Talk:Old English: Difference between revisions
imported>Michel van der Hoek |
imported>Thomas Simmons (Phonetic aids to pronunciation) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:Hunh. I just checked in Hock's 'Principles of Historical Linguistics', and Hock seems to use Old English for the language, and only uses Anglo-saxon a couple of times. Interesting... [[User:Brian P. Long|Brian P. Long]] 08:01, 29 April 2008 (CDT) | :Hunh. I just checked in Hock's 'Principles of Historical Linguistics', and Hock seems to use Old English for the language, and only uses Anglo-saxon a couple of times. Interesting... [[User:Brian P. Long|Brian P. Long]] 08:01, 29 April 2008 (CDT) | ||
::Among philologists, "Old English" is really the only term used for this stage of the English language. "Anglo-Saxon" is a term usually reserved for studies on the culture of the people who spoke the language. I guess every once in a while you see "Anglo-Saxon" used for the language, but it's very rare. You can start another article "Anglo-Saxon" reflecting this difference in usage. [[User:Michel van der Hoek|Michel van der Hoek]] 23:54, 6 May 2008 (CDT) | ::Among philologists, "Old English" is really the only term used for this stage of the English language. "Anglo-Saxon" is a term usually reserved for studies on the culture of the people who spoke the language. I guess every once in a while you see "Anglo-Saxon" used for the language, but it's very rare. You can start another article "Anglo-Saxon" reflecting this difference in usage. [[User:Michel van der Hoek|Michel van der Hoek]] 23:54, 6 May 2008 (CDT) | ||
::I have to agree even if it may be a bit imprecise. I rarely ever see it referred to as Anglo-Saxon. [[User:Thomas Simmons|Thomas Simmons]] 00:17, 18 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
==Phonetic aids to pronunciation== | |||
It would be helpful to produce a phonetic guide here or at least on a supplemental page if anyone has the time. Numerous letters are unfamiliar to the average reader and vowel combinations are going to be unfamiliar to some. A phonetic guide would make it user friendly. [[User:Thomas Simmons|Thomas Simmons]] 00:17, 18 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:17, 17 August 2009
Beowulf
Beowulf survives in its entirety, except for some very small lacunae. The text of this article should be revised to reflect that. Michel van der Hoek 20:10, 28 April 2008 (CDT)
- Changed - how about this? John Stephenson 21:28, 28 April 2008 (CDT)
Old English v. Anglo-Saxon
What's the rationale for having this article live at 'Old English' rather than 'Anglo-saxon'? My very subjective, imprecise sense is that unlike Middle English, academics usually refer to the language as Anglo-saxon (this despite the fact that the standard linguistic abbreviation for Anglo-saxon is "OE"). Is this impression incorrect? Brian P. Long 07:59, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
- Hunh. I just checked in Hock's 'Principles of Historical Linguistics', and Hock seems to use Old English for the language, and only uses Anglo-saxon a couple of times. Interesting... Brian P. Long 08:01, 29 April 2008 (CDT)
- Among philologists, "Old English" is really the only term used for this stage of the English language. "Anglo-Saxon" is a term usually reserved for studies on the culture of the people who spoke the language. I guess every once in a while you see "Anglo-Saxon" used for the language, but it's very rare. You can start another article "Anglo-Saxon" reflecting this difference in usage. Michel van der Hoek 23:54, 6 May 2008 (CDT)
- I have to agree even if it may be a bit imprecise. I rarely ever see it referred to as Anglo-Saxon. Thomas Simmons 00:17, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Phonetic aids to pronunciation
It would be helpful to produce a phonetic guide here or at least on a supplemental page if anyone has the time. Numerous letters are unfamiliar to the average reader and vowel combinations are going to be unfamiliar to some. A phonetic guide would make it user friendly. Thomas Simmons 00:17, 18 August 2009 (UTC)