|
Old forms of the English language? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Sushipunk |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
Ejaculate |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
I came too late |
:gsmile: |
|
|
| Lira |
| Yeah, I guess you may say I put the "late" in "ejaculate" :D |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| Do you really think it's an "extensive change" for "to-day" to become "today"? Language changes constantly. Look at all the new terms and meanings that have sprung up in the last ten years thanks to the Internet. The word "epic" has shifted from meaning "heroic or grand in scale or character" to primarily being a synonym for "very good" to most young people. That took less than a decade. Set against that, do you really think it's implausible that "to-day" lost a hyphen somewhere in the 124 years since The Picture Of Dorian Gray was published? |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Chimney
Haha, I actually spoke to an Englishman a while back about this. Told him that for me, hearing the word 'fag' in a non-homosexual context (he used to say he ägoes out for a fagä) felt weird. |
Well this is where things go on a little bit of a differnt path.
When talking about the terms gay or faggot, you're actually talking about slang terms that made it in to the popular vernacular, rather than the evolution of more complex words or sayings being simplified (as in on the morrow, to tomorrow) or becoming a far narrower usage (such as ejaculated from it's prior more generally accepted meaning.)
In this respect it's not actually old form of the english language changing, rather new uses of existing words or slang.
For instance faggot means a bundle of wood (not really ever used) or a sticks of metal (actually still used in welding terminology). It could have come from the yiddish word for "little bird" ("Fageyle") or referencing that a term for a bundle of wood that is difficult to carry, like a difficult woman being "baggage". |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Do you really think it's an "extensive change" for "to-day" to become "today"? Language changes constantly. Look at all the new terms and meanings that have sprung up in the last ten years thanks to the Internet. The word "epic" has shifted from meaning "heroic or grand in scale or character" to primarily being a synonym for "very good" to most young people. That took less than a decade. Set against that, do you really think it's implausible that "to-day" lost a hyphen somewhere in the 124 years since The Picture Of Dorian Gray was published? |
you've got a point that it's a minor change but technically, two words become conjoined to create a new one. Not staggeringly different but still it's a change, albeit one over a very long period which also dilutes it's impact.
However, I'm not sure about your example. Many slang uses come and go. In the early 90's every one said dumb words like "crucial" and "wicked" (to mean good). It even made it's way in to BBC "youth" productions and now you never hear anyone use those words apart from in their proper original context.
(Micheal jackson) "bad"? No one uses it in that context anymore but for 5 years it was rampant.
Epic will be the same thing. 5/10 years time, no one will be using it in that context anymore.
Therefore two words actually morphing in to one word that is still around 100 years later, suddenly seems like a significant change to the language. |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
| I shall retire for the night. I'll bid thee adieu. See you gents on the morrow. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
It was just a recent and obvious example of how language is in flux. Your own example shows that you only have to go back twenty years to find outmoded language. And while many slang terms don't stick, some actually do. That's how words like "******" end up permanently acquiring new meanings - it starts as dialectical vernacular but becomes so widespread as to be standardised.
There are plenty of words in English that are just contractions of other words: "nobody", "sometimes", "albeit". It's pretty obvious why this happens and I think it's much less notable than semantic drift. |
|
|
| Vector A |
In some cases it can even lead to mispronunciation, as happened to me for quite a while with "albeit" ("all bite").
I'm trying to think of recent (say last 50 years) imports to English from other languages and coming up blank. It seems to all go in the other direction these days. |
|
|
| Chimney |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Do you really think it's an "extensive change" for "to-day" to become "today"? Language changes constantly. Look at all the new terms and meanings that have sprung up in the last ten years thanks to the Internet. The word "epic" has shifted from meaning "heroic or grand in scale or character" to primarily being a synonym for "very good" to most young people. That took less than a decade. Set against that, do you really think it's implausible that "to-day" lost a hyphen somewhere in the 124 years since The Picture Of Dorian Gray was published? |
Well, the word epic sprung to general notice during the 2006-2007 World of Warcraft era when the best attainable equipment in the game was of the epic rank. Players started using it as a significance for something very good, eventually sipping out in the popular internet culture, if I'm not mistaken. Besides, most of these new internet words are really rather non-sense, but I assume they're necessary to keep up to date on the language (I have a strong feeling you'll disagree to this).
Words like 'today' and 'tomorrow' are used daily and by everyone so I was curious as to what triggered the change.
(I sense aggressiveness within you :p) |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| I just think it's a bit of a daft question. The more common a term, the more sense it makes to shorten or contract it. And it's not unusual for words to contract, especially if they have phonetic potential. Look at "cellular phone" becoming "cell phone" and now very commonly being written as "cellphone". You wouldn't think of that as strange. I'm very confident that the same thing happens in most languages, including yours. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vector A
In some cases it can even lead to mispronunciation, as happened to me for quite a while with "albeit" ("all bite").
I'm trying to think of recent (say last 50 years) imports to English from other languages and coming up blank. It seems to all go in the other direction these days. |
1, Uber. Granted it's thankfully died off a little but journalists especially love to (mis) use the word to describe something "cool". (drives my missus crazy when someone uses it in that context or even worse, one bloke I know actually says "that's so Uber".
2, schadenfreude. (meaning a malicious enjoyment of other's misfortune (actually comes from the dutch via german as a literal translation of "Harm-Joy".
3, Maitre D - to describe the manage of service at a restaurant (bastardized in english from Maitre d'hotel or the manager of service at a hotel).
I don't think it's such a daft question. If you think that that the OQ was commonly said or written as "on the morrow", when them became "to morrow" then "tomorrow" you actually get to the see evolution and anthropology of even simple words evolving.
But it really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things; English has over 30,000 words in it's full vocabulary, far more, even twice as much as the next nearest language, so tiny shortenings or conjoining don't really matter in that respect at there's probably 28,000 other words the average brit will never even use (as opposed to the average american where it's reckoned they will only use a base of around 500 in their lifetime :wtf: )
Some forgotten words get recycled in to completely new meanings.
Twat for instance. It was actually an obscure reference to a cut in a tree or forest clearing, and was used so little when we became developed and the general need of the average person to identify specific terms related to trees tree waned, and it became a description for vag first, then later an idiot. Barely anyone you ask knows it's original meaning. |
|
|
|
|
