Quote:
Originally Posted by SameOldStory
"English" is a boiling caldron of many languages. I recall reading, somewhere, that Spanish readers can still read El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha (15th century) or El Cantar de Mío Cid (12th century).
Anyone want to try 14th Century English? In modern type it's do-able, but in the script of the time I think very few would be able to read it.
"& he openynge his mowthe techinge hem, seyenge, Blessyd be pore in speryte, for here is the rewme of heuenes. Blessyd be the mylde, for thei schal haue the lond of lyf. Blessyd be thei that waylen, for thei schal be comfortyd. Blessyd be thei that hungren and thrusten ryghtwysnys, for thei schal be fulfyllyd. Blessyd be mercyful men, for thei schal swe mercy. Blessyd be men of clene herte, for thei schal se God. Blessyd be pesyble men, for thei schal be cleped Godes chyldren...."
Those who have learned to spell relief - Rolaids might have a small problem reading it.
txt msg ma b the end of enlsh u thnk 2? |
You know, I have less trouble reading that old piece... That "modern" texting style is horrible. It relies too much on the spoken word. Whenever I encounter it, I ask the person typing it to explain what he (or she!) says.
And you think English is bad? I bet you can read books from the 18th century without problems (though the language may be a bit longwinded, as Harry already said, the grammar hardly changed).
I already have troubles reading books from the early 20th century in Dutch. There have been so many grammar changes that books from that time don't only bore you to death with their longwindedness (is that a word?), but they also are a pain to read because of the grammar changes...
And to be honest, I have no idea what the "official" grammar is anymore.
An example:
Spoiler:
take combined words. Such as oak leaf, pancake and berry juice. In Dutch all those three "words" are one word, so
oak leaf = eikeblad
pancake = pannekoek
berry juice = bessensap
Now, when I went to school (and that was in the '80s!), the rule was easy:
an oak leaf was a plant, so there was no "n" between the two words.
you made a pancake in only one pan, so, no "n" between the two words either
but you made berry juice from multipe berries, hence you'd get a "n" there.
At some point they changed it. A few years later, they changed it again.
I had to check the internet, but I found the new rules:
A combined word won't get the inbetween "n" if:
- The first part of the combined word as plural can have either an "-s" and "-en"
- The first part of the combined word as plural has an "-s"
- The first part of the combined word doesn't have a plural
- The first part of the combined enhances the second part (whatever they mean with that...)
- The firs part of the combined word is unique (huh?)
- If one of the parts is no longer recognizable as standalone word
- With fixed expressions
And it would be Dutch if there wasn't an exception to the rule:
Because there will be added an "-n" if the first part of the combined word as plural can have either an "-s" and "-en", but the gender of those two plurals is different.
So, oak leaf should be written as eikenblad, pancake as pannenkoek and only the berry juice would be the same.
And those changed happen every few years... And somewhere in the '40's or '50's, there was a huge grammatical change that really makes all those public domain books mostly a joke...