LeBrok
Elite member
- Messages
- 10,261
- Reaction score
- 1,617
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Calgary
- Ethnic group
- Citizen of the world
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b Z2109
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H1c
I have asked myself a question, why grammar of many modern languages is simpler, sometimes much simpler, when compared to their root language?
English has a very simple grammar compared to its most influential source of Germanic family of Anglo-Saxon.
Romance languages are grammatically simplified form of Latin.
Maybe it means that Latin and Anglo-Saxon was for a long time a second language for people of conquered areas? There were no schools back then to teach young kids correct versions. The languages of conquerors became dominant, but because it was a second language and most of locals learned them from other locals who didn’t know the language perfectly, it became simplified. Latin became Vulgar Latin, Anglo-Saxon became Old English.
If I’m correct with this assertion we should be able to trace source of languages even if we don’t know history of it
I wonder how the situation pans for the whole family of Germanic languages. Can we trace the source of it to most influential country? Who has the most complicated grammar? Is it Danish, Swedish, or some places in Germany with some old difficult grammatically dialects?
Is it possible to do the same with Slavic languages? What can we get when we compare grammars of Polish, Bulgarian or Macedonian for example?
With Romance languages case is much easier. By historic records we can trace it to small area of Latin tribe.
Interesting is that when I’ve heard Basque language for the first time I thought that they were speaking Spanish. The melody, the pronunciation, the accents was very like Spanish. Mind that I don’t speak either, and my judgment was only audible.
Looks like in Spanish the vocabulary and grammar are Vulgar Latin but pronunciation and melody is area local, I guess. (Digression: Portuguese sounds different for me, sometimes similar to Slovenian or Slovakian with these very soft Č, Š, Ž. Maybe something to do with Galicia here and there? Old Celtic influence?)
Off course everything is based on assumption that original and long isolated languages had very complicated grammar. Plus some observation that spread of a language over none speaking population meant simplification of grammar.
What do you think guys?
English has a very simple grammar compared to its most influential source of Germanic family of Anglo-Saxon.
Romance languages are grammatically simplified form of Latin.
Maybe it means that Latin and Anglo-Saxon was for a long time a second language for people of conquered areas? There were no schools back then to teach young kids correct versions. The languages of conquerors became dominant, but because it was a second language and most of locals learned them from other locals who didn’t know the language perfectly, it became simplified. Latin became Vulgar Latin, Anglo-Saxon became Old English.
If I’m correct with this assertion we should be able to trace source of languages even if we don’t know history of it
I wonder how the situation pans for the whole family of Germanic languages. Can we trace the source of it to most influential country? Who has the most complicated grammar? Is it Danish, Swedish, or some places in Germany with some old difficult grammatically dialects?
Is it possible to do the same with Slavic languages? What can we get when we compare grammars of Polish, Bulgarian or Macedonian for example?
With Romance languages case is much easier. By historic records we can trace it to small area of Latin tribe.
Interesting is that when I’ve heard Basque language for the first time I thought that they were speaking Spanish. The melody, the pronunciation, the accents was very like Spanish. Mind that I don’t speak either, and my judgment was only audible.
Looks like in Spanish the vocabulary and grammar are Vulgar Latin but pronunciation and melody is area local, I guess. (Digression: Portuguese sounds different for me, sometimes similar to Slovenian or Slovakian with these very soft Č, Š, Ž. Maybe something to do with Galicia here and there? Old Celtic influence?)
Off course everything is based on assumption that original and long isolated languages had very complicated grammar. Plus some observation that spread of a language over none speaking population meant simplification of grammar.
What do you think guys?