Why English will never be a Romance language
>>What is "umlaut"?<<
It's quite simple, the changing of a vowel which changes the pronounciation more similarly to a vowel or semivowel in a following syllable. An umlaut doesn't have to look like "ä" or something like that, nor is it something limited to German, English has them too. Examples include;
sing/sang/sung
tooth/teeth
goose/geese
man/men
LAA :
apophonie ~ alternance vocalique ~ ablaut ~ dilation
métaphonie ~ mutation vocalique ~ umlaut ~ inflexion ~ voyelle infléchie
Mais parfois le sens de <ablaut> et <umlaut> est inversé suivant les traditions philologiques (romanistes/germanistes, diachronistes/synchronistes etc).
Le mot <umlaut> peut alors avoir deux séries d'acceptions : 1/ signe diacritique (tréma) — 2/ phénomène linguistique (métaphonie et/ou apophonie). Et peut-être davantage ?
Uriel : « "French manure"? Seems a bit harsh, there, buddy! »
En effet ! D'autant que ce mot est tiré d'un étymon vétérofrançais apparenté à <manœuvre> — une généalogie donc plus prometteuse que l'acception anglaise actuelle...
<<étymon vétérofrançais >>
Is that something like "Old French", greg? Babel Fish spit it right back out, I'm afraid!
And good lord, how did "manœuvre" take a wrong turn and become "manure"?!
The French word for hand is main. To work the soil by hand (main -> manoeuvre). So I suppose it's because you work manure into soil.
Well, so it is! Fascinating!
(From Answers.com:)
ma·nure (mə-nʊr', -nyʊr')
n.
Material, especially barnyard or stable dung, often with discarded animal bedding, used to fertilize soil.
tr.v., -nured, -nur·ing, -nures.
To fertilize (soil) by applying material such as barnyard dung.
[From Middle English manuren, to cultivate land, from Anglo-Norman mainouverer, from Vulgar Latin *manūoperāre, to work with the hands : Latin manū, ablative of manus, hand + Latin operārī, to work.]
Bravo Uriel ! Je vois que le démon de l'étymologie vient de s'emparer de toi...
En effet on retrouve <manuopera> en médiolatin carolingien :
« Ut maiores nostri et forestarii, poledrarii, cellerarii, decani, telonarii vel ceteri ministeriales rega faciant et sogales donent de mansis eorum, pro manuopera vero eorum ministeria bene praevideant ».
ML <manopera> = une journée de labeur
ML <manuopera> = une corvée
Quant à Fr <manœuvre> [manœvʁ], son ancêtre vétérofrançais multiforme <manevre> <manuevre> <manoevre> <manovre> <maneuvre> <meinovre> <meinovere> <meneuvre> <mennueuvre> <mainovre> *serait* un emprunt à l'ancien occitan.
Allemand : <Manöver> [ma'nø:vɐ].
Uriel : « <<étymon vétérofrançais >> Is that something like "Old French", greg? Babel Fish spit it right back out, I'm afraid! »
Ouais, c'est un néologisme un peu pompeux qui m'épargne des locutiosn du style <en ancien français>.
why English should be a romance language ?
English is a germanic language, there is nothing bad of that.
>>>>What is "umlaut"?<<
It's quite simple, the changing of a vowel which changes the pronounciation more similarly to a vowel or semivowel in a following syllable. An umlaut doesn't have to look like "ä" or something like that, nor is it something limited to German, English has them too. Examples include;
sing/sang/sung
tooth/teeth
goose/geese
man/men<<
To be exact, these are not all examples of umlaut. In particular, "sing"/"sang"/"sung" is an example ablaut rather than umlaut, with ablaut being an entirely separate phenomenon from umlaut.
LAA, German and Dutch phonology is rather different. They are, however, both our neighbours: one sounds like it wants to steal your back garden, whilst the other sounds like it wants to smoke it.
English will never be a Romance langauge because NO ONE WANTS TO MAKE LOVE IN ENGLISH. Not voluntarily anyway. That is why Spanish speaking countries have higher birth rates than English speaking countries. It is really hard for English speaking women to overcome their nastalgia and have sex with their English speaking men.
Morphology is another reason why English will always be germanic.
Many have commented that English doesn't "look" or "sound" like a germanic language, but this is not really true--it depends on the person looking/hearing it. I have heard many Spanish speakers comment that English looks just like Dutch.
I find that native English speakers have become too subjective in their opinion of their language, and a bit confused, as if they are suffering from a severe identity crisis wanting to be something they are not. I wonder if all this started hunderds of years ago when educators drilled in the belief and trained English minds to think: Latin = Good; German = Bad, and it's perpetualized still today. Somehow, English speakers, esp in America, think that they are descendants of the Romans and heirs, at which Italians look at them like they're crazy.
English speakers seem to think that there is a marked distinction between their language and Frisian/Dutch/German, but to speakers of of other languages (my mother is Serbian and speaks both German & English among others) they are nearly identical. I think native English speakers are blind to their own truth, being too close to the situation.
My French teacher, a French native, balked when a girl in my class made a comment that English shouldn't be Germanic, but was more Latin, to which she retorted: "English is a Germanic Language."
--and she should know.
<< I find that native English speakers have become too subjective in their opinion of their language, and a bit confused, as if they are suffering from a severe identity crisis wanting to be something they are not. I wonder if all this started hunderds of years ago when educators drilled in the belief and trained English minds to think: Latin = Good; German = Bad, and it's perpetualized still today. Somehow, English speakers, esp in America, think that they are descendants of the Romans and heirs, at which Italians look at them like they're crazy. >>
I absolutely love this paragraph! I think it's hilariously true.
I think that guest makes a point here.
In England at least, French and Classical Latin are often associated with high culture and high education — someone who knows Latin well will be perceived as *very* highly educated. If you want to sound sophisticated and you know you're writing for an educated audience, you can include the occasional French or Latin expression into your English text. Although the teaching of Latin in schools has declined in recent years, it is still by far the most commonly taught 'old' language here — the main arguments for teaching it is that it is apparently useful for building English vocabulary and that it apparently gives you a greater understanding of the English language overall.
It is never seriously suggested that it might be a good idea to teach Anglo-Saxon (Old English) in schools in England. Someone who actually knows Anglo-Saxon would likely be perceived as a rather eccentric historian sort of person by many people.
German has a certain 'coolness' amongst a minority of people here, and German loan-words go in and out of fashion in English, but its level of prestige is still perceived to be lower than that of French. The stereotypical English person who has learnt German would either be a World War II enthusiast or someone involved in pan-European business, economics or finance — very different from the stereotypical English person who has learnt French.
Spanish is the new trendy language here which almost everyone interested in languages now suddenly wants to learn. Kind of like how Italian used to be a few years ago.