How far back in time can you understand English?
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay Fun, but I have a some comments and criticisms.
1900: I wish the author had leaned less obviously on Clement Clarke Moore and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. They spoke (or wrote) a stylized English consciously, and our traveller would not.
1700: The letter "ſ", the "long s", is typographical, not linguistic. Readers at the time would read "congress" as readily as "congreſs".
1600: Again, this is mostly typographical variation. Spoken, one would understand it easily. The weird "thouing" want seen until some fifty years later.
1500: Spoken, this would present no trouble to a modern listener.
1400: Typographical again, wiþ only minor variations in þe ſpelling used. Nat harde to reade, alþouȝ again the letter ſubstitution can be rouȝ.
1300: I don't see "ſchaltou" that far back, bit I didn't dig hard. I imagine spoken, one would realize it's two words mashed together. A Germanic "en" seems to show up randomly. "Rewþe" made me smile.
1200 and earlier: I feel like the vocabulary is starting to change here to the point where my unfamiliarity with the typographical anachronisms becomes an impediment. Hearing it spoken would help, and I'm interested enough to want to substitute modern characters for the archaic to see if that gets me further.
Thanks for posting this.
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay as old as 1300.
I did read a lot of Medieval & Arthurian literature as a kid. -
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay I got back to 1200 but it got much harder after that
-
@Natasha_Jay Fun, but I have a some comments and criticisms.
1900: I wish the author had leaned less obviously on Clement Clarke Moore and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. They spoke (or wrote) a stylized English consciously, and our traveller would not.
1700: The letter "ſ", the "long s", is typographical, not linguistic. Readers at the time would read "congress" as readily as "congreſs".
1600: Again, this is mostly typographical variation. Spoken, one would understand it easily. The weird "thouing" want seen until some fifty years later.
1500: Spoken, this would present no trouble to a modern listener.
1400: Typographical again, wiþ only minor variations in þe ſpelling used. Nat harde to reade, alþouȝ again the letter ſubstitution can be rouȝ.
1300: I don't see "ſchaltou" that far back, bit I didn't dig hard. I imagine spoken, one would realize it's two words mashed together. A Germanic "en" seems to show up randomly. "Rewþe" made me smile.
1200 and earlier: I feel like the vocabulary is starting to change here to the point where my unfamiliarity with the typographical anachronisms becomes an impediment. Hearing it spoken would help, and I'm interested enough to want to substitute modern characters for the archaic to see if that gets me further.
Thanks for posting this.
@Natasha_Jay Oh, and more the fool me. I stopped reading at the end of the travelogue text, and a superset of my comments appears afterwards.
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay would love to hear someone read this aloud
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
Very Interesting.. thanks for sharing.
-
Interestingly, as a German, I can understand quite a lot of the very old texts. But my mother had a PHD in English and French and knew a lot about old Germanic sagas and medieval German literature. So, that is nothing foreign to me.
If you read anything from Walther von der Vogelweide, you will clearly see the similarities to the oldest texts. Words and grammar are recognizable, and if you can read one, you can read the other.
But even in Shakespeare's time, you will find a lot of those common roots of our languages, and if you get used to the different spelling, the sound of it rings familiar. And as late as in Jane Austen's times, even the number format was still the same as in German, for instance, four-and-twenty and not twenty-four.
After all, with all the lost grammar and words, modern English is just a watered-down version of old German.
@HarryMutt @Natasha_Jay I made it through 1200 without too much effort. 1100 felt like I was reading my Walther von der Vogelweide book, but after comparing now, the Mittelhochdeutsch there is much easier to understand. By 1000, the vocabulary had shifted enough I couldn't discern much by reversing the shifts I know.
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay Thank you for introducing me to this fascinating blog!
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay "environs" is my favorite word so far
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay I could read 1200 with difficulty, but nothing older.
-
@Natasha_Jay but much more easier written than spoken !
Here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=842OX2_vCic
Well I 'm lost until modern English
when the kite picked up the chicken, i heard the word chicken clear as day, so that was around 950 to even get the first word & i understood nothing much else for a few more centuries...
-
@Natasha_Jay but much more easier written than spoken !
Here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=842OX2_vCic
Well I 'm lost until modern English
I picked up right away that the guy was a lousy farmer with no cows, so pretty happy about that!
I guess it helps being a Scandinavian who understands German, has Scottish friends, and knows enough Dutch to know what a bauer is. There's a lot of words from all over the place.
@beatricejess @Natasha_Jay -
@Thumper1964 @Natasha_Jay @WeirdWriter
For those interested, Samuel Pepys is also in the Fediverse: @samuelpepys
He's a 17th century guy so he can really be a sexist asshole. He's an interesting person to follow, not many people from the 17th century around here
@Mab_813 @Natasha_Jay @WeirdWriter @samuelpepys Sexist asshole is right! On many days in his diary he very strongly insinuates that he practices, shall we say, extracurricular activities with many women not his wife. Still fascinating, though. Definitely a different time and place.
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay Started losing me in 1500 & totally lost me in 1400 but I didn't try to get any father than that.
️ -
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay Anything past 1500s is a battle I lose. Despite having studied this decades ago.
-
when the kite picked up the chicken, i heard the word chicken clear as day, so that was around 950 to even get the first word & i understood nothing much else for a few more centuries...
@peachfront @beatricejess @Natasha_Jay
i love this.
i got the "swine" from day one, and the chicken soon after
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
@Natasha_Jay Loved that. I hit a wall at the 1200 section.
This is the kind of exercise any pedant needs to go through. There is no "pure" English to preserve. It's a living language.
-
How far back in time can you understand English?
It’s a thousand years of the English language, compressed into a single blog post.
"... as his post goes on, his language gets older. A hundred years older with each jump. The spelling changes. The grammar changes. Words you know are replaced by unfamiliar words, and his attitude gets older too, as the blogger’s voice is replaced by that of a Georgian diarist, an Elizabethan pamphleteer, a medieval chronicler."
How far back in time can you understand English?
An experiment in language change
(www.deadlanguagesociety.com)
I read it easily back through 1600. I'm used to Shakespearean English, so it was comfortably familiar.
At 1500, I had to begin reading aloud, because the typography looked strange, so I needed to actually hear the words, but once I heard them, it easily made total sense.
At 1400, my reading aloud went much slower, with some backtracking ("Ah, wait, that's what that word is!"), but once I nailed the words, there was not a problem understanding it. Sort of like reading Chaucer.
At 1300, I began to have serious problems. There were a number words I just couldn't figure out at all. Got maybe three-fourths of the passage, but there were a lot of gaps.
At 1200, I hit a wall and had difficulty climbing it. I only got about two words in every ten. I managed to figure out that the narrator had somehow escaped, but I have no idea whatsoever how he managed that.
At 1100, my comprehension simply evaporated. I had no idea at all what was happening from that point on.
Thank you! This exercise was a lot of fun!
-
R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
