Policy? Edit

Hey guys! I'd like to ask a bit anent the realisation of the Anglish project. By now I have worked out that this is not a manmade tung, what it would have looked like if Harold Godwinson had won the Battle of Hastings. From what I gather, Anglish would seem as a some kind of a "language reformation" aiming at a more Germanic English. Am I on the right track or am I outright lost? Thanks in advance, Padraig 15.06.2006

I think, now that many more people are interested (a good thing), other than the original three, that some set of guidelines ought to have a page of their own -- a written constitution or manifesto would be useful -- not an inflexible one, but the fact that Padraig is asking what it's all about means that we probably want a page detailing what it's all about. Basically, we are trying to create a language that is valid modern English as much as possible, except that all Romance(and most blatantly foreign) words are surgically removed. Their replacements must consist of either 1) morphemes that existed in Old English or 2) Morphemes that look as if they might have existed in Old English, even if we know they didn't. Furthermore, the whole word ought to look as if it could be a long-lost English language word, especially by using existing morphological rules. For example, I chose "lifen" to mean organic ("made of life") with the same real-life rule that means "wooden" is "made of wood". Use existing morphological rules and existing morphemes as much as possible. Last but not least, there ought to be an inclination toward aestheticness, as a tiebreaker. Do we agree?
To summarise, Anglish is an attempt to stretch the potential of modern Anglo-Saxon vocab as far as possible.
Okay now I think I've got it. I'll take a situation for clearance: we have a word in modern English that is a Scandinavian loanword (dawn), yet it was expressed indigenously in Old English (dægrima). In this case, do we continue to use the loanword OR do we transform the indigenous word to what it would have looked like nowadays (dayrim?) OR do we create a new word using indigenous material (newday or something?)? I know it's a poor example but an example nonetheless. Padraig 16.06.2006
The rule of thumb is this: If the morpheme came to us via Old English, it stays, otherwise it goes. The overall aim is to make English roughly as homogenous as Old English was at its time (that is, not wholly). However, it is better to leave a word as it is, than to rush an ugly, artificial-looking word in its place. ~Inkstersco
I think Inksterco's reply pretty much sums up how most of us feel. For Scandinavian words though, it depends on how you see the need outtake Romance words. For me, I see Romance words as having been 'forced' onto English speakers, and hence the need to get rid of them. But Scandinavian words were adopted far more peacefully as Norse and Danish settlers were assimilated into English society. Therefore, I feel they are fairly natural and ought to be left. Oswax Scolere 08:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Well let's say it's a French loanword (I used the Scandinavian 'cause I couldn't think of a French example). What is done in that case? Padraig 16.06.2006
Forgive my misunderstanding. I dare say that we keep writing and speaking the loanword until there is a good swap for it in Anglish. But, the best way of making that new word is either to find an English word that already means (roughly) the same thing, or to make a new compound or derivation based on English words. I would advise against either updating an Old English word (unless absolutely needful) or calquing a word in Anglish. Anglish ought to be seen as a separate tongue from English and Old English, and new words ought reflect this. Oswax Scolere 10:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I think Anglish ought to look like a plausible dialect of English. That way, it can be incorporated into English usage to varying extents, instead of using it wholsesale xor not at all. It will cater for people who are only seeking a Romance-to-A-S thesaurus. Ideally, it ought to be understandable to an English speaker without prior introduction, but we must also accept that that cannot always be the case. But these things should be our compass 1) Morphemes via Old English 2) The appearence of a plausable English dialect. ~Inkstersco

Forum? Edit

Hello! Would you all think that there is a need for a forum of some sort for other people to ask questions about anything and where people regularly write? Padraig 16.06.2006

There is a mailing we use at Follow the instructions there to subscribe. Oswax Scolere 08:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Anglish wordbook? Edit

I've read somewhere that this is being made. Is this true? It would be a great help atleast for me :) . Padraig 16.06.2006

I am/was working on an Angilsh wordbook. I have done a fair bit so far, but unfortunately cannot do anymore for I have limited access to a linkreckoner (look it up!). I will resume my work in time, but even then, it is something that will take years, and so is for the future. If you really want to I can send you copy of what I have done so far, but you'll have to wait a short while. Oswax Scolere 08:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
If you could somehow send me it I would be grateful :) . Padraig 16.06.2006
Padraig, The Anglish Workbook is on this site, and is where most of our effort has gone. See the main page. ~Inkstersco
I'm not talking about an English -> Anglish wordbook, I mean the Anglish wordbook which lists only Anglish words, and give their meanings using only Anglish words. Just like the one you have on your bookshelf. Oswax Scolere 12:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think there is such a book, nor is there any real need for one. It's best to describe Anglish as a cypher for English. That way, English and Anglish will remain forever interconvertable. Anglish is a "constrained form of writing", is it not? ~Inkstersco
To my mind, it is not. Oswax Scolere 15:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Well as a pragmatist I say that the only way to make Anglish a proper reality is to make it an addition to the English vocabulary. For example, in a hundred years time who knows, maybe "birdlore" will be an established English word thanks to our efforts. It will never be an established German word, however. That is how Anglish is joined to English. The internet works wonders with modern English evolution, and six degrees of seperation quickly become a million. We have a convenient set of meanings created for us as part of the English language, and Anglish is an orthodox improvement upon it, using English morphological rules and so on. We've not once on this website had an argument about meaning, and that is all thanks to the fact that we have a one-to-one relationship between English and Anglish words. Furthermore, Anglish becomes more timeless and flexible if it is a parellel to English, because although English meanings may alter, the cypher need not. I think for the time being, an Anglish dictionary, in the sense of not being a trans-lingual dictionary, is on one hand harmless, but also a misdirected effort. I don't mean to be too heavy-hearted, for all this is just my own opinion, judgement and preference, but I've seen similar efforts made by Scottish nationalists to try and portray the local speech as something sovereign and independent, when clearly it is not. Photay, meaning photo, is based on a kind of steady "cypher rule". ~Inkstersco
The Anglish wordbook will take years? I hope not!! Your First English wordbook may well, Joe, and I wish you the utmost luck in that undertaking. However, *AN* Anglish wordbook, made up of the "best" of the wikicities, I hope to be working on before the year is out. Currently I am working on another, more frivolous project of my own, called "Tutonisk". It is a language which is supposed to be easy to understand for speakers of English, German, Dutch and Swedish. This is taking up most of my freetime presently. I've been working on it for a while, but decided to shift my efforts towards it for the short time at the expense of Anglish. HOWEVER, I do very much intend to make *AN* Anglish wordbook, and then distribute it. I think it will have words which are of Germanic birth attested, let's say, any time in the Modern English period (1500ish onwards). Asides from attested words, highly plausable words (such as "birdlore", which you above mention, Ian) will be included. If anyone's interested in such a project, please e-mail me. The idea here is to take the Anglish words which could well end up being general English ones, no matter how unlikely, as opposed to the (wunderful) Anglish words which are likely too far remooved from English to ever catch on. BryanAJParry 20:01, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
As for Anglish's independence of English, it is and it isn't. On one hand, it is essentially the Anglo-saxon part of our tung to the max. But it follows it own logic, as it were, and so at times goes a tad beyond English. More than this, the character of Anglish is different to English. HOWEVER, the concept with Anglish, for me, is to show what English might look like if we wished for it to be so. BryanAJParry 20:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk at Widukind Edit

On this talk leaf you said:

I highly recommend this sort of writing, since it forces new words to be made up faster.

You are so right. I have worked to write a few leafs in times foregone, on these same grounds. New leafs, whether overbrought or newly written, will do so much to speed the growth of Anglish. Oswax Scolere 08:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Outtaking Entires Edit

Hi Padraig, can you please not take entries out of the wordbook without first bringing it up on the talkleaf for that letter. This is quite important. :) BryanAJParry 06:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay sure, sorry about that. Until now I've put suggestions from new writs to the talkleafs of the writs, because I usually end up with just two or three words. Anyway, I'll put them to the talkleafs from now on :) Padraig 27.06.2006
Well ,the way it works is that if you are unsure about an entry, bring it up on the talkleaf first. However, if you are sure your suggestion is a good one, just post it to the wordbook. If anyone else disagrees with your entry, they can bring it up in the talkleaf, and then the thing will either be deleted or not. :) Bryan BryanAJParry 10:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.