Talk:Northumbrian Old English

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scotland-stub or England-stub?[edit]

Forget it - this is an English related article, the forerunner of the Geordie, Mackem etc dialects of England (and according to the Northumbian language Association are dialects of a separate Nothumbian language (!)). I see no reason why one of the most well known English dialects should be nabbed by the Scots and declared a "Scotland related article", it is relevant to both England and Scotland. Izehar 18:22, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please calm down: Wikipedia:No personal attacks. I am not your "darling" (sic).
The two things are not mutually exclusive. Northumbrian Anglo-Saxon is both an English and a Scottish topic. The sad fact is that there is no such thing as an {{England-stub}}. Why?--Mais oui! 18:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I could start speculating why there is no England-stub, but I'll refrain. The main fact is that Northumbrian Anglo-Saxon is related to both England and Scotland - like I told you above. The article with the Scotland-stub is misleading, as it implies a relationship with Scotland alone, while leaving out the fact that the Kingdom of Northumbria where this dialect was spoken was in the are which is now England and has left a distinctive mark on the speech of the people living there ever since. I know that stub categories are a rather petty thing to be arguing over, but they cannot be misleading. How about using {{Template:UK-stub}}? That's better that Scotland-stub alone or even worse: the Scotland-stub and the hypothetical England-stub - that would clutter the page. The UK-stub includes both. Izehar 19:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just made the change. Izehar 19:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ynglis language now redirects here[edit]

Ynglis language was redirecting to Middle English which seemed less relevant, so I've changed it to redirect here. It might be worthwhile moving this article to the "Ynglis language" title. From other pages it seems that the invaders in this area were Angles, and the idea of Anglo-Saxon is a later construct implying a unity with the language of Saxon areas which seems unsupported by the differences still preserved in Geordie and Lallans. ....dave souza 15:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ynglis just means "English"; if it were to be moved, it would be to Northumbrian language, which would actually be pretty convenient for editors writing in links. - Calgacus 23:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a language, it was a dialect of the Old English language. Izehar 23:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah yeah and "Gaidhlig" just means "Gaeilge". Latina means Italiano and Dutch/Deutsch are all one thing. Give us a break and stop your double standards regarding language definitions80.192.59.202 03:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think David is disputing that, he was thinking of the Mercian Language parallel (which ought to be moved in any case, as the "L" should not be capitalized). Certainly, these matters should be kept consistent. The Mercian language article was moved in November without explanation; maybe it ought to be reverted or something. - Calgacus 23:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) That's true about Mercian language, the guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages mandate the form XXX language. Perhaps Ynglis should have its own page (a disambiguation page) and direct readers to Mercian, Northumbrian, Old English, Anglic etc. Izehar 23:27, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was simply caused by the move:

In my view, the article Ynglis is worthless, even as a redirect. It was produced mainly because well intentioned, but misguided, supporters of "Scots" on wikipedia consistently wish to antedate the separate existence of the "Scots" dialect/language to as early a date as possible; although I'm sure that is not always the case. A link to Middle English would probably suffice. - Calgacus 23:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You talk elsewhere of "spurious modern condstructs" yet use the modern construct "Middle English" and show disdain for the earlier "Ynglis"!?!? Please enlighten us as to why in the case of Scots (and not Gaelic rather than the term Middle Irish where you take the opposite stance without explanation for this reversed position seeing Gaelic as a non spurious term for the Goidelic language spoken at the same time as Ynglis, rather than the more modern "Middle Irish" its always spurious, despite your clear personal bias and lack of evidence for such "expert" analysis. The Gaelic language written in Scotland in the Middle Ages (another "spurious modern term" I take it?) was the same one as in Ireland at that time (as you you know very well despite remaining silent on this in comparison to your a historical attacks on Scots.) If modern terms are spurious because there modern, then please support the article "Ynglis" rather than "Middle English" and thus stay consistent in your criticisms. Otherwise, you are guilty of continued negative propoganda against a particular linguistic group and twisting "evidence" ("all but proven??? give us a break please!) to suit your apparently vindictive campaign.82.41.4.66 10:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I suppose we could get Mercian Language moved back to Mercian (Anglo-Saxon) if we had a poll on WP:RM. I am concerned about the fact that we have two redirects: Ynglis and Ynglis language, which both redirect to different articles now. Izehar 23:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we could save ourselves the bother by just renaming all three. Say, Northumbrian Old English, Old English language, Northumbrian, Northumbrian Old English language, etc. - Calgacus 23:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As Mercian (Anglo-Saxon) was not moved by a poll, then it does not need a poll to be moved back. I just moved it back :-) Izehar 00:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since 2010-07-17 Ynglis language no longer redirects here but to the disambiguation page Ynglis. Angr (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ynglish, Inglis, Anglish etc etc are all simply examples of the many ways in which the word 'English' was spelled before Standard English emerged. The earliest recorded spelling as E-N-G-L-I-S-H is not until the end of the 16th century (OED) Cassandra. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.247.153 (talk) 09:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Use "(Old English)" disambiguator[edit]

In any case, the articles should be moved to Northumbrian (Old English), Mercian (Old English), West Saxon (Old English) and Kentish (Old English) as the name as 'Old English' is generally prefered to Anglo-Saxon, is more commonly used and the Wikipedia article is Old English language. Sigurd Dragon Slayer (talk) 01:40, 18 March 2008

Dialect vs. variant[edit]

This all seems terribly confused. Having been investigating this and related subjects for a whole year now I offer the following: Northumbrian English was one of the historical variants (a variant not a 'dialect') of Old English. It is not a term which refers to dialects of the area of northern England now commonly known as Northumbria. The term refers to the former Kingdom of Northumbria which extended from the Firth of Forth to the Humber. The term is 'relatively' new - an older technical term appears to have been Northern English. The language (or dialect group) spoken in lowland Scotland has been known by various names: until the last decade of the 15h century it was always called English (though most often spelled Inglis) from the mid 16th century it was commonly (but never exclusivley) called Scots. Tbe terms 'Lallans' (for 'lowlands') was coined in the late 18th century, and 'Doric' in the late 19th century. 'Modern' Northern English dialects and Scots dialects are both descended from Northumbrian English. Cassandra. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.2.26 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 4 June 2013‎

What distinction do you think there is between "variant" and "dialect"? I see no reason not to call Northumbrian Old English a dialect of Old English. Angr (talk) 16:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as I understand it a language variant is something larger than a dialect since it may have multiple related dialects, a group of dialects, within it; but it is in turn part of a larger language. Thus 'Northumbrian English', Southern English (of Wessex) and Midlands English are three distinct historical language variants of English which once existed side by side, each no doubt, even then, with numerous local dialects within those variants. As I undertand it southern English withered away, whilst modern standard English is, mainly, descended from the historic Midlands English variant originally associated with the Kingdom of Mercia. Inevitably since the distinction between a language, a variant and a dialect are imprecise, being 'man-made' categories, they can be(and are) argued over. From what I read however the Nortumbrian variant (or perhaps, and arguably, language; but not, I think, dialect) of English is the ancestor of all surviving, and related, dialects of English in Lowland Scotland, Northumberland, Durham and Yorkshire i.e. most of the area which once made up the Kingdom of Northumbria. Hope that makes sense. It's the best I can do, though others may explain it better. Cassandra

We actually have an article on Variety (linguistics), according to which a variety is any specific form of a language, whether a language, a dialect, a subdialect, a dialect cluster, or whatever. So Northumbrian is definitely a variety of Old English, but that doesn't mean it isn't also a dialect. My definition of dialect may be different from yours, though; in fact, my feeling of what a dialect is is barely different from the definition of variety given in that article. Angr (talk) 19:20, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree. It's a tricky one. And I certainly don't claim to know the exact answer. Writers often seem to use the terms dialect and variant interchangably. In this context however I'd say a variant was a cluster of dialects of a single language which have more in common with each other than with one or more neighbouring variants/dialects of the same language. Old Northubrian was just such a large cluster (and as 'Northen English' still is). Confusion arises I think because there is a 'Northmbrian dialect' in existance today in North East England which is a different thing from (though historically a part of) the much, much larger 'Northumbrian' language variant of English. Distinguishing the two by the use of 'dialect' and 'variant' seems helpful in describing these two distinct things, the latter a once large, and diverse, entity, the former more or less a single dialect. Perhaps there ought to be two Wiki pages, one for each, in order to avoid confusion? Hope that makes sense. Cassandra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.106.199 (talk) 10:17, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we do have a separate article on Northern English, which is about the modern language. Angr (talk) 06:53, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have just made some minor mechanical emendations to this article. I have introduced the term subdialect (based on the wiki entry for that term) for the northern and southern versions of Northumbrian. It's unclear to me whether Scots and Ulster Scots derive from the northern version or from Northumbrian in general (though I would guess it's the former). Would the author of this fine and useful article please check to make sure my changes don't alter the meaning in any way? S/he might also wish to insert "northern" in the attribution of Scots/Ulster if I'm correct about that.

Thanks to all who've contributed to this entry. KC 20:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Lord's Prayer[edit]

This section needs a topic sentence connecting the information about the Lord's Prayer to the rest of the discussion. As it stands, the statement about contemporary use comes out of the blue in an article that to this point has been clearly constructed and logically argued. I assume the opening sentence documents the survival of Northumbrian phrases and pronunciation because of the widespread influence of the Lord's Prayer. If so, that point should be articulated and the discussion should follow the prayer—which itself should be contextualized in the larger article and provided with some background. Where does it come from, to start? What's the justification for The Lord's Prayer as a separate category?

Thanks! KC 20:37, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 4 January 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved, per consensus. —usernamekiran(talk) 19:57, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Northumbrian dialect (Old English) → Northumbrian Old English – This name is more easily readable and avoids unwieldy parentheses. "Northumbrian Old English" also appears in Google and Google Scholar searches far more than other alternatives like "Old Northumbrian English". Wolfdog (talk) 02:11, 4 January 2019 (UTC)--Relisting. Renerpho (talk) 00:51, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The "(Old English)" for Kentish is to distinguish it from the modern Kentish dialect, but here we have no need, as the modern dialect is at English of Northumbria. 178.164.139.37 (talk) 12:17, 4 January 2019 (UTC) Struck !vote: Same editor, different IP 94.21.204.175 (talk) 08:11, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd say a disambiguator is necessary. It is not clear that a search for the term refers to the language, rather than the people or anything else related to Northumbria. See many other language articles, usually called X-ian language rather than X-ian. A redirect to Kingdom of Northumbria seems natural to me. Alternatively, a disambiguation page may be an option. Renerpho (talk) 02:32, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is already a disambiguation page at Northumbria (disambiguation), which covers both "Northumbria" and "Northumbrian" uses. But it gets less than 1% of the views of Kingdom of Northumbria, which hatnotes it. The redirect gets about half the views that the Kingdom does. (Page view stats here.)
So "Kingdom of Northumbria" is the primary topic for "Northumbria", but that does not imply that "Northumbria" is the best title for that topic. (I've checked on Northumbrian (locomotive) and other candidates for the title, but none comes close.) 94.21.204.175 (talk) 07:58, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:English of Northumberland which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:32, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

54kl 103.214.201.109 (talk) 03:58, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Northumbrian_Old_English&oldid=1208022479"