Nancy Gish wrote:
> It seems worth noting that Old English is a Germanic language and that it
> is easier to learn it if you speak German than if you speak modern
> English. Because the changes (post 1066) took place more slowly and
> less completely in the north than the south, modern Scots is much closer
> to German and shares sounds lost in modern English (the sound of Loch,
> licht, and muir--which get mispronounced by English and Amercans as "k"
> and "oo," and has many more cognates: "ken" is know; for example,
> "licht" is light in both languages; "kirk" is "kirche" and "night" is "nicht."
> So I think we really have as a history an invasion of German by French
> that became "English" and the reversal of English words in German is just
> part of a constant process. But I think the Germans should refuse to let
> their version be invaded.
It's been fifty years since I read any Old English -- and I don't
remember whether it had that participial construction of modern German
and Russian. And if I remember correctly -- this is also 50 years or so
ago -- my Russian instructor said that the Russians had deliberately
imported the construction from German, during a period of infatuation
with German culture. The Russian language _allows_ it but hadn't had it
before sometime in the 19th century. (I won't swear by this because my
memory of it is pretty vague.)