Who are the Anglo Saxons

Oct 2016
117
Ashland
I've finally been able to read the 'Diglossia...' paper. Thanks much for bringing it to my attention!
I would have to say that I find it tendentious and unconvincing.
I do not say that it is impossible that 'Middle English' was Spoken as early as the 8th or 9th Centuries, while the Written language was conserved due to political pressure---I wasn't there, after all. Either.--- but I found no substantial support for it in the paper itself. I still feel that the shift from an inflected to an relatively un-inflected language is a more important linguistic feature in the development of English than the partial relexification after the Conquest.


Off-Topic:
How many times have I searched out and read an Archeological paper,(on Room 33 at Chaco, say )which devolved tiresomely into a discussion of 'Processualism v Post-Processualism?' (Hmm. the Dictionary that pops up here doesn't contain the terms. Hope the sp. is right.)The paper above just resists succumbing to the same irrelevancy.;)
 

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
5,194
I do not say that it is impossible that 'Middle English' was Spoken as early as the 8th or 9th Centuries,
That's not Tristram's claim not is her article, which was written for one of the 'Celtic Englishes' Colloquia a detailed argument. For linguistic arguments, you need to read several studies. One which is often cited is Graeme Davis' Comparative Syntax of Old English and Old Icelandic. Davis argues in this book that the similar word-order of the two should lead us to stress the similarities between the two languages. Old English and Old Icelandic were sufficiently close to be mutually comprehensible. They diverge after the 13th century, not at 1066.

If you want a quick summary of the changes in english grammar: Drift in the history of English
 
Oct 2016
117
Ashland
That's not Tristram's claim not is her article, which was written for one of the 'Celtic Englishes' Colloquia a detailed argument. For linguistic arguments, you need to read several studies. One which is often cited is Graeme Davis' Comparative Syntax of Old English and Old Icelandic. Davis argues in this book that the similar word-order of the two should lead us to stress the similarities between the two languages. Old English and Old Icelandic were sufficiently close to be mutually comprehensible. They diverge after the 13th century, not at 1066.

If you want a quick summary of the changes in english grammar: Drift in the history of English
Isn't it? I'll re-read the last couple of pages. I assumed that it was not a rigorous argument or a Thesis she'd have to defend.
Thanks for the new Link. It'll take me a week or so to get around to it.
As to word order: in Gordon's An Introduction to Old Norse, a discussion of it was notably missing.
In Hogg An Introduction to Old English the concept of 'weight' in Anglo-Saxon word order has led me to look(so far in vain, but I ain't finished) for a similar mechanism in Old Norse (or Old Icelandic.) ON and Anglo-Saxon seem quite similar to me, though ON is much simpler and easier to read, for me at least.
Thanks again!
 

Similar History Discussions