Creation of the English Language

This can be read as an insinuation that neither jar nor I know how the sun gets it's energy and that we believe what Hovind says. Is that what you meant?ABE - We said fusion, not combustion, is the source, remember Edited by anglagard, : title

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

I think I just heard the Venerable Bede roll over in his grave. Are you talking about the Norman Conquest of 1066, and the Domesday Book? Because prior to this the English did not speak French. In fact the common people never spoke French.From Wikipedia at English language - Wikipedia

quote:

---

English is an Anglo-Frisian language. Germanic-speaking peoples from northwest Germany (Saxons and Angles) and Jutland (Jutes) invaded what is now known as Eastern England around the fifth century AD. It is a matter of debate whether the Old English language spread by displacement of the original population, or the native Celts gradually adopted the language and culture of a new ruling class, or a combination of both of these processes (see Sub-Roman Britain).

---

and

quote:

---

The Norman Conquest of England in 1066 profoundly influenced the evolution of the language. For about 300 years after this, the Normans used Anglo-Norman, which was close to Old French, as the language of the court, law and administration. By the fourteenth century, Anglo-Norman borrowings had contributed roughly 10,000 words to English, of which 75% remain in use. These include many words pertaining to the legal and administrative fields, but also include common words for food, such as mutton[7] and beef.[8] The Norman influence gave rise to what is now referred to as Middle English. Later, during the English Renaissance, many words were borrowed directly from Latin (giving rise to a number of doublets) and Greek, leaving a parallel vocabulary that persists into modern times. By the seventeenth century there was a reaction in some circles against so-called inkhorn terms.

---

So, former English colonies speak English better than the English speak English? Is this because they are more English than the English?ABE - Geography 101, England (or properly, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) is part of Europe.Are all you musings as wrong as this post?Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

You are wrong. I showed you exactly how you are wrong in Message 42.If you want to argue you are right, give a citation to any book, article, or website that supports this false claim that the population of England spoke French prior to 800. For bonus points, feel free to provide the name of the 'King of England' that supposedly made English the official language in 800 AD. ABE - Nevermind...see you have retracted.Edited by anglagard, : Posted at same time as previous message.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

Wow, guess what, it's a science thread. That means when you make claims, you are supposed to back them up.You still seem to insist that the "French" ruled England prior to 1066. (Provided you insist on calling the originally Viking Normans the "French") Show me any evidence that "France" occupied England prior to 1066. No book I have ever read supports this claim, and I've read dozens on English history, including the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, the original source of much of this history written by the people who were often there at the time.This article seems to contain no glaring errors: History of England - Wikipedia Would you consider actually reading it so you don't make wrong and unsupported claims in a science thread?Try this on the history of the Normans for further enlightenment.Normans - WikipediaOr this for the 'actual' (as opposed to the made up and unsupported) history of the English Language.History of English - WikipediaI believe I linked to this site before, why can't you read it before contradicting all other sources in history?As to any so-called King of England in 800AD would you like to know why you can't recall his name?Because there was no single country or political entity called England in 800AD. Disagree? show me England on this map from the above mentioned website on the history of England. As this is a science forum, please feel free to support your claims that the 'French' ran anything in 'England' prior to 1066 or that any such unidentifiable 'King of England' imposed the English Language upon the populace around 800AD.The rest of the world disagrees with your assessment and appears to have an endless amount of material that contradicts your position. Maybe you should actually read something about the history prior to insinuating you know more about it than everyone else on the planet.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza