Afrikaans: Ek het hier Donderdag vyf soet appels gekoop. Díe was verrot. Dit kan gebeur. In plaas daarvan sal jy 'n klein potjie van vars heuning kry. Goed. Dankie.
Ik heb hier donderdag vijf zoete appels gekocht. Die waren verrot. Dat kan gebeuren. In plaats daarvan, zal jij een kleine potje honing krijgen. Goed. Bedankt.
Ik ha hjir tongersdei fiif swiete apels kocht. Dy wiene ferrotte. Dat kin barre. Yn plak dêrfan, silst do in lytse potsje huning krije. Goed. Dankewol.
Nederlands in 2100: ewa fakka met jouw die appels waren rot eh niffauw. Verkoper: Ewa ben je serieus met mij a neef! Ik geef je deze potje honing wel om te tjappen Koper: aii is goed man tallah.
As a native Dutch speaker I notice the same with older versions of English... Even though I understand Modern English perfectly fine because of media and the internet, I do notice older forms of English sound more closely related to Dutch.
Old dutch and old anglo saxon are brother and old saxon and old frisian same family. Detail english never was anglo saxon. English is latinized by normand french today.
The problem is not with modern Dutch but with modern English which was heavily influenced at some point by French a Romance language since the Normans conquered England while Dutch stayed dominant Germanic.
It is not. It has split in the 17th century, but some of the basic differences are lack of gramatical gender, lack of verb conjugation, and lack of cases. Modern Dutch has only dropped the cases and had some changes in verbconjugasion. There are some soundshifts represented in African spelling, too. Afrikaans does not differentiate ei and ij anymore, which standard Dutch does only do in writing and dialects along the German border do to this day. Also in contrast to standard Dutch Afrikaans does not differentiate f and v nor does it differentiate z and s.
I must say that the one from year 500 was the easiest to understand, because it's literally the one that is most similar to Scandinavian... Jahr 500: Thunres dago ik kaupoodèè heer. Fiif pundo swotjeero applo. Thee wèèrun rutane! Swa mag gaskehana. Anèè theero stadai skuluth jii habeena puttakiina mith frisko hunango. Mith Frisko Hunango... Good... Thanko... Swedish: Tors dag jag köpte här, fem pund söta äpple. De varde ruttna! Så må ske. Och Då istället skulle du hava en burk med frisk honung. Med Frisk Honung... Gott... Tack. My dialect: Tors dag, ä käupde här, fee pund söta äbble. De var rötana! So må hänna. O Då ställed skulle i ha krus me frisk honung. Me frisk honung... Godt... tack.. Mine is a southern Swedish dialect, some sounds are softened in my dialect and some long vowels have become diphtongs, which is the main shift from standard Swedish which is just a written language... But also that year 500 looks awfully close to Norse, gaskehana, skuluth, theero, wèèrun... etc, are basically the same as Old norse, although the names of the days are slightly different, after all Thursday was literally Thuras daga. Not to be confused with Thüras daga, because that is Tuesday, the day of Tyr.
@The Major At the time the latter days of the migration period the germanic tongues were still mutually intelligible to a high degree though there had been many shifts, there is a reason why there was a division between north, west and east germanic, now Old Norse is the language we have most knowledge of due to the Icelandic sagas, and it is comcievable that from what scholars know from reconstructed old Dutch that it would be fairly similar to.Old Saxon which was very close to Old English and formed a dialect continuum with Old Frisian, all languages which were mutually intelligible, Anglo Saxon soldiers at many of the battlefields against the Danes.who spoke Old east norse could communicate to a large degree with one another, it is not inconcievable that wgen they reached the low countries that communication to some degree was possible however limited.
Pretty cool that a TV series has a such a concise and linguistically sound explanation of historical linguistics and sound change. You'd never see something like this in the States. There's no bullshit, just solid linguistics presented accurately in a way the layman can understand. Really cool.
I love seeing how similar languages become the further back we go, there is some clips of proto-norse language (roughly 200-500 ad) from scandinavia, which looks similar to some of the reconstructed speech here,
I found the older Dutch easier to understand 🤔 One of the most interesting videos I've ever seen, seriously 👍🏾 Unrelated: the host is really handsome, especially in the "past" videos for some reason 😊
@@olypav4593 does his name make you think he's a native speaker? It is the international language and it's closely related to Dutch, so seems the comment is pretty general in nature, not colonially as you imply, lol.
It is interesting that Afrikaans sounds more like Flemmish than Dutch. Belgium is surrounded by Germany, the Netherlands, France and Luxemburg. Afrikaans have developed from Dutch, French, German as well as South-East Asian languages such as Bahasa Malayu, Bahasa Indonesia and indegenous African languages from the Khoi and San inter alia.
While studying at school in Westhoek (Southwestern corner of West Flanders), we were repeatedly told by the teachers that the local dialect sounds more like Dutch did about 500 years ago. There was little evolution compared to the standard language spoken today. While I am not a native speaker, I do admit that the limited knowledge of the West Flemish dialect I acquired during my life in Belgium, helps me to understand Danish better.
Lol anno 1000 dutch makes more sense to me as a german. Sounds so much cleaner than modern dutch. Donnerstag kaufte ich hier fünf pfund suesse äpfel. no idea why dutch went from kopoda (kaufte) to kochte (cooking lol) So mags geschehen (it might happen so) An derer statt sollet ihr haben (einen) pot mit frischen honig. (insteat of that you shall have (a) pot of fresh honey) And no it does not sound like french at all. it sounds like strange German mixed with latin word endings. Ok and the anno500 dutch is basically completely understandable for since for me hearing the anno1000 version before prepared me for it. Its harder sure but not harder than going from my language to the anno1000 version.
Fun to see how "ik kocht" (I bought) used to be "ik kaupoodèè". I'm a flemish immigrant in Finland and here the finnish word for shop is "Kauppa" Just like the double 't' and double 'i' in puttakiina, kauppa has a pause at the p's. All Finnish double vowels are stretched like that. Fun to see how that feature also used to be part of dutch, even if kauppa is just a loanword from germanic and the finnish language has otherwise not that many similarities.
@@gavinrolls1054 depends what you're used to. Here the orthography is to double. tuli -> fire tuuli -> wind ('uu' sounds exactly the same but is just longer) Banana -> banaani ('aa' idem)
Well, the modern Dutch present infinitive tense is "kopen", conjugated as: "ik koop", "jij koopt", "hij/zij koopt", "wij kopen", "jullie kopen", "zij kopen". It makes sense that the past tense would be "koopte", but it isn't. It's an irregular verb: "ik kocht", "jij kocht", "hij/zij kocht", "wij kochten", "jullie kochten", "zij kochten".
@@shadowsir It is because Dutch changed -ft > -cht; for example in zacht - English soft, lucht 'air' in German luft. Also gracht 'canal' should be graft from graven 'to dig'.
As a Swede, I understand the year 1000 version very well while the 500 and the 1500 versions start to get tricky, for different reasons. For me, the order of understandability is 1000, 500, 1500, 2000...
Another interesting thing is how the further you go, the more simillar languages get to each other. The language from 500 AD seems a bit more simillar to Slavic, for example "swotjeero" sounds quite simillar to "słodki" in modern Polish (which means "sweet" of course). The Proto-Indo-European hypothesis makes sense to me.
Here it is a coincidence. Slavic word for "sweet" (soldk) has most likely originated from a Proto-Indoeuropean word with meaning "salty, spicy, tasty". Also Polish (West Slavic actually) had no Ł sound back then ;)
There are written texts in old low franconian (old Dutch),just there aren’t as much as old English or old high German,one example is the wachtendok psalms
Nouja, als wij bezet worden door Amerika en we schrijven een woord; Kneekvarcansen. Dan klinkt dat als ; 'Nie-war-ken-sen. Zijn wij bezet door de Duitsers, klonk het waarschijnlijk als; Kneek-war-khansen' Zijn we bezet door de Belgen (haha) dan klinkt het als; 'Knéék-war-kánsén. Enzovoorts. Ze weten vast wel welke taal er op dat moment prominent was. En hebben daar de oude klanken van gebruikt.
Old dutch/old frankish is very conected with old limburguish. Proto-Germanic Nordic it was a powerful lang that united nation and tribes, your influence remains today. Afrikaans an example guards too many sounds and memories, structures of protogermanic nordic lang too like your sisters langs too.
I've noticed a major difference in pronunciation between the Dutch that I hear in my everyday life in the US and that which I hear in my Dutch studies. That is the "ui" sound. The Dutch-Americans pronounce it like a long "i", as in "like" or "mine", with a little bit of "oi" in there. (Some examples are the names Kuiper, Huisenga, Uitenbogaard, Buikema.) In fact, you can actually tell when someone else has the strong Dutch ancestry because they pronounce those name correctly. But when I hear it in my Dutch listening exercises, it leans more toward "ow" than "i". I'm wondering if the difference is due to (a) a regional accent from our ancestors when they came to the US, (b) a change in Dutch pronunciation in the US, or (c) a change in Dutch pronunciation in the Netherlands.
If you regret to old frankish true first form of dutch you see the sound of "ui" stronger, highed, if you go to dutch emigración to US, in the meeting of english and dutch, these sound changed to 'i'or "ii", btw idioms evolute and change this same sound 'i' or 'ii" softly and implicity is changing to soft 'y' or 'yy' in this century 21 and on the new generations on dutch comunities expats out Netherlands.
Actually You in English and Jij in Dutch is weird among Germanic languages,in the past even old Dutch and old English had “thu” or “thi” as “you”,but in old german and old Norse languages (wich was also “thu”) it later changed into “Du”
Very interesting, thanks. Although to an outsider, an English speaker, it all just sounds like Dutch :-) How I wonder would it sound to a Friesian? Technically Friesian is supposed to be closer to English, they form an Anglo-friesian sub-group of Germanic, but in practice it seems to have stayed close to Dutch.
I don't think it's supposed to be closer to english, it's just out of all the other languages Frisian is the closest to english. That is, if you consider it to be an actual different language, which most of us Dutch people don't XP It's just a silly dutch dialect. Yeah, no, I know it's technically a different language, but I do think Frisian is still closer to Dutch than it is to English.
Well tbh they do belong to the same language family of Anglo-Frisian, but what you are saying that it's closer to dutch is nonetheless true as well due to the contact Frisians had with dutch, so I would probably phrase it as more that it's a brother-language to English that's heavily influenced by dutch? :)
Frisian back then was more the same as Frisian now. It would sound like beowulf, Frisian is technically the earliest form of English. As a Frisian I cannot believe that people compare Dutch to English but not Frisian to English. If you want a good representation of what old Frisian sounded like, hear a native Frisian speak. It's about the same as what they talked.
To me as a monolingual😬 English speaker, *Dutch* sounds appealing, it comes across as sociable and the structure sounds logical - both in the year 1500 role play and in its modern form.
Correctie, oud Engels. Het moderne Engels bestaat uit meer dan 70% buitenlandse leenwoorden van voornamelijk Latijnse origine. Daardoor kan Engels, ofwel modern Engels, niet claimen een oudere taal nog te spreken dan zelfs het moderne Nederlands. Even voor de context.
@@hiddenintheshadows1469 all of those latin words is vocabulary, just words that are for science and other niche things. Basic talking is mostly germanic origin. The grammar is germanic also.
Ik moet hier even bij zeggen dat dit trouwens nep is De dingen die gezegd worden over volle klinkers en dubbele medeklinkers zijn correct maar de zinnen en woorden komen niet eens in de buurt
Container,.... PR ofwel "Public relations". Ze glippen er gewoon in. Wij hebben het Engels woorden gegeven zoals: Koekie - Cookie. Stoep - Stoop. Vaas - Vase. Als je de gemiddelde Engels spreker vraagt of ze weten waar dat soort woorden vandaan zijn gekomen weten ze dat niet in 90% van de gevallen, en nemen daarom automatisch aan dat het altijd al Engelse woorden waren. Vraag een Australier waarom Arnhemland "Arnhemland" heet,...al zijn ze er geboren, ze hebben geen idee. Van Nieuw Holland hebben ze meestal ook niet gehoord. Vraag een New Yorker waarom er zo veel verbasterde Nederlands namen in hun stad zijn,...Breukelen-Brooklyn, Haarlem-Harlem, Jonkheer-Jonkers, Vlissingen-Flushing, Wallenstraat-Wallstreet, Lang-eiland-Long Island, etc, etc en dan staan ze verbaast dat dat zo is. Vertel ze dat New York eerder Nieuw Amsterdam heten, en dan heb je ze net iets kompleet (Compleet⬅ook zo iets;) nieuws vertelt.
@@gemluka6666 , in case of "complete"/"compleet", both variants come from French "complet" which comes from Latin "com" (with) and "plere" (to fill). Also, the English "vase" did not come from Dutch "vaas", but from the French "vase" which again comes from Latin "vas" which means vessel.
Ben bang dat meeste Nederlanders in het ongelukkig geval dat het Koninkrijk met water zou onderlopen niet massaal naar België zullen uitwijken, maar eerder naar zowel Duitsland en Denemarken zullen migreren.
Im not so sure about that. Deutschland was written Duitschland with UITSCH in 1900 or so. Not its Duitsland with UITS. That definitely had an impact on the pronounciation. And especially the G was different. I highly doubt that modern dutch speakers would be able to speak with people from 1500 let alone 1200. Germans for example can pretty much read dutch but listening to them speak is a catastrophe with the G being a CH(r) almost. Because it changed so much (german G is like latin dutch is not anymore). You might understand them more than they understand you like you understand germans more since their language is clearer than dutch with their sharp S sounds and their unchanged G etc. Dont forget just because you can read the text like germans can read dutch you have no clue how people spoke. The scientists also dont they just assume it. You can somewhat get it from old poetry and looking for rhymes etc but thats it. (just comapare that to veni vidi vici. Is it vichi or viki? Still a debate about that.)
G comes from the hard sound of the Latin G, which in turn comes from the original sound that was likely a Latin G followed by a H (=aspirated). CH and its variant H came from the original K. That's about 8000 years ago and as far as we can currently reach. Who knows what came before?
middle english is where it started with the more dutch/frisian tongue, most low/old english derived from norse and danish, old english therefor is a lot more like scots too, if you think away the celtic /gaelic. i'd say the english language slowly traveled from the northenmost "bordering" (still sea in between) countries, slowly but surely going south in terms of linguistic influence
German language is totally different pronunciation of English , so I think when Germans came to Europe they've had got English in this way , English must be original one . Turks got the pronunciation of Latin alphabet from Germans , when I write down what I heard in English in the way I heard them it becomes German language :)))
German or English both aren't 'the original'. The original is the Germanic language (which is not the same as the modern German language). That Germanic lanuage split into Frisian, English, Dutch and German. So all of these languages share a common ancestry: the Germanic language as the ancient original one.
The original language was Proto-Germanic and it split into Western Germanic languages: Frisian, Dutch, German, and English, and into Northern Germanic languages: the Scandinavian languages: Icelandic, Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian. However, English has been influenced by French so much after the Norman invasion of Guillaume le Conquérant that it can seem like a Romance language at times. In English, there are now more words derived from French and Latin than from Proto-Germanic.
Suzanne V. wrong, it splitted up in Northern Germanic, West,Elbe and East Germanic and than splitted up again West Germanic became Dutch-English-Frisian and Dutch splitted up in Afrikaans-Flemish
you can be right , it looks like English , Dutch and even French drawn totally from Roman Empire like every thing else , but still Dutch have some differences sounding original that parts must be remains in North as it is so obvious that Northie people less mixed comparable other Europeans , like Basques isolated from cultural assimilation of Roman(First Europeans were mining slaves of Romans at skirts of Alps ) and Arabic culture . France has a massive influence of Arabic language and mixing , Germans shows it by pronunciation "R" letter pronouncing it like Arabs do .
well yeah, but he came up not very amused and looked like he could cause a ruckus there weren't multinational conglomerates back then, populations a lot smaller too, the black death (pestilence) culled the herd too, and there was a lot of superstition back in those days, you had to keep those individual customer relations a bit stronger, right? i reckon you still had some leverage by just being intimidating in the year 1500 , people still have that in 2001, but it's no comparison to what it meant back then :)
Interesting, why does the Dutch written record not go back as far as English or German? Was the influence of French and Latin too strong for the literate to write in their own vernacular?
Good question. Indeed it seems that the Latin influence held on longer on the continent, resp. that there was less of a centralized authority than in England that could switch to the vernacular. As regards the difference between Dutch and German, this is mainly a matter of scale: Germany is much bigger so there was a bigger chance that someone would at some point switch to writing German. Also the main pieces of pre-1200 vernacular writing are by schooled clergymen, but in the Low Countries, esp. in the north, there were only few places where this could develop, as opposed to Germany.
@@michieldevaan5292 English split from the continental Germanic dialects when the Anglo-Saxons migrated to Britain around 500AD. But would you not agree that Dutch and German did not really split until much later? Until the Netherlands and Germany formed separate national identities (whenever that happened, but certainly after 1000AD), they formed a dialect continuum. To avoid confusion, for the 500AD situation one might better speak of "the group of dialects that later amalgated into modern Dutch".
I write this comment in English for the sake of standard youtube language; I am Belgian. I am not a linguist but I think the starting point for this study is wrong. It started of studying written language. Written language was used by scholars ( who would look down on "regular" people ) and not by the "normal" population of an area. For starters, I dont think any 2 villages spoke in the same manner; there was no common language. I believe that a study of dialects, local speech, needs to be done. After all, the way our different local languages have grown is a natural proces. I remember, as a kid, we had to read some mideaval text. Reading it in Dutch needed translations; however, reading it in my dialect permitted me to understand the text much more naturally, like a mother tongue is understood; without reflection. I think, if you take a text written in say, Limburg in 1200, another text written in Ghent in 1200, another written in Rijsel in 1200, another written in Amsterdam in 1200 and another one in Bruges written in 1200 (so different places with distinct dialects; listen to it read in the local dialect, then maybe try to read a text from Amsterdam read by someone from Ghent and keep mixing the texts with the reading in another dialect, maybe a common denominator could come forward to have a soundbite from the mideaval Flemish. Also, a while back - can't remember where or when - I heard a theory that traveling by foot for traders ( or with a packhorse, but not on horseback) in the midleages gave no language problems from scandinavia to largely into france. Allthough there were differences in the language (someone from Scandinavia could not understand someone from Northern France) the speed of travel permitted the traveller to adapt to local speech and be able to comunicate all along the way. I do (off course) not know if this is true, but it seems very plausible to me. This would mean that only 2 languages would be needed from Scandinavia all the way to Italy. That would off course also explain how unschooled people would be able to go on a pelgrimage and still be understood all along the way. Anyway, just my thoughts written down immediately after seeing this video, so maybe not well put and a bit random. Kind regards Alain
Hi Alain, it is true that dialects are closer to the original language than the standard language spoken by the majority nowadays. It happens in every nation, and it is a natural process as it improves communication and makes any state more efficient. However, a standard language is nothing but the amalgamation of dialects and standardisation of pronunciation and spelling. As I have written in another post just now, I lived in West Flanders (Poperinge and Ieper) for quite some time as a teenager and while Dutch is not my native language, I had to deal with standard Dutch at school and local dialects anywhere else. I do not speak them, but I do recognise and understand them to a certain degree. This year I moved to Denmark and I had never studied Danish before, but whenever I hear some Danish words, my mind makes a connection to the dialects I heard in Westhoek and it makes it easier for me to understand it even without looking for a translation. I would love to meet a Flemish person who lives in Denmark and still knows their dialect perfectly well, and hear their opinion.
@@Flamdring Thank you for this interesting reply. I believe this kind of backs me up on the theory stated. I do not speak nor understand any Scandinavian language but I can understand the jest of it when I read it (again) in my dialect. Maybe, after getting used to the sound of it like you did, I would be able to understand. Or maybe, by walking to Scandinavia and only talking with people in dialect, doing aprox 15 km a day, I would "grow into" Danish or Norwegian all naturally like this theory I heard a while back states. It is definitly an interesting topic.
The year 500 is probably the hardest to predict. At that time Rome just fell and the differences between Germanic dialects was vague. It is refreshing to hear that the "Dutch" language of that time was tonal in the sense of having true vowel lengths.
Het zal van regio tot regio toch giswerk blijven denk ik. En dan Proto-Germaans. Ook daar zullen verschillende dialecten en talen in bestaan hebben, lijkt me zo.
My god, the 1500s Dutch sounds so much clearer, similar to David Crystal's reconstructed early modern English, Modern Hollandic Dutch accents sound different from the spelling in many ways and almost muble their words, similar to English at times.
It could also be due to the fact that the host and the lady are Flemish. Flemish standard Dutch is very clear and softer than the perceived standard Dutch in the Netherlands. They also do not eat the "n" at the end of the verbs like many Dutch do e.g. "werken" becomes "werkeh", and the "r" is most often rolling as in Spanish or Italian.
@@Flamdring the problem is that Old Low Franconian and its various dislects have so little records the Anglo Saxon missionnaries from Northumbria focused mainly their efforts in Friesland and Old Saxony, I think the Venerable Bede even mentioned this in the texts, the English taught the Frisians and Saxons and most mainland Germanic speaking peoples to read and write using Latin characters mostly because they had an affinity for the Frisians and Saxons due to having a close connection to both cultures, it is theorised by somd schars that the Frisians after the 5th century were actually an offshoot of the Angles Saxons and Jutes migrating to England
Zoals het er nu uitziet wordt het een soort Engels. Wanneer wij tenminste niet via de EU onder Duitse heerschappij terechtkomen, want dan blijft het Nederlands wat langer bestaan om tenslotte een dialect met sterke Duitse invloeden, of helemaal Duits, te worden.
Afrikaans: Ek het hier Donderdag vyf soet appels gekoop. Díe was verrot. Dit kan gebeur. In plaas daarvan sal jy 'n klein potjie van vars heuning kry. Goed. Dankie.
Afrikaans is a sweet language.
Ik vind het altijd leuk hoe gelijkend onze twee talen nog steeds zijn
Ik heb hier donderdag vijf zoete appels gekocht. Die waren verrot. Dat kan gebeuren. In plaats daarvan, zal jij een kleine potje honing krijgen. Goed. Bedankt.
Ik heb heej Donderdaag vief appelle gekoch, die ware rot.
Ken gebeure... in plaats daorvan gaef ik dich 'n klein pötje honing.
Des good, danke.
Ik ha hjir tongersdei fiif swiete apels kocht. Dy wiene ferrotte. Dat kin barre. Yn plak dêrfan, silst do in lytse potsje huning krije. Goed. Dankewol.
Nederlands in 2100: ewa fakka met jouw die appels waren rot eh niffauw.
Verkoper: Ewa ben je serieus met mij a neef! Ik geef je deze potje honing wel om te tjappen
Koper: aii is goed man tallah.
😂😂😂😂😂
HAHAHAHAH
Ik wil niet eens beginnen met wanneer ze d'r zinnen beginnen met "Wollah"
Nah het zijn alleen de ontzettend hippe kinderen die zo praten. Stelletje schapen
@@GreyWhiteBlue You don't want to know.
As a native English speaker who has studied some old English, but never Dutch, I found it much easier to understand the older Dutch tongues.
As a native Dutch speaker I notice the same with older versions of English... Even though I understand Modern English perfectly fine because of media and the internet, I do notice older forms of English sound more closely related to Dutch.
That's because the older version is much more related to other languages. Less specialized. Less distinct.
duh
Old dutch and old anglo saxon are brother and old saxon and old frisian same family. Detail english never was anglo saxon. English is latinized by normand french today.
The problem is not with modern Dutch but with modern English which was heavily influenced at some point by French a Romance language since the Normans conquered England while Dutch stayed dominant Germanic.
I'm just impressed that Netherlands had factory-produced jars of honey back in 500AD. Truly an advanced nation!
Considering my language(Afrikaans) is basically 17th-century Dutch, it's equally difficult to understand modern and old Dutch.
Very interesting show!
It is not. It has split in the 17th century, but some of the basic differences are lack of gramatical gender, lack of verb conjugation, and lack of cases. Modern Dutch has only dropped the cases and had some changes in verbconjugasion.
There are some soundshifts represented in African spelling, too. Afrikaans does not differentiate ei and ij anymore, which standard Dutch does only do in writing and dialects along the German border do to this day.
Also in contrast to standard Dutch Afrikaans does not differentiate f and v nor does it differentiate z and s.
I'm learning Dutch and I understood the older Dutch better than I understand modern Dutch 😂😂
Understandable. Our language is spoken so 'lazy' today, people just vomit and ramble the words.
That's how people perceive linguistic change in all languages. :p
Afrikaans is the language to learn since its sounds the same like old Dutch
Baie lekker taal om te praat , glo my ek is n afrikaner...
I must say that the one from year 500 was the easiest to understand, because it's literally the one that is most similar to Scandinavian...
Jahr 500: Thunres dago ik kaupoodèè heer. Fiif pundo swotjeero applo. Thee wèèrun rutane!
Swa mag gaskehana. Anèè theero stadai skuluth jii habeena puttakiina mith frisko hunango.
Mith Frisko Hunango... Good... Thanko...
Swedish: Tors dag jag köpte här, fem pund söta äpple. De varde ruttna!
Så må ske. Och Då istället skulle du hava en burk med frisk honung.
Med Frisk Honung... Gott... Tack.
My dialect: Tors dag, ä käupde här, fee pund söta äbble. De var rötana!
So må hänna. O Då ställed skulle i ha krus me frisk honung.
Me frisk honung... Godt... tack..
Mine is a southern Swedish dialect, some sounds are softened in my dialect and some long vowels have become diphtongs, which is the main shift from standard Swedish which is just a written language...
But also that year 500 looks awfully close to Norse, gaskehana, skuluth, theero, wèèrun... etc, are basically the same as Old norse, although the names of the days are slightly different, after all Thursday was literally Thuras daga. Not to be confused with Thüras daga, because that is Tuesday, the day of Tyr.
@The Major At the time the latter days of the migration period the germanic tongues were still mutually intelligible to a high degree though there had been many shifts, there is a reason why there was a division between north, west and east germanic, now Old Norse is the language we have most knowledge of due to the Icelandic sagas, and it is comcievable that from what scholars know from reconstructed old Dutch that it would be fairly similar to.Old Saxon which was very close to Old English and formed a dialect continuum with Old Frisian, all languages which were mutually intelligible, Anglo Saxon soldiers at many of the battlefields against the Danes.who spoke Old east norse could communicate to a large degree with one another, it is not inconcievable that wgen they reached the low countries that communication to some degree was possible however limited.
Pretty cool that a TV series has a such a concise and linguistically sound explanation of historical linguistics and sound change. You'd never see something like this in the States. There's no bullshit, just solid linguistics presented accurately in a way the layman can understand. Really cool.
I love seeing how similar languages become the further back we go, there is some clips of proto-norse language (roughly 200-500 ad) from scandinavia, which looks similar to some of the reconstructed speech here,
Yeah almost has a danish sound to it 🤣
Cuz they were all proto-Germanic that was originally spoken in southern Scandinavia and a part of northern Germany
I found the older Dutch easier to understand 🤔 One of the most interesting videos I've ever seen, seriously 👍🏾
Unrelated: the host is really handsome, especially in the "past" videos for some reason 😊
That's because the older version is much more related to other languages. Less specialized. Less distinct.
Thank you for sharing this! :D
Fancy finding you here Cefin! Love your vids.
4:01
I just noticed, 'nog steeds hebben' is translated as; 'still happen.'
But that should be; 'We still have.'
Excellent, I definitely will be reviewing this many more times. Cultural and enjoyable, thanks!
It's funny how the more you go back in time with this, the more it closely resembles to English. At least Old English.
It's amazing how much more, and how much more quickly English changed through the years.
No one’s talking about English here, you guys don’t have to be everywhere.
@@olypav4593 does his name make you think he's a native speaker? It is the international language and it's closely related to Dutch, so seems the comment is pretty general in nature, not colonially as you imply, lol.
I've watched both old dutch and old english videos. I think someone from the Netherlands can understand old english better than someone from England.
@lbb2r Stojanoff is not a Dutch name
@@mvwouden yeah old english way different then modern english. I can only pick out a few words.
The Dutch from 1500 sounds a little bit like the Flemish you hear in Belgium nowdays to me for some reason.
It is interesting that Afrikaans sounds more like Flemmish than Dutch. Belgium is surrounded by Germany, the Netherlands, France and Luxemburg. Afrikaans have developed from Dutch, French, German as well as South-East Asian languages such as Bahasa Malayu, Bahasa Indonesia and indegenous African languages from the Khoi and San inter alia.
Well this is a flemish video
Progress xD.
While studying at school in Westhoek (Southwestern corner of West Flanders), we were repeatedly told by the teachers that the local dialect sounds more like Dutch did about 500 years ago. There was little evolution compared to the standard language spoken today. While I am not a native speaker, I do admit that the limited knowledge of the West Flemish dialect I acquired during my life in Belgium, helps me to understand Danish better.
West-Flemish is the most conservative Dutch dialect. People who know it have a significant advantage when reading texts in Middle Dutch.
Zer interessant, hartelijk dank, ik vind persoonlijk het NL van het jaar 1000 geweldig
It doesn’t look like I am the first to notice that the older Dutch is easier to understand the modern version to an English speaker. Interesting.
Lol anno 1000 dutch makes more sense to me as a german. Sounds so much cleaner than modern dutch.
Donnerstag kaufte ich hier fünf pfund suesse äpfel.
no idea why dutch went from kopoda (kaufte) to kochte (cooking lol)
So mags geschehen (it might happen so)
An derer statt sollet ihr haben (einen) pot mit frischen honig. (insteat of that you shall have (a) pot of fresh honey)
And no it does not sound like french at all. it sounds like strange German mixed with latin word endings.
Ok and the anno500 dutch is basically completely understandable for since for me hearing the anno1000 version before prepared me for it.
Its harder sure but not harder than going from my language to the anno1000 version.
Fun to see how "ik kocht" (I bought) used to be "ik kaupoodèè". I'm a flemish immigrant in Finland and here the finnish word for shop is "Kauppa"
Just like the double 't' and double 'i' in puttakiina, kauppa has a pause at the p's. All Finnish double vowels are stretched like that. Fun to see how that feature also used to be part of dutch, even if kauppa is just a loanword from germanic and the finnish language has otherwise not that many similarities.
agreed, though i wish a better orthography in this video. kaupōdē makes way more sense along with puttakīna
@@gavinrolls1054 depends what you're used to. Here the orthography is to double.
tuli -> fire
tuuli -> wind ('uu' sounds exactly the same but is just longer)
Banana -> banaani ('aa' idem)
@@lGalaxisl yeah. but the th instead of þ is just pure evil lmao
Well, the modern Dutch present infinitive tense is "kopen", conjugated as: "ik koop", "jij koopt", "hij/zij koopt", "wij kopen", "jullie kopen", "zij kopen".
It makes sense that the past tense would be "koopte", but it isn't. It's an irregular verb: "ik kocht", "jij kocht", "hij/zij kocht", "wij kochten", "jullie kochten", "zij kochten".
@@shadowsir It is because Dutch changed -ft > -cht; for example in zacht - English soft, lucht 'air' in German luft. Also gracht 'canal' should be graft from graven 'to dig'.
As an English speaker I could understand 1500's Dutch better than modern Dutch, the 1000 one though I had no idea.
As a Swede, I understand the year 1000 version very well while the 500 and the 1500 versions start to get tricky, for different reasons. For me, the order of understandability is 1000, 500, 1500, 2000...
I didn't know that they had jars with printed labels 1000 years ago. ;)
Also interesting how much more Romance-like did Dutch sound back then.
Another interesting thing is how the further you go, the more simillar languages get to each other. The language from 500 AD seems a bit more simillar to Slavic, for example "swotjeero" sounds quite simillar to "słodki" in modern Polish (which means "sweet" of course). The Proto-Indo-European hypothesis makes sense to me.
Here it is a coincidence. Slavic word for "sweet" (soldk) has most likely originated from a Proto-Indoeuropean word with meaning "salty, spicy, tasty". Also Polish (West Slavic actually) had no Ł sound back then ;)
Ahh, I didn't know that. Interesting.
puttakiina sounds like finnish to me
which unfortunately isn't an indoeuropean language :)
Sekere woorde klink soos wat ons dit uitspreek in Afrikaans.
hoe klinkt het afrikaans dan ? ben jij afrikaans?
Reinhardt Pienaar very similar to afrikaans pronunciations lmao
Ek is Afrikaans, dit klink net soos Vlaams maar die "g" word uitgespreek soos in Nederlands.
verseker
Niet boos worden hoor, maar voor een Nederlander klinkt Afrikaans als peuter-Nederlands.
Heel goed en interessant. Thanko!
zoet (as in with o-umlaut) sounds exactly like Limburgish now.
No offence, but I kind of like older Dutch more than the modern standardized version
Learn Afrikaans coz that's what it sounds like
@@lebronwaden4416 That's why he likes it.
Flemish is also old Dutch.
@@lebronwaden4416 Afrikaans happens to be my native language
@@olypav4593 Flemish is also cool
Leuk om een Nederlander degelijk AN te horen praten.
Older was easier to understand for me than today. ^ . ^
What languages do you guys speak?
@@heidijapan3468 Sarah speaks German and Westphalish Saxon a dialect of Low German which is extremely conservative
@@iceomistar4302 whoa interesting
There are written texts in old low franconian (old Dutch),just there aren’t as much as old English or old high German,one example is the wachtendok psalms
Op welke manier is achterhaald hoe de taal vroeger klonk? Dat is toch een stuk moeilijker over te dragen dan de schrijfwijze.
Nouja, als wij bezet worden door Amerika en we schrijven een woord; Kneekvarcansen.
Dan klinkt dat als ; 'Nie-war-ken-sen.
Zijn wij bezet door de Duitsers, klonk het waarschijnlijk als; Kneek-war-khansen'
Zijn we bezet door de Belgen (haha) dan klinkt het als; 'Knéék-war-kánsén.
Enzovoorts. Ze weten vast wel welke taal er op dat moment prominent was. En hebben daar de oude klanken van gebruikt.
Old dutch/old frankish is very conected with old limburguish. Proto-Germanic Nordic it was a powerful lang that united nation and tribes, your influence remains today.
Afrikaans an example guards too many sounds and memories, structures of protogermanic nordic lang too like your sisters langs too.
The older the Dutch the easier it was for me to understand at this rate they may as well reconstruct old Frankish or old Low Franconian from this.
I can understand and read Old English and Old Frisian to a degree and can understand the modern equivalents somewhat fine
Old low franconian is old Dutch
Zeute klingt als zuid Limburg / Maastrichts Valkenburgs ( aan de Geul)
Dat 1500 nederlands klinkt wel lekker.
Klink soos my taal Afrikaans...ek het letterlik elke woord verstaan wat ge praat was
I've noticed a major difference in pronunciation between the Dutch that I hear in my everyday life in the US and that which I hear in my Dutch studies. That is the "ui" sound. The Dutch-Americans pronounce it like a long "i", as in "like" or "mine", with a little bit of "oi" in there. (Some examples are the names Kuiper, Huisenga, Uitenbogaard, Buikema.) In fact, you can actually tell when someone else has the strong Dutch ancestry because they pronounce those name correctly. But when I hear it in my Dutch listening exercises, it leans more toward "ow" than "i". I'm wondering if the difference is due to (a) a regional accent from our ancestors when they came to the US, (b) a change in Dutch pronunciation in the US, or (c) a change in Dutch pronunciation in the Netherlands.
If you regret to old frankish true first form of dutch you see the sound of "ui" stronger, highed, if you go to dutch emigración to US, in the meeting of english and dutch, these sound changed to 'i'or "ii", btw idioms evolute and change this same sound 'i' or 'ii" softly and implicity is changing to soft 'y' or 'yy' in this century 21 and on the new generations on dutch comunities expats out Netherlands.
Fascinating. Kudos!
This video has comments enabled but the original video didn't
Charlemagne was a dutchman
Heel boeiend! Groeten uit Nederland... :-)
Groete uit Suid Afrika
Very interesting
Fascinerend!
I understand the Netherlands
Oh I love this video!
Actually You in English and Jij in Dutch is weird among Germanic languages,in the past even old Dutch and old English had “thu” or “thi” as “you”,but in old german and old Norse languages (wich was also “thu”) it later changed into “Du”
Broer, dit klinkt als volendams 😂🤣🤣
weet iemand uit watter dokumentêr dit kom? Ek is mal oor tale en dokumentêre rolprente oor hoe dit oor tyd verander het.
Good. Thanko!
Nederlands wordt deels marokaans door waar ze nu nog mee bezig zijn.
I am learning German and I could understand some things
bro it didnt even change
Very interesting, thanks. Although to an outsider, an English speaker, it all just sounds like Dutch :-) How I wonder would it sound to a Friesian? Technically Friesian is supposed to be closer to English, they form an Anglo-friesian sub-group of Germanic, but in practice it seems to have stayed close to Dutch.
I don't think it's supposed to be closer to english, it's just out of all the other languages Frisian is the closest to english. That is, if you consider it to be an actual different language, which most of us Dutch people don't XP It's just a silly dutch dialect. Yeah, no, I know it's technically a different language, but I do think Frisian is still closer to Dutch than it is to English.
Well tbh they do belong to the same language family of Anglo-Frisian, but what you are saying that it's closer to dutch is nonetheless true as well due to the contact Frisians had with dutch, so I would probably phrase it as more that it's a brother-language to English that's heavily influenced by dutch? :)
marconatrix I think of the "bigger" languages, dutch is the closest to English, especially if you look at written language.
Frisian back then was more the same as Frisian now. It would sound like beowulf, Frisian is technically the earliest form of English. As a Frisian I cannot believe that people compare Dutch to English but not Frisian to English. If you want a good representation of what old Frisian sounded like, hear a native Frisian speak. It's about the same as what they talked.
Wilhelm, we were always taught in school (in Limburg) that Frisian is definitely a Language.
Amazing
Easier to understand than spoken limburgs
Dankuvel!
Who knows if all of Europe will speak Dutch in 200 years... really guy.
ponyheist He is just highlighting the fact we can not predict the future...
Ion Knight this actually just blew my mind, never thought of that before
To me as a monolingual😬 English speaker, *Dutch* sounds appealing, it comes across as sociable and the structure sounds logical - both in the year 1500 role play and in its modern form.
We where close to all of europe speaking german at some point of recent history. Cant predict the future man
@@TheHildle german and germanic are 2 diffrent things
was het in 500 al kaupoodee met een K en niet sjaupoodee?
Correctie, oud Engels.
Het moderne Engels bestaat uit meer dan 70% buitenlandse leenwoorden van voornamelijk Latijnse origine.
Daardoor kan Engels, ofwel modern Engels, niet claimen een oudere taal nog te spreken dan zelfs het moderne Nederlands.
Even voor de context.
70% lijkt me een beetje overdreven, ik denk eerder 40 of 50
@@hiddenintheshadows1469 all of those latin words is vocabulary, just words that are for science and other niche things. Basic talking is mostly germanic origin. The grammar is germanic also.
dat doet niet terzake
Very interesting.
Ik moet hier even bij zeggen dat dit trouwens nep is
De dingen die gezegd worden over volle klinkers en dubbele medeklinkers zijn correct maar de zinnen en woorden komen niet eens in de buurt
Probably similar to the dialects of Dutch spoken in America that went extinct in the 20th century.
Dit klinkt gewoon vlaams
In principe is het niet eens heel onrealistisch dat Nederland ooit weggeveegd zal worden door een natuurramp vanwege de ligging.
Denk dat over 50 jaar we Arabisch of Turks praten..
6:49 "Vermoedelijk gaan alle nederlanders naar belgie verhuizen"
ait, das helemaal gucci man
This sounds so like Afrikaans
Hoe kan het zijn dat de taal veranderd vraag ik mij dan af
Container,.... PR ofwel "Public relations".
Ze glippen er gewoon in.
Wij hebben het Engels woorden gegeven zoals:
Koekie - Cookie.
Stoep - Stoop.
Vaas - Vase.
Als je de gemiddelde Engels spreker vraagt of ze weten waar dat soort woorden vandaan zijn gekomen weten ze dat niet in 90% van de gevallen, en nemen daarom automatisch aan dat het altijd al Engelse woorden waren.
Vraag een Australier waarom Arnhemland "Arnhemland" heet,...al zijn ze er geboren, ze hebben geen idee.
Van Nieuw Holland hebben ze meestal ook niet gehoord.
Vraag een New Yorker waarom er zo veel verbasterde Nederlands namen in hun stad zijn,...Breukelen-Brooklyn, Haarlem-Harlem, Jonkheer-Jonkers, Vlissingen-Flushing, Wallenstraat-Wallstreet, Lang-eiland-Long Island, etc, etc en dan staan ze verbaast dat dat zo is.
Vertel ze dat New York eerder Nieuw Amsterdam heten, en dan heb je ze net iets kompleet (Compleet⬅ook zo iets;) nieuws vertelt.
@@thatdutchguy2882 dutch:compleet
english:complete
@@gemluka6666 Yep👍.
@@gemluka6666 , in case of "complete"/"compleet", both variants come from French "complet" which comes from Latin "com" (with) and "plere" (to fill). Also, the English "vase" did not come from Dutch "vaas", but from the French "vase" which again comes from Latin "vas" which means vessel.
@@Flamdring thanks for the further information
Why did it say that Finnish is a germanic language wtf
FSMVito in some parts of Finland
puttakiina
Wtf dutch is not german XD
it is germanic, north germanic. Also if you dont know anything about languages germanic doesnt mean german
@@N0rdicPsycho No man. Finnish, unlike Swedish, Norwegian,Danish,Dutch,German, is in no way germanic.
Grappig dar het Belgen zijn die dit doen
Sounds So Similar to..... ummmm.... Ik weet het niet.... English
Leuk! Maar zo onpasend afgesloten met een vloek... jammer.
Ben bang dat meeste Nederlanders in het ongelukkig geval dat het Koninkrijk met water zou onderlopen niet massaal naar België zullen uitwijken, maar eerder naar zowel Duitsland en Denemarken zullen migreren.
Watse taal is hierdie want dit klink beslis soos Afrikaans lol
@@lebronwaden4416 Niet echt.
Alleen op sommige momenten maar dat is ook niet vreemd, Afrikaans is een Nederlands dialect.
Im not so sure about that. Deutschland was written Duitschland with UITSCH in 1900 or so. Not its Duitsland with UITS. That definitely had an impact on the pronounciation. And especially the G was different. I highly doubt that modern dutch speakers would be able to speak with people from 1500 let alone 1200.
Germans for example can pretty much read dutch but listening to them speak is a catastrophe with the G being a CH(r) almost. Because it changed so much (german G is like latin dutch is not anymore).
You might understand them more than they understand you like you understand germans more since their language is clearer than dutch with their sharp S sounds and their unchanged G etc.
Dont forget just because you can read the text like germans can read dutch you have no clue how people spoke. The scientists also dont they just assume it. You can somewhat get it from old poetry and looking for rhymes etc but thats it.
(just comapare that to veni vidi vici. Is it vichi or viki? Still a debate about that.)
so the question is where"G" & "CH" came from?
G comes from the hard sound of the Latin G, which in turn comes from the original sound that was likely a Latin G followed by a H (=aspirated). CH and its variant H came from the original K. That's about 8000 years ago and as far as we can currently reach. Who knows what came before?
From some very anonymous cranky old fart lost in the mist of time.
But definitely not from a non Germanic source.
Old Dutch sounds like English
middle english is where it started with the more dutch/frisian tongue, most low/old english derived from norse and danish, old english therefor is a lot more like scots too, if you think away the celtic /gaelic.
i'd say the english language slowly traveled from the northenmost "bordering" (still sea in between) countries, slowly but surely going south in terms of linguistic influence
dat belgische accent. lol
ametyst the purple destroyer of boring things er bestaat geen Belgisch accent...
@@Deelom100 het vlaamse accent?
Very good video!
Hmmm so mag geskian
Deutch
This is SOO FUCKING INTERESTING. This is my first year of dutch tho. 😕
Ek is afrikaans en ek verstaan hedi
Het accent is helemaal niet correct. 100 jaar geleden was er nog een ander accent, dit is veels te modern
Hoe zou het dan eerder klinken?
@@mahakalabhairava9950 th-cam.com/video/jefaToEtXH4/w-d-xo.html
@@mahakalabhairava9950 moeilijk te zeggen
tja klinkt net fries
Goddomme ma
Finnish is not Germanic, so it shouldn't be colored.
correct, although Swedish did penetrate the area as linguistic superstratum
German language is totally different pronunciation of English , so I think when Germans came to Europe they've had got English in this way , English must be original one . Turks got the pronunciation of Latin alphabet from Germans , when I write down what I heard in English in the way I heard them it becomes German language :)))
German or English both aren't 'the original'. The original is the Germanic language (which is not the same as the modern German language). That Germanic lanuage split into Frisian, English, Dutch and German. So all of these languages share a common ancestry: the Germanic language as the ancient original one.
The original language was Proto-Germanic and it split into Western Germanic languages: Frisian, Dutch, German, and English, and into Northern Germanic languages: the Scandinavian languages: Icelandic, Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian. However, English has been influenced by French so much after the Norman invasion of Guillaume le Conquérant that it can seem like a Romance language at times. In English, there are now more words derived from French and Latin than from Proto-Germanic.
Suzanne V. wrong, it splitted up in Northern Germanic, West,Elbe and East Germanic and than splitted up again West Germanic became Dutch-English-Frisian and Dutch splitted up in Afrikaans-Flemish
you can be right , it looks like English , Dutch and even French drawn totally from Roman Empire like every thing else , but still Dutch have some differences sounding original that parts must be remains in North as it is so obvious that Northie people less mixed comparable other Europeans , like Basques isolated from cultural assimilation of Roman(First Europeans were mining slaves of Romans at skirts of Alps ) and Arabic culture . France has a massive influence of Arabic language and mixing , Germans shows it by pronunciation "R" letter pronouncing it like Arabs do .
@@chouchoumuse2729 Even older. Most European languages started with Proto-Indo-European.
That jar of honey would be worth a lot more than a basket of apples back then. Still probably is now
well yeah, but he came up not very amused and looked like he could cause a ruckus
there weren't multinational conglomerates back then, populations a lot smaller too,
the black death (pestilence) culled the herd too, and there was a lot of superstition back in those days, you had to keep those individual customer relations a bit stronger, right?
i reckon you still had some leverage by just being intimidating in the year 1500 ,
people still have that in 2001, but it's no comparison to what it meant back then :)
Interesting, why does the Dutch written record not go back as far as English or German? Was the influence of French and Latin too strong for the literate to write in their own vernacular?
Good question. Indeed it seems that the Latin influence held on longer on the continent, resp. that there was less of a centralized authority than in England that could switch to the vernacular. As regards the difference between Dutch and German, this is mainly a matter of scale: Germany is much bigger so there was a bigger chance that someone would at some point switch to writing German. Also the main pieces of pre-1200 vernacular writing are by schooled clergymen, but in the Low Countries, esp. in the north, there were only few places where this could develop, as opposed to Germany.
@@michieldevaan5292 English split from the continental Germanic dialects when the Anglo-Saxons migrated to Britain around 500AD. But would you not agree that Dutch and German did not really split until much later? Until the Netherlands and Germany formed separate national identities (whenever that happened, but certainly after 1000AD), they formed a dialect continuum. To avoid confusion, for the 500AD situation one might better speak of "the group of dialects that later amalgated into modern Dutch".
@@xaverlustig3581 Yes, of course, the terms 'Dutch' and 'German' are anachronistic.
I write this comment in English for the sake of standard youtube language; I am Belgian.
I am not a linguist but I think the starting point for this study is wrong. It started of studying written language. Written language was used by scholars ( who would look down on "regular" people ) and not by the "normal" population of an area.
For starters, I dont think any 2 villages spoke in the same manner; there was no common language.
I believe that a study of dialects, local speech, needs to be done. After all, the way our different local languages have grown is a natural proces.
I remember, as a kid, we had to read some mideaval text. Reading it in Dutch needed translations; however, reading it in my dialect permitted me to understand the text much more naturally, like a mother tongue is understood; without reflection.
I think, if you take a text written in say, Limburg in 1200, another text written in Ghent in 1200, another written in Rijsel in 1200, another written in Amsterdam in 1200 and another one in Bruges written in 1200 (so different places with distinct dialects; listen to it read in the local dialect, then maybe try to read a text from Amsterdam read by someone from Ghent and keep mixing the texts with the reading in another dialect, maybe a common denominator could come forward to have a soundbite from the mideaval Flemish.
Also, a while back - can't remember where or when - I heard a theory that traveling by foot for traders ( or with a packhorse, but not on horseback) in the midleages gave no language problems from scandinavia to largely into france. Allthough there were differences in the language (someone from Scandinavia could not understand someone from Northern France) the speed of travel permitted the traveller to adapt to local speech and be able to comunicate all along the way. I do (off course) not know if this is true, but it seems very plausible to me. This would mean that only 2 languages would be needed from Scandinavia all the way to Italy. That would off course also explain how unschooled people would be able to go on a pelgrimage and still be understood all along the way.
Anyway, just my thoughts written down immediately after seeing this video, so maybe not well put and a bit random.
Kind regards
Alain
Hi Alain, it is true that dialects are closer to the original language than the standard language spoken by the majority nowadays. It happens in every nation, and it is a natural process as it improves communication and makes any state more efficient. However, a standard language is nothing but the amalgamation of dialects and standardisation of pronunciation and spelling.
As I have written in another post just now, I lived in West Flanders (Poperinge and Ieper) for quite some time as a teenager and while Dutch is not my native language, I had to deal with standard Dutch at school and local dialects anywhere else. I do not speak them, but I do recognise and understand them to a certain degree. This year I moved to Denmark and I had never studied Danish before, but whenever I hear some Danish words, my mind makes a connection to the dialects I heard in Westhoek and it makes it easier for me to understand it even without looking for a translation. I would love to meet a Flemish person who lives in Denmark and still knows their dialect perfectly well, and hear their opinion.
@@Flamdring Thank you for this interesting reply. I believe this kind of backs me up on the theory stated. I do not speak nor understand any Scandinavian language but I can understand the jest of it when I read it (again) in my dialect. Maybe, after getting used to the sound of it like you did, I would be able to understand. Or maybe, by walking to Scandinavia and only talking with people in dialect, doing aprox 15 km a day, I would "grow into" Danish or Norwegian all naturally like this theory I heard a while back states. It is definitly an interesting topic.
The year 500 is probably the hardest to predict. At that time Rome just fell and the differences between Germanic dialects was vague. It is refreshing to hear that the "Dutch" language of that time was tonal in the sense of having true vowel lengths.
vowel lengths has nothing to do with tonality though?
Het zal van regio tot regio toch giswerk blijven denk ik. En dan Proto-Germaans. Ook daar zullen verschillende dialecten en talen in bestaan hebben, lijkt me zo.
Nederlands anno 2100: ewa broere die appelen zijn niet fresh WOLLAH je beloofde voor fresh appelen agmar
..Want daar heb ik recht op
De v'lôrene zőn.
En kääd’l had twî jongers; de êne blêv täus;
de andere xöng vôrt f’n häus f’r en stât.
Hāi wāz nît tevrêde täus en dârkîs tû râkni ārm.
Hāi doǵti ôm dāt täus en z’n vâders pläk.
Tû zāide: äk zāl na häus xâne. Māin vâder hät plänti.
Leuk. Een stukje van de gelijkenis van de verlorene zoon. Welke taal / welk dialect geeft u hier weer?
@@gardenjoy5223 Dat is Jersey Dutch.
This is very interesting. I can understand many of the Germanic languages.
I understand old Dutch 😁
Excellent
1:37 GVD zeg dit is nou eens een lekkere Belg. Heet ding.
The fact that I'm Dutch and didn't understood a thing..
My god, the 1500s Dutch sounds so much clearer, similar to David Crystal's reconstructed early modern English, Modern Hollandic Dutch accents sound different from the spelling in many ways and almost muble their words, similar to English at times.
It could also be due to the fact that the host and the lady are Flemish. Flemish standard Dutch is very clear and softer than the perceived standard Dutch in the Netherlands. They also do not eat the "n" at the end of the verbs like many Dutch do e.g. "werken" becomes "werkeh", and the "r" is most often rolling as in Spanish or Italian.
@@Flamdring the problem is that Old Low Franconian and its various dislects have so little records the Anglo Saxon missionnaries from Northumbria focused mainly their efforts in Friesland and Old Saxony, I think the Venerable Bede even mentioned this in the texts, the English taught the Frisians and Saxons and most mainland Germanic speaking peoples to read and write using Latin characters mostly because they had an affinity for the Frisians and Saxons due to having a close connection to both cultures, it is theorised by somd schars that the Frisians after the 5th century were actually an offshoot of the Angles Saxons and Jutes migrating to England
Zoals het er nu uitziet wordt het een soort Engels.
Wanneer wij tenminste niet via de EU onder Duitse heerschappij terechtkomen, want dan blijft het Nederlands wat langer bestaan om tenslotte een dialect met sterke Duitse invloeden, of helemaal Duits, te worden.
imbeciel