Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!jabber!cpp!cloutier
From: cloutier@cpp.pha.pa.us (Diane Cloutier)
Subject: Re: Anglo-Saxons & Celts
Message-ID: <D64GB2.M8x@cpp.pha.pa.us>
Organization: Critical Path Project
References: <1995Mar17.154647.9595@onionsnatcorp.ox.ac.uk> <dnb105.127.2F6FEC1C@psu.edu> <SMAILL.95Mar23093903@papa.dcs.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 23:09:02 GMT
Lines: 56

In article <SMAILL.95Mar23093903@papa.dcs.ed.ac.uk> smaill@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Alan Smaill) writes:
>In article <dnb105.127.2F6FEC1C@psu.edu> dnb105@psu.edu (Ferret) writes:
>
>   In article <1995Mar17.154647.9595@onionsnatcorp.ox.ac.uk> gmb@onions.natcorp.ox.ac.uk (Glynis Baguley) writes:
>
>   >that the traditional belief - that the English invaders drove the
>   >Celts into Cornwall, Wales and Cumbria so that there was very little
>   >contact between the two - has been modified somewhat, and it's now
>   >thought that there was more mingling. But the fact remains that
>   >English shows very little trace of Celtic influence: if there was more
>   >contact than we used to think between Anglo-Saxons and Celts, it
>   >appears that the former dominated linguistically at least.
>
>   The alternative is that the Brittons dropped their native tounge for the 
>   conqueror's.
>
>The closer parallel is presumably with the original gaulish, Celtic
>language, however.  Likewise there is little trace of this is
>contemporary French. However, I've not heard it suggested that the
>population there was displaced.
>
>Alan Smaill                       email: A.Smaill@ed.ac.uk

Two notes:

1. Modern French has hundreds of loanwords from Gaulish. Mostly nouns,
relating to wildlife, common agricultural crops, livestock and products,
important craft and trade artifacts. Many of these words were borrowed
by Common Vulgar Latin and have entered other Romance languages. In
addition, French personal possessive adjectives seem to be influenced
by Gaulish. "Le charpentier charge son char," for instance, uses 4
Gaulish roots. Many Gaulish loanwords displaced Classical Latin
equivalents - e.g., "caballos" (cheval) knocked out "equus" and
"camminos" (chemin) killed "strata via." So Gaulish had a very different
fate under Latin-speaking rule than Brythonic did under English-speaking
rule.

2. We need not assume that Old English speakers eliminated Old Welsh
speakers from their new range. It's enough to assume that Old English
speakers monopolized the means of production as well as administration.
In this case, bilingual Britons could have persisted for centuries
without leaving traces on the tongue of their dominant neighbors.
Nobody preserves the speech of powerless serfs.

A modern example - in French-speaking Canada, the means of production
and administration were, not monopolized, but dominated by English-
speaking immigrants for over 200 years. Neither French nor the French
Canadians went away; but there was much intermarriage; maybe half the
North Americans of French Canadian descent are anglophones today.
Canadian French has been massively influenced by English. Canadian
English shows barely a trace of locally borrowed French. The reason?
French speakers held low status and little power; their language
followed suit.

-Anthony West (from my wife's address - merci, Diane)

