Latin vs. English

[Novsvacro]

English (Anglo-Saxon) was the language of the peasantry and (Norman) French the language of the nobility post-1066. The Norman nobility introduced a thoroughly Latin clergy who happened to be some of the only learned people in all England. Just as many Norman words 'bled' into Anglo-Saxon, many Latinate terms come from the Church's use of Latin.

Latin terms being introduced via (heh) the clergy dated back to well before the Conquest. If anything, the Conquest may have reduced the influx of Latin loanwords, since it set up Norman French as an alternative prestige language to borrow from if, say, a word was needed to fill some sort of gap.

Eh, I think the difference between the ante-Conquest and post-Conquest periods in terms of Latin intrusion would have been substantial. Much of the Norman terms for statecraft came from Latin as well.

I may be incorrect; I mostly study Bantu and Brythonic (Welsh, Cornish, Breton) languages.

[Gringostan]

But today, that Pacific islander would have no problem explaining it. True, he wouldn't use a language or words that we know, but he could explain it using words common to other Pacific islanders.
By the way, I think we would less problems if we excised French from our English.

French is an essential part of English. We'd be better off learning Frisian than trying to resurrect Old English as a living language.

That would be an interesting challenge. Can anyone write using Old English

[Angleter]

To be fair, if one lived in 1130 AD and incorporated Latin terms into your speech, or especially your writing, it was a sure sign of a comprehensive and advanced education, seeing as how nearly all important literature was in Latin.

To be a Pacific Islander with no knowledge of Latin or Greek in the Middle Ages would certainly mean one was not as knowledgeable as, say, a clergyman (that is, if one also had no access to Asian literature).

But today, that Pacific islander would have no problem explaining it. True, he wouldn't use a language or words that we know, but he could explain it using words common to other Pacific islanders.
By the way, I think we would less problems if we excised French from our English.

Werig sceal se wiþ winde roweþ.

[Gringostan]

But today, that Pacific islander would have no problem explaining it. True, he wouldn't use a language or words that we know, but he could explain it using words common to other Pacific islanders.
By the way, I think we would less problems if we excised French from our English.

Werig sceal se wiþ winde roweþ.

And that means what ?

[Novsvacro]

French is an essential part of English. We'd be better off learning Frisian than trying to resurrect Old English as a living language.

That would be an interesting challenge. Can anyone write using Old English

If we can read Beowulf in the original Anglo-Saxon, I'm sure you could write novels and letters and newspapers in Old English.

[Angleter]

Latin terms being introduced via (heh) the clergy dated back to well before the Conquest. If anything, the Conquest may have reduced the influx of Latin loanwords, since it set up Norman French as an alternative prestige language to borrow from if, say, a word was needed to fill some sort of gap.

Eh, I think the difference between the ante-Conquest and post-Conquest periods in terms of Latin intrusion would have been substantial. Much of the Norman terms for statecraft came from Latin as well.

I may be incorrect; I mostly study Bantu and Brythonic (Welsh, Cornish, Breton) languages.

There might be a case for an influx of Latin political words, since William I did decisively make Latin the sole written language of temporal government. But then, Latin was already used to some extent alongside English in the Anglo-Saxon administration, and Norman French was most certainly the spoken language of the administration.

Certainly the Church had been using Latin all along, anyway.

[Angleter]

Werig sceal se wiþ winde roweþ.

And that means what ?

Weary shall be he who rows against the wind.

And you're rowing against a 1000-year hurricane, here.

[Appalatchia]

We all know that certain words are thought of being intrinsically wrong, where as if we use the Latin word for exactly the same thing, it is held to be proper and noble. An example is the word "excrement". We all can easily recall the English word for it. Yet, whenever we use the English equivalent, it is made into something that a crude, uneducated person would say.
My question is why ? We don't usually speak Latin or the Latin equivalent. So how come the English equivalent for the same word is held to be wrong, crude and vulgar ? Why the clear intolerance for English ? What sayeth thou, O NSers ?

Excrement is still an English word. Even if it is the exact same as the Latin word, its common usage in the English language makes it English. And as a word in a different language it can have a different meaning than it did in its origin language, e.g. it being not vulgar in English. That's just sort of how language evolution goes.

[Ifreann]

To be fair, if one lived in 1130 AD and incorporated Latin terms into your speech, or especially your writing, it was a sure sign of a comprehensive and advanced education, seeing as how nearly all important literature was in Latin.

To be a Pacific Islander with no knowledge of Latin or Greek in the Middle Ages would certainly mean one was not as knowledgeable as, say, a clergyman (that is, if one also had no access to Asian literature).

But today, that Pacific islander would have no problem explaining it. True, he wouldn't use a language or words that we know, but he could explain it using words common to other Pacific islanders.
By the way, I think we would less problems if we excised French from our English.

A Pacific Islander with a physics education, or enough of one to describe a thermonuclear explosion in more detail than "A very big explosion", would probably use terms derived from Latin and Greek to describe a thermonuclear explosion.

[Thyrgga]

What sayeth thou, O NSers?

What say ye, O NSers?

[Risottia]

We all know that certain words are thought of being intrinsically wrong, where as if we use the Latin word for exactly the same thing, it is held to be proper and noble. An example is the word "excrement". We all can easily recall the English word for it. Yet, whenever we use the English equivalent, it is made into something that a crude, uneducated person would say.
My question is why ? We don't usually speak Latin or the Latin equivalent. So how come the English equivalent for the same word is held to be wrong, crude and vulgar ? Why the clear intolerance for English ? What sayeth thou, O NSers ?

We don't usually speak Latin or the Latin equivalent.

In red: OP's words derived from Latin.

Not to mention evident syntax and orthography errors in the OP's Engllish.

[Socialist Tera]

English is not a flowing language unlike Latin.

[Koninkrijk Zeeland]

Anglicus est

[The first Galactic Republic]

Well for awhile in Europe it was spoken by all the educated, and most of the books were written in Latin.

[Lady Scylla]

We all know that certain words are thought of being intrinsically wrong, where as if we use the Latin word for exactly the same thing, it is held to be proper and noble. An example is the word "excrement". We all can easily recall the English word for it. Yet, whenever we use the English equivalent, it is made into something that a crude, uneducated person would say.
My question is why ? We don't usually speak Latin or the Latin equivalent. So how come the English equivalent for the same word is held to be wrong, crude and vulgar ? Why the clear intolerance for English ? What sayeth thou, O NSers ?

English is influenced by far more than just Latin alone -- languages naturally influence each other. Even as a Germanic language, it has major adoptions from Romance, Sino, Afro-Asiatic, Turkic, Ugric, Finnic, and much more. These adoptions happen through contact, and usually the word adopted is more favourable for things such as appreciation, pronunciation, sophistication, etc. In a specific case, defecation, excrement and such were favoured over the Old English scitan and arse-gang which meant to "have a bowel movement". Scitan itself evolved into shit, but since the 1600s was considered vulgar and inappropriate to use. So largely the complaint of us not using the "English equivalent" is something we've done ourselves, and secondly, the Latin equivalents express the same just fine, and aren't particularly difficult to pronounce.

The association, however, with unsophistication is the result of social roles and how they affected the language. Much like how French has decidedly remained stubborn about any little change to its language, that mentality is residual of the Bourbon era of French language. In English, especially during the period between the 16th and 19th centuries, upper-class people intentionally refined their accents and language to differentiate themselves from the masses. This is where you get the development of the 'posh' accent that people stereotypically associate with British persons, called the Received Pronunciation or Queen's English. This accent isn't commonly spoken in the UK outside of the Queen and descendants, news anchors, and public speakers -- but during the 19th century it was prevalent of highborn society. Compare lower-class accents such as Cockney, Geordie, Scouser etc.

Cockney, as an example, routinely adopted many words influenced by cultures it came into contact with. It's depicted as an accent of the working-class Londoner, and was often looked down upon to the point that it received an official condemnation in 1909 by the London County Council who stated, "the Cockney mode of speech, with its unpleasant twang, is a modern corruption without legitimate credentials, and is unworthy of being the speech of any person in the capital city of the Empire." Politics affecting language wasn't uncommon either.

In fact, the reason Americans spell their words differently from British English is because of Noah Webster, who believed that there should be a revolution of language to finally separate Americans from the British, and set out to compile a book of changed spellings and altered vocabulary that later developed into the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. He adopted the spellings that best fit the pronunciations, choosing variations for their simplicity and use, to help give America its own language identity, which he hoped would spur a sense of further community between people.

If we were to peel away every bit of extra-language influence, we'd be speaking Anglo-Saxon once again, which would be difficult to pronounce. Sometimes words are adopted simply because they are easier to say, or express an idea more simply than whatever phrase we currently had. Excrement and Defecate aren't difficult to pronounce, and shit has had a negative connotation, while meaning the same thing, for the last few centuries. To take a dump is just too long to be taken seriously, especially considering that it is a recent euphemism.

[The first Galactic Republic]

Well for awhile in Europe it was spoken by all the educated, and most of the books were written in Latin.

[Raventsvo]

Most of the latin influence in the English language is French.

It is for this reason that I'm lerning to write in Anglo-Saxon runes, then learn Old English, then live in a hut in the forest for the rest of my life, free from the tyranny of latin influenced languages and alphabets.

[Lady Scylla]

But today, that Pacific islander would have no problem explaining it. True, he wouldn't use a language or words that we know, but he could explain it using words common to other Pacific islanders.
By the way, I think we would less problems if we excised French from our English.

A Pacific Islander with a physics education, or enough of one to describe a thermonuclear explosion in more detail than "A very big explosion", would probably use terms derived from Latin and Greek to describe a thermonuclear explosion.

Bomb go boom

[The first Galactic Republic]

Professor! Lava! Hot!

[Thyrgga]

A Pacific Islander with a physics education, or enough of one to describe a thermonuclear explosion in more detail than "A very big explosion", would probably use terms derived from Latin and Greek to describe a thermonuclear explosion.

Bomb go boom

"Bomb" comes from Greek. Wiktionary says that the source word is "βόμβος" (bombos).

[Lady Scylla]

Bomb go boom

"Bomb" comes from Greek. Wiktionary says that the source word is "βόμβος" (bombos).

Does this mean I finally have my physics education?

[Ceolophysia]

We all know that certain words are thought of being intrinsically wrong, where as if we use the Latin word for exactly the same thing, it is held to be proper and noble. An example is the word "excrement". We all can easily recall the English word for it. Yet, whenever we use the English equivalent, it is made into something that a crude, uneducated person would say.
My question is why ? We don't usually speak Latin or the Latin equivalent. So how come the English equivalent for the same word is held to be wrong, crude and vulgar ? Why the clear intolerance for English ? What sayeth thou, O NSers ?

It is because the Romans were apparently more civilized than the Germanic people that English was invented by.

[Ceolophysia]

What sayeth thou, O NSers?

What say ye, O NSers?

Ye is a misspelling of þe (the) that came about when the printing press was invented. The French printing presses that the English used didn't have the letter þ (thorn), so saying "ye" is historically inaccurate.

[Risottia]

Most of the latin influence in the English language is French.

It is for this reason that I'm lerning to write in Anglo-Saxon runes, then learn Old English British Celtic, then live in a hut in the forest for the rest of my life, free from the tyranny of latin influenced languages and alphabets.

Fixed because if you want something British without Roman influence, you have to go back to BEFORE the Roman conquest of Britannia.

[Ceolophysia]

Most of the latin influence in the English language is French.

It is for this reason that I'm lerning to write in Anglo-Saxon runes, then learn Old English British Celtic, then live in a hut in the forest for the rest of my life, free from the tyranny of latin influenced languages and alphabets.

Fixed because if you want something British without Roman influence, you have to go back to BEFORE the Roman conquest of Britannia.

That wouldn't be Old English, because that was before the Anglo-Saxons came.