Talk:World History Lecture Seven

Old English

I like what you have to say about it, but I don't agree that it's as unrecognizable as (I think) you're trying to say.

Eft he axode, hu ðære ðeode nama wære þe hi of comon. Him wæs geandwyrd, þæt hi Angle genemnode wæron. Þa cwæð he, "Rihtlice hi :sind Angle gehatene, for ðan ðe hi engla wlite habbað, and swilcum gedafenað þæt hi on heofonum engla geferan beon."

Some simple pronouns like "he" are recognizable, as are the Old English equivalents of verbs like "were".

This is just my take on it, but if you even hazard a guess at OE pronunciation, and read the line aloud, there are several words (even nouns) that are recognizable! And there are the obvious ones, as you pointed out, like "him", "that", "for", "and".

• Eft: after
• axode: asked (the x>ks is called metathesis, and people still do it (improperly) in English today when they say "aksed")
• engla: angel
• heofonum: heaven (alright, there's a case ending, but it still looks like heaven!)

Great work! Go ahead and add a paragraph in the lecture with your observations, if you like. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 17:34, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Oh my gosh, thanks for that fast response! I hardly had time to finish reading about feudalism, which I found developed in France a couple of centuries before England. Since Middle English borrowed the word "tyranny" from French "tyrannie", is it possible that the concept may have existed in France/French before we grabbed the word in the 14th century? The same could be said I guess for numbers. I might not understand what you're trying to say, but Latin had plenty of numbers, so did German and others (Hebrew, Arabic?), and they were all around before English was even on the horizon! (My girlfriend is a linguistics major and talks about etymology ALL the time. It's a good thing I'm equally interested in it :)

I don't see any contradictions with the lecture in what you say above.--Andy Schlafly 17:59, 8 March 2009 (EDT)