This is fascinating. 1300 offered no real difficulty, 1200 I couldn't read. It's very interesting that there is such a clear distinction at that date, given that there are clear changes in every century's version of our language
What a fascinating sortie into past. I got down to 1500 without any real problem. 14.00 to 12.00 was certainly doable with two or three read throughs and translation lookups. From 11.00 downwards took considerable effort with multiple read throughs and look ups. I’ve been studying OE for 12 months and this exercise was a real eye opener. I’m currently half way through a second reading of Osweald Bera and half way through Ælfrics Colloquy. Without OE I would say that 1500 would be OK if you watched your Ps and Qs but from thereon I would get ready to duck, because understanding the spoken word might be a very different challenge. On a final note, I would say that a grounding in OE develops understanding across the whole spectrum; including modern English. Perhaps its time to start making it more accessible through the education system?
I couldn't agree with you more! Old English in every school!
A spoken version would ironically be easier in some centuries (although harder in others). The writing change by fits and starts, and not at all in lockstep with the changes in sound, which is why English spelling is such a mess.
I would also imagine that the regional ME /OE dialects would be as challenging as they are to day. In the UK there are an estimated 40 -50 dialects some of which can be interesting when we slip out of RP mode
Wow, very interesting. And I love Simon’s videos. Reading aloud, in Chaucer style, 1300 was really no trouble. But, as you predicted, 1200 was incomprehensible. So c. 1250 was the very steep cliff for me.
I was going to do that (hence the picture) but then I realized I'd have to change the dialect of the older selections, and I wanted to keep things vaguely London-adjacent for as long as possible.
I could make out 1200 with a bit of guessing (though I thought the woman was a wife!). No sense of 1100 or 1000 though. It helps having the context from the more recent sections.
I got back to 1300 all right, but then it began to get more and more difficult - had to look for words I recognized and then fill in others from context. Gave up about 1100.
Old English was a requirement for all English majors when I went through, as well as courses in Chaucer, Spencer, Shakespeare. You need more than one undergrad course in OE to be able to read it fluently I found, even if I saw some familiar words in the 1000 section. I so enjoyed recognizing stylistic keys in each section that correspond to many texts of my long ago university experience.
1900, 1800: classic writing style, something I personally like reading, so no troubles at all.
1700, 1600: the sudden introduction of the "lisp" (the variant S) trips my mental voice up, but mouthing the words is enough to have no difficulty understanding anything.
1500, 1400: still understandable, with some difficulty. It's getting harder very quickly though.
1300: A real struggle, and I've certainly missed the meanings of a few words here.
- My native language is Dutch, but the sudden spelling changes at 1200 made it very hard to figure out what the word was supposed to be pronounced like, which would probably have given me some extra clues as to their meaning.
- I've followed you for long enough that I know eth, thorn, yogh, the "lisp" S and æ. That made reading a lot easier for a big part of this.
Hi Colin, I have dabbled a bit in Old Engish (u3a Wymondham group are using Osweald Bera to learn). Did Chaucer way back at school. So I got right back to the final text where I managed about 75%. Great exercise. ALISON B x
I had no difficulty up to and including year 1300. Year 1200, now there I struggled with much of it, but still had a great deal of fun trying to figure it out. 1100 and 1000? I was pretty much lost but it was fascinating nonetheless.
At the year 1000 I was reaching for the OE dictionary.
Great fun.
I was shocked to find that I often write in the language of 1900, even 1800.
No wonder people think I am nuts.
If that's nuts, I don't want to be sane! 1800–1900 is a really good period for English prose style.
This is fascinating. 1300 offered no real difficulty, 1200 I couldn't read. It's very interesting that there is such a clear distinction at that date, given that there are clear changes in every century's version of our language
Part of the reason might be the big dropoff in French words between 1300 and 1200, since 1250 is when the French flood began.
What a fascinating sortie into past. I got down to 1500 without any real problem. 14.00 to 12.00 was certainly doable with two or three read throughs and translation lookups. From 11.00 downwards took considerable effort with multiple read throughs and look ups. I’ve been studying OE for 12 months and this exercise was a real eye opener. I’m currently half way through a second reading of Osweald Bera and half way through Ælfrics Colloquy. Without OE I would say that 1500 would be OK if you watched your Ps and Qs but from thereon I would get ready to duck, because understanding the spoken word might be a very different challenge. On a final note, I would say that a grounding in OE develops understanding across the whole spectrum; including modern English. Perhaps its time to start making it more accessible through the education system?
I couldn't agree with you more! Old English in every school!
A spoken version would ironically be easier in some centuries (although harder in others). The writing change by fits and starts, and not at all in lockstep with the changes in sound, which is why English spelling is such a mess.
I would also imagine that the regional ME /OE dialects would be as challenging as they are to day. In the UK there are an estimated 40 -50 dialects some of which can be interesting when we slip out of RP mode
This was great. Like many others I got as far as 1300 and could understand some of what was going on in 1200 but missed some details.
Wow, very interesting. And I love Simon’s videos. Reading aloud, in Chaucer style, 1300 was really no trouble. But, as you predicted, 1200 was incomprehensible. So c. 1250 was the very steep cliff for me.
So then the interesting question is: did you notice the same cliff at 1250 in Simon's spoken version of this experiment?
I loved this! I lost it around 1200/1300, like you predicted.
Was thorn used for both voiced and unvoiced th?
Yes, thorn was used for both in Old and Middle English. In Old English, ð is used indifferently for both as well.
I'm not sure about in English, but the International Phonetic Alphabet uses ð as voiced th and θ as unvoiced. It's funny how the same symbols pop up.
PS I thought we were going to be in Whitby (Dracula).
I was going to do that (hence the picture) but then I realized I'd have to change the dialect of the older selections, and I wanted to keep things vaguely London-adjacent for as long as possible.
I could make out 1200 with a bit of guessing (though I thought the woman was a wife!). No sense of 1100 or 1000 though. It helps having the context from the more recent sections.
I got back to 1300 all right, but then it began to get more and more difficult - had to look for words I recognized and then fill in others from context. Gave up about 1100.
Well done! By 1100 you're more or less in Old English, so I'm not surprised the comprehension broke down there.
Old English was a requirement for all English majors when I went through, as well as courses in Chaucer, Spencer, Shakespeare. You need more than one undergrad course in OE to be able to read it fluently I found, even if I saw some familiar words in the 1000 section. I so enjoyed recognizing stylistic keys in each section that correspond to many texts of my long ago university experience.
Thank you.
I'm glad to hear it brought back some memories for you!
This wonderful. The exercise (I got to about 1300) and the story. I thank you.
Thank you! Well done on getting partway through the Middle English portions!
2000: normal English
1900, 1800: classic writing style, something I personally like reading, so no troubles at all.
1700, 1600: the sudden introduction of the "lisp" (the variant S) trips my mental voice up, but mouthing the words is enough to have no difficulty understanding anything.
1500, 1400: still understandable, with some difficulty. It's getting harder very quickly though.
1300: A real struggle, and I've certainly missed the meanings of a few words here.
1200: Huh???
For some extra context:
- My native language is Dutch, but the sudden spelling changes at 1200 made it very hard to figure out what the word was supposed to be pronounced like, which would probably have given me some extra clues as to their meaning.
- I've followed you for long enough that I know eth, thorn, yogh, the "lisp" S and æ. That made reading a lot easier for a big part of this.
I'm sensing a trend that the 1300-to-1200 jump is the hardest one!
Hi Colin, I have dabbled a bit in Old Engish (u3a Wymondham group are using Osweald Bera to learn). Did Chaucer way back at school. So I got right back to the final text where I managed about 75%. Great exercise. ALISON B x
This is amazing! Bravo!
Incredible post
I had no difficulty up to and including year 1300. Year 1200, now there I struggled with much of it, but still had a great deal of fun trying to figure it out. 1100 and 1000? I was pretty much lost but it was fascinating nonetheless.
What a wonderful article!