[progmetaldev]

Modern English didn't pop up out of nowhere, or relied on borrowing everything. Old English was a Germanic language, and while modern English borrowed quite a bit from other languages, it didn't start from scratch. It is still based upon Old English, which was Germanic. Even if you mean extremely modern, the base language is Old English, although the language evolves constantly. You would have a harder time comparing what is currently being spoken to Old English, but at the same time, you can't disconnect the two just because comparing the two now sounds entirely different. Language should evolve, since it's meant to communicate, not on it's own merit (as much as those who study language would like it to be). It's not crazy to think that in the future that a language could evolve even further to convey more meaning in a smaller amount of speech.

[Retric]

We’re well past “quite a bit” at this point. Overall 29% of English words have Latin roots, 29% are French, and only 26% are Germanic in origin. Common vernacular favors French.

It’s best described as a creole language.

[progmetaldev]

I upvoted because that make sense, but isn't that Old English still a kind of "glue language", where words are replaced and of different origin, but ultimately just chosen based on contact with other languages and/or slang that matches another language? I'm honestly interested, because translating from Old English or Germanic seems to be easier to do with automated tools, than what you'd consider modern English. Granted, being American, I am pretty good with figuring out slang or new words (especially having a teenager). I can definitely see American-English being a creole language, with a lot of evolution towards Spanish, given a lot of Hispanic culture being blended into American culture. I wish I knew more about language evolution, because it seems exciting and actually useful for tracking meaning between people.

I guess I explained so much so that you could tell I wasn't trolling, and looking for a legitimate answer (or your educated opinion). I appreciate whatever you respond with!

[laurencerowe]

(To deep to reply to the sibling comment.)

> On the other hand English has copied enough from French to make it noticeably easier to pick up at the beginning than German. Some of that is simply being a more recent exchange with less time for linguistic drift, but these kinds of classifications are ultimately based on arbitrary criteria.

I think the difficulty with learning German is the complex grammar which is quite different from English. I suspect Dutch or Norwegian would be easier as their structure is more similar. And while there are more shared words in French, Spanish is normally considered easier to learn as it is more regular.

[Retric]

I agree. I may not have been clear enough when I said “at the beginning” but I was referring to shared vocabulary being more obvious vs German.

Perhaps a better way to say it is the overlap between Modern English and Old English is nearly useless when looking at an old text without prior training because of everything experienced linguistic drift.

Meanwhile more recent exchanges in either direction just pop out. The pop up here has buttons labeled “Accepter et continuer” which looks like accept and continue, and “S’abonner” which looks enough like Abandon to suggest what clicking on them does even if that’s the first exposure an English speaker has to French. https://www.lemonde.fr/

So IMO when looking at how closely related things are it’s worth remembering not just where something comes from but how much of that shared history is still around.

[laurencerowe]

> I can definitely see American-English being a creole language, with a lot of evolution towards Spanish, given a lot of Hispanic culture being blended into American culture.

I don't think American-English is likely to become a creole language through mixture with Spanish because modern media is such a huge standardizing force. As a Brit I've never had trouble understanding anyone in the US while in the UK there are regional dialects I struggle to understand.

[Retric]

Linguists focus on grammar and generally agree with you. To be fair, Dutch is really close to modern English in terms of grammar and they have a lot of shared vocabulary.

On the other hand English has copied enough from French to make it noticeably easier to pick up at the beginning than German. Some of that is simply being a more recent exchange with less time for linguistic drift, but these kinds of classifications are ultimately based on arbitrary criteria.

[Wildgoose]

All the base structure and common words are Germanic/Scandinavian. Yes, "fancier" vocabulary and constructed words like television or telephone are Latin/Greek derived. You could restrict English to its Germanic roots and still make (stilted) conversation. You could not do the same using only its added French/Latin/Greek vocabulary.

[Retric]

Reducing things to exclusively Germanic/Scandinavian roots without any crossing to old French etc would massively restrict vocabulary so yes you could hold a conversation but you could also hold one without any of those words. Both could seem natural or really stilted depending on the subject and your approach to dialogue.

When you say fancy it’s not just allure or autocrat, but also words like age, air, alarm, aunt, chair, money, beef, dance, etc