What if William the Conqueror had been defeated in Hastings?
What if William the Conqueror had been defeated in Hastings?
A while ago, I was wondering how English would look like if William the Conqueror failed to conquer Britain?
Because I haven't a lot af knowledge of historical linguistics, I would like to ask this question to the more experienced conlangers
and the native speakers of English, for I am not a native speaker.
Because I haven't a lot af knowledge of historical linguistics, I would like to ask this question to the more experienced conlangers
and the native speakers of English, for I am not a native speaker.
Last edited by Duaseron on Tue Dec 05, 2017 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- KathTheDragon
- Smeric
- Posts: 2139
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
- Location: Brittania
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
It would probably look very similar to how it does today. Grammatically... possibly identical. However, we probably wouldn't have the c=s/k problem we do today. Can someone add to this?
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Old English was already using <c> for both /k/ and /tS/, so the letter having two uses can't really be blamed on the Normans. We'd have fewer French loanwords I guess, but would we necessarily respell those where a French <c> represents /s/ ? Wikipedia says Dutch started replacing <c> with <k> in the tenth century ... would we necessarily have wound up doing the same if England weren't conquered in the eleventh? I don't see why that would have to happen.
(Dutch by the way also has the c=k/s "problem" in loanwords anyway so ...)
(Dutch by the way also has the c=k/s "problem" in loanwords anyway so ...)
<Anaxandridas> How many artists do you know get paid?
<Anaxandridas> Seriously, name five.
<Anaxandridas> Seriously, name five.
- KathTheDragon
- Smeric
- Posts: 2139
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
- Location: Brittania
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Well, one source I read (don't remember what) said that after the Normans arrived, English started respelling native words containing an 's' to have a 'c'. The example it gave was i:s > ice. Although, yes, it does appear that the pronunciation of 'c' would have to be learnt. But it's not as if we don't have to do that with some words.
We'd probably also have kept the Futhorc for longer, maybe even into our super-power era. We'd probably have switched to Latin eventually, but not in the 11th century.
Edit: look at this
We'd probably also have kept the Futhorc for longer, maybe even into our super-power era. We'd probably have switched to Latin eventually, but not in the 11th century.
Edit: look at this
- WeepingElf
- Smeric
- Posts: 1630
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
I think you are misinformed on this; Old English used the Latin alphabet already before the Norman conquest. Futhorc went out of use in the 9th century, after the Anglo-Saxons had been converted to Christianity.KathAveara wrote:We'd probably also have kept the Futhorc for longer, maybe even into our super-power era. We'd probably have switched to Latin eventually, but not in the 11th century.
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
- KathTheDragon
- Smeric
- Posts: 2139
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
- Location: Brittania
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Really? Oh.WeepingElf wrote:I think you are misinformed on this; Old English used the Latin alphabet already before the Norman conquest. Futhorc went out of use in the 9th century, after the Anglo-Saxons had been converted to Christianity.KathAveara wrote:We'd probably also have kept the Futhorc for longer, maybe even into our super-power era. We'd probably have switched to Latin eventually, but not in the 11th century.
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Sveinn Ástríðarson would come and finish Haraldr's job
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
I don't see an English with a defeated William the Conqueror looking identical to Anglish. There would be borrowings, but likely not as many. For meats, we'd likely just use the animal name as we do for chicken, turkey, and other more "exotic" forms of meat that we don't have a French-derived word from. For some reason I find us likely to retain the use of the word "pig" to mean the animal, with "swine" retained for the meat.
Overall, it'll depend much on how the alternate history progresses. Scientific vocabulary will probably still be Greek or Latinate; the question is which one will be used. I could see such an English, for instance, using a Germanic word (likely "shapeshift" or something along those lines) in most of the senses where real English uses the Latinate "transform", and using "transform" where real English would use the Greek "metamorphosize".
(Or alternatively they could use metamorphosize where we use transform... or something else entirely. That was just an example of a possibility.)
Overall, it'll depend much on how the alternate history progresses. Scientific vocabulary will probably still be Greek or Latinate; the question is which one will be used. I could see such an English, for instance, using a Germanic word (likely "shapeshift" or something along those lines) in most of the senses where real English uses the Latinate "transform", and using "transform" where real English would use the Greek "metamorphosize".
(Or alternatively they could use metamorphosize where we use transform... or something else entirely. That was just an example of a possibility.)
MI DRALAS, KHARULE MEVO STANI?!
- Curlyjimsam
- Lebom
- Posts: 205
- Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:57 am
- Location: Elsewhere
- Contact:
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
I'd predict maybe about as much non-Germanic vocabulary as Dutch or German? Or maybe a bit less, given the extra factor of the English Channel.
- Hallow XIII
- Avisaru
- Posts: 846
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 3:40 pm
- Location: Under Heaven
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Now that I think of it, you might want to give William the Conqueror his proper name in the title... ^^
陳第 wrote:蓋時有古今,地有南北;字有更革,音有轉移,亦勢所必至。
Read all about my excellent conlangsR.Rusanov wrote:seks istiyorum
sex want-PRS-1sg
Basic Conlanging Advice
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
William the Would-Be Overrunner?Hallow XIII wrote:Now that I think of it, you might want to give William the Conqueror his proper name in the title... ^^
MI DRALAS, KHARULE MEVO STANI?!
- Drydic
- Smeric
- Posts: 1652
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 12:23 pm
- Location: I am a prisoner in my own mind.
- Contact:
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Btw, it's metamorphose.bulbaquil wrote:I don't see an English with a defeated William the Conqueror looking identical to Anglish. There would be borrowings, but likely not as many. For meats, we'd likely just use the animal name as we do for chicken, turkey, and other more "exotic" forms of meat that we don't have a French-derived word from. For some reason I find us likely to retain the use of the word "pig" to mean the animal, with "swine" retained for the meat.
Overall, it'll depend much on how the alternate history progresses. Scientific vocabulary will probably still be Greek or Latinate; the question is which one will be used. I could see such an English, for instance, using a Germanic word (likely "shapeshift" or something along those lines) in most of the senses where real English uses the Latinate "transform", and using "transform" where real English would use the Greek "metamorphosize".
(Or alternatively they could use metamorphosize where we use transform... or something else entirely. That was just an example of a possibility.)
Conqueror.bulbaquil wrote:William the Would-Be Overrunner?Hallow XIII wrote:Now that I think of it, you might want to give William the Conqueror his proper name in the title... ^^
- Ser
- Smeric
- Posts: 1542
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:55 am
- Location: Vancouver, British Columbia / Colombie Britannique, Canada
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
To metamorphosize exists. I've probably even heard it much more often than to metamorphose.
- Salmoneus
- Sanno
- Posts: 3197
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: One of the dark places of the world
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Not sure I've heard it. Wiktionary lists it as "(US)".Serafín wrote:To metamorphosize exists. I've probably even heard it much more often than to metamorphose.
Blog: [url]http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/[/url]
But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!
But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!
- Herra Ratatoskr
- Avisaru
- Posts: 308
- Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 5:26 pm
- Location: Missouri (loves company!)
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
My two cents:
Honestly, I think that the most noticeable change would be in the spelling. The issue of c has been brought up, but I think that it probably would have continued with k/tS, without use to represent [s]. There were quite a few other spelling features that we have that I imagine owe there place in English to Norman scribal conventions.
Vocab wise, I think there would still be a heavy Latinate contingent, as a lot of them came into English centuries after the Conquest. We probably wouldn't have the "deeper" Latinate vocabulary that was truly Norman, such as the beef/cow style distinctions we have now, as well as the Norman-French/Parisian French doublets we have, like warranty/guarantee or chief/chef.
Grammatically, that's a bit harder to say. One the one hand, I'm of the opinion that the biggest factor in making English so distinct among its Germanic brethren (things like the rapid inflectional attrition, and some other syntactic peculiarities) was not the Norman conquest, but the Norse settlement of the Danelaw. This can be seen in the fact that the most innovative, modern looking dialects were the ones in the north, and their features spread south over the Middle English period. In the south, meanwhile, the Southern and Kentish dialects (which had no norse influence) were quite conservative.
On the other hand, one of those conservative southern dialects (the descendant of the West Saxon dialect) probably would have continued to be the prestige dialect, the language of court. It was already the basis of a somewhat standardized written language late in the Anglo-Saxon period, and might have worked to arrest the spread of northern innovations. This is more speculative though.
If I had to give a description of Non-Normanized English, I'd guess it would be spelled a bit different, RP would sound more like the West Country dialect, and grammatically it would be about as distinct from "real" English as Scots is, except more in the direction of Dutch or Frisian, if that makes sense. Probably still quite understandable, but it might be tricky to read initially, and trickier to speak "correctly".
Honestly, I think that the most noticeable change would be in the spelling. The issue of c has been brought up, but I think that it probably would have continued with k/tS, without use to represent [s]. There were quite a few other spelling features that we have that I imagine owe there place in English to Norman scribal conventions.
Vocab wise, I think there would still be a heavy Latinate contingent, as a lot of them came into English centuries after the Conquest. We probably wouldn't have the "deeper" Latinate vocabulary that was truly Norman, such as the beef/cow style distinctions we have now, as well as the Norman-French/Parisian French doublets we have, like warranty/guarantee or chief/chef.
Grammatically, that's a bit harder to say. One the one hand, I'm of the opinion that the biggest factor in making English so distinct among its Germanic brethren (things like the rapid inflectional attrition, and some other syntactic peculiarities) was not the Norman conquest, but the Norse settlement of the Danelaw. This can be seen in the fact that the most innovative, modern looking dialects were the ones in the north, and their features spread south over the Middle English period. In the south, meanwhile, the Southern and Kentish dialects (which had no norse influence) were quite conservative.
On the other hand, one of those conservative southern dialects (the descendant of the West Saxon dialect) probably would have continued to be the prestige dialect, the language of court. It was already the basis of a somewhat standardized written language late in the Anglo-Saxon period, and might have worked to arrest the spread of northern innovations. This is more speculative though.
If I had to give a description of Non-Normanized English, I'd guess it would be spelled a bit different, RP would sound more like the West Country dialect, and grammatically it would be about as distinct from "real" English as Scots is, except more in the direction of Dutch or Frisian, if that makes sense. Probably still quite understandable, but it might be tricky to read initially, and trickier to speak "correctly".
I am Ratatosk, Norse Squirrel of Strife!
There are 10 types of people in this world:
-Those who understand binary
-Those who don't
Mater tua circeta ibat et pater tuus sambucorum olficiebat!
There are 10 types of people in this world:
-Those who understand binary
-Those who don't
Mater tua circeta ibat et pater tuus sambucorum olficiebat!
- Hallow XIII
- Avisaru
- Posts: 846
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 3:40 pm
- Location: Under Heaven
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Most importantly, the English monarch would be Cwene Elizabeth II. Which is nice.
陳第 wrote:蓋時有古今,地有南北;字有更革,音有轉移,亦勢所必至。
Read all about my excellent conlangsR.Rusanov wrote:seks istiyorum
sex want-PRS-1sg
Basic Conlanging Advice
- KathTheDragon
- Smeric
- Posts: 2139
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
- Location: Brittania
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Oh yes, little/no native 'qu'! Hurrah!
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 370
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:22 pm
- Location: UK
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
I remember somebody writing a long passage of un-Normanised English somewhere. Has anyone else seen anything like that?
Update: I found this while I was looking for it. Not What I wanted, but it might be useful to somebody.
Update: I found this while I was looking for it. Not What I wanted, but it might be useful to somebody.
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 370
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:22 pm
- Location: UK
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Yes, but not exactly. A Norman defeat doesn't necessarily mean the English would be spurred towards maintaining "linguistic purity" - there would still be Greek/Latinate loanwords, just not necessarily as many, and not necessarily with the same connotations.
MI DRALAS, KHARULE MEVO STANI?!
- KathTheDragon
- Smeric
- Posts: 2139
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
- Location: Brittania
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
All it means is we never got the core vocab that we did get, plus whatever orthographical nightmares came with.
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
I suspect modern English would look and sound like a West Germanic version of the Scandinavian languages.
Perhaps another question would be what would have happened if the Danes had conquered beyond the Danelaw...would Danish be the equivalent of French in vocabulary overlay?
Perhaps another question would be what would have happened if the Danes had conquered beyond the Danelaw...would Danish be the equivalent of French in vocabulary overlay?
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
This is the most important part.KathAveara wrote:All it means is we never got the core vocab that we did get, plus whatever orthographical nightmares came with.
MI DRALAS, KHARULE MEVO STANI?!
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Tolkien believed (rightly, in my meaning) that the French overwinning was a fearful goatsong for the English wordhoard.
- communistplot
- Avisaru
- Posts: 494
- Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 6:49 am
- Location: La Ciudad de Nueva York
- Contact:
Re: What if William the Conquerer had been defeated in Hasti
Or if the Norwegians had won Stamford Bridge.FearfulJesuit wrote:I suspect modern English would look and sound like a West Germanic version of the Scandinavian languages.
Perhaps another question would be what would have happened if the Danes had conquered beyond the Danelaw...would Danish be the equivalent of French in vocabulary overlay?
The Artist Formerly Known as Caleone
My Conlangs (WIP):
Pasic - Proto-Northeastern Bay - Asséta - Àpzó
My Conlangs (WIP):
Pasic - Proto-Northeastern Bay - Asséta - Àpzó