837
edits
Cumbraek: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Internal History
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
Historical evidence suggests that a distinct Cumbrian identity continued into at least the 13th century and it was presumably the emergence and strengthening of the Scottish and English national identities as a result of continued animosity which eventually forced Cumbrians to realign their cultural affinities. However, the border region was unstable up until the 17th century and the Marches were inhabited by powerful families who paid little attention to national identities. In the Western March, which covered Dumfries and Galloway and old Cumberland, a Cumbrian identity could feasibly have continued and flourished as a way for the Marchers to mark themselves out as a distinct group, thereby avoiding too strong an alignment with either Scotland or England. The noble Marcher families or Reivers, engaged in constant raiding amongst themselves, were in many ways similar to their Cumbrian forebears of the 6th and 7th centuries, who were immortalised in poetry and legend. They would have perpetuated the heroic ideals of bravery, loyalty and generosity and perhaps reinvigorated ancient customs, employing bards to sing praise poems as they feasted in their bastle houses. With the Union of the Crowns in the 17th century this situation began to change and Cumbric gradually lost out to English and Scots. | Historical evidence suggests that a distinct Cumbrian identity continued into at least the 13th century and it was presumably the emergence and strengthening of the Scottish and English national identities as a result of continued animosity which eventually forced Cumbrians to realign their cultural affinities. However, the border region was unstable up until the 17th century and the Marches were inhabited by powerful families who paid little attention to national identities. In the Western March, which covered Dumfries and Galloway and old Cumberland, a Cumbrian identity could feasibly have continued and flourished as a way for the Marchers to mark themselves out as a distinct group, thereby avoiding too strong an alignment with either Scotland or England. The noble Marcher families or Reivers, engaged in constant raiding amongst themselves, were in many ways similar to their Cumbrian forebears of the 6th and 7th centuries, who were immortalised in poetry and legend. They would have perpetuated the heroic ideals of bravery, loyalty and generosity and perhaps reinvigorated ancient customs, employing bards to sing praise poems as they feasted in their bastle houses. With the Union of the Crowns in the 17th century this situation began to change and Cumbric gradually lost out to English and Scots. | ||
====Phonology, Grammar and Lexis==== | |||
From the end of the Common Brittonic period (c.6th century AD) to about the 12th century, Cumbraek remained relatively indistinct from its closest relative, Welsh and probably retained considerable intelligibility with Cornish and Breton, though it was isolated from its sister languages from the 8th century. | |||
The main divergences between Cumbraek and Welsh dating from this period are: | |||
* Proto-Brythonic (PBr.) */ɛː/ becomes Cu. /əi̯/, W. /oi/ (''cait'' vs. ''coed'') | |||
* PBr. */ɔː/ remains in Cu. but becomes W. /au/ (''moar'' vs. ''mawr'') | |||
* PBr. */ɔu/ remains in Cu. but becomes W. /əɨ/ ~ /aɨ/ (''cogow'' vs. ''cogau'') | |||
* PBr. */p, t, k/ remain after nasals in Cu. but are assimilated in W. (''hanter'' vs. ''hanner'') | |||
* Word initial PBr. */sC/ remains in Cu. but develops epenthetic /ə/ in W. (''strat'' vs. ''ystrad'') | |||
* Word initial PBr. */l, r/ lose their fortis pronunciation in Cu. but not in Welsh (''lann'' vs. ''llan'', ''ri'' vs. ''rhi'') | |||
* PBr. pretonic /i, u/ remain distinct as Cu. /ʌ, ə/ but merge as W. /ə/ (''Cumbraek'' vs. ''Cymraeg'') | |||
* Internal epenthesis is phonemicised in Cu. but not in W. (''cenedhil'' vs. ''cenedl'') | |||
* Conversely, Cu. syncopates originally unstressed vowels between ''l, r, n, m'' and another consonant (''galnas'' vs. ''galanas'') | |||
* PBr. */lg, rg/ become Cu. /ɫ(ː), r(ː)/ but W. /lV, rV/ (''lorr'' vs. ''llory'', ''dall'' vs. ''dala, daly'') | |||
Also during this early period, Cumbraek is subject to influence (mainly lexical) from Norse, Gaelic and Old English/Scots. | |||
Following this period, Cumbraek diverged considerably from its sister languages, though partly through being more conservative. There was a general trend towards simplification in both grammar and phonology, which resulted to some degree in the loss of distinctions in meaning but since Cumbraek was less a language of government and literature than of everyday communication, a complex literary language was not required. | |||
Some of the features of later Medieval and Modern Cumbraek are: | |||
* the merger of some diphthongs, triphthongs and vowel sequences into long vowels | |||
* the merger of Cu. /i, ɪ, ə, ɛ/ into /i, ɛ/ | |||
* the development of some marginal phonemes such as /ʃ, t͡ʃ, d͡ʒ/, partly through borrowing | |||
* change of word initial /tl/ and /dl/ to /kl/ and /gl/ | |||
* simplification of geminate consonants in most environments | |||
* analogical spread of vowel alternation and affection | |||
* loss of the article ''en'' in favour of ''er'' in all environments | |||
* reduction in number of plural endings and increase in the use of certain endings according to semantics | |||
* loss of numerative noun forms | |||
* loss of almost all plural adjective forms | |||
* reduction in verb conjugation, with almost total loss of the subjunctive, plus analogical levelling of inflexions | |||
* increased borrowing from English and the Classical languages | |||
==Phonology and Orthography== | ==Phonology and Orthography== | ||