AHC: Have a Widely Spoken Germanic Language That's Mutually Intelligible With English

Actually, that would have been possible if William Clito was victorious against Henry I and later Empress Matilda.
 
I recall reading that Frisian was quite mutually intelligible with English.

I'm pretty sure I was once told by an English Language professor that Frisian fishermen (both Dutch and German) could communicate to a pretty useful extent with Northumbrian fishermen (specifically from the area around Blyth*) at least into the early twentieth century. How much of the mutually intelligible words related directly to fishing, fish, boats and the sea, I can't say.

*While, not too dissimilar to a Geordie/Newcastle accent now, Pitmatic would have been rather more different back then, at least to the locals...
 
I'm pretty sure I was once told by an English Language professor that Frisian fishermen (both Dutch and German) could communicate to a pretty useful extent with Northumbrian fishermen (specifically from the area around Blyth*) at least into the early twentieth century. How much of the mutually intelligible words related directly to fishing, fish, boats and the sea, I can't say.

*While, not too dissimilar to a Geordie/Newcastle accent now, Pitmatic would have been rather more different back then, at least to the locals...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeC1yAaWG34

since nobody got my initial allusion.
 
No, "Germans" is derived from "Germannen" = Men who carry spears.

Admit it, it would be quite odd if some peoples' name didn't come from their own language.
 
No, "Germans" is derived from "Germannen" = Men who carry spears.

Admit it, it would be quite odd if some peoples' name didn't come from their own language.

Germans is perhaps ultimately derived from "Germannen" or "Gaizamannoz". But even if it is, it entered English from the Latin 'germani'.
 
Germans is perhaps ultimately derived from "Germannen" or "Gaizamannoz". But even if it is, it entered English from the Latin 'germani'.

Irrelevant, it's still a Germanic term (albeit introduced in a roundabout way, which doesn't change its basic nature). It's for that reason I consider English vocabulary more Germanic than it's given credit for: a LOT of Latin and French words are themselves Germanic in origin, just spelled/pronounced differently.
 
Does whatever it is they speak in New Zealand count?

I can understand most of what a Kiwi says, though I find it helpful to have an Australian around as a translator.
 
Irrelevant, it's still a Germanic term (albeit introduced in a roundabout way, which doesn't change its basic nature). It's for that reason I consider English vocabulary more Germanic than it's given credit for: a LOT of Latin and French words are themselves Germanic in origin, just spelled/pronounced differently.

Of course it's relevant. Firstly German entered the English language as a result of Latin influence, not German. Secondly, German is definitely derived from Latin, but not definitely derived from German. If you were going to discount the language from which words entered the English language, you might as well say that 99% of English is Indo-European.
 
What if we had a scenario similar to the two Norwegian languages: Bokmal and Nynorsk. What happened there was that some regional variants were codified into a standard form that they referred to as a new language. I can see this happening with the variants in Scotland or some parts of England.

Depending on the OP's definition of language, this counts.
 
Of course it's relevant. Firstly German entered the English language as a result of Latin influence, not German. Secondly, German is definitely derived from Latin, but not definitely derived from German. If you were going to discount the language from which words entered the English language, you might as well say that 99% of English is Indo-European.

I'm not arguing that "German" entered the English language from Latin, but that its roots, how it entered Latin to begin with, was from Germanic descent. I can admit it may have come from Latin directly, but considering that Latin borrowed so many other Germanic-derived words I don't see why this particular one wouldn't, given the relationship between the Romans and Germanic tribes.

EDIT: Apologies for the misunderstanding at the top, I edited my response accordingly.
 
Last edited:
What if we had a scenario similar to the two Norwegian languages: Bokmal and Nynorsk. What happened there was that some regional variants were codified into a standard form that they referred to as a new language. I can see this happening with the variants in Scotland or some parts of England.

Depending on the OP's definition of language, this counts.

Interesting; depending on whether butterflies decide to go a-flyin' in a particular way, this could be delineated along homeland/colonial lines (going back to that "English-American language split" theory)
 
I don't agree with stateless_englishman, but I think he meant the word "German", not German as a language. Of course the latter isn't Latin-derived. (I did once hear someone [a student of languages, of all places] claim that the German word for "nose" was derived from the Latin word, but of course that's nonsense.)
 
In that case he may be right, it depends on whether the word came from "Germanus" or "Germannen". He holds that it was a Latin word from the beginning, which I can respect; I hold the opinion that the latter definition is true, considering that so many other words entered Romance languages concerning Germanic subjects FROM Germanic sources (Alamanni, Tedesco, names like Gerard or Fernando, etc.)
 
have you ever heard our language?! Dutch does not sound like German with an English accent, Frysian is far closer to English.
I sure have, dearie. I've watched entire documentaries in Dutch (with subtitles) and couldn't help but think that I was hearing German with an English accent.
 
Top