The survival of Celtic (Brythonic) words in England and Scotland

[Albion]

If it is true that mass numbers of Britons survived, why does English contain so few loan words from Brythonic?

There are many theories, but my own is that most of English is based on Southern English dialects. The South was more quickly taken by the Anglo-Saxons whereas the Celts hung on in the North for quite some time.

[Wyn]

There are many theories, but my own is that most of English is based on Southern English dialects. The South was more quickly taken by the Anglo-Saxons whereas the Celts hung on in the North for quite some time.

That would make a lot of sense. In addition, dialects and local regionalisms that may have persisted have been rapidly losing ground to the "standard", official, in all reality Southeast-based English over the past few hundred years with the development of Modern English (massively important when discussing this subject IMO).

Celtic cultural/linguistic presence was also much more long-lived in the West/Southwest, of course.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Curtis24
If it is true that mass numbers of Britons survived, why does English contain so few loan words from Brythonic?

One possibility is the fact that the Old English material we have was largely meant for elite consumption. In the Roman Empire the system of education in the late empire was dependent on teaching classical Latin authors to the children of the nobility. A form of Latin was preserved that was different from the everyday “vulgar” Latin spoken in the empire. Likewise it has been suggested that something similar happened in Anglo-Saxon England, British natives learned Old English improperly (just as Britons undoubtedly learned Latin on the go) and yet we see Old English in the light of the primarily elite sources of the preserved literature. Think of it in terms of believing that everyone in Elizabethan London spoke like one of Shakespeare’s characters.

There are probable Celtic influences elsewhere, though, Old English has two forms of the verb “be” which occurs in no other Germanic language but it does in Welsh.

[Osweo]

There are many theories, but my own is that most of English is based on Southern English dialects. The South was more quickly taken by the Anglo-Saxons whereas the Celts hung on in the North for quite some time.

Sorry C, but I have to point out the simplicity of that. SOME areas of BOTH were taken very quickly. I don't think a North-South thing is applicable. Quick conquest means introduction of large numbers of Britons into a polity anyway.


Curtis asks WHY...

I can't do it justice here. It's several things interlocked.

Look at the layers. Welsh - English - Danish - Norman. Unsurprisingly, the common folk aren't very good at being TRI-lingual, and the earliest layer gets submerged first.

The Anglo-Danish relationship was vital, I think. If you're a peasant who has to speak with his new Danish master or neighbour, your old British words won't do the job. You will have a synonym for almost all of them anyway, so it's the common Germanic inheritance that is preserved. Our present standardised language is from the East Midlands, to put it concisely. THE region for Anglo-Danish contact. Previously the heartland of the Mercian state and the Middle Angles too. Blame Chaucer et al.

And let's look at the regions... Here's an example of Welsh borrowings at a VERY high level of state;
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20222
Look for 'Gwassena' there!


Hmm... What else... yes, if peasants in one area retain a British word, lets say for a certain plant, the peasants in the next big estate might not necessarily have done. Substrate words usually exist in parallel with the synonyms in the other language, so guess which one wins out - guess which one is held to be 'English'. Which one ends up in BOOKS? Which one becomes part of respected elite speech that everyone is anxious to ape to 'get on' in the world.


What else.......? A modern example; I lived a sort of bilingual life in Russia for several years. Most expats knew a lot of Russian words, and so these slipped into the expat 'dialect' there. But obviously, we were still also using the words from our own language. And - this may be especially significant in Britain's case - some Russian words are simply hard to say for the English mouth. These words lose out. Inserting them into an English sentence involves a certain 'modulation', to put it in musical terms. A change of key, of tempo, of stress pattern, even basic consonants and vowels. It's an effort. Russian words would be used pointedly. When we were jabbering away, we'd stick to our own. AND our local friends and spouses in such company would do likewise, as best they could. English was ... prestigious. People WANTED to be seen to excell in it. A language is a system, with its own rules. It will to some extent resent too much new stuff added in.


Hmmm... was there even antipathy to Welsh survivals? Read Bede, and you'll see that the Church certainly appears to have 'held a grudge'...


And there's the more SUBTLE impact of Late British on syntax... Complex. Maybe you've heard of it elsewhere though.

[Albion]

Sorry C, but I have to point out the simplicity of that.

I know, I just couldn't be bothered writing a lot.

SOME areas of BOTH were taken very quickly. I don't think a North-South thing is applicable.

Bernicia on my maps seemed to only hold a small area of Bernicca around Yeavering during its initial stages with Deira confined to a small area of East Ridding of Yorks. The conquest of Northumbria, especially the North West seems to have gone at snails pace compared with say Kent or Norfolk.

Quick conquest means introduction of large numbers of Britons into a polity anyway.

Hmmm... But I suppose its whether the British elites spoke Brythonic or Latin, however there doesn't seem to be much evidence of either in Old English as we know it.

Look at the layers. Welsh - English - Danish - Norman. Unsurprisingly, the common folk aren't very good at being TRI-lingual, and the earliest layer gets submerged first.

Well OE and Danish had the advantage of being relatively close at that stage as well as the advantage of the the Danes and Wessex ruling England.
I see your point there.

The Anglo-Danish relationship was vital, I think. If you're a peasant who has to speak with his new Danish master or neighbour, your old British words won't do the job.

I'm not so sure. Like take a Northerner slipping Northern slang and words into a conversation with a Southerner, words which might be completly new to them but eventually the Southerner would learn the meanings of the slang and it would be accepted into their speech patterns.

guess which one is held to be 'English'. Which one ends up in BOOKS? Which one becomes part of respected elite speech that everyone is anxious to ape to 'get on' in the world.

Yeah, you've got a good point there too.

[Allenson]

Have you seen the trade-specific variants used in New England?

Heh, just now seeing this one after so long!

Anyway, none that I am aware of...and growing up in rural New England, I'd likely have heard something by now. However, times have changed a lot around here and it is by no means the same place is was when our economy was much more agricultural now. The sheep boom here was in the mid-1800s. The non-arable, thin-soiled, rocky hills were cleared of trees and converted into pretty good pasture lands and the wool trade reigned surpreme. There is still in plenty of evidence of those days in the old stone walls that were built to contain the flocks that now run through dense second/third-growth forest that was once open pasture (and before that, 'virgin' forest).

So, perhaps back in the day, the sheep farmers around here used a counting method similar to that described above.....

[Osweo]

I know, I just couldn't be bothered writing a lot.

Bernicia on my maps seemed to only hold a small area of Bernicca around Yeavering during its initial stages with Deira confined to a small area of East Ridding of Yorks. The conquest of Northumbria, especially the North West seems to have gone at snails pace compared with say Kent or Norfolk.

Field by field conquest from a tiny core, is probably more likely to prevent mixing. It gives the invaded more chance to flee, and the invader more chance to build up numbers.

Kent was 'signed over' all in one go. Perfect situation to envisage thousands of British peasants suddenly saddled with a narrow top-layer of mercenaries turned landlords.

Hmmm... But I suppose its whether the British elites spoke Brythonic or Latin, however there doesn't seem to be much evidence of either in Old English as we know it.

The supreme ruler of Britannia in the 440s bore a Brythonic title - Vortigern. He had been named in the Latin style originally (Vitalis), but appears to have named his son in Celtic. He was from the less Romanised regions in the west, Gloucester, I believe, and appears to have actually been in civil war with more blatantly Roman rivals. The general story seems to be of a resurgence, however brief, of PRE-Roman Britishness. You see it in the artforms too.

I'm not so sure. Like take a Northerner slipping Northern slang and words into a conversation with a Southerner, words which might be completly new to them but eventually the Southerner would learn the meanings of the slang and it would be accepted into their speech patterns.

Think how different Welsh is, though. I reckon that was the obstacle. Like I said with the Russian example. People say I put on a completely different voice when I switch languages. It's a real mental 'change of gear'.

Heh, just now seeing this one after so long!

Anyway, none that I am aware of...and growing up in rural New England, I'd likely have heard something by now. However, times have changed a lot around here and it is by no means the same place is was when our economy was much more agricultural now. The sheep boom here was in the mid-1800s. The non-arable, thin-soiled, rocky hills were cleared of trees and converted into pretty good pasture lands and the wool trade reigned surpreme. There is still in plenty of evidence of those days in the old stone walls that were built to contain the flocks that now run through dense second/third-growth forest that was once open pasture (and before that, 'virgin' forest).

So, perhaps back in the day, the sheep farmers around here used a counting method similar to that described above.....

I wun't mind coming and having a look at all that some day!

As I remember it, though, the counting systems in New England were recorded in an urban environment, connected with taking rapid tallies of boxes or bundles of raw goods at dockyards or markets. Perhaps it could be traced to a random individual employed in such a place. I don't know if it got to the farming sector. Then again, it'd probably have been less likely to have been recorded there.

[Albion]

Think how different Welsh is, though. I reckon that was the obstacle. Like I said with the Russian example. People say I put on a completely different voice when I switch languages. It's a real mental 'change of gear'.

Yeah, I suppose that's correct, I noticed that a bit with the bits of Romanian I picked up in the past. Welsh doesn't sound completely alien and Cornish seems a nice language at least in written form (I've never heard it spoken) but despite this my English surname of Celtic origins simply feels quite odd in English.