The name Roots English gives a good indication that the project seeks to get to the “roots” of the English language. I therefore say that my name for the language-I the one which I will use from now on when writing here, and might already be obvious-should be “Roots English”. ![]() It is no use to say that all existing names are bad but fail to put one forward myself, for it would simply leave the situation worse than I found it. So rejecting these names I must at last propose my own. Full marks for standing out, but none for understanding. “Ednew English” truly makes me interested in what it might be, but doesn’t allow me to know until I’ve sought through the wordbook and found what exactly “ednew” means. The language would do well to disown any notions of that from the start, and so the name is a complete non–starter. It promotes the idea that the language is only for some hypothetical set of people with specific physical characteristics or descent. “Blue–eyed English” is an even worse name, with awful connotations of racism and discrimination. To have the name contradicting the goal is a bad move, especially as it promotes the kind of deadend thinking mentioned above. But if you believe-as I do-that the goal of the project is not the increase the “Saxon” or Germanic elements in English, the the description is dead wrong. “Saxonized English” tells us that the language is a “more Saxon” kind of English, which may well be true to some extent, and is probably the best overall name. The next names do exactly this, but all give the wrong message in their own way. Whatever name is given to the language it should more clearly state that it is a kind of English, and then add a simple descriptor to show what kind. It’s near enough to “English” that many might recognize it as the name for language somehow connected to English, but in what way? The name doesn’t allow a person to go any further, and so is a dead end when used to sell or explain the language. Yet further to this, the name “Anglish” is poor for explaining what the language actually is. ![]() To name a project which you earnestly believe after a joke is not a good beginning. I do not know why it became the most used name, but the first objection against it is probably the best: Jennings had no serious interest in the project and his article was only a joke. ![]() The name “Anglish” was coined by Paul Jennings in a humorous article intended to portray what the English tongue would have been like had the Normans not succeeded in their invasion. Any name we choose must both sell the language to others while at the same time explaining something of its nature. But as I have already mentioned, I do not feel that this is the most fitting name, and I further believe that other existing names are also poor. Up til now I have called this language project “Anglish” as that is the most written and understood name.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |