Trump's Tripe

Post Reply New Topic

The Anglo Saxons did the raising, and the French aristocrats did the eating! Lol!

American pundit Roy Blount Jr. penned a funny little column about his background. The name "Blount" is a Norman name. And he talked about how "the English oppressed the World, but we Normans oppressed the English. So we are 'the oppressors of the oppressors!'".

Don't know, but my guess is that connive is related to the word "knife" in some way.

But those silent K words are interesting.

King Canute. Both "king" and "Canute". King came from anglo saxon "cyning" and has an obvious kinship the modern German "Koning" (both words for 'king'). We still pronounce the K in king. But not other words like 'knife'.

Back then they pronounced the K in know and in 'knowledge'. And in the Scottish dialect of English they talk about something being "beyond my ken". Ken in that sense must be the truncated first part of "know/knowledge". A knife can be 'keen'.

^^^If I had an English teacher like you, I might've ended up in academia.

well these people are clearly misinformed about their own heritage

Prior to the arrival of Celtic and German speakers there were populations already living this part of Europe. In modern France and Spain they spoke Basque. The indigenous groups stuck in the north after the ice age probably evolved their own language. The Germanic tribes took over their lands and probably their language/culture but the people maintained their own identity - I think these people are the Frisians. The indigenous population stuck in the island of Britain were never invaded by the Germanic tribes but were swept away by Celtic invaders arriving from Gaul. The Celts couldn't entirely subdue these free spirited people and neither could the Romans. These people were the Picts and they were eventually killed off by the coalition of Celts, Anglo-Saxons and Frisians.
======================================================================

No.
Your narrative is not quite right. And that's not the problem (there are other problems but that isn't one of them) with this modern movement for "Anglish"( this pure Anglo Saxon English they want). It don't see how they are wrongly informed about their heritage. Just wrong headed. In theory you could create an all Anglo Saxon rooted English. Though it would not be the same thing as Old English. But Old English except for a few loan words was all Germanic rooted.

The British Islands were inhabited by the Celtic tribes, and then they were conquered and ruled by the Romans for four hundred years. Then the Romans pulled out, and the Germanic tribes invaded from the east. The Germanic Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians, all booted the celtes out of the eastern parts of Britain, and Became the modern English. And the Celtic tribes of the west became the Welsh, and the other Celtic folks (the Cornish, Irish, Scots). The Celts of then became the Celts of now. And the Germanic tribes of then became the English of now. There were little blending of the Celtic and Anglo Saxon languages. Early on the Picts got absorbed by Celtic invaders from Ireland whom the Romans knew as "the Scoti" (Skoh-shee). The Irish Scoti invaded northern Britain and absorbed the Pics and became the modern Scots of Scotland. The Pics don't figure in the history of English as a language much.