11-29-2004, 07:52 PM
The loss of the Latin case system had begun even during the "Classical" period in the spoken language. When dealing with the development of the Romance languages (Italian, French, Spanish, etc) from Latin, you have to remember that it was the <em>spoken</em> language that evolved, while the written language stayed frozen (relatively, anyway) up to the present day.<br>
<br>
It's a rule of linguistics that languages change, internally, at a constant rate. They do not become "degraded" or "barbaric" or "inferior" in any linguistic sense. They may borrow vocabulary or, more rarely, grammar, and can certainly be influenced by other languages. English has changed since Shakespeare wrote in it, and it's changed even more since "Beowulf" was written, but it hasn't become any worse (or better!), it's just changed (despite the protests of prescriptive grammarians and purists).<br>
<br>
Quote:</em></strong><hr>To understand why we native english speakers shorten these roman names, and many other words, is quite simple. We are lazy when it comes to foreign words or names incorporated into english. We are based on time efficent culture, which means we don't want to take the time to pronounce full words, so we shorten them. <hr><br>
<br>
That's really not the true story. I believe that the English names in -y come from French forms of the names, which people had occasion to use once William won at Hastings... and the French forms were just evolved through regular sound change from Latin.<br>
<br>
Also notice that such things are not fixed. Cicero used to be known widely in English as "Tully," but now of course you know him just as Cicero. Of course, you probably read that as /Sissero/ where an Italian would say /cheechero/ and Tully himself probably said /Keekero/, but someone passing him on the street might have said something closer to /cheechero/. So who's to say what's correct? <p></p><i></i>
<br>
It's a rule of linguistics that languages change, internally, at a constant rate. They do not become "degraded" or "barbaric" or "inferior" in any linguistic sense. They may borrow vocabulary or, more rarely, grammar, and can certainly be influenced by other languages. English has changed since Shakespeare wrote in it, and it's changed even more since "Beowulf" was written, but it hasn't become any worse (or better!), it's just changed (despite the protests of prescriptive grammarians and purists).<br>
<br>
Quote:</em></strong><hr>To understand why we native english speakers shorten these roman names, and many other words, is quite simple. We are lazy when it comes to foreign words or names incorporated into english. We are based on time efficent culture, which means we don't want to take the time to pronounce full words, so we shorten them. <hr><br>
<br>
That's really not the true story. I believe that the English names in -y come from French forms of the names, which people had occasion to use once William won at Hastings... and the French forms were just evolved through regular sound change from Latin.<br>
<br>
Also notice that such things are not fixed. Cicero used to be known widely in English as "Tully," but now of course you know him just as Cicero. Of course, you probably read that as /Sissero/ where an Italian would say /cheechero/ and Tully himself probably said /Keekero/, but someone passing him on the street might have said something closer to /cheechero/. So who's to say what's correct? <p></p><i></i>
Dan Diffendale
Ph.D. candidate, University of Michigan
Ph.D. candidate, University of Michigan
