How Britain Effortlessly Kicked out the French Language
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ก.ย. 2024
- thomassowelltv...
Visit Our Shop: www.spreadshir...
Get Thomas Sowell Quotes: play.google.co...
Subscribe to our second channel:
/ @thomassowelltvbits
ODYSEE:odysee.com/@Th...
Support on Patreon:
www.patreon.co...
To get all this content plus free quotes of Dr. Thomas Sowell, visit thomassowellwisdom.com
You can support our work by buying any of Dr. Sowell's books:
- Black Rednecks and white Liberals:
amzn.to/3y2TtJv
- Intellectuals and society:
amzn.to/3kYFD5x
- Intellectuals and Race:
amzn.to/2OEyAms
- Basic Economics:
amzn.to/3kYGlzJ
- Charter Schools and their enemies:
amzn.to/3l2P3gs
- Discrimination and Disparities:
amzn.to/30w17gu
- Economic Facts and Falacies:
amzn.to/3qy7Zo4
- The Vision of the Anointed: Self-congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy:
amzn.to/3buiOmW
Image copyright:
depositphotos....
pexels.com
www.dreamstime...
www.storyblock...
Thomas Sowell is an American economist and political commentator. He taught economics at Cornell University, the University of California, Los Angeles, and since 1980 at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, where he is currently a Senior Fellow.
This channel helps to promote his teachings and principles of economics and philosophy.
Please subscribe to this channel through the link
/ @thomassowelltv
FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted (©) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior general interest in receiving similar information for research and educational purposes.
![เขามัทรี - เอ็กซ์ ศุภกฤต - จอนนี่มิวสิค [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/AS9ufKuQIVs/mqdefault.jpg)
The English people never spoke French ; the elite and the ruling class did as most of the English nobility were deposed but the people in general did not speak French. It became easier for the nobility to speak English. Quite a lot of French words gradually worked their way into the English language but most of the rural people were still speaking mainly English , also there were many dialects regional and local.
From UK, totally ignorant of the history of my country! Thank you Dr Sowell ❤️👍
Err, we never did ‘kick French out’.
We adopted it.
English is 1/3 Latin, 1/3 Dutch, and 1/3 Norman French.
That is why English is such a good European language.
R
Quebec is the only French speaking province in Canada.
Watch Time Team Lots of information.
@@RalphEllis Cobblers here is a repost:
But the Norman founded both France & England out of the remanence of Rome's occupations.
Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte in 911ad between Rollo a Norsemen & west Frankia's Charles the Simple changed much to come.
The Birth of France & England came around the same contrary to the nonsense you Frenchmen think.
Normandy was Norse colony in France & William the conquer defeated France multiple times.
Technically speaking Aquintaine, duche Britany, Normandy, du maine, danjopu etcetera from the Angevin Empire is rightfully our kings Charles land but why would we want France again?
1415-1429 England in 116 years war ruled all of northern France rightfully.
Our Aristocracy is as much French nobility by blood.
You should know England held Paris for shy of 7 years.
all matter considered before England later Britain entered (splendid Isolation) & such ruled France for at least 2 centuries though the borders changed many times & even French nobility through family matter required France territory.
it was a rather messy matter between our toffs & your nation.
England was never Frances colony but England & France were both founded by Norse men that happen to be related to our king & departed majesty Elizabeth the 2nd.
Personally I do not care for Charles the 3rd as a former conditional monarchist as he does not meet my conditions!
You know nothing Ralph.
Really France & England nation wise are ah siblings & our nations had the USA together in regrettable night of incestuous def orgy of passion with a lot of violence.
Why we limeys can't stand you is from our similarities most likely for it is the particulars we can't stand of the other!
Genuinely I hear French people I want to kill them yet in argument with French women I can't but want to both fvck & kill them.
Mind as a man reason & a stoic disposition I keep myself in check.
Love & hate is strange thing that are closer then people would like to admit!
Theres no Dutch in English. Dutch is just a variant of Deutsche, it's basically just a German dialect. @@RalphEllis
Britain did not effortlessly kick French out of Britain. As noted in the video, it took hundreds of years before the aristocracy stopped speaking exclusively French and most wealthy and aristocrats, even into the 20th century, still learned and spoke French. All of this hardly demonstrates evidence for the title of the video. Also, given that some 40% of modern English is derived from French, we could argue the language is very much still with us.
I was going to say we English speakers still speak a lot of French albeit not modern French etc.
The title of the video itself has at least two french words in it. Sowellheads are such dweebs
Exactly!
There are many facets to a language. Structurally, English is far closer to Scandinavian languages, especially Norwegian, even if old French was the origination of a significant amount of the words. "Kicking-out easily", is not even relevant… It's clearly Just click bait to make people watch the video. The transformation was The result of infighting, Integration, and negotiation between many different tribal groups, including the Normans. The culture within 2 centuries was very different from that of France, which itself was In a state of flux and emerging itself, at that time with a commonality of identity starting to be identified throughout France that had been more disjointed and localised before.
*Chaucer was the prevalent literature, even as early as the Mid to late 1300's
All educated Brits were expected to understand French well into the 20th century. It was still required for diplomats well into the postwar era. The era when international relations were conducted in French is still in living memory.
History is precious especially when it teaches great lessons to be learnt that are either forgotten or not taught in education
After the Norman conquest, the nobility spoke French but gradually learnt English as well. In fact the upper class spoke French even into modern times and even today school kids are taught French. French never went out, it was more that English came into all corners of the English society.
No they spoke English influenced by french, huge difference.
Yes old english and even earlier Anglish definitely were no spoken by most nobility.
@@antoinemozart243 NO you're wrong, a good exemple is Richard Lionheart never spoke english... Like said in this video english nobility & elites were speaking French until early 15th.
The new written English that emerged after the Norman conquest had a Latin grammar. This also came to affect spoken English. The French that is now spoken is that of Paris and is one of the many dialects of French that used to be spoken and definitely not the French that the Normans spoke. Neither language has remained as it once was. Like all languages they are dynamic.@@antoinemozart243
@@thomaslacornette1282 Complete myth, Richard I did speak English, he was raised here
This man is so intelligent and knowledgeable. Truly a remnant of a more sophisticated era.
His generation would read books.
not true he had to school Joe Biden time and again who is decades his junior 😂, Dr. Sowell is just a treasure of our times
Your sentence has so much French in it that it rather disproves OPs point.
@@APOKOLYPESlol what did he school him on? Was it when he went to a hearing or something?
@@klalakomacoiYour comment seems to be in the wrong thread.
I’ll be very interested to see if English culture survives the latest invasion that started in the 20th century.
It won't. The patient is terminal.
It was lost centuries ago. Whatever it was.
The Quislings will see it won't.
"English" culture? No such thing. The island of Britain has always been a melting pot of cultures.
@@Macca-rb5ok Not true. You really cannot recognize English culture? Scottish culture? Irish culture? French culture? Italian culture? German culture? You know you can. White people have culture, a variety of cultures actually, just like Blacks, Arabs, and Asians. This whole 'White people have no culture' BS is just a way of trying to justify demeaning and destroying White people. If you're White, don't buy into it. If you're Black, Muslim, or whatever, you know you're a liar.
Mr. Sowell is like a Living History Book - so full of information and things I didnt know or a fresh take on well known subject but where standard public education, books and documentaries fall short.
Hoping to see him celebrate his 100th Birthday.
He will have done lots of research for this. This is well known stuff if you know a bit about our history.
It's just history. The sad part is, Americans don't know anything anymore and are astounded by basic knowledge.
There is nothing more American than them confusing England and Britain. Honestly, you would think that considering the US was founded by British people, they would understand their heritage. England = England. Great Britain = England, Scotland and Wales, created in 1707. The United Kingdom = those nations plus [Northern] Ireland, created in 1801.
And Britanny : a french celtic region ;)
I think it has became colloquial and interchangeable with England, i think they genuinely don't care as long as they understand eachother
@cardett75 They do care. Americans can't understand regional English accents. Don't get me started on the number of Americans who call me Irish because I have a Northern English accent. From an American perspective, they think London = Britain/ England and the rest is Scotland or Ireland.
That's what y'all don't understand. The US was founded by Brits but the majority of the country was colonized by the French and Spanish. New Orleans was never British. Louisiana history has little to do with Britain.
Dr. Sowell is a remarkable man of huge intellect. I admire him greatly.
Listening to the history of the Normans and their amazing conquests I would like to add that when they invaded and conquered England in 1066 within 30 years they had also swept across Europe and even evicted Saladin from Jerusalem. In 1096. The cathedral they had built in Palermo is breathtaking. (Using local labour of mixed religions)
everyone: "Why do we have to learn history and dates? What good will it do me?"
History: lessons learned, patterns of behavior and failure, same atrocities repeated over and over again and everyone acts like there was no way to foresee it coming.....
Henry IV made the political decision to speak English and use it as his court language. French had been the language of the English court and aristocracy since the Norman Conquest in 1066.
That is far too simplistic. Most of the baronage were bilingual within a couple of generations of the conquest. Edward I spoke English and earlier kings had at least some knowledge of it too.
@harrynewiss4630 I didn't say that the English aristocracy and court couldn't speak English just that French became the language of the ruling class.
Not 'the' language, 'a' language. That's the point.@@richardlahan7068
@@richardlahan7068 I've read that French nobles would mock the accents of the French speaking English aristocracy. This made them reluctant to use the language in the presence of the French.
During the usurper Henry IV reign, English was already a mixed language.
England after the Romans lleftis a great case study in how colonialism can benefit you.
OK, Thank you for the open invitation to come and colonize England for your benefit. Remember, you wanted this.
Jack Reacher.
It wasn’t called England back then
As always Dr. Sowell always adds a great nuance to history
More likely a great nuisance to history.
I still want my reparation payments for the Norman invasion of 1066.
@@LucMtl1 I'll take it!
That he uses “AD” and “BC” is just one more of the thousand reasons to love Thomas Sowell
But everyone uses that
So it took about 500 - 600 years. "Effortlessly"
That’s not England 🏴 in the thumbnail, it’s England 🏴 and Wales 🏴 both parts of the UK 🇬🇧 .
You Americans never learn, it’d be like calling the US ‘Washington State’.
Lol you're wrong
Good hearing a re-run of English history. Well done as always
Dr Sowell. A giant among giants.
🇺🇸☮️
For once, someone who got it exactly right. I learnt all this courtesy of my standard education in the fifties and sixties ,yet so many seem to be completely unaware of our Island's amazing history. One important point is that following the Battle of Crecy the "Black Prince" made it compulsory for the Norman elite to learn English as during the battle he and his Norman officers were having difficulties communicating with his English archers and infantryman who spoke only English.
Can you recommend any fifties-style history books?
Many of the archers spoke Welsh
@@rodjones117some did
@@Theoriginalsparkythemagicpiano The Welsh ones did.
@simonengland6448 "bastard irish missionaries" wow! Just, wow!
As an interesting aside, only 5% (approx) of ''Normans'' were actually of Scandinavian descent (these being the elites). The other 95% are composed mainly of Bretons and Gauls. That being the case, you could say that technically, the Norman invasion of the British Isles was tantamount to a kind of Celtic re-invasion. Ironic huh? Just saying and not hating OK.
Yea I've kinda soured on Sowell cuz he trots the party line for a certain old school of thought. Still respect his bravery cuz he kept doing it after it became really unpopular. But everything he talks about is a continuation of this same hyper Anglo Saxon cultural superiority myth that came into existence during the interwar period.
William was 1/4 Norse. And no doubt his two grandmothers had some Scandinavian in them, the 'Saxon Shore' influence going back 900 years before Hastings- just one ingredient
The British did not kick the French out of Britain. It just sort of dissolved away dematerialized if you will the French culture was hardly kicked out.
Its say language, not the people...
He pretty much said that. the title is click bait… I doubt it's from him. Effectively Said that the number of different tribal groups, integrating, negotiating, infighting, et cetera led to assimilation of normal culture, to being unrecognisable, from that on the emerging culture of France, which in itself was taking time to embed, Over the centuries, throughout "all" the regions We now see as modern France
We still use some Norman French in every day language, for instance, we use the English words for the animals...pig, cow, chicken, deer, but use derivatives of Norman French for the meat of these animals...pork, beef, poultry, venison.
Norman French is still used in legal terms in court and in parliament. During ceremonies in parliament, Norman French is spoken. Court martial is a Norman French derivative, for example, as opposed to martial court.
Thanks. @@StillAliveAndKicking_
a) Enter my chamber = Norman French
b) Come into my bedroom = Old English
a) I recieved your present = Norman French
b) I got your gift = Old English
@@jerryappleton6855 According to online sources, only receive comes from Norman French, the other words are from old French. I assume French was perceived as a prestige language, due to Norman French origins of the royals. Hence we borrowed liberally, such that English and French feel like dialects.
@@StillAliveAndKicking_ Norman French comes from Old French so it's much of a muchness.
I’ll stick with The Adventure of English written by Melvyn Bragg, which explains the way in which the Anglo Saxon language merged and simplified to avoid misunderstanding and conflict with the Vikings of the Danelaw. After the Norman Conquest, the Anglo Saxon language absorbed Norman French , particularly vocabulary, because the Norman children were cared for by servants speaking Anglo Saxon. The two languages merged such that by the time of the 100 years war, everyone spoke this early “English”, and the aristocracy Norman French poorly, that their children needed education in France to improve their French. I understand that at his coronation , Henry 1V spoke in English , and that Henry V wrote to Parliament in English, announcing his victory at Agincourt. He then decided to make the English language the official language of State, and Chancery English was developed to determine spellings. Voila !!
I believe he's the first to go all-in with English.
The adventure of English by Bragg is inaccurate. In that book he said that English's ancestor came from the plains of India. The language English comes from came from the Steppe ie Indo-European, Proto-indo-European went into India it didn't come from it.
Also the Anglo-Normans would be speaking English as their main tongue like you said by 1150 and that would be 'middle English' not early English.
The English tongue was already called Englisc in the time of Alfred, and the people called themselves and the tongue they spoke 'Englisc' rarely Anglo-Saxon.
Þǽr ádranc mycel Ænglisces folces,
Chr. 1016; P. 151, 18.
That references the drowning of many English folk in 1016.
Ealra monna, Fresiscra and Engliscra,
897; P. 91, 1
which means,
' All men, Frisian and English.' - year 897
Ealle þá þe on Norþhymbrum búgeaþ, ǽgþer ge Englisce ge Denisce ge Norþmen,
Chr. 924; P. 104, 20
All those whom dwell in Northumberland, be they either English, Danish, or Norwegian. - Year 924
Hér syndon on ðis íglande [Britene] fif geþeóda [MS. þeóda], Englisc, and Brytisc, . . . and Scyttisc, and Pihtisc, [and Bóc-Lǽden]
here are in this island [Britain] five languages, English, and British, . . . and Scottish, and Pictish, [and Book-Latin ],Chr. Th. 3, 3-6, col. 3, 2.
Ic [Ælfríc Abbod] gesett hæbbe wel feówertig lárspella on Engliscum gereorde
I [Abbot Ælfric] have composed about forty sermons in the English tongue,Ælfc. T. 27, 17.
@@redwaldcuthberting7195 Thank you for the information. It’s a very interesting topic. The source for your information please.
@@redwaldcuthberting7195 I thought Henry V was the first to speak English as a first language.
@@californiadreamin8423 Which part of my information?
Some of the old English bits are from the Anglo-Saxon chronicles and I took them from the Bosworth and Toller old English dictionary.
As for my statement about Bragg about what he said that in the book, infact the what he said so annoyed me I couldn't read the rest of the book.
The elite speaking English is from a book The English and the Normans
Ethnic Hostility, Assimilation, and Identity 1066-c.1220.
The Indo-European language family began to diverge from around 8,100 years ago, out of a homeland immediately south of the Caucasus. The language originated in the steppe region, north of the Black Sea, no earlier than 6500 years ago and then spread across Europe and parts of Asia with the domestication of horses. It is highly probable that the earliest speakers of this language originally lived around Ukraine and neighbouring regions in the Caucasus and Southern Russia, then spread to most of the rest of Europe and later down into India 1.
Between 2000 BCE and 1000 BCE, there were significant migrations from the Central Asian Steppe that most likely brought Indo-European languages into India 2. The Indo-Aryans moved into the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (c. 2400 -1600 BCE) and spread to the Levant (Mitanni), northern India (Vedic people, c. 1700 BCE) 1. The Sintashta culture extended the Indo-European culture zone east of the Ural mountains, giving rise to Proto-Indo-Iranian and the subsequent spread of the Indo-Iranian languages toward India and the Iranian plateau 1.
Recent DNA evidence supports the idea that mobile herders from Eurasian steppe grasslands, not Near Eastern farmers, brought Indo-European languages to South Asia 1. The Yamnaya, a group of Indo-European speaking Eurasian herders, reached parts of early Bronze Age Europe by around 5,000 years ago 1. Between 2000 BCE and 1000 BCE, there were significant migrations from the Central Asian Steppe that most likely brought Indo-European languages into India 12.
The origin of Indians has been the subject of a heated debate. New research using ancient DNA is rewriting prehistory in India and shows that its civilization is the result of multiple ancient migrations . The Harappan civilization thrived in what is now north-western India and Pakistan around the same time as the Egyptians and Mesopotamians 3. Scholars have questioned the “out of India” thesis, arguing that these Indo-European language speakers were possibly just one of many streams of prehistoric migrants who arrived in India after the decline of an earlier civilization.
The 'out of India' hypothesis holds no water. English's earliest ancestor doesn't come from Sanskrit...
The Britto-Roman kingdoms of Gwynedd, Powys, Glywysing and Rheged can be considered the heirs of the Western Roman Empire!
@@sassenspeyghel4155 The kingdoms of Powys and Rheged voluntarily became part of England.
If the English are so smart why do they let the passenger steer the car.
😂😂😂😂😂nice!
It goes back a long way as it does in Britain, knights would allow others to pass on their right so the knight could use his dominant right hand for protection with his sword.
Most things started in Britain it seems and the rest of the world follows or adapts
Good point and do remember some of drive on the “right” side of the road. If you don’t you’re stuck with what’s left.
Because our toffs won't let us & the last time an Englishmen was in charge as in Cromwell he drench Europe in blood!
1/4 of the Irish died to plaque after the stabbed England in the back our civil war so he killed just as many as the plaque almost.
2,700 Royalist soldiers & who knows how many catholic priests & England fought against 17 European nation during our civil war.
England brought back Charles II who started the (RAC)=royal African company in the style & manner of France were he was raised to transport his human cargo.
Look at how involved the EU & all of toffs are still involved in continental European affair & to make matter worse the USA as well of more say in how Britain is ran then it's own people.
Read (The Secret People) by G.K.Chesterton then you might have glimpse of the Englishmen's mind & now why we are.
If ''America is the land of dreams'' & (England is the land of Heroes were dreams come to die) for the land fey folk is no more among many other things!
Ever more is taken from us to the point English life & tradition is naught but work.
We Englishmen smile in despair for we are wiser then all & know we are fvcked for our wisdom!
Because the servant drives the car, while the owner rides in comfort.
From another documentary I watched about the evolution of the English language. Most of the wet nurses and nannies for the French speaking ruling elite were English speaking, as it was called in the doc, "The hand that rocks the cradle."
That is a lot of very good information!
In UK, families of Norman origin still dominate power structures over families of Britons or Anglo-Saxons origin.
I find it ironic that the French deplore the intrusion of English words into their pristine language. Turn about is fair play, I say.
France used to speak many languages as it was really many countries
Next video: How English became the most important international language while French became less important than English in this regard.
Once the key international language in Europe, being the language of diplomacy from the 17th to the mid-20th centuries, French lost most of its international significance to English in the 20th century, especially after World War II, with the rise of the United States as a dominant global superpower.
French is still important and popular though.
But the British didnt bother doing the same when it conquered the royal colony of Quebec from France in the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. Im saying this as a Canadian
Do not conflate Englishness and Britishness.
It has never been the policy of the British to replace a culture, rather we use it for profit, and conscript the elite to help us. And it is likely that there were too many French speakers in Quebec, and too few British. It made more sense to let them keep their language, their Napoleonic legal code, and their Catholic religion. It’s odd how anti British many Quebeckers are. In Brittany the Breton language has almost been destroyed by the centralised French system, and Langue d’Oc is as good as dead.
They did try.
@@poeleabois Did they? The British were hugely outnumbered. Schooling continued in French, unlike in Brittany where even speaking Breton at school was punished.
@@StillAliveAndKicking_Go look at the treatment of the Acadians by the British.
Love Dr. Sowell but there are many errors here. First of all many of the invaders came from what is not the Netherlands. In fact the language the most similar to Anglo Saxon is the dialect spoken in Freisland. Also King Edward III made it mandatory to have all legal documents in English in 1362 and not in the 15th century.
At it's core english is a west germanic language, like dutch is, whereas scandinavian languages are northern germanic ones.
That's where the similarities come from, a common "ancestor".
Modern english evolved from that core, with some significant french influence on the way.
Languages are composite structures, not built from a single type of building block
@@boxonothing4087 Your mama isn't built from a single building block. And I would appreciate it if you refrained from putting childish insults on this intellectual thread.
@@chamboyette853 could you point out the "childish insults" I used ?
I find this unfounded responses quite rich coming right after opening a comment with "your mama"
English is a germanic language, as is dutch, as are scandinavian languagues. They share a linguistic ancestor, and evolved from it while absorbing influences, which makes them composites.
Could you point out which part of this is childish and insulting, and doesn't hold up to your intellectual standard ?
Your reaction is so misplaced I would be inclined to think you attack me for something someone else posted, or even worse, you're trolling.
Before you try to spin anything out of this, remember. You made it personal.
@@boxonothing4087 The word "composite structure " is a racist term since most African languages were not built in such a way. To insult blacks by calling them racist names like you do, in my imagination, are childish insults. Also I had a dream about you making childish insults to me. If you don't like what I am saying, and you are any kind of man, why don't you come alone to meet me along with my friends Dinky and Bubba behind Gus' gas station? What's the matter, too chicken ?
@@boxonothing4087 Listen here, if you're any kind of man, why don't you come alone and meet me and three of my friends at some place at night so we can settle this like men. Or are you too chicken?
Stupid strapline. Languages are not ‘kicked out’. They evolve and adapt. English is a mixture of English and Norman French as is apparent if you hear Chaucer read aloud. It’s the reason for example, there are separate words for cattle and beef, pig and pork. The English words reflect who did the rearing and the Norman who did the eating
The administration of pre-conquest 11th century Saxon England was the best and most sophisticated in Europe.
English is classified as a Germanic language, not a Romanche language.
Excuse me, the English invaded Ireland in 1169. I think you'll find the Kings of England were in fact Norman at that date, so in fact it's a Norman invasion of Ireland facilitated by the use of English soldiers-who had very little choice under their feudal obligations. But hey Nuances . ISTR that Henry II was the king under which the English language became the official language of the court. Wikki citesTo recover his kingdom, Mac Murchada solicited help from the King of England - Henry II. The deposed king embarked for Bristol from near Bannow on 1 August 1166.[13] He met Henry in Aquitaine in the Autumn, but Henry would not help him at this time, instead providing a letter of support. " Hardly an invasion by the English
2:38 is a depiction of a viking age long boat. It's believed that the boats that the Angles, Saxons and other Germanic migrants came to England on in the 5th century were generally smaller, shallower and did not have sails or masts on them. cf the Nydam boat. They were powered purely by rowing and as such had to stick to the coastline during the majority of their journeys.
Cornwall always get left out when this topic is discussed, even though it payed a big part in the English language survival and in a sad case of irony meant the demise of our own Cornish language. But people should at least know how important John Trevisa, Richard Pencrych and John of Cornwall were to Britain and our language!
@@Benedictus-tl5uz So why is Bede burried in Durham?
This sounds like a PowerPoint made from cliff notes of an abridged version of post-roman history of Britain. And suddenly there was the demise of French language on the island due to intermarriage.
There were only about 10,000 Normans in England after the takeover, they didn't have a big impact on the racial make up of England , population of about 2 million, but the English were oppressed by the Normans for many years and taxed into oblivion to fund wars. The Peasants revolt, Magna Carta and the Civil war all had their roots in an ongoing battle for freedom from an oppressive elite class (still ongoing)
They stopped the common man from hunting decent game, like deer, too.
The Anglo-Saxon nobility did no such thing. Peasants had it better under Anglo-Saxon feudalism than under the Norman variety.
Well the English language is heavily influenced by French, of course. So we didn't completely get away.
I thank the French for that though as otherwise English would sound German.
The mix of Latin, German, and French language is what makes English such an efficient and precise language.
You mean, English is what happens when 10 different languages get stuffed into a 5 lb sack, and beaten and sodemized in a back ally.
It's what makes it such an inconsistent and vague language
@@ZXNovaBoom Your demonstrated vocabulary betrays your intended position.
Also, Norse and Danish
@@LordEriolTolkien Danish is Norse, East Norse to be precise.
In France we have a say:"England is the first failed French colonny".
But the Norman founded both France & England out of the remanence of Rome's occupations.
Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte in 911ad between Rollo a Norsemen & west Frankia's Charles the Simple changed much to come.
The Birth of France & England came around the same contrary to the nonsense you Frenchmen think.
Normandy was Norse colony in France & William the conquer defeated France multiple times.
Technically speaking Aquintaine, duche britany, Normandy, du maine, danjopu etcetera from the Angevin Empire is rightfully our kings Charles land but why would we want France again?
1415-1429 England in 116 years war ruled all of northern France rightfully.
Our Aristocracy is as much French nobility by blood.
You should know England held Paris for shy of 7 years.
all matter considered before England later Britain entered (splendid Isolation) & such ruled France for at least 2 centuries though the borders changed many times & even French nobility through family matter required France territory.
it was a rather messy matter between our toffs & your nation.
England was never Frances colony but England & France were both founded by Norse men that happen to be related to our king & departed majesty Elizabeth the 2nd.
Personally I do not care for Charles the 3rd as a former conditional monarchist as he does not meet my conditions!
@@arnijulian6241 England wasn't founded by Normans. Englaland means 'land of the Angles or English' in old English. England was founded by the house of Wessex not Norse men albeit Harold Godwinson had an English father from Wessex and Norse mother. Normans and Norse men the Normaunds were French culturally by English standards and were even called Frencisc ie Frenchish by the English.
@@redwaldcuthberting7195 Æthelstan in 927 made the greatest Anglo-Saxon king but no king of England as pengwern east of
wales was it;s own nation as well Dumnonia /corwall-devon originally defass.
Summerset & Dorset was also under it's own rule.
Modern Historians can call Æthelstan the 1st king of England all they want but he never went by that title.
At best you could consider him the proto-king of England if that makes any sense.
It was only till the North Sea Empire/ the Anglo-Scandinavian empire from 1013 to 1042 under forkbeard, Cnut & his son Hathacnut that what one could consider England came to be but London never accepted them in constant urban trench warfare & Dumnonia was still a thing.
from 1042 to 1066 Edward the Confessor another Anglosxaon king after the died in 1066 & started a sucession crisis & diod name william the conquer his heir & not Harold Godwinson who was only king for less then 10 months.
William the conqueror & duke of Normandy that did the harrowing of the north in 1067 killing 1/2 million northerners was the rightful king of the Anglo-Saxons though succession though he killed the anglo north that would not submit to his rule unlike the the Saxons that submitted & the Jutes in London made william sign an agreement to make London a self autonomous city state that was loyal to him being effectively a nation with in a nation to date.
William knew conquering London would take to long let alone the cost so came to agreement & built the tower of London initially as a fortification as he thought London would rebel but it never did.
Technically speaking London was the only lot that didn't submit or get slaughtered as they adapted with the times.
William the conquer put Dumnonia & Genweng then parts of wales under his rule by bloody force.
Wiliam never lost a battle & had his 1st assassination against him at 7 warned by the court jester the only man he would let insult him without cutting out their tongue.
He proposed to his wife by beating her for listening to him.
He was terrifying man in his day the took his dukedom stolen from him as a child back by force at 16 with token force relatively speaking.
he humiliated France, the Friesians & Britany in outnumbered combat.
His wife did love him mind even with his cruel mean streak that lessoned in age but I suspect it was to try & redeem himself in some capacity.
He even even fined sold his subject out of England one of the 1st references to England.
Britain was the 1st land to abolish slavery on it soil through his mainly selfish decisions.
Few people have as complex a life Story as William the conquer/bastard.
You think the most powerful and influential culture in recorded human history was a failure?😂
@@davidatkinson5858 "powerful and influential culture" cringe
French was never "kicked out." English became the language of the royal court and law in the mid-14th century, but by that time it was no longer the English of pre-1066. It had gained (and retains to this day) a strong French influence.
It really is laughable and barely relevant, and people read so much into what they label "influence" when the reality is the following. There were "Old French", or Frankish Words incorporated, but alsoa there were Latin, Celtic words and influence from 2, Or 3 Old Scandinavian tribes Shaping new words and "completely changing" the formation, and tweaking the meaning and sound of those French words, so that they were barely recognisable
@@Rowlph8888 “really, relevant, people, label, influence, reality, incorporated, tribes, completely, changing, formation, sound, recognizable” : all those words in your comment are of french origin
and yet tthey sound and Look nothing like the French words, for the reasons I gave - You made a pointless Comment
@@Chrysobubulle True enough...and most of the words he used in between were Germanic, a few are direct from Latin...English is a mix. And meanings to drift over time too.
@@Rowlph8888 it is neither laughable or irrelevant, as your first comment stated. The Normans and their use of french modified deeply the english language.
They didn’t kick it all out. One is aubergine that’s French. Two, spellings: colour, centre etc. Things like this are still in their language and, if French language had to go then these too have to go. One last thing, while the metric system has merit it isn’t the only way to measure. If we are kicking France from England then Metric must go too.
I would love it if we kicked out all french words.
Metric is objectively a more convenient system. It reduces calculations for conversions.
@@alioshax7797 so would the thousandths scale, if your going to go that way go all the way. Which is more human sounding “hey bar keep gimme a 0.95 liter of ale” vs “ hey bar keep gimme two pints of your finest ale” I think I’d rather have the English measurement of pints.
@@valentine_puppy So would the thousand indeed. You could adopt this one too. Doesn't change the fact that metric is indeed more convenient in every field, and especially science.
Don't know about the imperial system, but in Europe, a pint is half a liter. 500 mL. And a "demi" is half a pint, therefore 250 mL. Nothing complicated here.
You could turn the question in every possible way. Metric is better. Tradition makes you keep the imperial system, but it doesn't change that fact.
@@alioshax7797 A subjective fact. As we human’s determined that. There are things that are complex about the system we use. Imperial is not for the simple. You actually have to think. It’s not based on a simple easy to understand system for simple people. If you are going to go that simple go all the way and do nanoscale instead. It really gets that hyper grain people want but uncomplicated that apparently people in Europe need. Sounds good. It’s just not English. Keeping my comments to the vid.
The Romans left nothing genetically and neither did the Vikings, the French only replaced the Aristocrats.
The Romans did not integrate with the local Britons. They were an administrative class that came and left leaving very little DNA.
English is primarily a mix of French and German today.
No, it isn't. :) Its foundations are Germanic but not Deutsche.
Basically it is a germanic language with a lot of french vocabulary introduced by the normans.
The description of post-Roman decline ignores the eminence of Irish and English Latin-based scholarship and the essential role of these islands in the preservation of scholarship and its re-introduction to the continent. It is no accident that the foremost writer of history in Latin between Late Antiquity and the 12th Century Renaissance was an Englishman, the Venerable Bede. It is also no accident that Charlemagne's foremost religious and cultural advisor was also an Englishman, Alcuin of York. St. Boniface, the 'Apostle of Germany', was also English.
The English scholarship was ultimately a product of the Gaelic Monasticism when Irish monks were converting the Pagan Anglosaxons in the North of England to Christianity. Which is why much of the great Anglosaxon scholars of the period like the Venerable Bede and Alcuin of York like you mentioned came from Northumbria, which was heavily influenced the Celtic Christianity of the Irish monks
@@zakariyaabdullahi5669 Yes, I know, that is why I mentioned the Irish first. However, the major figures that had the most effect on Continental culture were English. St. Boniface (Winfrid) was educated at Exeter in Wessex.
And then you compare Modern English wild Old English and realize that a significant part of the modern dictionary is French in origin.
Does he realize how many French loan words there are in English? Like the words "realize" and "effort".
You see, how many latin languages based words you use, when you watch in the farseer nameknown showplayers or news of kinglic family of England, when you walk through the rain without a rainshade , or holding a farspeaker to your ear. Oh, farspeaker/ Fernsprecher appears in current german only in older official documents. Greetings from Germany!
There’s a remarkable difference between “loan words” and “speaking the language itself”. I also have to ask how many of those words are French loanwords and not Latin ones (with maybe some French influence on pronunciation).
Apparently not!
@@John-fk2ky : Rindfleisch/ beef/boeuf. Schweinefleisch,/ pork/porc. Stuhl/ chair/ chaise. I am german: Schweinefleisch is surely unfamiliar to you, but would you understand, swineflesh'? Out of context, I know. Also umbrella is italian origin, french paraplui is an umbrella against rain, french parasol is an umbrella against sun. In german Regenschirm/ Sonnenschirm IS rainshade/sunshade. Languages are an Intressting toppic.
Since half of the English vocabulary is of French origin, I don't think the English stopped speaking French.
So French was only spoken by a small minority, those that had power. I guess it was inevitable it would lose significance when the majority speaks English. French isn't as inclusive of other languages as English is, it's one reason why French isn't popular around the world these days, they are still trying to stop 'foreign' words from entering their language even now.
Problem with the French is.... well, they talk about "liberty" and then act like managerialist despots.
Look at the differences between the aftermath of the US Revolution and the French Revolution.
Those former British subjects didn't start a "Reign of Terror" nor let a Corsican upstart become "Emperor," even though they were meant to over all that "monarchy stuff" by then 😂
@@Si_Mondo
So french colonialism is despotic and imperialism but british colonialism isn’t… ?
That’s double standard right here…
Modern dna testing has shown the only invader that had any significant effect upon English dna was those old Germanics we now refer to as the Anglo-Saxons and then only in parts of England to the tune of 10-30%. Our dna was not conquered and neither are we mongrels nor multicultural.
Remember NO ENGLAND before Anglo-Saxon came ...😮
Good job mr Sowell
I spent 8 years in school 'learning' French - a complete waste of time.
Thank you Thomas. If only you tube existed 40 years ago . Your intelligence and wisdom could have helped your country far more...
I'm sure he is well over 40...
Effortlessly? It took over 2 centuries and 75% of our vocabulary still comes from French and/or Latin.
The English never stopped speaking English. After the Norman conquest only the court and Norman nobles spoke French, not the vast majority of the English population. After a while, the Normans started speaking English, just as they had started speaking French when they settled in Normandy.
He seems to have done very little research with regard to pre-Conquest English history.
Typical, he also has a terrible take on the Sudeten German/Czech relations. Outside of US politics, he has the same knowledge as the average American, they are all commies.
“une bouteille d'eau” just isn’t the same as “bo’oh’o’wa’er”
Bottle of Jew is racist.
You even English bro?
:@@_--Reaper--_: When french was international language, the bouteille reached also Germany, as Buddel in the North, and (today rare used) Buudl the south. German word is Flasche, you have flask.
@@brittakriep2938 And why do I need to know this??
@@_--Reaper--_ : Why Not?
It is very possible that the British Isles was a very sophisticated society as evidenced by Stonehenge, Avebury, other stone circles.Over 4-5000 years ago.
It was only the snotty nobles who spoke French, partly because the French invaded and ruled the English, but also all the nobles, including Russians, liked to speak French. The English, non aristocracy, spoke Englisg because they were English; just as the Russian peasants spoke Russian because they were Russian.
Now to kick french from france.. ..
already tried during the 100 years war and failed
The interesting bit, not addressed here, is that early English as used in writing pre Norman conquest is grammatically complex, using cases and three genders, just like modern German. The English that emerged in writing in the fourteenth century had lost most of the grammatical baggage and was much closer to modern English. We still don’t know when the English spoken by the peasants underwent this transformation. Was it already like this before the Norman conquest, and only the elite used the high form of the language when speaking and writing, or did it transform itself post Norman conquest, as it was the tongue of the peasant. Some think it was caused by the influence of the large celtic population, others that it was the arrival of the Vikings, who created a patois that both Vikings and Anglo-Saxons could understand.
You can call it baggage but it was beautiful, sophisticated, and rich.
English language lost its grammatical genders early on. Old English had three genders, masculine. feminine and neutral - French has masculine and feminine and was often incompatible with one another. A neutral noun in old English would be say feminine in French so Middle English became a blend of the two languages and dropped the complexity of grammatical genders. Something often overlooked fact that Modern English has a huge duplication of nouns, because of the two language streams. Example "woods" (Old English) and "forest" (Old French) etc. There are hundreds of other examples.
@@michaelhalsall5684 There is no evidence for that, and as far as I know it is not a theory supported by linguists. There were too few Normans, they became the elite i.e. the royal family, and the nobles. Using your idea, Quebec French should have lost its genders and verb endings as Quebec was controlled by English speakers for over two centuries. It has absorbed English words, such as bécosse (back house i.e. outside toilet), and truck, but it has maintained all of its grammar. English gained many words from Norman French, but they tended to be used for higher concepts, such as ‘concept’ (though that might probably arrived later). We also gained many French words later on, from France and not from the Normans.
Sky, earth, woman womb are anglo saxon words, Norman from the Norse men North men or Vikings) , a very interesting video, our history is wonderful unfortunately there are some who would have us deny its existence. English has around 500,000 words the next closest is french with 250k
Sky is Norse, from the viking invaders
Sky is from Norse skyr, it is related to old English sceo 'cloud.'
In the first place, the people of England never spoke French, just the Norman rulers did. And it merged with Anglo-Saxon in the law courts. Many words were adopted and adapted into English, but this is just ridiculous.
As a french livng in Normandy, i guess the english people are cousins to me :)
Glass disappeared from Roman times until the 17th century.
That's mad.
Here in Britain, we have been rightly educated on just how good for Britain (England, actually) the Roman invasion was...funnily enough, just as British colonisation of so many countries was good for them (it's just that they are honest enough to recognise it).
A video that totally ignored the question posed in the title !
The Normans had their eyes on England because it was the richest land in Western Europe at the time.
The fall of Rome or even fall of its provice such as BRITANNIA is great tragedy as it has brought fallen provinces centuries back in development. No surprise that when Rome collapsed, western partof known world immediatelly entered PERIOD OF DARK AGES, we can see here why, it was greatest empire that ever existet. Why have you left ROME again Brittania ? Is it not cold and lonelly out there on the edge ?
Any chance we could see videos on the history of France you've piqued my interest
The Irish had a written language that still exists
I love Thomas Sowell! He's one of America's true treasures! If only he could write a book about us Native Americans! Get history straight! Love you Mr. Sowell! ❤😃👏
they didn't though I saw a vid that showed roughly 40% of current English is derived from French
The Roman contribution to British DNA was almost non-existent and the Norman infusion was small. Most Britons are, to varing degrees depending on where in the island they're from, descended from prehistoric stock, Celts, Germanics and a nice dash of Scandanavian.
rubbish. britons are closer to scandinavians, especially norwegians, than to highly celtic peoples such as the french
@@bennyklabarpan7002 The map I read displayed heavy Germanic/Scandanavian DNA predominating on the eastern half and extreme north of the Island, with older bloodlines dominating in the west.
The British Isles was basically North America before North America.
Part of it is sheer bloody mindedness and an ancient mistrust of the French.
What a wonderful, bountiful and truly grateful knowledge of history. Thank you‼️ 👏❤️👏❤️👏
Good. Thanks.
Canada should take note!
Some people will believe anything
YES, tell them the truth.
Now the UK is undergoing the same post-US empire regression
This is why that "modern cradle of civilisation", beyond what had been created by the Greeks and Romans, developing more independently in British culture emerged predominantly as the integration, infighting, negotiation, et cetera of many different cultures, leading to many uprisings and resistance against Kings abuse of power, leading to human and civil rights legislation through the centuries,, then modern Parliamentary structure and emancipation and enlightenment of groups other than the small ruling elite, which you didn't see anywhere else in the world, until they were adapted from British documentation by the USA, then France than other continental European societies.
*This is mainly why such amazing innovation's, such as Free-market capitalism, modern centralised banking, fractional reserve investment deployment, incredible innovations stemming from so many different industries from so many more emancipated societal groups, assisted by the emergence of the canal networks going right through to the mechanisation and fuel power deployment of the Industrial Revolution, which all of these eventually spread to Europe
Hence, Voltaire running away from France in 1726, complaining of the intolerance and backwardness of the structures remaining "Unchanged" in French culture down the centuries, wrote, "I learned to think in England.", "England is the land of liberty" and "England taught Europe how to think."
England and Britain aren’t the same. Sloppy.
Something of an eye-opener about English history.
Some viewers say this is BS and I couldn't agree more. The author doesn't even consider the black death impact on the cities which incidently contained the greatest numbers of frenchspeaking people. What a joke
By kicked out, did Dr. Sowell mean fully incorporate into law, culinary arts, fine arts, music, dance, and academics? Don't mind me, after my pilates class, I need to buy some poultry, before I file a demurrer. As Yogi Berra might say, "It is like deja vu, all over again."
3:19 This is incorrect as islamisation is currently fully underway there now as we speak...
The English dictionary is chalk full of anglicised Norman French. Eg, anything ending in *tion * sion, etc.
There is no evidence that pre Roman Britons did not already speak a Germanic tongue, and were not already influenced culturally, economically and genetically by their trading partners along the European coast of the North Sea.
Doggerland only sank beneath the waves of the North Sea around 5,000BC.
Before that time, travel to and from Europe from the east coast of the UK was made easier than travel to the west coast of the UK from its east coast.
There were no east west Roman roads.
Trade in tin and copper with the mediterranean from Cornwall and Wales had formed a longstanding connection with the ancient classical world for Western Britons.
But eastern England's trade with Germanic speaking northern Europe can only be inferred by the Saxon Coast forts the Roman's built.
Why they built these forts has not been satisfactorily answered.
Were they trading posts to facilitate tax collection?
Or were there a demarcating a political boundary, nominally describing the border between classical Rome and the undefeated Germanics?
'the Normans were so very good at adapting . so good they adapted themselves out of existence. They kept marrying outside of their culture and etc'
we were taught at school that around the time of the Norman conquest England was rich, well organised with a civil service and an efficient tax structure. it was that which attracted the Normans.