|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LitNet is n onafhanklike joernaal op die Internet, en word as gesamentlike onderneming deur Ligitprops 3042 BK en Media24 bedryf. |
|
|
|
The differences between Middle and Modern English
Finuala Dowling
So suddenly in Middle English
we start to sound like ourselves.
Why did they call
their language
“Middle English”?,
queries Stacey.
No, we called it that, we name
everything for our convenience.
Now, after 1066, we -- gradually --
lost inflections, word endings,
like the -ed in “She loved Sushi”.
Oh I do too,
says Annaelle, sushi is
my best.
Good
I say, now: in the days of
Alfred, we had a lot more. Not sushi,
no.
Aren’t you cold? Aimee asks Chris,
who is proudly showing his new tattoo.
Today, our poor bare nouns and poorly
dressed verbs are committed to SVO.
Subject Verb Object. “I love Sushi”, not
“Sushi loved I” . “I loved the man” not
“The man I loved” – that’s a fragment,
a mere noun phrase, which we are not
doing today, the full sentence of which
would be, say “The man I loved left me”,
where “loved” is weak, but “left” is strong,
going tightly into the past by itself.
Leave-left. Weep - wept.
You
will also notice
that Chaucer’s pronouns are closer
to ours. A pronoun is a word that stands
in for you when you are not around.
We all need pronouns. Persons
are singular or plural. He loved her;
She loved him. Singular. Sadly,
they were divorced. Plural.
Ag shame says
Stacey, who?
No, no it’s just an example.
Sorry
says Stacey.
Moving on, then, the French of course,
brought thousands of words – “beef” for “cow”,
“judgement” for “doom” and “desire” for
“wish”.
They’re not
the same says Aimee,
“desire”
and “wish”.
Quite right, I say, and in the shadow
and the shortfall of this subtle difference
– desire and wish – lies our English.
From Doo-Wop Girls of the Universe. Penguin: 2006
LitNet: 31 January 2006
Did you enjoy this poem? Have your say! Send your comments to webvoet@litnet.co.za,
and become a part of our interactive opinion page.
back / to the top
|
© Kopiereg in die ontwerp en inhoud van hierdie webruimte behoort aan LitNet, uitgesluit die kopiereg in bydraes wat berus by die outeurs wat sodanige bydraes verskaf. LitNet streef na die plasing van oorspronklike materiaal en na die oop en onbeperkte uitruil van idees en menings. Die menings van bydraers tot hierdie werftuiste is dus hul eie en weerspieël nie noodwendig die mening van die redaksie en bestuur van LitNet nie. LitNet kan ongelukkig ook nie waarborg dat hierdie diens ononderbroke of foutloos sal wees nie en gebruikers wat steun op inligting wat hier verskaf word, doen dit op hul eie risiko. Media24, M-Web, Ligitprops 3042 BK en die bestuur en redaksie van LitNet aanvaar derhalwe geen aanspreeklikheid vir enige regstreekse of onregstreekse verlies of skade wat uit sodanige bydraes of die verskaffing van hierdie diens spruit nie. LitNet is ’n onafhanklike joernaal op die Internet, en word as gesamentlike onderneming deur Ligitprops 3042 BK en Media24 bedryf.
|