The English and the Celts - no genocide?

[ambrosius]

I think the article fails to note the closer example to Britain, that of Roman Africa, there Latin vanished without leaving any trace on Arabic. Social prestige and cultural identity explain that.

The amount of Gallic words entering into Latin, a few hundred, was also disappointing, given that Latin and Gallic were spoken next to ach other for half a millennium? If one compares that to British words entering into English, the very low number is not so surprising.

Certain Gallic words remaining in Frankish (French) are ~120
Certain Gallic words remaining in Latin are ~40
Certain British words remaining in English are... 3

That is the most disappointing thing of all, and, as Coates points-out,
strongly suggests an Anglo-Saxon conquest of the British people,
treating everything about their culture - including their language -
as being utterly irrelevant and not worthy of adoption.

Maybe Celtic was just too difficult for Latin- and Germanic speakers to enter into their vocabulary? I like that explanation better than to conclude that no British were present to speak to the Anglo-Saxons!

I'm sure you do prefer that explanation better, Robert. [text moderated] Why not simply accept
the simplest explanation for the lack of British words in Old English,
which is that the Anglo-Saxons didn't want to speak them? As for there
being no Britons present to speak to the invading Anglo-Saxons, I don't
think anyone has ever suggested that scenario. Obviously, during the
initial phase of the Anglo-Saxon conquest, the native Britons would
have vastly outnumbered the incoming Anglo-Saxons. The question is
not one of whether or not there were any British speakers alive to
transmit British to the Anglo-Saxons. The question is why the Anglo-Saxons chose not to adopt the British language - even slightly.

I think Aryaman makes the point. When invading cultures fail to adopt
any vocabulary from the conquered native population, it is because
they see absolutely no prestige in adopting that language. And the
reason for that is because the invaders regard the natives as being
either inferior or totally alien to themselves. Didn't the Anglo-Saxons
call the native Britons 'wealas' (the origin of modern 'Welsh') meaning:

1.)Foreigners?
2.)Slaves?
3.)Romanised people?

All three of which connotations denoting that the Anglo-Saxons
regarded the native Britons as being inferior and/or alien.

Ambrosius / Mike