News (Languages) Linguist makes sensational claim: English is a Scandinavian language

[Aurifex]

Now that I know some Old English I find it hard to believe that modern English doesn't directly descend from it.

I mistook your standpoint initially; it seemed you were implying you accept that Modern English isn't directly descended from Old English. Ambiguity would have been removed if you'd said: "Now that I know some Old English I find the assertion that Modern English doesn't directly descend from it hard to believe."
I don't think there needs to be any controversy over the ancestry of Modern English; the evidence for the extent of the contributions different languages have made to it is plain for everyone to see. It's partly a Scandinavian language, yes, but wanting to call it a Scandinavian language in the same sense as Norwegian or Danish is just fanciful. That said, I suspect nothing will unseat Faarlund and Emmonds from their hobby horse now that they've mounted it.

 

[Pacifica]

What is ambiguous in "I find it hard to believe that modern English doesn't directly descend from it"....?

 

[Aurifex]

What is ambiguous in "I find it hard to believe that modern English doesn't directly descend from it"....?

The uncertainty as to whether or not you are acknowledging there to be any substance in the claim that Modern English doesn't descend directly from Old English.

 

[Pacifica]

The uncertainty as to whether or not you are acknowledging there to be any substance in the claim that Modern English doesn't descend directly from Old English.

I don't understand. I said that "I find it hard to believe"...

 

[Aurifex]

I don't understand. I said that "I find it hard to believe"...

It's not your finding something hard to believe that is the critical part of the sentence; the critical part is the perceived status of what it is you find it hard to believe.

In your sentence, the reader doesn't know whether you are presenting the clause "that modern English doesn't directly descend from [Old English]" as an acknowledged fact that you simply find it hard to believe, or merely as a claim made by a particular person that you find hard to believe. In my sentence the reader knows that it is the latter.

When or if you reply, please don't say "What difference does it make whether it's being presented as a fact or merely a claim, if all I'm saying is that I find it hard to believe?" or words to that effect; the difference in meaning is substantial, as I hope I've made plain.

 

[Pacifica]

Ok, I see now.

 

[Abbatiſſæ Scriptor]

Perhaps this ſhould have been titled
SENSATIONAL CLAIM MAKES LINGUIST

 

[Tomer]

Having left my Danish behind me for a while (so that I may focus on Latin, which requires way more brain-cells), still I bear in mind so many similarities between English and Danish, both literal and grammatical (actually, even some proverbs are precisely the same). I suppose the Danelaw reign over England had quite a lot to do with it. Almost any city/town/village ending with "shire" (there are more such Danish suffixes) is a relic of that era, if I remember my history correctly. Oh, and since it is still a Latin-oriented forum, Latin "pro-sit" is used as "bless you", when sneezing.

's not your finding something hard to believe that is the critical part of the sentence; the critical part is the perceived status of what it is you find it hard to believe.

This truly shows how hard one has to work in order to master just a single language, even his own mother tongue. It is just so tempting to try having a level of fluency in as many as possible
Luckily, there are places such as these Fora, in which one may find himself immersed in them all over.

P.S.
Pacis puella, I really admire that resilient dexterity of yours when it comes to tending languages. Your English is quite impressive (not mentioning your Latin of cousrse... ).
P.P.S.
I hear native speakers degrading whatever's left of Hebrew on a daily basis, but I suppose that's a worldly problem.

 

[Pacifica]

P.S.
Pacis puella, I really admire that resilient dexterity of yours when it comes to tending languages. Your English is quite impressive (not mentioning your Latin of cousrse... ).

Thank you... I tend only a few, but as lovingly as I can.

 

[Ater Gladius]

P.P.S.
I hear native speakers degrading whatever's left of Hebrew on a daily basis, but I suppose that's a worldly problem.

You can't really expect that much since Hebrew is a revived language, mayhaps.

If you went 400 years back in time and became an Italian duke, perhaps what you would say is "I hear native speakers degrading whatever's left of Latin on a daily basis, but I suppose that's a worldly problem."

 

[Mettius]

You can't really expect that much since Hebrew is a revived language, mayhaps.

If you went 400 years back in time and became an Italian duke, perhaps what you would say is "I hear native speakers degrading whatever's left of Latin on a daily basis, but I suppose that's a worldly problem."

Edit: I misunderstood you first, but still the small differences between Biblical, Mishnaic, and Modern Hebrew cannot be compared to those between Latin and Italian.

 

[Tomer]

You can't really expect that much since Hebrew is a revived language, mayhaps.

If you went 400 years back in time and became an Italian duke, perhaps what you would say is "I hear native speakers degrading whatever's left of Latin on a daily basis, but I suppose that's a worldly problem."​

​

True, but that's quite far from what I meant with that. For the protocol (assuming you do not speak any form of Hebrew), Biblical Hebrew has very little to do with, say, the way our peddlers shout out their goods (I wouldn't mind giving you a full scale research, but it's too far from this thread). By "degrading" I intended to point out both slang's & Internet/modern era's deteriorating effects (yeah, yeah, there are good effects too, but dare you mentioning them, you corny laudatori temporis novi out there! ). Though I do suppose most people who are aware of their native tongue's capabilities (i.e. literature, prose or even a dignified conversation) in oppose to what's actually being done with it, would feel somewhat like that.​

 

[Pacifica]

Laudator is third decl.

 

[Tomer]

Damn straight it is. *Laudatores
That said, does "novi" convey what I wanted it to convey?

 

[Pacifica]

I suppose it depends on what exactly you wanted to convey, but as "praisers of the new time" it seems to make sense.

 

[Tomer]

Cool then, merci beaucoup.

 

[Pacifica]

De rien. Speak French, or a bit?

 

[Tomer]

Je peux comprendre, mais pas bein m'exprimer. J'etudie* seul et je me sens que je peux seulement lire et ecrire, parce que, malheureusement, jamais eu la chance pour vraiment parler.


*ain't got no stress mark to show that it's meant to be in past-tense.

 

[Pacifica]

Je peux comprendre, mais pas bien m'exprimer. J'étudie* seul et je me sens que je peux seulement lire et écrire, parce que, malheureusement, je n'ai jamais eu la chance pour de vraiment parler.

Just a few little things.

*ain't got no stress mark to show that it's meant to be in past-tense.

What do you mean? Do mean you wanted to say "I studied" and not "I study"? "J'étudie" is only present tense. "I studied" = "j'ai étudié".

It seems like you're another one that's touched a lot of languages.

 

[Tomer]

What do you mean? Do mean you wanted to say "I studied" and not "I study"? "J'étudie" is only present tense. "I studied" = "j'ai étudié"..

Oui, c'est vrai. I ain't got no French keyboard, thus all of the "accents" are fairly difficult to follow, plus I did forget the "have" on my supposed present perfect "have studied".

je n'ai jamais eu la chance pourde vraiment parler.

Oh, I didn't realise I had to repeat the pronoun again.

I miss practicing French, but it'll have to wait 'till I'm in some Francophone country. I bet it'll be way easier after having some more substantial Latin.

Merci une fois de plus