English language without norman invasion?

this is an idea ive put some thought it;
if no Norman invasion, then how does English evolve?
I imagine it would be alot more german sounding, but what of scotland and wales?
or irie?

It would probably sound a lot more Norse sounding, assuming the Vikings still invade. All that Danish and Norwegian influence on a predominately German-sounding language would definitely have a greater effect.

Delvestius said:

It would probably sound a lot more Norse sounding, assuming the Vikings still invade. All that Danish and Norwegian influence on a predominately German-sounding language would definitely have a greater effect.

Click to expand...

Ja. I think it would sound a lot more Norse.

King of Rome said:

Ja. I think it would sound a lot more Norse.

Click to expand...

thats sort of what i was thinking, at least Scotland would have more norse;
the english would probably have some influences but would be a more german language.
what of ireland? would they still be speaking gaelic?

-Obviously less french words but not that less : after all almost all the trade of England was or with Flanders, or with France. By simple cultural prestige, you'll have french words coming in english.
Now they wouldn't be that of norman origin. Probably many, but picard dialect should be more present, as (in a lesser way) gallo.

-With the butterfly of angevine demesne, occitan words would be less important as well. Still, as french, by trade and cultural prestige, you'll have as well. Probably same origin than OTL Lemosin and Gascon.

-More flemish words. Not only it's relativly closer to english than german, but englishmen would trade massivly with them. Probably some economics or technical words would be directly issued from Flemish dialect of dutch.

-More words directly issued from latin than passing trough romance languages. Anglo-Saxons were known as the best scholars for latin linguistics up to the X century. You'll have still remains of that.

-For norse influence, it could be more important than OTL, but (all respect due to previous posters) not enough to not be equivalent to the french norman words issued from norse. Mainly words from seafare or war, but danes weren't in enough important numbers to efficiently influence in the same way than Normans.

You'll argue that Normans weren't that in important numbers, but consider that in addition of Normans, you have a lot of french or flemish nobles from Picardy, Normandy countryside (Normandy had maybe 1/3 of "normans" nobles), romance brittany...
Furthermore, unlike the Danes, they didn't settled region with few population, but the most rich, the most populated and where backed by french continental culture and its growing prestige.

PoeFacedKilla said:

thats sort of what i was thinking, at least Scotland would have more norse;

Click to expand...

Debatable. As the Danes did in England, the Norvegian nobles didn't settled in a widespread way (better way to influence a language) but concentrated themselves in precise places.

You could have more scandinavian influence in Scot or Scottish Gaelic, but not that much than OTL.

what of ireland? would they still be speaking gaelic?

Click to expand...

Hard to say. Once butterflied the franco-norman conquest of England, everything can happen.
The most likely would be the continuation of Irish kingdoms as OTL, but a more important dane grasp on the island is likely as well.

What is interesting would be the fate of brythonic languages. They could develop a more independent cultural and political presence in England, and be less "englified". Admittedly they weren't that much OTL.

LSCatilina just opened a can of answer on this thread.

It would probably be much closer to Dutch, possibly to the point of having the same level of partial mutual intelligibility as Swedish/Danish or Spanish/Portuguese.

Assuming of course the identification of Dutch in its own right as a distinct language rather than being a dialect of Low German isn't butterflied away by later events in this hypothetical scenario.

one word: Anglish

It'd be a Germanic language (with the Vikings it might end up sounding more like Norse or Danish instead of Dutch) with Celtic influences.

Thande said:

It would probably be much closer to Dutch, possibly to the point of having the same level of partial mutual intelligibility as Swedish/Danish or Spanish/Portuguese.

Assuming of course the identification of Dutch in its own right as a distinct language rather than being a dialect of Low German isn't butterflied away by later events in this hypothetical scenario.

Click to expand...

Well, Flanders already distinguished themselves as a political and cultural center. Even if OTL Dutch doesn't appears, Flemish of Flanders and Barbant would still likely emerges and live independently from Low German.

In fact, it could make a closer relation, as the Dutch importated *English would come from Flemish and a more southern based *Dutch.

Now, same level of intelegibility? I don't think so. Sweden and Norvegian belong to the same sub-group when Low German and Anglo-Frision are distinct.

The Kiat said:

It'd be a Germanic language (with the Vikings it might end up sounding more like Norse or Danish instead of Dutch) with Celtic influences.

Click to expand...

As above, I don't think it would evolve more scandinavian.

For Celtic influences, it's hard to believe. Anglo-Saxons was already existing as a language since the 750's as the other germanic languages. Celtic influences could be added significantly as a superstrate and such thing would need a brythonic revival or reconquest of germanic Brittania.

Throw me in for English sounding more similar to Dutch than a Nordic language: Old English and Old Norse were already separate groups by the time of the Viking invasions.

Further, even if they have some intelligibility left, whatever Norse influence on English may very well be bastardized into its existing native English forms and cognates.

EDIT: As someone who studies Old English and occasionally modernizes its spelling for effect, the intelligibility with other Germanic languages would be a lot more apparent. I have enough Old English words in my head now I occasionally hear Dutch and feel I SHOULD understand it.

An oft-made claim (now thought to be somewhat exaggerated, but still rooted in reality) is that there are less than 20 words in English that are Celtic imports. Mostly they describe geographic things that the Anglo-Saxons weren't already familiar with (being from Flatland) such as "crag" and "cairn".

Does inflection still fade away like OTL?

Also, the Celtic peoples may be more Anglicized, seeing as the Normans don't need to assimilate the English, then the Normanized English attempt to assimilate the Welsh--an already united Anglo-Saxon England can continue assimilating the Cornish and possibly conquer and try to assimilate Wales.

Umbric Man said:

Throw me in for English sounding more similar to Dutch than a Nordic language: Old English and Old Norse were already separate groups by the time of the Viking invasions.

Further, even if they have some intelligibility left, whatever Norse influence on English may very well be bastardized into its existing native English forms and cognates.

Click to expand...

In OTL the varying level of Old Norse influence largely defines dialectal differences between North and South, but nowhere near to the point of mutual unintelligibility, so I don't see why Norse influence would sufficiently divert English from its core to be all that much different from Dutch. Unless there was another later Viking invasion, an important royal union with Denmark or Norway or something, but even then it seems unlikely.

Zuvarq said:

Does inflection still fade away like OTL?

Also, the Celtic peoples may be more Anglicized, seeing as the Normans don't need to assimilate the English, then the Normanized English attempt to assimilate the Welsh--an already united Anglo-Saxon England can continue assimilating the Cornish and possibly conquer and try to assimilate Wales.

Click to expand...

This is more of a political question but I don't think an Anglo-Saxon England would have the same drive to conquer the Celtic nations as OTL's Norman England due to its different system of government, less driven by feudal knights wanting titles and lands and so on. Others may disagree with this reading though.

Thande said:

This is more of a political question but I don't think an Anglo-Saxon England would have the same drive to conquer the Celtic nations as OTL's Norman England due to its different system of government, less driven by feudal knights wanting titles and lands and so on. Others may disagree with this reading though.

Click to expand...

But like all kingdoms it's going to want to expand, successful or not. And Wales is close and small.

Engla land may stay out of Ireland though.

Zuvarq said:

But like all kingdoms it's going to want to expand, successful or not. And Wales is close and small.

Engla land may stay out of Ireland though.

Click to expand...

Not to mention Scotland as well.

Shogun said:

Not to mention Scotland as well.

Click to expand...

As a place to attack or a place to ignore?

Zuvarq said:

But like all kingdoms it's going to want to expand, successful or not.

Click to expand...

Why? It's not like England in 1066 is short of good farmland and it has a small population that can grow into its resources. Wales, by definition, consists of the parts of Welsh Britain the Anglo-Saxons considered too crap to bother with settling in the first place. It doesn't have anything they would want. The Norman conquest of Wales in OTL was driven, as I said above, by the feudal system and the fact that there were knights who wanted to carve out their own territories to gain power and influence. The system under which Anglo-Saxon England was run didn't have that factor--though you can argue it might eventually have imported it from the Continent.