Anglo-French

[X99Lynx at aol.com]

>Jim Rader writes:

>The literate classes of medieval England had at least a good
>  working knowledge of Anglo-French well after 1250, judging by its
>  use in commerical transactions and Parliamentary and court
>  records.  Far more prose writing in Anglo-French survives from the
>  period after 1250 than from before.

In a message dated 11/7/2000 9:59:51 PM, stevegus at aye.net writes:

<< The French used by lawyers was increasingly a jargon applied by rote,
and I suspect without real understanding of French. >>

In a message dated 11/7/2000 10:36:38 PM, larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk writes:

<< Yes, of course.  But, in my posting, I was careful to say that Norman
French died out as a *spoken language* -- that is, as a mother tongue --
after a couple of centuries.  The later administrative Anglo-French was
nobody's mother tongue.>>

Steve Gustafson's comments about the "Anglo-Norman" used in English law being
a jargon may have been the case very early.  Awhile ago I had to work  with
A-N texts and from what I understood about the translations that were given
to me, very little "Anglo" was involved, especially in the areas of trade
regulation.  Looking in Black's Law Dictionary, they quote Wharton in
"properly" describing it as "Norman French".   It also says that Norman
French was "the language of English legal procedure till 36 Edw. III (A.D.
1362)."

But wasn't this Norman version an odd dialect of French and not the one that
penetrated into English about the time of Chaucer?   I seem to recall in
notes in Canterbury Tales that Chaucer was picking up a lot Parisian that may
have been fashionable at Court at the time, but that he also felt comfortable
putting into the mouths of his common folk characters.

So I'm just wondering if "Anglo-Norman," as opposed to a different later
influx of more conventional French, was anything but an "occupation" language
that was never really spoken in the streets.

Regards,
Steve Long