Shakespeare's language was early Modern English of London, from which
our English derived. He wrote refined versions and bawdy versions and
colloquial versions depending on his character. He wrote what was spoken
in his time and place.
The King James Bible was written with the idea of transcribing the word of
god and that undoubtedly affected how they phrased it.
Nancy
Date sent: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 11:21:06 -0700
Send reply to: [log in to unmask]
From: "Richard Seddon" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Dans le Restaurant and the Commedia
Pat:
Was Shakespeare's "language", as opposed to the English language, a
refined version of the English vernacular? How about "King James Version"
English? Dante's "language" was a refined version of the Italian
vernacular of the time. Another question for the list, where does
Provencal fit into all this? Provencal, I think, differs significantly
from either 13th century or 21st century Italian. Dante's lyric tradition
was troubadour which is Provencal.
Rick Seddon
McIntosh, NM, USA
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sunday, March 18, 2001 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Dans le Restaurant and the Commedia
In a message dated 3/18/01 7:43:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
My question was that I knew Dante's 1200 Italian was closer to
modern Italian than Chaucher's 1200 English is to modern English
but was it closer than Shakespeare's 1600 English. He said yes.
Italian students of Dante do not have much trouble with the
language or grammar although there are problems with some terms (I
would guess on a parr with Shakespeare's "collier" for example.)
Also there was trouble with some of the allusions and history.
Thanks, Rick, that's really interesting. Did he say why English has
changed more than Italian? Or maybe it just isn't known why.
pat
|
