• Caveman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 hours ago

    As a person that is native Icelandic speaker, took Danish in school and speak Dutch it was really fun. I whish they kept going so it becomes more like Icelandic again.

      • Caveman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Exactly, Icelandic is basically old norse with a spelling skin and different vocabulary. Most people take an least one class which involves reading old norse like Hávamál. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hávamál?wprov=sfla1

        How similar? Here’s the first stanza of Hávamál translated by me just now. All the words are common. Other places like Snorra Edda is also easily readable although Snorri used less common words so there’s more vocabulary to memorise like “röðull” for sun and “gumi” for man.

        Gattir allar, aþr gangi fram, vm scoðaz scyli, vm scygnaz scyli; þviat ouist er at vita, hvar ovinir sitia a fleti fyr[b]

        Gáttir allar, áður gangi fram, um skoðast skal, um skyggnast skal: því að víst er að vita, hvar óvinir sitja á fleti fyrir.

  • balsoft@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I could understand more-or-less everything at 1300, got the gist of the story at 1200, and could make out some familiar roots and morphology from other languages at 1100 and 1000 but not enough to puzzle things together.

  • Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 hours ago

    1300s I can understand.

    1200s I can make out the odd word.

    In my a-level English lessons we did a term on the Canterbury Tales and Middle English so we had to learn how to read it.

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      It’s easy if you know the rules - the fs that are s’s, the fact v and u were pretty much interchangeable and that prior to 1700 spelling was largely vibe driven

      • OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Yeah but i mean actually talking to someone lol. The reading I get but talking it in a convo? I reckon 1500s i just might barely be passable

        • Taleya@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 hours ago

          I parse the first line of the 1400’s “But the man would me not abandon there, nor suffer me to pass forth. I might not flee, for his companions, of whom there were a great number, beset me about and held me fast that I should not escape.”

          So…if you’ve read a pompous fantasy hack in your teens (and honestly who hasn’t) you’ll get by.

          also the word douȝti suggests there’s a chunk of scots in there.

  • trailee@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    That was great, thanks for sharing! The þorn guy around Lemmy might learn from it a few more ways to be archaically misunderstood.

  • stickly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Just reading text isn’t really a fair representation of the English language as you go back to beyond the 14th century. The grammar remains pretty similar if you sound it out and most vocab is similar (or can be figured out by context clues).

    The non-standardized spelling and premodern characters make it feel alien but it’s mostly someone with a heavy accent using phonetics to write [approximately] what they’re sounding like. I bet most people wouldn’t struggle if the text was massaged a bit.

  • Taleya@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I crap out at the 1200’s. Which is ironically how far back i can trace my paternal line

  • realitista@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    About to 1400, then it starts to look more like Dutch or something. A few hundred years more and it starts to look like Danish or something. I bet it’s harder to understand verbally.

    • 5ibelius9insterberg@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      Some of the rules for the use of the long s from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_s

      Long s was always used (ſongſubſtitute), except:

      • Upper-case letters are always the round S; there is no upper-case long s.
      • A round s was always used at the end of a word ending with ⟨s⟩: hiscomplainsſucceſs
        • However, long s was maintained in abbreviations such as ſ. for ſubſtantive(substantive), and Geneſ. for Geneſis(Genesis).
      • Before an apostrophe (indicating an omitted letter), a round s was used: us’d and clos’d.
      • Before or after an f, a round s was used: offsetſatisfaction.
    • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      It was often used for “f” as well, specifically in print to save money.

      Towards the end of the article, they explain the same thing was done with using “y” to replace the letters that make the “th” sound (ð and þ) so instead of “the” or “ðe” you got “ye”

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    Written English has been remarkably stable over the last 300 years

    And yet the College Board will use the most incoherent journal entry that makes the westing game look like a picture book

  • KittenBiscuits@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    I muddled through the 1200s with context clues, and was still catching words in the 1100s, but gave up on the 1000s. It was too brutally yuele.

    I would love to find an audio version to see how far I could get on spoken word alone. Being from the Appalachians, I’ve always been told our dialect is older.