thinks he's big geek...? 😊
Knife - in modern Danish kniv (pronounce all letters 😊)
The British and the American English are different in so many ways, and the Australian version is something else.
I don't think it will take a long time before the difference in language starts showing. East and West Germany were on the way to separate that way - so less than 50 years.
The Canterbury Tales quote is translated in two
ways, thus;
Whan that Aprille with his shoures soote,
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote,
And bathed every veyne in swich licóur
Of which vertú engendred is the flour
*TRANSLATION BY NEVILL COGHILL (1951)*
When in April the sweet showers fall
And pierce the drought of March to the root, and all
The veins are bathed in liquor of such power
As brings about the engendering of the flower
*OR*
*TRANSLATION BY A. S. KLINE (2007)*
When that April with his showers sweet
The drought of March has pierced root deep,
And bathed each vein with liquor of such power
That engendered from it is the flower,
hahaha " Kneef " hahaha .... Haaa yeah.
i'm french and it is funny to me.
Check out Simon Ropers channel,he talks a lot about old English,old Norse, Middle English as well as other language related topics.
Thank you for waking me up I still come out with Viking words today and my family doesn't
Conner. Check out "Warwick Castle 2020 - Tower Suite" . I think you might wanna go stay there.
I agree with the interconnectedness thing (if that’s a word) 😅
I’m from the south of Finland and speak the most common dialect (just going by numbers).
Always love hearing other accents but I think that those may be eroding and certainly no new ones are being created. Hold on to your accents people!
I was at school in the 60s & 70s. We all studied Shakespeare's plays from age 11, and started learning Chaucer at 13- both help us have a wide vocabulary. For you to say that some words are redundant is ridiculous, So many similar words have a nuance that you need to understand- there's over 20 words for rain, for example.
He missed out how many English words are derived from Greek and Latin. Until relatively recently, all educated people were expected to learn these languages,
OE is Frisian. Frisian is still spoken in the Netherlands. Scots is based on Northumbrian dialect of OE. ME is based on the W Saxon dialect of OE. Danish speaking Vikings didn't understand OE either ... so they couldn't be processed by the Anglish customs house ;-)
He's completely wrong about the American accent being close to that of Shakespeare.
The symbol Þ is pronounced "th" if anyone cares. Originally a Norse rune - then in the Old English alphabet. What a journey.
I find alot of Americanisms are more common in the UK now. In like the 90s we had TV shows like friends and hollywood movies on VHS. Now in the 2000s we have the internet. Pretty much every single big tech company and social media site is run from the USA. The cultural influence of America has never been stronger. The UK used to be a world superpower that exported our version of English when we had an empire. But now its the USA who has the most influence id argue.
Even as i type this. My web browser tries to correct my spelling to American English. heck, eve the spelling of sulfur was officially recognized and changed from the Sulphur spelling we previously used on periodic table back in maybe 2014?
Whats the story of some coastal communities in the Carolina's speaking cornish..hows that?
They don't speak cornish, do they?
It’s interesting to think about if William of Normandy wasn’t successful in conquering England, what modern English would sound and look like.
It would likely have stayed predominantly Germanic, unlike modern English which is Germanic in origin but heavily influenced by Romance languages, and is effectively a hybrid.
Most of the American accent is a result of the general population of USA wasn't originally speaking English (they were German, Dutch, French, Polish, Italian etc etc). They were taught English in school once in America.. Claiming US English is closer to Shakespeare's English is redicolous.. What about the Australians.. They were actually British..
None of this is true, the English were the first nation to colonise the East coast of America and the thirteen colonies was a huge area that was speaking English, from Maine to Florida it was controlled by the English and the English people that came over from England all spoke their native tongue... English. Yes eventually their was other European settlers but the English people weren't speaking German or French that's ridiculous. I think it's more of you wishing this was true but none of what you said has any basis in reality.
English settlers didn't have to learn their own language wtf are you on about??!!
11:45 're: word choice making it difficult to understand' - Yes but that was a dramatic piece of writing intended to be performed...not general spoken usage...of course it's different. People by that time would not have spoken like that either. If someone today spoke in rhyming couplets and iambic pentameter then that would sound weird now as well. That was a stupid thing to say.
"No language is static". No shit, I haven't got a clue what kids are talking about today lol
One could only speculate on how English would have evolved if Harald Hardrada had won at Stamford Bridge and then defeated William or for that matter if Harold Godwinsson had won at Hastings. In both cases the vocabulary would probably be smaller as the French vocabulary would not have been introduced. In the first case English would probably have been more like the Scandinavian languages and in the second case more like the original Anglo-Saxon...
You're wrong. Languages are continuing to change. Even on Twitter, many completely new doalects are forming and we struggle to understand each other.
Yes, languages continually changed in the past, and they are still changing today. But it is not certain that this will still be the case in the future. What will for instance be the influence of artificial intelligence and extreme longevity of humans on language development?
Shakespeare was incredibly famous in his day .
The spread of English has meant a sort of cultural snobbery that I suspect the actual English started (because of Empire) and is now becoming a hindrance. You can see it in geopolitics. It might be worthwhile if you're American, but the 2nd biggest economy is China. And that is now a closed world to a lot of us simply because of language. There isn't the same connectivity that we have with other Germanic or Romantic languages. My girlfriend is Dutch-German and mad about Shakespeare (more than I am - but I think that's more to do with the class system, which regards him as something the elite might enjoy) and she knows and recites it, much better than I could. Despite the fact I've been in the UK nearly 51 years and she's been here for 2!
That's how I can't pronounce my words right for my accent
G'day mate, i often think what it would be like to come back in three or four hundred years for a few days to my home Country to meet my future family. I have sort of come to the conclusion that it would be very scary and confusing as i doubt i'd understand NEARLY NOTHING of what we were saying. If you understand what i'm typing Connor old mate. Duh. 😮😮😮😂😂😂
Connors a bit of a dipthong 😂
Re your opinion about language development being understandable because of communication - please look at new, emerging forms of English in Asia, driven by the internet and global business.
I seems that at the time many clever people knew that Shakespeare was outstanding, and he certainly added words to our vocabulary. But his contemporaries spoke something similar. Queen Elizabeth I spoke magnificently. The King James Version of the Bible also influenced us.
Connor, I don't completely agree with you over whether English will continue to change. True, mass literacy means a language will change less rapidly. However, I am now a pensioner, and there have been differences. For example, when I was a boy, we didn't have the word 'hassle'. Some of the grammar has changed.
English people talk come out with French saying so now come out with a lot of French words and all what you could expect that because it's only an hour's crossing from each other
English has much more mass/inertia now. So changes will come slower.
I wont accept the fact English needs to blend in with American not a chance our culturally differences are unique ❤
I'd disagree with your final comment about language development, for example, MLE (Multicultural London English) has only emerged during the last 30 years since the internet exists, you would have never heard it in the 80's and early 90's.
I disagree with the idea you put that english will not change as much. Your theory is mainly based on the concept of isolation vs the globalization that is happening now and such, but it is well known that it is not the case. Just look at the fact that english is being used more and more as a lingua franca by more and more people all over the world. Each of them coming from hundred of different languages and each bringing new words, grammar and semantics.
Just look at the fact that most of the video was centered on the dynamic changes of clashing languages coming to england and how it affected it.
Language also change with sub groups, communities and generations. Language is as much a way to create identity as it is a way to communicate.
The english, several centuries in the future, will certainly be totally different from now. And it would be very bad if the language does not change. A static language is the sign of a dead culture.
I have a Masters degree on the English language and early and middle English, although fascinating, was very difficult to comprehend at times.
We were taught that text messages.on the Internet would become part of a new language in time. Language is never static.as the dictionary adds.new words on a regular basis.
Middle English is fairly incomprehensible to modern speakers if pronounced that badly...much less so if you just actually read it.
Old english and old frisian are mostly the same.
stop talking before you unpause the video
funny
skip the "OLD" xD english makes no sense xD