#makeenglishanglishagain

We should purge Anglish of the stuck-up Norman words.

Yes, this really is a great mistake in English, backstabber words from mostly Français/Latina. Some of the most wielded backstabber words, and right Germanic words that are needed to be wielded.

(also, no backstabber words above here ---)

Because -> Since
Question -> Frain
City -> Borough

Edited 4/2/2016 20:24:39

In greek we pronounce it always like Teeth θ

This guy is more unfourtunate than me : https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/user/Artifexian%3F&ved=0ahUKEwimgcP3wfLLAhUCnA4KHcYyCwsQFggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNHUcE3GhPR-URjSGAKEf1yRBtHHuA&sig2=V3nDsxOl6kmrfrF1odw1aA

Watch his videos. Be sure to listen how he pronounces th words

Edited 4/3/2016 12:56:19

Juq, if you're going to use those words, at least do it the right way.

Because (we have no other word for since) -> 'cauz
Frain -> Frane
Borough -> Burgh

Frain -> Frane
Borough -> Burgh

Just another way to spell. By the way, I've seen that Scottish and North England tongue are better about keeping good true English words. I mean, look at England's saw: "Dieu et mon droit" - not even English, that's upsetting.

Lol. By your reasoning of "make it purer", Britain should not be English-speaking, but "Brythonic" speaking (Welsh). "Dieu et mon droit" and French-Norman words are the indirect results of the Norman conquest, as for English it is another result of the Anglosaxon invasion of Britain, both were foreigner to these lands, so I do not see why one is less valid than the other. If anything the Celts should start to protest too.

I am not saying to make any land "purer", just the tongues. Doesn't matter where English or French is spoken, as long as it is spoken with only English or French words. Also, Celtic tongues have many backstabber words from English.

Let's just accept that all languages have it's number of loan words from other languages (with exception of icelandic).
You make me feel bad about the fact that most popular word from my language is one. :'(

Well Modern English is composed of a majority of french-latin-greek words, like it or not. Having English without this influence would be denaturing it and would make just another language. We are not in the case of Icelandic, Chinese or Turkish (this is less the case anyway for Turkish since they just replaced Arabic influence with western influence), where they indeed replaced most of the foreign loanwords with modern Icelandic or Chinese equivalents (for example veðurfræði ("meteorology") with veður "weather", and fræði "science" in Icelandic, or "Diannao" (literally "electric brain") for computer in Chinese), because Icelandic was already not that much affected by foreign influence, this is not the case of English for example. English is a mixed language already.

You're a Frenchman, face it, Angland will be be speaking pure Anglish by Woden!

Let's just accept that all languages have it's number of loan words from other languages (with exception of icelandic).

Let's not, instead, just stop wielding such words. And Icelandic does have loan words - but they are trying to be pushed out. Icelandic is one of the best tongues ever, though, really true tongue.

Well Modern English is composed of a majority of french-latin-greek words, like it or not.

It shouldn't be.

Having English without this influence would be denaturing it and would make just another language.

No, it would bring back English from the dead as it is now. Over half English words aren't even from Germanic roots, that is just pitiful.

English is a mixed language already.

There's no such thing as a "mixed" tongue, just a tongue that likes to sometimes try to speak French and Latin, too, for some grounds.

You're a Frenchman, face it, Angland will be be speaking pure Anglish by Woden!

I dont care that much as a "Frenchman", but again if you want to speak some pure "English" learn Old English or Anglo saxon and stop speaking this pigdin of language x)

þes is sóþ Englisc! (at least I tried)

And to make it clear, I am not against the fact to change loanwords to more "natural" words or neologisms of a language.
In Basque there were also some attempts, like Independentzia (no need to tell the signification of it) to "Burujabetza/burugabetza" ("buru" head, "gabe" without, so "without head": independence), but this term is not very used), or another example Politzia (Police) to Ertzaintza (from "(h)er-ri" (people) and zañ or zain ("guard"), this neologism is widely used now for the Basque Police see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ertzaintza).
Nothing is impossible, but as for English, it is very difficult since without a doubt many common words are of latin/french origin, we would need to invent basically just a new language, or revive Old English (which is a separate language)

Note: Every words in italics are of latin/greek/french origin, you see the work needed to replace all these words.

Edited 4/3/2016 19:23:17

I dont care that much as a "Frenchman", but again if you want to speak some pure "English" learn Old English or Anglo saxon and stop speaking this pigdin of language x)

no one speaks Old English and it is overstandable to new English, what can be done though, is to stop wielding backstabber words.

Nothing is impossible, but as for English, it is very difficult since without a doubt many common words are of latin/french origin, we would need to invent basically just a new language, or revive Old English (which is a separate language)

It would not be making any new tongues, only stop using the weird words that do not belong in English tongue.

https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.language.artificial/ZL4e3fD7eW0/_7p8bKwLJWkJ

(Every word I write in slant above here --- is a word of true roots).

As for your saying, that's also easy to make into true English.

And to make it wis, I am not against the thought to gaincast loanwords to a tongue's more "true" words or new words.
In Euskara, there were also some tries, like Independentzia (no need to tell its weight) to Burujabetza/burugabeta ("buru" head", "gave" without, so "without head": freedom), but this word is not very wielded), or another* bytalk Politzia (Watch) to Ertzainta (from "(h)er-ri" (folk) and zañ or zain (guard*), this new word is widely wielded now for the Euskaran Watch see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ertzaintza). Nothing is unfeasible, but as for English, it is very hard since indeed many everyday words are of Latinan/Françaisic roots, we would need to develop a new tongue, or bring back Old English (which is its own tongue).

Line: Every word in slant is Latinan/Ellinikan/Françaisic root, you see the work needed to gainstead these words.

*Already true English word.

Well Modern English is how it is, and this is what I was implying by "denaturing" it, here you tried to change words with some other words which are btw for some not even comprehensible for modern speakers (as they are obsolete or very rarely used), but worse some do not have even the same meaning.

Let's see:

"wis" is not synonym of clear, it is synonym of certain or sure, close but not similar. Furthermore this term is obsolete, used only until Middle English.

"thought" and fact do not have the same meaning either, that is why it is not possible to change words randomly with some other words that are indeed in some way close but not 100% similar in their meaning.

"gaincast"? Is this your own invention? Gosh this is ridiculous now. I am ok to replace loanwords with exact similar words, but here what's the point really? Etymology always fascinated me (I had some class about languages and semiotics so that also helped), and about the word "change" (Middle English Chaungen from Norman French Chaunger) the funny story is that this word although having a latin equivalent is not purely latin (Cambiare) in origin, but Celtic (from Gaulish and Brythonic "Kambyon" then went to Latin), and if we had to say which word is purer or not, well I would say "change" is better (the word "gombe" used in Old English is also related to "change" through Irish, same origin as Gaulish), since Celtic languages were spoken before English ever came to existence in England. What are the right alternatives to "change" then in English? well you have "alter, replace, exchange, modify, evolve" and sadly none of them would match with your ideals of a "purer English tongue".

"New" isn't a synonym of "Natural", not at all.

"weight" and "signification" does not match either... But I will help you out this time, you could have simply used "meaning" (from maenan in Old English).

"freedom" and independence are indeed used alternatively in some contexts and are indeed close, but not similar. Freedom and independence have different meanings: Independence is free from outside control. Freedom is the absence of such a restraint.
This is why the Basque neologism is closer to the true meaning of Independence ("Burugabetza" without head, without control from someone/something above you), whereas for Freedom in Basque we would use "Askatasuna".
As for freedom you have also liberty.

"wielded" instead of "used"?
Here are the only situation you would use it:
(obsolete) To command, rule over; to possess or own.  
(obsolete) To control, to guide or manage.  
To handle with skill and ease, especially of a weapon or tool.
To exercise (authority or influence) effectively.
Conclusion: Incorrect use.

"bytalk" instead of "example"?
meaning: incidental conversation, chit-chat; small talk.
Conclusion: Incorrect use.

"another" pure English? Well Indoeuropean certainly, as it is a word almost transparent in most of the Indoeuropean languages, see An+other (English) and Un+Autre (French) both almost identical when pronounced. That's why wanting a purer English is pathetical, since many words are not only "germanic" but shared in many other close family languages. Something we can't say about way different languages such as Chinese, Turkish or Basque

"guard" true English? well it is not that easy. Guard originally comes from "guarder" (Middle French) borrowed from Frankish wardōn (it was an usual process when Romance languages borrowed Germanic words to replace German words starting with "w" to "gu", here "guard" is a perfect example of this w>gu process). Ok, English is a Germanic language, but ironically here this etymologically Germanic word is not pure English, but a borrowing from Old French itself borrowed from Frankish. Now you see the absurdity of your approach.

"Euskaran" this would be such a nicer word for our language :) but sadly English only uses "Basque" (borrowed again from French)... Spanish at least improved and modified it as in Spanish Vasco (for the language) is way less used than "Euskera" or "Eusquera" in the common language.

"Unfeasible" instead of Impossible? why not, but unfeasible is a totally French loanward from "Infaisable" so...

"Françaisic", sorry I do not speak Juquistish...

"develop" is also borrowed from French. But you could have used "make" for this sentence isntead it could have worked.

"Line" English? ewll again as for the word "guard" things are not that easy, languages were intermixed for centuries, line is definitely indoeuropean, but is both used in Germanic and Latin language families (Linea/linum in Latin, ligne in French, Germanic lino). And the current meaning of line was influenced by French "rope, cord, thread"; from this the senses "path", "continuous mark" were derived. But no correlation with "note" anyway...

Edited 4/3/2016 22:01:28

Well Modern English is how it is, and this is what I was implying by "denaturing" it, here you tried to change words with some other words which are btw for some not even comprehensible for modern speakers (as they are obsolete or very rarely used), but worse some do not have even the same meaning.

I want to bring some words out of the brink (but I am not using any words that are not wielded at all today), and yes, if this is "denaturing" to you, then I want to "denature" all tongues. And yes, some meaning will be lost, since you can't really do it for all.

"wis" is not synonym of clear, it is synonym of certain or sure, close but not similar.

Well, I do not know what you mean by "clear" then, but I guess you mean "understandable". Also, wis is still used, but not much.

"thought" and fact do not have the same meaning either, that is why it is not possible to change words randomly with some other words that are indeed in some way close but not 100% similar in their meaning.

It means the same thing, I could have instead wielded "truth", but "truth" and "fact" would both be wrongly wielded here.

"gaincast"? Is this your own invention?

gain + cast, works fine to me. gain + make would also be good. Using re- though, is bad since re- comes from Latin.

the funny story is that this word although having a latin equivalent is not purely latin (Cambiare) in origin, but Celtic (from Gaulish and Brythonic "Kambyon" then went to Latin), and if we had to say which word is purer or not, well I would say "change" is better

Gaulish is a Celtic tongue, Celtic words do not belong in English, either.

well you have "alter, replace, exchange, modify, evolve" and sadly none of them would match with your ideals of a "purer English tongue".

I have not yet said "pure", stop quoting me on this. Also, "tweak" works.

"New" isn't a synonym of "Natural", not at all.

I do not think I wielded it this way, I said true instead of "natural".

"weight" and "signification" does not match either... But I will help you out this time, you could have simply used "meaning" (from maenan in Old English).

I thought by weight, you meant that it was a weighty moment in the Euskaran past and today (the freedom), but yeah, meaning could mean what you wanted to as well.

"freedom" and independence are indeed used alternatively in some contexts and are indeed close, but not similar. Freedom and independence have different meanings: Independence is free from outside control. Freedom is the absence of such a restraint.
This is why the Basque neologism is closer to the true meaning of Independence ("Burugabetza" without head, without control from someone/something above you), whereas for Freedom in Basque we would use "Askatasuna".

This is nibbles; freedom works in this setting. But ok, how about self-power?

As for freedom you have also liberty.

"liberty" does not work.

"wielded" instead of "used"?
Here are the only situation you would use it:
(obsolete) To command, rule over; to possess or own.  
(obsolete) To control, to guide or manage.  
To handle with skill and ease, especially of a weapon or tool.
To exercise (authority or influence) effectively.
Conclusion: Incorrect use.

"To handle with skill and ease" seems good to me. But you could also say "work".

"bytalk" instead of "example"?
meaning: incidental conversation, chit-chat; small talk.
Conclusion: Incorrect use.

Bispel* would be better word, come to think of it, but I wielded the way the Germans do, Beispiel: bei (by) + Spiel (talk).

"another" pure English? Well Indoeuropean certainly, as it is a word almost transparent in most of the Indoeuropean languages, see An+other (English) and Un+Autre (French) both almost identical when pronounced. That's why wanting a purer English is pathetical, since many words are not only "germanic" but shared in many other close family languages. Something we can't say about way different languages such as Chinese, Turkish or Basque

I overstand Hayeren, and so do you. Some words will be alike by luck, and some not. For bispel, there is Slovenščinan "vi" which means "you", and Svenskan "vi" which means "we". And there is Islenskan "mál" and Hanguk "말" (mal) (both mean "tongue"). And for the files, I am for ridding Euskaran, Türkçen, and Chungwen words from English, too (but these are fewer).

"guard" true English? well it is not that easy. Guard originally comes from "guarder" (Middle French) borrowed from Frankish wardōn (it was an usual process when Romance languages borrowed Germanic words to replace German words starting with "w" to "gu", here "guard" is a perfect example of this w>gu process). Ok, English is a Germanic language, but ironically here this etymologically Germanic word is not pure English, but a borrowing from Old French itself borrowed from Frankish. Now you see the absurdity of your approach.

To be safe, I will say instead "lookout", since the Françaisic tongue seems to have butchered the Frankish word.

"Euskaran" this would be such a nicer word for our language :) but sadly English only uses "Basque" (borrowed again from French)... Spanish at least improved and modified it as in Spanish Vasco (for the language) is way less used than "Euskera" or "Eusquera" in the common language.

I am for using the names of how the folk live there call it, no more Spain, but now España, no more China, but now it's Chungkuo.

"Unfeasible" instead of Impossible? why not, but unfeasible is a totally French loanward from "Infaisable" so...

Whoops, ok, should have said "out of the frain", "beyond knack", "hopeless", "far-fetched".

"develop" is also borrowed from French. But you could have used "make" for this sentence isntead it could have worked.

But where does "developer" come from in Français? Well, from Old Français "desveloper", which came from des + veloper, from Germanic "wrappan", however, Français seems to have butchered this one, so "make" is better here, too.

But no correlation with "note" anyway...

I don't know what you meant by "note". "One more thing to read?" In this meaning, "line" works fine. Maybe you mean "heed" or "thought" isntead, though.

"Line" English? ewll again as for the word "guard" things are not that easy, languages were intermixed for centuries, line is definitely indoeuropean, but is both used in Germanic and Latin language families (Linea/linum in Latin, ligne in French, Germanic lino). And the current meaning of line was influenced by French "rope, cord, thread"; from this the senses "path", "continuous mark" were derived.

This is a shared Indoeuropean word, there is English "line", Spanish "línea", Russian "лён" (lön), unluckily in the other tongues, these were beat out through Arabic or Latin loanwords. But it is Germanic, no Latinists had anything to do with "line" in the English tongue.

Spielen in deutsch means to play, not to speak. ^

Edited 4/4/2016 06:04:35

I want to bring some words out of the brink (but I am not using any words that are not wielded at all today), and yes, if this is "denaturing" to you, then I want to "denature" all tongues. And yes, some meaning will be lost, since you can't really do it for all.

well again I understand your approach, but unfortunately with English it is impossible to replace every French/Latin words to Germanic words without denaturing it. For some words i t works perfectly since there are equivalents but for some other there is none.

Bispel* would be better word, come to think of it, but I wielded the way the Germans do, Beispiel: bei (by) + Spiel (talk).

Alright I see it better now. But again you replace one "Foreign" influence (French/Latin) for another one (German and not Germanic), the best approach would be to change it with a word of Anglosaxon/Englisc (Old English) origin not a foreign one (German, as German is not Old English), if you see what I meant. I made my own researches and I found "Bisen/Bisenung" (Old English term which means: example, pattern, model, similitude, parable, parallel, rule, command, precept).

I overstand Hayeren, and so do you. Some words will be alike by luck, and some not. For bispel, there is Slovenščinan "vi" which means "you", and Svenskan "vi" which means "we". And there is Islenskan "mál" and Hanguk "말" (mal) (both mean "tongue"). And for the files, I am for ridding Euskaran, Türkçen, and Chungwen words from English, too (but these are fewer).

Yes but here it is not "by luck", as Other and Autre have both the same Indoeuropean origin (form IE "anteros"), as well as "an" and "un" (both from IE "óynos") which are both articles and prepositions with the exact meaning too. Hence this is not "by luck" but these words in French and English are surprisingly very correlated.

To be safe, I will say instead "lookout", since the Françaisic tongue seems to have butchered the Frankish word.

Ok why not, and "butchered" x) this comment is not very neutral uh? (Butchery a very French word again ahah).
I don't really get how and why many germanic words which started with a "W" ended up with a "Gu" in French like War>Guerre but we aren't here to judge about it. The GU is also present in other Romance languages, Spanish/Italian "Guerra", or Basque "Gerla" but in Basque we have a similar "purer" terms for war: Guduka (id. to war) or Borroka (more like a battle).
Also about the W>Gu Romance process, surprisingly it wasn't present in Norman French (as this romance language was way more influenced by Germanic languages as the Vikings settled there for centuries, William the Conqueror is after all the direct heir of Rollo the Viking Chieftain).
Hence, "War" in (Old Norman French) was pronounced "Werre" (and war originates again from Norman French not directly from Old English), or "Waitier" (which the English term "wait" came from, which in French is spelled "Guetter")
And about "Guard" I think (not sure) that "Ward" have the same origin but this one was more influenced by Norman French than French itself, so this world kept the original "W" sound.

I am for using the names of how the folk live there call it, no more Spain, but now España, no more China, but now it's Chungkuo.*

* Zhongguo is more appropriate (official Pinyin spelling of China in Chinese)

But where does "developer" come from in Français? Well, from Old Français "desveloper", which came from des + veloper, from Germanic "wrappan", however, Français seems to have butchered this one, so "make" is better here, too.

Well do not blame the French for this one, it is more the Late Latins that "butchered it", since this term was already used in Vulgar Latin (and nowadays you have also a similar term in Italian).

I don't know what you meant by "note". "One more thing to read?" In this meaning, "line" works fine. Maybe you mean "heed" or "thought" isntead, though.

By note, I mean similarly as NB (from Classical Latin notā bene ‎(“note well”) "which see for more". I still don't get how you can change it with 'line' though.

This is a shared Indoeuropean word, there is English "line", Spanish "línea", Russian "лён" (lön), unluckily in the other tongues, these were beat out through Arabic or Latin loanwords. But it is Germanic, no Latinists had anything to do with "line" in the English tongue.

Well from what I see, the current meaining of the word "line" was influenced by the Latinist meaning more than the original Germanic one. But anyway it is not that important, Latin or Germanic, this term has the same origin.

Forgot this one:

Gaulish is a Celtic tongue, Celtic words do not belong in English, either.

Well "Celtic tongues" (or more precisely Brythonic ones) also influenced English, but it wasn't a "Foreign" influence such as French, Latin or German, this influence was led by the Native Britons who were "germanized" more than anything, Brythonic languages worked as "substrates" (substrate: indigenous language) and not "superstrates" (a language imposed upon a population that previously spoke another language). Hence Celtic words totally belong to English, historically speaking and in terms of heritage.

Some linguists even argued that Brythonic influence went not only in the vocabulary but in the very particular structure and grammar of English (hence the difference of English compared to other Germanic languages in term of grammar and construction), some hints of Celtic influence:

* Old English had case and gender word endings for nouns, pronouns and adjectives while at the time Brittonic did not have these endings. The endings in English were lost.

* Old English had several versions of the word 'the' while at the time Brittonic only had one. The variations of 'the' were lost in English. The lack of different forms of 'the' is an unusual language feature shared only by Celtic and English in this region.

* English developed a fixed word order, which was present earlier in Brittonic.

* DO-periphrasis in a variety of uses. Modern English is dependent on a semantically neutral 'do' in some negative statements and questions, e.g. 'I don't know' rather than 'I know not". This feature is linguistically very rare. Celtic languages use a similar structure, but without dependence. The usage is frequent in Cornish and Middle Cornish.

* Rise of the periphrastic aspect, particularly the progressive form (i.e. BE verb-ing: I am writing, she was singing etc.). The progressive form developed in the change from Old English to Middle English. Similar constructs are rare in Germanic languages and not completely analogous.

(from: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Diglossia+in+Anglo-Saxon+England,+or+what+was+spoken+Old+English+like%3F-a0125953281)

So again English is how it is, it is a language that experienced many different and mixed influences, more than any other languages (I think, see Middle English creole hypothesis for more information) in Western Europe, and it is clearly impossible to change every words to German/Germanic, because it would basically make another new language (Unlike Icelandic which was poorly influenced and kept many ancient words).