Speakes thou even English, brether?
-
More fun with ChatGPT.
Most of Modern English derives from evolutions from a specific dialect of Middle English: the London dialect. Problem with this is, it was heavily compromised by Norman influence.
The Northern Midlands dialect, on the other hand, was more conservative in its evolution: word order stayed far more fluid, etymologies more heavily favored Old Norse and Old English, and there was less of a French influence overall.
Got me thinking what modern english would sound like if it had derived from this dialect, and not that of London.
So, I made a very quick and dirty GPT by feeding it the most common of the North Midlands dialect's grammar, etymology, vocabulary, word order and verb conjugation rules.
This is a bit like Dr. Grant's comment on Hammond's "Dinosaurs," which really weren't, but it was still fun to do.
This was one of @LuFins-Dad 's replies in the "8 Months of Pay" thread, but put through the GPT dialect translator:
Wiþ þe amendement written when hit was, I tende lean to þe Trump interpretes. Folk of nations oft yet called subjects. In þe case of þe Chinese mon, both parents here legally were, and þe mon his whole life here lived and was grown. I fail see how þat giveth forego for folk to cross þe border unlawfully and children have þat straightway citizens be. Yet, as þat has been þe unspoken law of þe land till now, I would suggest þat all children born in þe US afore þe EO considered subjectes be. Howe’er, þat meanes not þe parents shielded from forþsend are. Þey choice have: take þe children wiþ hom (dual subjectes), or leave þe children here in þe forþsend system. I wot þat sounde grim, but þis nation of laws is. Þou canst not ignore þo laws for how hit feeleth.
Please love yourself.
-
More fun with ChatGPT.
Most of Modern English derives from evolutions from a specific dialect of Middle English: the London dialect. Problem with this is, it was heavily compromised by Norman influence.
The Northern Midlands dialect, on the other hand, was more conservative in its evolution: word order stayed far more fluid, etymologies more heavily favored Old Norse and Old English, and there was less of a French influence overall.
Got me thinking what modern english would sound like if it had derived from this dialect, and not that of London.
So, I made a very quick and dirty GPT by feeding it the most common of the North Midlands dialect's grammar, etymology, vocabulary, word order and verb conjugation rules.
This is a bit like Dr. Grant's comment on Hammond's "Dinosaurs," which really weren't, but it was still fun to do.
This was one of @LuFins-Dad 's replies in the "8 Months of Pay" thread, but put through the GPT dialect translator:
Wiþ þe amendement written when hit was, I tende lean to þe Trump interpretes. Folk of nations oft yet called subjects. In þe case of þe Chinese mon, both parents here legally were, and þe mon his whole life here lived and was grown. I fail see how þat giveth forego for folk to cross þe border unlawfully and children have þat straightway citizens be. Yet, as þat has been þe unspoken law of þe land till now, I would suggest þat all children born in þe US afore þe EO considered subjectes be. Howe’er, þat meanes not þe parents shielded from forþsend are. Þey choice have: take þe children wiþ hom (dual subjectes), or leave þe children here in þe forþsend system. I wot þat sounde grim, but þis nation of laws is. Þou canst not ignore þo laws for how hit feeleth.
Love it. Makes me think of this video on how Richard III’s 15th Century English would have sounded when he spoke:
Link to videoThis one is interesting as well:
Link to videoElbows up!
-
So, will we get more translations?
The Brad
-
Love it. Makes me think of this video on how Richard III’s 15th Century English would have sounded when he spoke:
Link to videoThis one is interesting as well:
Link to video@Renauda said in Speakes thou even English, brether?:
Love it. Makes me think if this video on how Richard III’s 15th Century English would have sounded when he spoke:
Link to videoThis one is interesting as well:
Link to videoYeah those were fascinating, weren't they? By that time in history, there was still a pretty big difference among dialects. Richard probably would have sounded a lot like Chaucer, but not so much like the Gawain poet.
Please love yourself.
-
So, will we get more translations?
@LuFins-Dad said in Speakes thou even English, brether?:
So, will we get more translations?
Fower score and seven years gone, our faðeres forth brought on þis land new folkdom, beþought in freedom and set to þe troþ þat all men alike made be.
Now, a great folk-strife we fight, trying if þat folkdom, or any so beþought and so set, long may last. On a great warfield we stand met. A bit of þis ground we have come to hallow, as last rest stead for those who here hor lives gave so þat folkdom might live. Right and fitting it is þat we do.
Howe’er, greater-wise, we hallow not—consecrate not—bless not—þis ground. Bold men, live and dead, who here fought, hallowed it, far above our meagre might to add or take. Little note þe world will, nor long hold what we here say, but ne’er may it forget what þey here did. It is for us þe live instead, to here stand for þe halfwrought work þat those who here fought so greatly forth brought. It is instead for us to stand for þe great task left—þat from þese honored dead, more troþ we take to þe cause for which þey gave þe last full gift of troþ—þat we here high-set our hearts þat þese dead not idly fallen be—þat þis folkdom, under God, a new birth of freedom shall have—and þat rule of þe folk, by þe folk, for þe folk, shall not from þe earth wane.
-
@Renauda said in Speakes thou even English, brether?:
Love it. Makes me think if this video on how Richard III’s 15th Century English would have sounded when he spoke:
Link to videoThis one is interesting as well:
Link to videoYeah those were fascinating, weren't they? By that time in history, there was still a pretty big difference among dialects. Richard probably would have sounded a lot like Chaucer, but not so much like the Gawain poet.
By that time in history, there was still a pretty big difference among dialects
Not to compare but I can remember as a kid when my grandfather and his brothers and sisters would get together and converse in their West Yorkshire dialects. All were born in the late 1800’s and grew up in England. My father could understand them but really couldn’t speak it with any real fluency. It was English but at the same time it wasn’t English - I understood very little other than few words and common expressions that my father would use from time to time.
-
By that time in history, there was still a pretty big difference among dialects
Not to compare but I can remember as a kid when my grandfather and his brothers and sisters would get together and converse in their West Yorkshire dialects. All were born in the late 1800’s and grew up in England. My father could understand them but really couldn’t speak it with any real fluency. It was English but at the same time it wasn’t English - I understood very little other than few words and common expressions that my father would use from time to time.
@Renauda said in Speakes thou even English, brether?:
I can remember as a kid when my grandfather and his brothers and sisters would get together and converse in their West Yorkshire dialects. All were born in the late 1800’s and grew I no England. My father could understand them but really couldn’t speak it with any real fluency. It was English but at the same time it wasn’t English - I understood very little other than few words and common expressions that my father would use from time to time.
Theirs is the truer English. Pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, word order—it's all a lot closer to Anglo-Saxon than what we consider modern English to be today.
Speaking of which, it may interest @Jolly (if he doesn't know this already) that there are a handful of quirks of English in the American south that are unique with respect to the rest of the country, but are Old English holdovers. Couple of examples:
- "Reach" pronounced as usual, but "reached" pronounced "wretched". Or maybe "het" instead of "heated." These are strong verbs, in which the vowel sound changes depending on the tense. (Weak verbs, by contrast, just have an "ed" ending to indicate tense.) This is an Anglo-Saxon holdover that the Scots and Irish immigrants retained. Our language used to have more strong verbs than weak ones. Now it's the opposite. Thanks, Normans.
- "Stacked modals" like "might could" are seen as wrong today, because we let silly Latin fetishists write our grammar books. But this was a feature of the language, not a bug.
- Adding "a" before a verb, like "a-fixin' to" is a holdover from when prefixes would change their meaning. We still use plenty of these: overmuch, become, prevent, etc. It's just that there are a few more examples in the American South.
