 | | | Subject: Roots of English
Posted Dec 11, 2000 by HappyDude
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
121
  | | I think we have to cofine areselfs to standard english, if we get into regional dialects it could all get very silly ( if you go back in the postings you will see what I mean).
I'm sure I read somewhere that 70% of words used in modern english have latin roots ? I also belive (could someone confirm this) that english has retained a scandanavian grammer structure.
|
| | | Subject: Roots of English
Posted Dec 11, 2000 by Wand'rin star
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
122
| | By 70% do you mean 70% of what's in the dictionary, in which case it would be the same for any European language except Finnish and Hungarian and even they are using scientific vocabulary that sounds very much like ours?
Or do you mean 70% of the words we use, in which case I have to disagree strongly? The commonsest words are nearly all Anglo-Saxon, or Danish, thus from Germanic roots. I think I could get through a day witthout using any Latin roots - and I'm an English teacher 
|
|  |
| | | Subject: Roots of English
Posted Dec 12, 2000 by  Gnomon
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
125
| | The grammar structure of old english was Germanic, rather than Scandinavian, but the two are very similar. The grammar structure of modern English is much simpler, but it certainly corresponds closer to German and Scandinavian than to the other main language families of Europe, namely Greek, Romance (Latin-based), Slavic, Celtic.
Up to about the 17th century, there were very few latin-based words in English. These were introduced by the educated upper classes. Some of them caught on. The general rule is, long words tend to be latin based, short words come from old English. So town is from Old English, conurbation is from Latin. There are also plenty of English words which came from French, which itself came from Latin much earlier. Beef in English can from boeuf in French, but it the latin word bos.
|
| | | Subject: Roots of English
Posted Dec 13, 2000 by Gnomon
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
131
| | I think the D with a line through it is called an Edh. The capital has ANSI code 0208 while the lower case version is 0240.
You can see all these characters using the Character Map program. On my computer:
Start / Run / charmap
or:
Start / Programs / Accessories / Character Map
I don't think the Edh was used in Old English. I think they use the thorn for both "th" and "dh", hence the sound of "th" in "thin" and "this".
|
| | | Subject: Why English is so hard
Posted Aug 21, 2002 by Researcher 188007
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
134
| | Been trawlin' again...
>Part of my research is on how Chinese students learn English and we don't start teaching until 23rd . It includes music/language links and maths/language ditto. Also do Chinese people who've made a start with Japanese do better at English or is it too different (and too similar to Chinese)?<
Wand'rin Star,
Don't suppose you could give me a little info on your findings?
Jack
|
| | | Subject: Very brief language learning results
Posted Aug 21, 2002 by Wand'rin star
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
135
| |  Hi Jack! (which is what you've done to the thread)
1. My Ss are all Cantonese mother tongue. Not enough speakers of other Chinese languages to comment on their experiences - yes I know the Chinese say their languages are dialects but us linguists (boast smiley inserted) know different.
2. Definitely learn better with soft classical music (with no words)playing in background.Piano concertos particularly good. HK Ss have been exposed to a lot of this, though. Other regions of China may have different feelings about western music. It would be worth trying in Peking, I think. The Ss liked classical Chinese music, but many said it was distracting. Yo Yo Ma's stuff for Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon seems(surprisingly to me) to help with learning English vocab.
3. Statistically, learning another non Indo European language does not make English any easier, but my sample is too small here.
4. Also, I was not able to find any abnsolute beginners.
5. People who are good at Maths are significantly better at languages than those who aren't.
6. There doesn't seem to be any correlation between those who play music well and those who are good at English (whatever sort of music they play)but good singers are better at spoken English.
Incidentally, you might expect speakers of tone languages to be really good at speaking English, but they aren't. I think this is because they make tone shifts on words and we make more on phrases or sentences than they do. (I do know that Chinese questions sound slightly different from statements)As you will unfortunately soon discover the Beijing English accent is flat and boring - very r coloured
This research wasn't published - it evolved into my massive independent learning project that took a couple of years - as indeed this thread seems to have been subsumed into Brit Eng. Interesting that a thread started a couple of weeks ago contains the same old misconceptions about the roots of English.
|
|
