If the Norwegians win the Battle of Stamford Bridge and conquer England, how would English's development as a language be affected? Would the effect be like French in English were French descendant worlds cone out with a more majestic connotation? Also would the letters Eth, Thorn, Wynn, and Yogh be kept in the orthography of English?
What would the English language look and sound like if the Norse conquer England?
- Thread starter Lothal
- Start date
I doubt it. Don't forget that their Norse relatives died out as well. The reason those letters isn't that the Normans made no use of them, although most likely continental influences (which would exist regardless, the Channel's not a big barrier to cultural interchange, and of course Church Latin yadda yadda yadda) played a role.
Also, for the record, the 'Norse' had already ruled large parts of England before in the previous centuries; Harald wasn't the first nor the last to attempt to conquer England. The effects on the language because of that are not insignificant, but not particularly notable since ultimately the languages are similar enough that it doesn't lead to radical changes. It's also wholly dependent on how long Norse supremacy would last. IOTL, it didn't quite.
Driftless
Donor
I'm no linguist, but would Saxon & Jute English been fairly similar to Norse of that era? More similarity between Norse & Saxon than to some of the Celtic dialects?
I believe a goodly number of place names in Britain, especially in the north are Norse derived. i.e. cities ending in -by
No there will be development but English was already full of Danish loan words. ITTL there will be no French influence. English will be closer to 1000AD English than today. No pork for example.
There's a theory out there that post-9th century English actually descends from a Norse/Old English creole rather than from "pure" Anglo-Saxon, which would suggest that Norse had rather a large impact. I'm not competent to assess whether or not the theory is true, though.
I think we forget that the Norse would still have to beat the Normans. England might have been divided again, or its possible that with King Harold dead, that the Anglo Saxons then ally with William and thus the Conquest might have resulted in a more Anglo Saxon, but still Norman influenced England.
--
Bill
Driftless
Donor
Or, the sequence of Stamford Bridge and Hastings is reversed and Harold Godwinson defeats the Norman first, and then loses to Harald at Stamford.
I've always heard the creole theory in regards to English and Norman French, so having the creole talk involve Norse instead is rather refreshing.
I've heard this as well. There certainly was a dramatic simplification of Anglo-Saxon grammar in areas where both Anglo-Saxon and Norse was spoken, and that simplification eventually became standard in later English. And of course a lot of Norse word forms made their way into English. Sometimes both word forms were retained, with Anglo-Saxon sh- and Norse sk-, as in:
ship / skipper
shirt / skirt
shatter / scatter
shin / skin
Driftless
Donor
Modern Norsk numbers 1-19 are mostly recognizable by current English speakers too:
1 = En or Et
2 = To (said like too)
3 = Tre (said like tray)
4 = Fire (said like fee-reh)
11 = Elve (said like elv-eh)
14 = Fjorten (said like fyort-en)
19 = Nitten (said like knit-ten)
Pretty similar
Dutch is even more similar imo.
Number Dutch
0 nul
1 één
2 twee
3 drie
4 vier
5 vijf
6 zes
7 zeven
8 acht
9 negen
10 tien
11 elf
12 twaalf
13 dertien
14 veertien
15 vijftien
16 zestien
17 zeventien
18 achttien
19 negentien
20 twintig
But then they are all Germanic languages so some overlap is to be expected.
I don't think Stamford Bridge would be a really good PoD on this regard.
Not only Anglo-Saxon identity pretty much evolved towards a "definitely not Norse" stance, but precedent mix of population was broken (or at least made irrelevant) one century before.
Giving the (mis)fortunes of Scandinavian takeover of an already English kingship, it would most look as a personal union without that much cultural influence and probably short-lived.
If we're asking about a Norse takeover in the Xth century (while, IMO, it would have been really hard to have more than they obtained IOTL), it's easier.
It would probably be similar to the linguistical impact of French after the Norman conquest, maybe less giving that IOTL Anglo-Norman was carried out by a specific social model while it doesn't seem that IOTL Anglo-Scandinavian culture was : from what we know, a mix occured in spite of the relative short time length.
Because of this, I'd tend to be inclined to argue in favour of a bipolarisation of Old English : more norse influenced on North-West, less so on South-West.
Not only Anglo-Saxon identity pretty much evolved towards a "definitely not Norse" stance, but precedent mix of population was broken (or at least made irrelevant) one century before.
Giving the (mis)fortunes of Scandinavian takeover of an already English kingship, it would most look as a personal union without that much cultural influence and probably short-lived.
If we're asking about a Norse takeover in the Xth century (while, IMO, it would have been really hard to have more than they obtained IOTL), it's easier.
It would probably be similar to the linguistical impact of French after the Norman conquest, maybe less giving that IOTL Anglo-Norman was carried out by a specific social model while it doesn't seem that IOTL Anglo-Scandinavian culture was : from what we know, a mix occured in spite of the relative short time length.
Because of this, I'd tend to be inclined to argue in favour of a bipolarisation of Old English : more norse influenced on North-West, less so on South-West.
Driftless
Donor
Key point there. After OTL 1066, the English language, culture and politics took a French twist
. If Stamford Bridge goes to the Norse, and they are able to maintain control, then the cultural axis shifts to a Scandinavian/Germanic orientation, doesn't it?Don't discredit French/Latin influence.
It seems likely there would certainly be a different latin influence but IOTL the Netherlands and even Sweden gained quite a bit of French influence.
With Latin being the language of the church and science it continuing to have an influence seems likely also.
It seems likely there would certainly be a different latin influence but IOTL the Netherlands and even Sweden gained quite a bit of French influence.
With Latin being the language of the church and science it continuing to have an influence seems likely also.
Redbeard
Banned
If I may feel so free:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=143305
Regards
Redbeard
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=143305
Regards
Redbeard
I somewhat disagree, there will still be some French influence, but not nearly as much as IOTL, so in that regard closer to OTL Dutch or German.
The Channel isn't a huge barrier .
(IOTL one can roughly range French influence on Western Germanic languages as the following: English (most), Dutch and German (least).)