Re: English: no rule for making "ing" verbs?
- Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2017 14:47:23 +0100
- From: rebro <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: English: no rule for making "ing" verbs?
Am 08.12.2017 um 22:45 schrieb NFN Smith:
Wolf K wrote:
If you want to know why English spelling is such a mess, the short
answer is that England adopted printing, and hence standardised
spelling, before the transition from Late Middle English to Early
Modern English was complete. Thus many spellings record English both
as spoken ca 1450-1550 and from ca 1550 on: wind/wind, bow/bow, etc.
Or gait/gate, neither of which was pronounced as they are now.
Spelling didn't become standardised until ca 1700, but some sounds
shifted some more: tea once rimed with Tay. Also, around that time,
some spellings were deliberately changed to reflect the etymology of
the word: Debt was earlier spelled dette, for example.
- Pronunciation has shifted, and spelling has not. Thus even before
standardization of spelling words that were spelled phonetically then
may still reflect the old pronunciations. I've seen analyses that
indicate that by reading poetry produced in Early Modern English, and
paying attention to the spellings, it's possible to get a reasonable
idea of what English of that era actually sounded like (e.g.,
Shakespeare, King James Bible, etc.)
- English is something of a creole language, where there's a lot taken
from other languages -- not just the Germanic roots of Old English or
the French from the Norman Conquest, but it has borrowed from virtually
any other language that English-speaking people have come in contact
with. English pragmatism is such that if we find a word in another
language that fits, we're happy to use it. And other languages may have
entirely different spelling/pronunciation rules than English does. And
that doesn't even account for anglicized pronunciation that differs from
'proper' pronunciation in the source language.
Just to support your view: Enjoy the English pronouncing Welsh place names.
general mailing list