The evolution of the English language over time

[Matey]

A squib is a small explosive device. A damp squib would not work well. Hence the term.

Kipling wrote, "A snider (Enfield rifle) squibbed in the jungle ...."
Far more poetic than "a snider shot rang out ...."

 

[prod_pep]

With the result that we end up increasingly spotting mangled expressions ("eggcorns") in social media, such as "a damp squid", "a mute point", "lack toast intolerant", "to wet your appetite" or "an escaped goat".

My favourite of these is definitely 'doggy-dog world'.

 

[swt_passenger]

I just remembered at junior school 60 years ago another lad wrote that his clothes were kept in a “chestive draws”.

Obviously I now realise he was just getting a head start on the of/ve conundrum…

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

One might ponder how the northern and southern European languages have been affected by such "language evolution", notably French, German and Spanish.

Perhaps even more interesting is what has happened to the three main Scandinavian languages (Danish, Norwegian, Swedish). They were once all mutually intelligible but apparently starting 200-250 years ago they starting diverging such that today the understanding has become limited. I can't remember the detail but something along the lines of native speakers can understand one of the other two but not the other while at the same time can be understood only by native speakers of the other of the two foreign languages. So the common roots of the three are very obvious but conversation relies on at least one participant having actively learned the language of the other.

Languages inevitably evolve over time but it cannot be forecast as to exactly how such evolution will take place. Trying to regulate such changes is therefore something of a fool's errand but there will always be people who try. Think of L'Academie Francaise and its bitter opposition to the use of le weekend.

 

[Strat-tastic]

That’s how language evolves. From mishearing things and making “errors”.

Language is created by the ignorant, which seems somehow wrong.

How about the misuse of 'off of'?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

One might ponder how the northern and southern European languages have been affected by such "language evolution", notably French, German and Spanish.

Funny you should mention that. I haven't seen (or sought out) any data on the prevalence of things like dyslexia in non-Anglophone countries, but I had a friend in sixth form who couldn't spell in English for love nor money, but he was fluent in Spanish whether spoken or written.
I don't recall ever seeing the equivalent of the "Grocer's apostrophe" in other languages, but as I'm not fluent in any of those languages I may well have missed them.

 

[takno]

Perhaps even more interesting is what has happened to the three main Scandinavian languages (Danish, Norwegian, Swedish). They were once all mutually intelligible but apparently starting 200-250 years ago they starting diverging such that today the understanding has become limited. I can't remember the detail but something along the lines of native speakers can understand one of the other two but not the other while at the same time can be understood only by native speakers of the other of the two foreign languages. So the common roots of the three are very obvious but conversation relies on at least one participant having actively learned the language of the other.

Languages inevitably evolve over time but it cannot be forecast as to exactly how such evolution will take place. Trying to regulate such changes is therefore something of a fool's errand but there will always be people who try. Think of L'Academie Francaise and its bitter opposition to the use of le weekend.

I'd say conversation is possible between all of them, but might go a bit slowly, and is always improved by learning the most important differences in vocabulary. People near borders are usually pretty much fine with the nearest other language.

Even within the languages though, there are two very different ways of writing Norwegian only one of which is learned to a high level by most students, and all of them have some pretty monumental regional vowel shifts as well as regional vocabulary. Most Norwegians are okay with this, but it definitely makes things more exciting for foreigners, and ultimately is probably one of the reasons why English is quite so prevalent there.

I'd argue that whatever the spoken language in an area, we should try to stick to a fairly consistent and slow-changing set of rules about how we write English, and we should avoid the urge to write phonetically. Having that allows people to safely express greater diversity in speech, and keeps English as a safe shared language for both native speakers and people trying to use it as a common second language.

 

[petergb]

How about the misuse of 'off of'?

C'mon, it's not that big of a deal

(ducks and runs)

 

[JamesT]

Perhaps even more interesting is what has happened to the three main Scandinavian languages (Danish, Norwegian, Swedish). They were once all mutually intelligible but apparently starting 200-250 years ago they starting diverging such that today the understanding has become limited. I can't remember the detail but something along the lines of native speakers can understand one of the other two but not the other while at the same time can be understood only by native speakers of the other of the two foreign languages. So the common roots of the three are very obvious but conversation relies on at least one participant having actively learned the language of the other.

Interesting. I was under the impression that there was a degree of mutual intelligibility. Admittedly this has mostly come from watching The Bridge, where I believe the Swedish and Danish characters each spoke their native languages.

 

[Railsigns]

I just remembered at junior school 60 years ago another lad wrote that his clothes were kept in a “chestive draws”.

Search eBay, and you will find several "Chester draws" for sale.

 

[swt_passenger]

Search eBay, and you will find several "Chester draws" for sale.

In one particular town hopefully…

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Interesting. I was under the impression that there was a degree of mutual intelligibility. Admittedly this has mostly come from watching The Bridge, where I believe the Swedish and Danish characters each spoke their native languages.

As per @takno above people in border areas pretty much by necessity are more likely to know the neighbouring language. The opening of the Øresund link will have made a significant impact on such cross-border communication as featured in The Bridge.

 

[urbophile]

Agreed - for me, the test is to take away the should / could and check for it still making sense.

So:
"I should have done it" - makes sense
"I could have done it" - makes sense
"I have done it" - makes sense
"I of done it" - is meaningless

"Should of" or "could of" might pass muster in casual writing, though it's still wrong, but definitely shouldn't appear in any professional context.

My (not so hidden) pedant agrees. But there are several examples of English spellings which derive from similar mishearing. orange is one, and I believe uncle: both originally spelt with an initial N* but became 'an orange'; 'an uncle'. Language evolves for various reasons, good and bad, but you can't turn back the clock. However you can resist change, which isn't quite the same thing, and I'll resist 'could of' as long as I live.

There is no logical reason to object to train station apart from anti-American prejudice, which I admit I suffer from but admit defeat on this.

*as in Spanish naranja. I'm afraid I don't know the origin of uncle.

I call it 'comprehensive school English'.

"You should of taken my advise and accepted there offer, your going to get alot of hassle and possibly loose everything."

It's so widespread and consistent, particularly amongst 'Gen X' (the comprehensive school generation), that it must have been taught?

As a former comprehensive school English teacher I plead not guilty.

What annoys me is the increasing tendency to change the word order when using the word "below", as in:-

"..the below items are on special offer.." , whereas it should be "...the items below are on special offer...".

I belive this is an example of an "indianism", where a sentence is translated from an Indian language, and they keep the word order for the Indian language rather that change it to the English word order.

When you translate the French phrase la voiture rouge into English you say the red car rather than the car red because in French the adjective is placed after the noun whereas in English it is the other way round.

Surely more likely to be assimilation to the usage of 'above'? You would say 'the above items' without raising an eyebrow.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I'm afraid I don't know the origin of uncle.

Latin origins (= 'avunculus'), then, more recently, Old French (= 'oncle'). A number of similar sounding words with similar meanings in Dutch / German / Danish.

 

[Gloster]

Going back to the original point (as usual I am quick on the uptake), my opinion is that nowadays a lot of people write as they speak. They either don‘t bother to or, more likely (in my opinion), can’t adjust their mind to the slight differences in thought processes needed to write clearly. There are many occasions where speech, unless very carefully enunciated, produces sounds that slide into one other: generally we know what is meant by the sense of what is being said. Writing requires more precision in order to be both easy to read and to avoid misunderstanding. Furthermore, a speaker can often be asked for clarification by a listener or can go on a bit in order to cover all the possibilities. When writing there is far less likely to be immediate ‘feedback’, but rambling on is only likely to lead to confusion.

I have no objection to language developing, but it should be to meet new situations and avoid confusion with existing words. It should not be to encourage sloppy use of existing words or adding extra meanings to an existing one, particularly when there is already a perfectly good word available for that meaning.

A particular bugbear is alibi, although the misuse has been around for a while. An alibi is a specific defence against an accusation in that you were elsewhere at the time: it is not a common or garden excuse.

As per @takno above people in border areas pretty much by necessity are more likely to know the neighbouring language. The opening of the Øresund link will have made a significant impact on such cross-border communication as featured in The Bridge.

Interesting. I was under the impression that there was a degree of mutual intelligibility. Admittedly this has mostly come from watching The Bridge, where I believe the Swedish and Danish characters each spoke their native languages.

There is a peculiarity in Sweden that in Skåne, the area around Malmö and Helsingborg, the locals speak the same grammatical Swedish as the rest of the country, but with an accent akin to Danish. When I lived in rural central Sweden thirty years ago we had one chap from Malmö and I, at least initially, had less trouble understanding him than the others because I had spent a year in Denmark beforehand.

It is more than twenty-five years since I lived in Scandinavia, but then Danes, Swedes and Norwegians could read each other’s languages without too much trouble. However, Danish has different pronunciations and rhythm to the other two, while Norwegian is grammatically closer to Danish. There are plenty of false friends, for example rolig: in Danish this means calm and peaceful, in Swedish it means lively and enjoyable.

 

[Calthrop]

There is a peculiarity in Sweden that in Skåne, the area around Malmö and Helsingborg, the locals speak the same grammatical Swedish as the rest of the country, but with an accent akin to Danish. When I lived in rural central Sweden thirty years ago we had one chap from Malmö and I, at least initially, had less trouble understanding him than the others because I had spent a year in Denmark beforehand.

It is more than twenty-five years since I lived in Scandinavia, but then Danes, Swedes and Norwegians could read each other’s languages without too much trouble. However, Danish has different pronunciations and rhythm to the other two, while Norwegian is grammatically closer to Danish. There are plenty of false friends, for example rolig: in Danish this means calm and peaceful, in Swedish it means lively and enjoyable.

I have seen it suggested that Danish is a decidedly difficult language for non-Scandinavians to learn -- markedly more so than the other Scandinavian tongues. Admittedly, I have this information chiefly from one of George MacDonald Fraser's "Flashman" novels -- from which I get a lot of my knowledge or otherwise, of historical and other matters from the period concerned -- the reader is aware that the author portrays "Flashy" as harbouring various strong prejudices, sometimes at variance with widely-accepted views.

It would be interesting to have your opinion on the difficulty or otherwise, for "furriners" to achieve any competence in Danish.

 

[takno]

I have seen it suggested that Danish is a decidedly difficult language for non-Scandinavians to learn -- markedly more so than the other Scandinavian tongues. Admittedly, I have this information chiefly from one of George MacDonald Fraser's "Flashman" novels -- from which I get a lot of my knowledge or otherwise, of historical and other matters from the period concerned -- the reader is aware that the author portrays "Flashy" as harbouring various strong prejudices, sometimes at variance with widely-accepted views.

It would be interesting to have your opinion on the difficulty or otherwise, for "furriners" to achieve any competence in Danish.

I'd generally characterise Danish as sounding like Norwegian as pronounced by somebody with a mouth full of marbles. It's fiddly to say the least

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Have Scandinavian languages had much an effect on the evolution of the English language, anytime recently?

A thousand years or so ago, perhaps, this after the Vikings had invaded much of the country (as is even now still reflected by various Old Norse place names) but more recently, surely not?

 

[Lloyds siding]

Search eBay, and you will find several "Chester draws" for sale.

I'm looking at property ads a lot at the moment: other gems include:
Attack windows, dorma bungalows, another with American style frij.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I'd generally characterise Danish as sounding like Norwegian as pronounced by somebody with a mouth full of marbles. It's fiddly to say the least

I've heard it said that Danes give their words a thorough chewing before spitting them out! Based on a couple of visits there it seems to me to be a fair description at least to English ears.

Have Scandinavian languages had much an effect on the evolution of the English language, anytime recently?

A thousand years or so ago, perhaps, this after the Vikings had invaded much of the country (as is even now still reflected by various Old Norse place names) but more recently, surely not?

I'm inclined to agree. The Norman Conquest eventually stopped Nordic influence in its tracks. Nevertheless English remains an obviously Germanic language even if it is considerably removed from German.

As for more modern influences the most obvious is American but there is also some from the various immigrant communities from all over the Commonwealth. In particular there are many young Londoners whose accent is much nearer West Indian than Cockney regardless of skin colour. I suspect this comes as a shock to those who come from places with few immigrants. Inevitably this will soon be reflected in the vocabulary they use.

 

[tomuk]

The Norman Conquest eventually stopped Nordic influence in its tracks.

Which is quite ironic given the Normans origins.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If you look are the area where the Celtic languages survived over the last two millennia, it also included part of the western coastal side of France.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I'm inclined to agree. The Norman Conquest eventually stopped Nordic influence in its tracks.

Which is quite ironic given the Normans origins.

Hadn't the descendants of the Vikings who had invaded Normandy in the late 8th / early 9th Centuries, essentially adopted Old French as their language of choice by the time their attention switched to England in the 11th Centrury, albeit retaining some Old Norse elements?

 

[Sm5]

One might ponder how the northern and southern European languages have been affected by such "language evolution", notably French, German and Spanish.

Latin…

Thats why its used in medicine, and overall not a bad language to learn, as it binds most of a continent in a common language base.

Crown.. Kroon, Krona, Corona, Coroa, Couronne….

chances are you speak the word, most of the continent will figure it out.

It's maybe one way, but more often it just seems to be a demonstration that someone perhaps doesn't have anything more than the most rudimentary grasp of the English language.

With the result that we end up increasingly spotting mangled expressions ("eggcorns") in social media, such as "a damp squid", "a mute point", "lack toast intolerant", "to wet your appetite" or "an escaped goat".

Cowboy has continued different meanings across the atlantic.

As for more modern influences the most obvious is American but there is also some from the various immigrant communities from all over the Commonwealth. In particular there are many young Londoners whose accent is much nearer West Indian than Cockney regardless of skin colour. I suspect this comes as a shock to those who come from places with few immigrants. Inevitably this will soon be reflected in the vocabulary they use.

i find Australian language, and culture is closer to Mancunians than Americans.

Though Australians are closer to British culturally, I feel they pretend to be more American, yet Canadians are much more like Americans but pretend to be closer to British myself.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There is a noticeable similarity in certain written words in both Welsh and French. one example being eglwys and eglise for church.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

There is a noticeable similarity in certain written words in both Welsh and French. one example being eglwys and eglise for church.

The above words go back a long way and undoubtedly have a common source.

In Latin, 'Ecclesia' means a church or place of worship, and the word probably also has Ancient Greek origins.

 

[Broucek]

The Swedes and Norwegians love to mock the Danish accent....

 

[Gloster]

The Swedes and Norwegians love to mock the Danish accent....

…and the Danes and Norwegians just mock the Swedes.

 

[Broucek]

…and the Danes and Norwegians just mock the Swedes.

And the Danes and Swedes think the Norwegians are workshy layabouts....

 

[Calthrop]

There is a noticeable similarity in certain written words in both Welsh and French. one example being eglwys and eglise for church.

The above words go back a long way and undoubtedly have a common source.

In Latin, 'Ecclesia' means a church or place of worship, and the word probably also has Ancient Greek origins.

One which tickles me, is "window" -- ffenestr (or something very like that) in Welsh: from the Latin fenestra -- as seems to be the case in most Western European languages -- even German (Fenster); just English appears to insist on bucking the trend with its w-word.