Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!ncar!uchinews!news
From: need@bloomfield.uchicago.edu (Barbara Need)
Subject: Re: PBS is at it again---so are the Linguists
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: bloomfield.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <D4q8Jx.E9n@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Organization: University of Chicago -- Academic Information Technologies
References: <3ituro$gd7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 1995 20:21:33 GMT
Lines: 25

In article <3ituro$gd7@newsbf02.news.aol.com> perotean@aol.com (Perotean)  
writes:
> 
[much deleted}

> And the
> Brittons' tongue and the "Anglo-Saxon" branches of West Germanic 
> pidgined with Roman and became "English" roughly in this time frame
> (tho these various dialects later also pidgined with Gaelic and 
> various Scandinavian dialects)  So what?  

No, I don't think we can say that English is a pidginized version of  
Germanic, Celtic and Latin. For started, the Anglo-Saxons killed or moved  
the native Britons. There is little evidence of influence from the older
Celtic languages (either Britton or Gaelic) in English. In addition, most  
of the Latin speakers either left with the Roman Army, or were Celts, and  
were moved or killed. There is good evidence that Old English was strongly  
Germanic to the end of the period (and you should read Thomason and  
Kaufamn (Language Contact, creolization and genetic lingustics) re the  
influence of Norse on English--mostly negligible).

[other stuff deleted]

Barbara Need
University of Chicago--Linguistics
