Since 1066, Latin (Romance language) and Anglo-Saxon has formed a confused layer cake comprising of overlapping strata and forgotten bits and pieces all over the centuries. In this layer cake, Latin was the prestige language – and still is.
In this linguistic layer cake: a humble “spade†(Anglo-Saxon) will never convince anyone to call it an “excavator†(Latin). Science is still coined in prestige Latinate vocabulary and the Holy Roman Apostelic Church used Latin exclusively until very recently. Whilst Anglo-Saxon derived words tend to are short, sharp, action-driving. Compare the items in this list:
Acquire & get
Agitate & stir
Discussion & talk
Discontinuity & gap
Incline & lean
Adjacent & near
Principal & first/main
Inventory & stock
Inaccurate & wrong
Miserable & bad
Accomplish & do
Purchase & buy
Accurate & true
Construct & build
For those people who are familiar with the London Underground: how would you react if you heard over the tannoy the following announcement: “Please mind the discontinuity…†as opposed to “mind the gapâ€.
The two languages moulded into one has given rise to rich variety of vocabulary: anger vs. rage, wrath vs. ire, bodily vs. corporal, brotherly vs. fraternal, leave vs. egress/exit/depart, thinking vs. pensive, dog vs. canine, come vs. arrive, ask vs. enquire…
“As a (very rough) general rule, words derived from the Germanic ancestors of English are shorter, more concrete and more direct, whereas their Latinate counterparts are longer, more abstract and are regarded as more elegant or educated.†Link here
What about the grammar?
Well, classical language teaching used Latin (and Greek) as models of excellence in schools and universities. These languages were thought to be somehow “pure†and “noble†and goals to be attained. Due to this snobbery, English was analysed as if it were a Romance Languages.
In fact, other than (a great deal of) lexis, English has little in common with Romance Languages and analysing it as if it were a Romance language is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
Doing this in an Second Language Learning environment has been one of the causes of what Rod Bolitho elegantly calls ‘verb tense neurosis’ (“The Whole Salami†Practical English Teaching June 1984). Rod almost apologises for extending the metaphor in which “the (…) doctors suffer the same ailment as the patientsâ€. In circles of traditional medicine the remedy for the ailment was in fact an increased dose of the neurosis causing ailment. A recent conversation I had with a (senior) colleague illustrates this:
“Our learners and learners with similar profiles benefit from worksheetsâ€
“Where is the evidence?â€
“Experience tells usâ€
“… gulp …â€
The words “our learners†refer to learners who have not been successful learners and are repeating the course for the second or third time…
In the 20th century, English linguistics has moved away from Latinate based categories and is fully able to stand up for itself as natural science. Instead of imposing a pre-formed template on the language and prescribing usage, lingusists became more interested in observing and describing language. After Chomsky’s idea of “Universal Grammar†became accepted, “generative grammar†models of language analysis steadily gained ground. In essence, generative theories of language describe syntax in terms of a small closed set of logical rules that can generate an infinite number of grammatically possible sentences in a languages. (Though they might not all be equally valid.)
Later, in the 1970s, MAK Halliday’s systemic-functional (SFL) approach seeks to treat language as foundation for the building of human experience. A key concept in this approach is the “context of situation”, in other words, social context, and how language acts upon, and is constrained and influenced by, this social context.
In short, the study of grammar and language has come a long way since Samuel Johnson’s A Dictionary of the English Language or English Grammar in Familiar Lectures by Samuel Kirkham (Ebook here). I believe that the mainstream EFL industry and institutions could do more to catch up with more modern views of how language might work.
If you enjoyed this article you might like to continue reading clicking the links below…
The Finished Chart
Since 1066, Latin (Romance language) and Anglo-Saxon has formed a confused layer cake comprising of overlapping strata and forgotten bits and pieces all over the centuries. In this layer cake, Latin was the prestige language – and still is.
In this linguistic layer cake: a humble “spade†(Anglo-Saxon) will never convince anyone to call it an “excavator†(Latin). Science is still coined in prestige Latinate vocabulary and the Holy Roman Apostelic Church used Latin exclusively until very recently. Whilst Anglo-Saxon derived words tend to are short, sharp, action-driving. Compare the items in this list:
Acquire & get
Agitate & stir
Discussion & talk
Discontinuity & gap
Incline & lean
Adjacent & near
Principal & first/main
Inventory & stock
Inaccurate & wrong
Miserable & bad
Accomplish & do
Purchase & buy
Accurate & true
Construct & build
For those people who are familiar with the London Underground: how would you react if you heard over the tannoy the following announcement: “Please mind the discontinuity…†as opposed to “mind the gapâ€.
The two languages moulded into one has given rise to rich variety of vocabulary: anger vs. rage, wrath vs. ire, bodily vs. corporal, brotherly vs. fraternal, leave vs. egress/exit/depart, thinking vs. pensive, dog vs. canine, come vs. arrive, ask vs. enquire…
“As a (very rough) general rule, words derived from the Germanic ancestors of English are shorter, more concrete and more direct, whereas their Latinate counterparts are longer, more abstract and are regarded as more elegant or educated.†Link here
What about the grammar?
Well, classical language teaching used Latin (and Greek) as models of excellence in schools and universities. These languages were thought to be somehow “pure†and “noble†and goals to be attained. Due to this snobbery, English was analysed as if it were a Romance Languages.
In fact, other than (a great deal of) lexis, English has little in common with Romance Languages and analysing it as if it were a Romance language is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
Doing this in an Second Language Learning environment has been one of the causes of what Rod Bolitho elegantly calls ‘verb tense neurosis’ (“The Whole Salami†Practical English Teaching June 1984). Rod almost apologises for extending the metaphor in which “the (…) doctors suffer the same ailment as the patientsâ€. In circles of traditional medicine the remedy for the ailment was in fact an increased dose of the neurosis causing ailment. A recent conversation I had with a (senior) colleague illustrates this:
“Our learners and learners with similar profiles benefit from worksheetsâ€
“Where is the evidence?â€
“Experience tells usâ€
“… gulp …â€
The words “our learners†refer to learners who have not been successful learners and are repeating the course for the second or third time…
In the 20th century, English linguistics has moved away from Latinate based categories and is fully able to stand up for itself as natural science. Instead of imposing a pre-formed template on the language and prescribing usage, lingusists became more interested in observing and describing language. After Chomsky’s idea of “Universal Grammar†became accepted, “generative grammar†models of language analysis steadily gained ground. In essence, generative theories of language describe syntax in terms of a small closed set of logical rules that can generate an infinite number of grammatically possible sentences in a languages. (Though they might not all be equally valid.)
Later, in the 1970s, MAK Halliday’s systemic-functional (SFL) approach seeks to treat language as foundation for the building of human experience. A key concept in this approach is the “context of situation”, in other words, social context, and how language acts upon, and is constrained and influenced by, this social context.
In short, the study of grammar and language has come a long way since Samuel Johnson’s A Dictionary of the English Language or English Grammar in Familiar Lectures by Samuel Kirkham (Ebook here). I believe that the mainstream EFL industry and institutions could do more to catch up with more modern views of how language might work.
If you enjoyed this article you might like to continue reading clicking the links below…
Related posts