9.849, Disc: Recent Change in English

[LINGUIST Network]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-9-849. Tue Jun 9 1998. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 9.849, Disc: Recent Change in English

Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Review Editor:     Andrew Carnie <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Editors:  	    Brett Churchill <brett at linguistlist.org>
		    Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>
		    Elaine Halleck <elaine at linguistlist.org>
                    Anita Huang <anita at linguistlist.org>
                    Ljuba Veselinova <ljuba at linguistlist.org>
		    Julie Wilson <julie at linguistlist.org>

Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
                      Zhiping Zheng <zzheng at online.emich.edu>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/


Editor for this issue: Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:           Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:21:42 +0000
From:  jcuesta at cica.es
Subject:        Re: 9.702, Disc: Recent changes in English

2)
Date:  Mon, 08 Jun 1998 15:32:50 +0100
From:  Sian Etherington <sian at sjh.bi.umist.ac.uk>
Subject:  recent changes in English

3)
Date:  Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:56:58 -0700
From:  Anthea Fallen-Bailey <afallenb at wvi.com>
Subject:  Changes in English...

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:           Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:21:42 +0000
From:  jcuesta at cica.es
Subject:        Re: 9.702, Disc: Recent changes in English

I was wondering whether the fact that the ending -ly is not
historically an adverbial ending has something to do with the
preference that speakers have always had (throughout the history of
English) for the use of adverbial forms without an ending: I work
hard. What about "it looks good", even if the adverb is from a
different root (well)? I'd like to hear something more about this
matter.

Julia Fernandez Cuesta
University of Seville
Spain


-------------------------------- Message 2 -------------------------------

Date:  Mon, 08 Jun 1998 15:32:50 +0100
From:  Sian Etherington <sian at sjh.bi.umist.ac.uk>
Subject:  recent changes in English

RE: the use of original language versions of Royal names (Juan Carlos
etc.) This seems to me to be similar to the growing trends to use
names of cities in appropriate languages rather translating into
English equivalents. The BBC uses "Beijing" now instead of "Peking"
and I have also heard "Athina" and "Thessaloniki".  --
______________________________________________________________ Sian
Etherington mailto: sian at sjh.bi.umist.ac.uk 23 Crossfield Grove tel:
0161 483 7745 Woodsmoor, Stockport SK27EQ fax: 0161 483 7745


-------------------------------- Message 3 -------------------------------

Date:  Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:56:58 -0700
From:  Anthea Fallen-Bailey <afallenb at wvi.com>
Subject:  Changes in English...

In response to A.M.R.'s comment on the names of royalty being
anglicised or not through various historical periods in English, I
wonder whether the (modern?) differences in treatment come from a
specific royal person being a ruler (or future ruler, in history
books) of England.....

To clarify: King Juan Carlos, Queen Beatrix, Crown Prince
Willem-Alexander, etc., are all "foreign" to England, i.e., they are
not ruling England/Britain.  In the past, the Orange family did come
to rule England -- William and Mary -- and their names were
anglicised.....as might be expected, I suggest, given that these
people were ruling an English-speaking population.  Admittedly, past
Spanish kings are referred to in English texts as Charles, not Carlos,
even though they were obviously not rulers of Britain.  Perhaps
"Charles" because it is easily transformed from "Carlos"... (and/or a
very common name) ??  And in other countries...?

Just a thought, not a theory....

Anthea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-9-849