[Bell Historians] Re: Carillonneur vs. carillonist

[Andrew Wilby]

My understanding is that it was a little more structured than just adding a 
bit to the existing mix. For a start there was quite a rupture and the 
language by which the country was governed change and has never reverted.

Also I'm not sure about the Celtic reference as there seems to have been 
much more of an ethnic cleanse as the Romano-brit population was pushed to 
the western fringes? Some authorities suggest that there are only about 7 
Celtic words left. I can't name them all without research but Avon and 
Coombe (Cwm) are a couple.

The Normans contributed a whole layer of language to do with Government and 
the Law and also to cultural subjects. Basically the ruling clases spoke 
French for a couple of hundred years or more and their vocabulary for those 
higher subjects became the prefered.

Andrew


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Anne Willis" <zen16073 at g7JdHjodtgsst3w6oaQ4ZS1zTVmdMVH4S_7aG_z0ZZhvXhfqbJPIeG0oQovyg1NdN7m6MbG7WQE.yahoo.invalid>
To: <bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 2:33 PM
Subject: RE: [Bell Historians] Re: Carillonneur vs. carillonist


>
>
> Anglo-Saxon and Norse became combined into Old English into which a huge
> amount of Norman French was injected after 1066.
> This is why the language is so rich and flexible.
>
> Andrew, Andre
>
>
>
> Surely the Normans just added their bit to the Celtic/Saxon/ Viking 
> mixture
> already spoken.
>
> Anne
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.9/457 - Release Date: 26/09/2006
>
>