Education & Reference How was the English language invented?

[DidakDelight]

...

..There are alternative, equally correct word orders, I am using the one that highlights differences - many of which are being picked up in Italian now to reflect English word orders!....

The beauty of English and also romance languages is the many different ways one can say the same thing:

I'll word some of your examples below differently in English and then you can translate them into Italian to see if the english structure is the same as latin.

The point I'm trying to make is your statement is wrong. Latin structure is not completely different from English.
English can be very similar and it can also be very different but it is not completely different.

I'll translate your first couple of sentences from your last post directly into spanish, where you can see the structure is 95% the same as english with red highlighting the differences.

"Whilst that is true, the sentences you've used - as you mentioned - are very basic ones. If you wanted to say anything slightly more complex, you wouldn't say it in the same order."
Mientras esto es verdad, las oraciones que has usado, como tu mentionaste - son muy basicos. Si uno quisiera decir algo un poco mas complejo, uno no lo diria en la misma orden


Who is the letter for?
Per chi è la lettera? (For who is the letter?)
What are you doing? .. I'm writing a letter... TO who?


Whose is the book?
Di chi è il libro? (Of who is the book?)
It's John's.
È di John. (It is of John.)
Who is the owner of this book?
The book belongs to John



The book is mine.
Il libro è il mio. (The book is the my.)
The book belongs to me

My sister has arrived.
È arrivata (la) mia sorella. (Is arrived (the) my sister.)
My sister is here

...

And I would argue that the auxiliary verb "have" does not always translate the same into Italian. In English, you always use the verb have. I have eaten, I have slept, I have been. In Italian (other Romance languages too?), the auxiliary verb may be 'have' or 'be', depending on whether the verb is transitive (have) or intransitive (be).

When it comes to any of the perfect tenses Spanish, French and Portuguese only use "have".

ENG - I have eaten
SPA - Yo he comido
FRE - J'ai comi
POR - Eu tenho comido

French uses 'be' as an auxiliary but in other tenses but lets not get started on french ..
I dont know about Romanian, Catalan, Occitan or any of the other Italian and Spanish dialects.

 

[BomberGal]

The beauty of English and also romance languages is the many different ways one can say the same thing:

I'll word some of your examples below differently in English and then you can translate them into Italian to see if the english structure is the same as latin.

The point I'm trying to make is your statement is wrong. Latin structure is not completely different from English.
English can be very similar and it can also be very different but it is not completely different.

But it is still not based on Latin. The sentence structure comes from Germanic roots, not Latin. Latin has been simplified, obviously, given that it was a very complex language. Italian is the language that has remained closest to its Latin roots, and provides the best examples of how Latin was composed. When you want to see where English has got its structure, look at Frisian or Dutch, or even the Scandinavian languages - the similarities are a lot higher, and whilst, sure, the French went everywhere, they don't all have the same Latin influence that English does.

I'd put good money on many languages, if you composed simple sentences - not just Romance or Germanic, but others too - retaining a similar word order. There are only so many ways you can say "the car is blue". Most Indo-European languages probably do this. All of the following have the same structure:

Romance:
Latin: Car est puteulanus.
French: La voiture est bleue.
Italian: L'auto è blu.

Germanic:
German: Das Auto ist blau.
Dutch: De auto is blauw.
Norwegian: Bilen er blå.

Slavic:
Czech: Auto je modrá.
Serbian: Automobil je plava.

Baltic:
Latvian: Auto ir zilā krāsā.
Lithuanian: Automobilis yra mėlyna.

Greek:
To af̱tokíni̱to eínai ble.

But I wouldn't say they all reflect Latin. Since Latin and Germanic languages are all part of the Indo-European family, it's unsurprising that you might have many elements retained, but I think within that - without comparing to languages outside of IE, the order is different enough. My statement that they are 'completely different' obviously remains within the realm of IE languages - I'm not comparing to Asian or African languages here.

I'll translate your first couple of sentences from your last post directly into spanish, where you can see the structure is 95% the same as english with red highlighting the differences.

I don't know why Spanish has diverged the way it has (looking it up it has a significant Arabic influence), but don't they say Spanish is generally the easiest Romance language to learn for an English speaker? I don't think it reflects Latin origins quite as closely. At any rate, a lot of what you said in Spanish would not be used in the same order in Italian. Many differences probably appear minor but within the scope of the discussion I think that's quite significant.

Who is the letter for?
Per chi è la lettera? (For who is the letter?)
What are you doing? .. I'm writing a letter... TO who?
etc

You can translate all of these back into another language with a different word order, though. I went for the most literal translation.

Also, you wouldn't translate "doing" into Italian as "doing", you would translate it as "do". I think most Latin languages are like this aren't they - you shouldn't use the gerund (-ing) to describe your current action unless you are for some reason particularly stressing it, but in English you use it all the time. It's things like this that differentiate the languages and highlight the different origins. German is big on '-ing' isn't it?

As for the auxiliary verb, according to Wikipedia, French has retained usage of 'to be' in the same way Italian has, but I don't speak French. (e.g. Je suis allé.)

Interestingly I just stumbled across this table: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexical_similarity

English has approximately the same Lexical similarity with French as it does Russian! Would never have guessed that.

 

[WorldGame94]

Language of course evolves. I meant different language groups have nothing to do with the evolution of humans.

See, you didn't realise Germanic was a family of languages, and yet you were adamant English wasn't as closely related. If you don't know the basic facts, please stop arguing, or at least choose to learn something. Don't you see why people get frustrated when you argue when you're ignorant of something like that?

BTW - Latin structure is completely different from English. As are the Romance languages. I studied Italian, and amongst the immediate things that can differ are the order in which you place verb/subject/object, the position of adjectives and adverbs, the position of prepositions, verb conjugation* (including how many different moods and tenses there are in other languages!), the position of pronouns, which article is used if at all, where modifiers go, the way modal and auxiliary verbs work...and this is only me studying another language at a basic level, let alone what someone could tell you who had studied it in much more depth. Read DidakDelight's post a few up, with the examples of English and German sentences - English has generally retained this Germanic origin. I recommend you read the highly informative third post of this thread too.

*Romance languages are what is known as inflected, or at least are highly so. Germanic languages are generally not so much, including English. Check out this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflected#Inflection_in_various_languages . As an example, take the verb 'to go' - it has a few inflections. Go, goes, going, gone. Count the inflections for the verb 'to go' in Italian, "andare", and you get 46 inflections.

Ignorance, please, get a life. Whether germanic languages is large group or a collection of a few languages it has absolutely nothing do with how much i know about the English language.

I have also studied latin and italian in detail. I am part italian so i see the similarities with english in my daily life.
Many of the structural aspects are similar and you are fool to think that there are very few similarities. Don't get em wrong, English does have a germanic base. But English is not the strong Germanic language you make it out to be.
You have your head so far up your own ass, you don't even bother to consider other peoples opinions and facts.
I can't be bothered debating with you any longer, there is just no getting through.

 

[BomberGal]

Haha, oh dear. You spent most of the thread saying English was closer to Latin than Germanic when you didn't even know what Germanic meant.

I'm actually "considering the opinions" of DidakDelight, and I think he/she has made some great posts. Provided lots of thought-inspiring facts. You have provided no facts and got the pretty fundamental one (the definition of Germanic) wrong. I'd like to know what 'fact' you provided that I won't consider.

Anyway, I made the claim that Latin structure is different to English - whatever its derivatives do, the Latin language itself is, because word order is not important - inflection is. In English, you can't just throw around word order.

Perhaps you should read the link which shows the lexical similiarity to Latin languages. French was about 27%. German was 60%. German and French were 29% (higher than the relationship between English and French!). I'd say English has retained a hell of a lot of its Germanic influence while taking on a certain percentage of Latinate words.

As you tried to direct us to before, I direct you back to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_influence_in_English

The influence of Latin in English is therefore purely lexical and limited solely to loanwords taken from Latin etymons. (And yes I've read one of the references on that page.)

 

[hirdy_is_champ]

Information overload.

 

[DidakDelight]

Latin has been simplified, obviously, given that it was a very complex language. Italian is the language that has remained closest to its Latin roots, and provides the best examples of how Latin was composed

Classical latin has never been simplified.

Is Italian the closest language to Vulgar latin?
This has been debated for decades and there is no solid answer. It's become one big childish debate if you ask me.
There are solid cases for Romanian and even more so for Sardinian

But it is still not based on Latin. The sentence structure comes from Germanic roots, not Latin

You were saying "Latin structure is completely different from English. As are the Romance languages."

I am saying modern ENglish sentence structure is not completely different to romance languages and have backed it up with facts and examples.
It doesnt matter where English sentence structure gets its roots from, the facts are English sentence structure can be similar to that of the romance languages.

I don't know why Spanish has diverged the way it has (looking it up it has a significant Arabic influence), but don't they say Spanish is generally the easiest Romance language to learn for an English speaker? I don't think it reflects Latin origins quite as closely. At any rate, a lot of what you said in Spanish would not be used in the same order in Italian. Many differences probably appear minor but within the scope of the discussion I think that's quite significant.

If Spanish doesn't reflect latin origins (whatever this is supposed to mean) what origins does it reflect?
It borrows Arabic vocabulary the same as English & Italian but so what, vocabulary is just bells & whistles.

One thing is certain, and that is Spanish is closer to Italian than Italian is to Classical or Vulgar Latin

You can translate all of these back into another language with a different word order, though. I went for the most literal translation.

Active Voice or Passive Voice.
English passive voice is structurally the same to that of romance languages.
subject + auxiliary verb (be) + main verb (past participle)

SHow me a romance language that doesnt follow this structure for the passive voice?

Also, you wouldn't translate "doing" into Italian as "doing", you would translate it as "do".

Are you now claiming that in Italian you cannot literally ask some "What are you doing?" It's the same in English and the same in Spanish & Portuguese.
Romance languages including Italian use the progressive all the time.

ITA - che stai facendo? - what are you doing?

I think most Latin languages are like this aren't they - you shouldn't use the gerund (-ing) to describe your current action unless you are for some reason particularly stressing it , but in English you use it all the time.

People who speak Latin languages (the French less so) use the progressive all the time to describe what they are doing. It has nothing to do with "particularly stressing" something. They are simply describing what they are doing. The same as English.

It's things like this that differentiate the languages and highlight the different origins. German is big on '-ing' isn't it?

German doesn't have a progressive tense which applies an inflection to the end of a verb like the:

English -ing
Italian -ando, endo
spanish - ando, endo, iendo
Port - ando, endo, indo

All the romance langauges do it except French.
I dont know why the french dont add an inflection for the progressive.
It could possibly have something to do with the fact that Frankish was a west germanic language.

 

[XFactor1979]

english is west germanic

if you listen to german conversations occassionally you HEAR a word that sounds an awful lot like english

for example, you just have to watch the movie lola rennt (run lola run) and the phone conversation at the start between lola and manny they say ein hundert tausend!

however skinheads and rednecks think english is english and the only language in the whole world and everyone speaks it

BUZZ! Ficker!

Anyway not this has anything to do with anything, i was at the Fifa fan fest the other night at Darling Harbour, and i was speaking German to a german girl at the fanfest (germany vs argentina). when she started speaking deutsch it was almost like World war 2 again! Sometimes German can sound and appear so threatening! Or if you watched some of Joachim Loew's undubbed interviews: theres an awful lot of "EINE" and general spitting when they are speaking

 

[FIGJAM]

[YOUTUBE]MwiFZwPwDzA[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]Lktt_DlpsJA[/YOUTUBE]

 

[XFactor1979]

ca va vous inquitez pas

Ich bin... O was ist das?!?!? Ich bin?!?!?!

 

[dude316]

prbly sumthin lk this lol

The sooner we learn to speak in binary code the better.

 

[morri]

Study Anglistic(english) and you shall know it. I can tell you as much as that English is an Amalgam of many languages. It has a lot of components from old low German (or low saxon as some people call it) and a lot of old french.
Not to forget a bit of old norse especially in the north of England.