It's like reading Shakespeare. Most people dont understand it, and need it to be broken down for them in simpler terms, lol.
The tongue(s) of Charlemagne
Previous page Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
<< <<in "827-839"!!!???? impossible! >>
Yes, Possible and Matter-of-Fact-ly.
<<Perdu ! Il parlait le vieil-anglais (une langue que tu ne comprendrais pas). >>
Old English IS English.
btw, No English speaker today would be able to understand Henry IV's English either. >>
Extract of wikipedia Englisc sprǣc (the "old english", also anglo-saxon):
Sēo Englisce sprǣc (ēac sēo Ealde Englisce sprǣc oþþe Engle-Seaxisce sprǣc gehāten; on Nīwum Engliscum Old English oþþe Anglo-Saxon) is West Germanisc sprǣc, þe fram Englalande ārās. Hēo is sibb tō þǣre Ealdan Fresiscan sprǣce and þǣre Seaxiscan sprǣce. Hēo is gāstlēas sprǣc, and hēo hæfþ 0 folc in 2002.
That is english????
You can say also Danish, Norwegian and German is English, and Spanish, Italian or Romanian is French...
Et sur Hugues Capet il parlait en FRANCIEN (dialecte Oïl de la région parisienne et donc ancêtre direct du français) , ou ROMAN, c'est à dire une forme proto-archaïque du français et non pas en FRANCIQUE langue germanique, d'ailleurs il avait besoin d'un interprète pour la comprendre!
Vous pouvez ne pas me croire, mais c'est contredire les historiens et ne pas accepter la vérité!
English men had to badly accept that their nobility so liked spoke only French during 4th century.
As the english king Edouard III said in french of course: "Messieurs, honni soit qui mal y pense !" (Most Noble Order of the Garter)
Yes, Possible and Matter-of-Fact-ly.
<<Perdu ! Il parlait le vieil-anglais (une langue que tu ne comprendrais pas). >>
Old English IS English.
btw, No English speaker today would be able to understand Henry IV's English either. >>
Extract of wikipedia Englisc sprǣc (the "old english", also anglo-saxon):
Sēo Englisce sprǣc (ēac sēo Ealde Englisce sprǣc oþþe Engle-Seaxisce sprǣc gehāten; on Nīwum Engliscum Old English oþþe Anglo-Saxon) is West Germanisc sprǣc, þe fram Englalande ārās. Hēo is sibb tō þǣre Ealdan Fresiscan sprǣce and þǣre Seaxiscan sprǣce. Hēo is gāstlēas sprǣc, and hēo hæfþ 0 folc in 2002.
That is english????
You can say also Danish, Norwegian and German is English, and Spanish, Italian or Romanian is French...
Et sur Hugues Capet il parlait en FRANCIEN (dialecte Oïl de la région parisienne et donc ancêtre direct du français) , ou ROMAN, c'est à dire une forme proto-archaïque du français et non pas en FRANCIQUE langue germanique, d'ailleurs il avait besoin d'un interprète pour la comprendre!
Vous pouvez ne pas me croire, mais c'est contredire les historiens et ne pas accepter la vérité!
English men had to badly accept that their nobility so liked spoke only French during 4th century.
As the english king Edouard III said in french of course: "Messieurs, honni soit qui mal y pense !" (Most Noble Order of the Garter)
<<English men had to badly accept that their nobility so liked spoke only French during 4th century. >>
4TH CENTURY???
To use your logic above, there was no French language EITHER in the 4th Century (if Old French be not French).
And to answer your question: Is this English????
>>Sēo Englisce sprǣc (ēac sēo Ealde Englisce sprǣc oþþe Engle-Seaxisce sprǣc gehāten; on Nīwum Engliscum Old English oþþe Anglo-Saxon) is West Germanisc sprǣc, þe fram Englalande ārās. Hēo is sibb tō þǣre Ealdan Fresiscan sprǣce and þǣre Seaxiscan sprǣce. Hēo is gāstlēas sprǣc, and hēo hæfþ 0 folc in 2002. <<
The Answer is YES! It is.
I can even read it:
Translation:
The English Language(also called the Old English Language or Anglo-Saxon Language; in Modern English "Old English" or "Anglo-Saxon") is a West Germanic language, which developed/arose in England. It is related to the Old Frisian language and the Saxon language. It is an extinct language, and has 0 speakers in 2002.
Easy.
and French speakers like to brag about being able to read Latin--Ha!
4TH CENTURY???
To use your logic above, there was no French language EITHER in the 4th Century (if Old French be not French).
And to answer your question: Is this English????
>>Sēo Englisce sprǣc (ēac sēo Ealde Englisce sprǣc oþþe Engle-Seaxisce sprǣc gehāten; on Nīwum Engliscum Old English oþþe Anglo-Saxon) is West Germanisc sprǣc, þe fram Englalande ārās. Hēo is sibb tō þǣre Ealdan Fresiscan sprǣce and þǣre Seaxiscan sprǣce. Hēo is gāstlēas sprǣc, and hēo hæfþ 0 folc in 2002. <<
The Answer is YES! It is.
I can even read it:
Translation:
The English Language(also called the Old English Language or Anglo-Saxon Language; in Modern English "Old English" or "Anglo-Saxon") is a West Germanic language, which developed/arose in England. It is related to the Old Frisian language and the Saxon language. It is an extinct language, and has 0 speakers in 2002.
Easy.
and French speakers like to brag about being able to read Latin--Ha!
<<< <<English men had to badly accept that their nobility so liked spoke only French during 4th century. >>
4TH CENTURY???
To use your logic above, there was no French language EITHER in the 4th Century (if Old French be not French).
>>>
I badly expressed myselfn forgiveness, I meant that French was used (and not English) in the court for 4 centuries ( XI-XV centuries).
<<The Answer is YES! It is.
I can even read it:
Translation:
The English Language(also called the Old English Language or Anglo-Saxon Language; in Modern English "Old English" or "Anglo-Saxon") is a West Germanic language, which developed/arose in England. It is related to the Old Frisian language and the Saxon language. It is an extinct language, and has 0 speakers in 2002.
Easy.
and French speakers like to brag about being able to read Latin--Ha! >>
Can be, personally I don't hide that the old French (Francien of the IXth century) is very different from current French.
Example (le serment de Strasbourg) of FRANCIEN (you can see this language is very close with latin and looks like a lot with Spanish for example):
«Pro deo amur et pro christian poblo et nostro commun salvament, d'ist di in avant, in quant deus savir et podir me dunat, si salvarai eo cist meon fradre Karlo et in aiudha et in cadhuna cosa, si cum om per dreit son fradra salvar dist, in o quid il mi altresi fazet, et ab Ludher nul plaid nunquam prindrai, qui meon vol cist meon fradre Karle in damno sit.»
In actual french:
[« Pour l'amour de Dieu et pour le peuple chrétien et notre salut commun, à partir d'aujourd'hui, en tant que Dieu me donnera savoir et pouvoir, je secourrai ce mien frère Charles par mon aide et en toute chose, comme on doit secourir son frère, selon l'équité, à condition qu'il fasse de même pour moi, et je ne tiendrai jamais avec Lothaire aucun plaid qui, de ma volonté, puisse être dommageable à mon frère Charles. »]
But the FRANCIQUE is different, it's a germanic language look:
«In godes minna ind in thes christiânes folches ind unsêr bêdhero gehaltnissî, fon thesemo dage frammordes, sô fram sô mir got gewizci indi mahd furgibit, sô haldih thesan mînan bruodher, sôso man mit rehtu sînan bruodher scal, in thiu thaz er mig sô sama duo, indi mit Ludheren in nohheiniu thing ne gegango, the mînan willon imo ce scadhen werdhên.»
In English:
“For the love of God and for Christendom and our common salvation, from this day onwards, as God will give me the wisdom and power, I shall protect this brother of mine Charles, with aid or anything else, as one ought to protect one's brother, so that he may do the same for me, and I shall never knowingly make any covenant with Lothair that would harm this brother of mine Charles.”
Charlemagne spoke certainly a germanic language as Francique, but Hugh Capet didn't spoke it.
4TH CENTURY???
To use your logic above, there was no French language EITHER in the 4th Century (if Old French be not French).
>>>
I badly expressed myselfn forgiveness, I meant that French was used (and not English) in the court for 4 centuries ( XI-XV centuries).
<<The Answer is YES! It is.
I can even read it:
Translation:
The English Language(also called the Old English Language or Anglo-Saxon Language; in Modern English "Old English" or "Anglo-Saxon") is a West Germanic language, which developed/arose in England. It is related to the Old Frisian language and the Saxon language. It is an extinct language, and has 0 speakers in 2002.
Easy.
and French speakers like to brag about being able to read Latin--Ha! >>
Can be, personally I don't hide that the old French (Francien of the IXth century) is very different from current French.
Example (le serment de Strasbourg) of FRANCIEN (you can see this language is very close with latin and looks like a lot with Spanish for example):
«Pro deo amur et pro christian poblo et nostro commun salvament, d'ist di in avant, in quant deus savir et podir me dunat, si salvarai eo cist meon fradre Karlo et in aiudha et in cadhuna cosa, si cum om per dreit son fradra salvar dist, in o quid il mi altresi fazet, et ab Ludher nul plaid nunquam prindrai, qui meon vol cist meon fradre Karle in damno sit.»
In actual french:
[« Pour l'amour de Dieu et pour le peuple chrétien et notre salut commun, à partir d'aujourd'hui, en tant que Dieu me donnera savoir et pouvoir, je secourrai ce mien frère Charles par mon aide et en toute chose, comme on doit secourir son frère, selon l'équité, à condition qu'il fasse de même pour moi, et je ne tiendrai jamais avec Lothaire aucun plaid qui, de ma volonté, puisse être dommageable à mon frère Charles. »]
But the FRANCIQUE is different, it's a germanic language look:
«In godes minna ind in thes christiânes folches ind unsêr bêdhero gehaltnissî, fon thesemo dage frammordes, sô fram sô mir got gewizci indi mahd furgibit, sô haldih thesan mînan bruodher, sôso man mit rehtu sînan bruodher scal, in thiu thaz er mig sô sama duo, indi mit Ludheren in nohheiniu thing ne gegango, the mînan willon imo ce scadhen werdhên.»
In English:
“For the love of God and for Christendom and our common salvation, from this day onwards, as God will give me the wisdom and power, I shall protect this brother of mine Charles, with aid or anything else, as one ought to protect one's brother, so that he may do the same for me, and I shall never knowingly make any covenant with Lothair that would harm this brother of mine Charles.”
Charlemagne spoke certainly a germanic language as Francique, but Hugh Capet didn't spoke it.
answer wrote
<< Et sur Hugues Capet il parlait en FRANCIEN (dialecte Oïl de la région parisienne et donc ancêtre direct du français) , ou ROMAN, c'est à dire une forme proto-archaïque du français et non pas en FRANCIQUE langue germanique, d'ailleurs il avait besoin d'un interprète pour la comprendre!
Vous pouvez ne pas me croire, mais c'est contredire les historiens et ne pas accepter la vérité! >>
and
<<Charlemagne spoke certainly a germanic language as Francique, but Hugh Capet didn't spoke it.>>
Why is it so important that Hugh Capet didn't spoke well Germanic. Do you think that, by speaking better ROMAN than FRANCIQUE, hugh's and his followers identity switched from Frankisk-German to Gallo-Roman?
<< Et sur Hugues Capet il parlait en FRANCIEN (dialecte Oïl de la région parisienne et donc ancêtre direct du français) , ou ROMAN, c'est à dire une forme proto-archaïque du français et non pas en FRANCIQUE langue germanique, d'ailleurs il avait besoin d'un interprète pour la comprendre!
Vous pouvez ne pas me croire, mais c'est contredire les historiens et ne pas accepter la vérité! >>
and
<<Charlemagne spoke certainly a germanic language as Francique, but Hugh Capet didn't spoke it.>>
Why is it so important that Hugh Capet didn't spoke well Germanic. Do you think that, by speaking better ROMAN than FRANCIQUE, hugh's and his followers identity switched from Frankisk-German to Gallo-Roman?
<<Why is it so important that Hugh Capet didn't spoke well Germanic. Do you think that, by speaking better ROMAN than FRANCIQUE, hugh's and his followers identity switched from Frankisk-German to Gallo-Roman?>>
As Henry IV who is the first english king to speak the kingdom vernacular language, Hugues Capet who spoke Roman, became the real king of the "Gallo-Roman" people, the "native and" people of Gallia was totally romanised since the IVth century, to germanize them would have been impossible. The franque nobility had to speak Roman as the English-Norman nobility had to speak the English.
Do you undestand?
As Henry IV who is the first english king to speak the kingdom vernacular language, Hugues Capet who spoke Roman, became the real king of the "Gallo-Roman" people, the "native and" people of Gallia was totally romanised since the IVth century, to germanize them would have been impossible. The franque nobility had to speak Roman as the English-Norman nobility had to speak the English.
Do you undestand?
<<Hugues Capet who spoke Roman, became the real king of the "Gallo-Roman" people, the "native and" people of Gallia was totally romanised since the IVth century, to germanize them would have been impossible.>>
It is obvious that 19th century propaganda and Asterix is still present in such a viewpoint. This propaganda made (and still makes) believe, that a Gallo-Celtic ethnicity/character/culture survived the consecutive domination of Roman and German invasions. In 19th century school and history books, a Gallo-Celtic population in France was opposed to a Germanic population in Germany. In the mean time this turned out to be historically erronious, but these tales helped France to motivate the people to see in Germany a herital ennemy.
Since then it has been prooved that traces of some residues of the Gallo-Celtic aera are minor compared to the Roman (culture) and German (population) heritage. The French people of today is in major parts of German (North, East and West) and Mediterranian (South) descendence speaking in major parts a language mix of Roman and Germanic (=Romanic). Hugh Capet is a protype of the modern Frenchman: he has German ancestors and speaks a mix of Francique (pronounciation, grammar) and Roman (vocabulary)
It is obvious that 19th century propaganda and Asterix is still present in such a viewpoint. This propaganda made (and still makes) believe, that a Gallo-Celtic ethnicity/character/culture survived the consecutive domination of Roman and German invasions. In 19th century school and history books, a Gallo-Celtic population in France was opposed to a Germanic population in Germany. In the mean time this turned out to be historically erronious, but these tales helped France to motivate the people to see in Germany a herital ennemy.
Since then it has been prooved that traces of some residues of the Gallo-Celtic aera are minor compared to the Roman (culture) and German (population) heritage. The French people of today is in major parts of German (North, East and West) and Mediterranian (South) descendence speaking in major parts a language mix of Roman and Germanic (=Romanic). Hugh Capet is a protype of the modern Frenchman: he has German ancestors and speaks a mix of Francique (pronounciation, grammar) and Roman (vocabulary)
Which is the proportion of French population of Mediterranean or Germanic stock, without counting, of course, mixtures or the great African, Asian or even Slavic populations now living in France?
At the very least, all France from the Loire downwards is as deeply Mediterranean and Latin as Iberian or Italic inhabitants.
The fact is a good part of the British population, according to specialists, is also considered Mediterranean. There have always been "dark" Brits and everybody knows that "dark" has never meant "black" in traditional British usage. The fact of having "dark" hair and brownish eyes was more than enough.
There are also important Germanic populations in Italy and Spain, as everybody knows.
Linguistics and stock have little to do with each other. You've only got to look and the native populations speaking English, French or Spanish in the Americas.
At the very least, all France from the Loire downwards is as deeply Mediterranean and Latin as Iberian or Italic inhabitants.
The fact is a good part of the British population, according to specialists, is also considered Mediterranean. There have always been "dark" Brits and everybody knows that "dark" has never meant "black" in traditional British usage. The fact of having "dark" hair and brownish eyes was more than enough.
There are also important Germanic populations in Italy and Spain, as everybody knows.
Linguistics and stock have little to do with each other. You've only got to look and the native populations speaking English, French or Spanish in the Americas.
<<The fact is a good part of the British population, according to specialists, is also considered Mediterranean. There have always been "dark" Brits and everybody knows that "dark" has never meant "black" in traditional British usage. The fact of having "dark" hair and brownish eyes was more than enough. >>
What does THIS have to do with the subject? Are you attempting to suggest that the Mediterranean strain in the British Isles is in any way connected to France or the Romans??? It isn't.
The Mediterranean in the British Isles is from ancient migration from N. Africa through Iberia. These people were not Indo-European, and they arrived before the Celts. Traces can be found esp strong in dark skin/hair/eyes of Wales (I am Welsh) and in Scotland.
This Med. strain is extremely watered down to non-existent in other parts
of Britain due to heavy immigration of Celtic, Anglo-Saxon and Norse strains in recent history.
What does THIS have to do with the subject? Are you attempting to suggest that the Mediterranean strain in the British Isles is in any way connected to France or the Romans??? It isn't.
The Mediterranean in the British Isles is from ancient migration from N. Africa through Iberia. These people were not Indo-European, and they arrived before the Celts. Traces can be found esp strong in dark skin/hair/eyes of Wales (I am Welsh) and in Scotland.
This Med. strain is extremely watered down to non-existent in other parts
of Britain due to heavy immigration of Celtic, Anglo-Saxon and Norse strains in recent history.
Previous page Pages: 1 2 3 4 5