Talk:Hēafodsīde
Fram Wikipedian
Innungbred |
[ādihtan] Main Page design
Hey all. The main page has been with us for over a year now, and I was wondering if anyone would be interested in a redesign of it. Here are a few of the possibilities:
Take your picks, take a vote. --James 08:56, 1 Hrēþmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
- I think the 3th and the 5th ones are very good. And there's no using of italics, that with signs as "ǣ" looks awful. I think we should change it soon. Michał P. 21:09, 15 Mǣdmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
[ādihtan] Native names
All the other Wiki language sites use their native name, e.g. Deutsch for German, 日本語 for Japanese. For consistency, shouldn't Anglo-Saxon be called Englisc or Anglisc?--71.195.182.164 03:59, 20 Solmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
It's called Englisc here, but other sites use Anglo-Saxon to avoid confusion with modern English. If it were changed to Englisc overall, I'd be fine with it. --James 08:56, 1 Hrēþmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
Ummmm, I would like to help this site, but I don't know a spit of Anglo-Saxon, so, is there a site with words or something like that? --Kikimora
nǽfre gehygd. ís ástemnian ác (dictionary). --Kikimora
- Man mæg ealde mōtunge findan hēr: Talk:Hēafodsīde/Hord 1.
- Sēo ēac Wikipedia:Þorpes Wiella.
Also, about first - there are several options, depending on the meaning, and I was wondering if someone could help me compare our usage to meaning and ensure correct usage. There's:
- ǣresta - first, erst, before all; Latin primus
- forma - first, earliest; Latin prímus; but formesta was primus, strenuissimus, foremost, first, best, most valiant
- frum - primal, original, first; Latin natívus, prímitívus, prímus
- fyrmest, formest - foremost, first; Latin primus
Anyone see any need to switch any to ǣresta or fyrmest or something else? --James 04:07, 3 Winterfylleþ 2005 (UTC)
umm, why does this exist? no one spakes anglo saxon anymore.
- Is that what this language is? Interesting. --198.163.150.33 21:19, 4 Blōtmōnaþ 2005 (UTC)
- Well, some people can speak Anglo-Saxon. This is surely obvious by virtue of the existance of this project. Similarly, there is a successful Latin Wikipedia. --87.80.42.198 20:34, 1 Géolmónaþ 2005 (UTC)
By definition, any Wikipedia that has its talk page in a more common language has no reason to exist.
- By whos definition? It only means that the only people to have posted so far are those who speak new English.
-
- Hmm, what is this? Does anybody speak ango-sachsian as a mother tongue? 213.67.231.142 00:05, 11 Solmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
[ādihtan] Word for "Czech"
It appears to me that "Czech" in Old English should either look like "Czesc" - by simple etymology, however spelling of the initial "ch"-sound as "cz" remains questionable - or it should be derived from "Bohemian".
What is the history of Czech? Is there some historical tribe to which the people/country correspond? --James 04:07, 3 Winterfylleþ 2005 (UTC)
There was a legendary forefather Czech (the ending -ch pronounced as in "loch"), who led his tribe to settle in central Bohemia. On a second thought, the Old English derivative adjective might rather be "Czechisc" (no idea about appropriate spelling nor pronunciation). My original suggestion came from the correspondence of Czech "-sky" (where "-y" is only either masculine or adverbial ending, therefore the formant itself is "-sk-") to Old English "-isc" (and some other Germanic languages "-sk"/"-sk-"). The Czech adjective "český" is a contraction of theoretical "čech-ský", hence my apparently incorrect first suggestion above.
On the other hand, the English word "Czech" is very young (19th century). Prior to that, any adjective used in western languages to refer to the people of Bohemia or their language would have been derived from Latin-originated Bohemia/Bohemian.
- In Old English, the Bohemians are Behēmas, so their land might be Behēm(a)land and the people Behēmisc. --139.62.223.172 20:00, 13 Winterfylleþ 2005 (UTC)
A wonderful surpise to find an Anglo Saxon Wikipedia. Keep up the good work.
It seems to me that 'Czechisc' is the right word, though the cz and ch are not really correct in Anglo Saxon spelling. It is not quite justifiable to use the ancient name of Bohemia to describe the modern state. Moreover, the Czech Republic consist of both Bohemia, Moravia and a part of Silesia. The proper name is surely disputable in many European langauges. The 'Czech Republic' is sort of formal, 'Czechia' is somehow a construction, and the good old name Bohemia can be misleading. The Czechs themselves use Cechy for Bohemia, and Cesko for the whole country, the first being plural of the name of the inhabitants, the latter an abstraction similar to a Latin-inspired -ia ending. After the split of Czechoslovakia, the proper name of the new state was discussed, according to information I can find.
'Czesc' would not be structurally correct but a neologism.
Let me add that in Danish we say 'Tjekkisk' (remember, Scandinavian J is spoken as English Y). Scandinavian -sk endings usually completely correlate to Anglo Saxon -sc. The initial tj and the kk in the middle are merely substitutes of the ch sounds we don't have (neither ch as in church nor as in Scottish loch.)
After writing this I just saw that 'Ċecisc' is already used in this Wikipedia language list. So it would be best to stick to this. The name of the country would be Ċecland or alternatively Ċecisc Lēodþing.
(User Casperin the Danish Wiki.)
- Good suggestions, but a republic was a cynewīse. It was defined as "the state, republic, commonwealth" in Bosworth and Toller. I'm just wondering 2 things: (1) would Cecisc be more understandable than Behēmisc, and (2) should we go with that over Bohemia (we kind of already use a neologism for Germany instead of Germania, which described the land of the German tribes around 500 or so AD). Perhaps a small vote is in order? --James 19:38, 7 Solmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
In Bohemian geo wunode Celtisc folc gehaten þā Boii. Æfterra Germanisc folc gehaten þā Mearcmenn (þe þā Romisce heton Marcomanni) feng þæt land ond heton hit Boiahaimaz þe þā Romisce writon Boiohaemum and wǣre in Ealdenglisce Boiaha-m, and of þissum cwom þæt nama Bohemia.
And þā Boii fordrifene of hira land fōron in Gallia- þe is nu Francland, ond Julius Caesar wrāt ymb þǣm Boiīs in his bēc De Bello Gallico. Ond mæg beon þæt in þǣm farungum manige Boii wurdon þeowas, ond mæg beon þæt of þissum cwom þæt Niwenglisce word boy, swa sume secgaþ þæt þæt stedename Boycott is of "Boia-cot", gif wæs ungewriten Ealdenglisc word *boia þe segde cnapan oððe þeow. Anthony Appleyard 08:02, 5 Hrēþmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
[ādihtan] Difference between Beon and Sindon
Hey, I'm thinking about writing some articles for Seo Wisdombōc, but I can't understand the difference between the beon and wesan stems of the verb "to be". I'm trying to learn Old English from Bright's Old English Reader, but it's rather unclear on that point. I know that the talk page isn't a langauge tutorial, but I know of no better place to ask.
Also, in this wiki, people seem to use accents. I haven't noticed such accents in any of the sample texts from the Reader, or on photographs of ancient manuscripts. Didn't the Anglo-Saxons employ a writing scheme that was regular and excluded accent marks?
Anyway, thanks for any reply in advance.
Hey it is quite simple in fact. Please take a look here: http://www.ucalgary.ca/UofC/eduweb/engl401/lessons/beonpron.htm I believe this shopuld help.
PS. It's cool to have a page on Wiki in OE
- Hi! Wilcume to þǣm wici! The bēon-stem was essentially a future stem, used sometimes to express eternal truths or wishes, while the wesan-stem was for present and past tenses and temporary statements (I'm cold - mē is ceald) and statements like "I'm a boy" (ic eom bearn) or "I am in my room" (ic eom in mīnum rūme). If you check out the actual texts, you can get a good feel for when each is used. As for the accent marks or macrons, we use those here because it's an easier way to differentiate between words that would otherwise look exactly the same:
* ǣl "eel" vs. æl "awl" * ēoh "yew-tree" vs. eoh (poetic word for) "horse" * hātian "heat, be hot" vs. hatian "hate" * hrān "reindeer" vs. hran "whale" * mētan "meet, encounter" vs. metan "mark off, estimate". * scēad "reason, distinction, discretion" vs. scead "shadow" * wācian "weaken" vs. wacian "waken, keep awake" * wrǣn "stallion" vs. wræn "wren".
I'm going to double-check on the beon/wesan usage in the syntax guide I had to be sure. --James 21:47, 14 Wēodmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
[ādihtan] Letters 'æ' and 'Æ' with a stress on them
I can't see them. They are displayed as white squares. Is there any way to fix this? 82.58.23.58 11:10, 21 Þrimilcemōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
- You must install some unicode fonts first. --222.94.41.48 15:24, 9 Sēremōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
- any ideas which fonts? 80.60.24.117 19:36, 31 Mǣdmōnaþ 2006 (UTC)
[ādihtan] how do you pronounce 'wicipǣdia'?
?
- Rufly "Week-ee-pad-ee-ah"
[ādihtan] Curious
I'm not trying to be a dick, but why is there an Old English Wikipedia? Is it the same kind of reason as a Latin Wikipedia? Please don't get me wrong, I admire all you guys for your hard work, I'm just curious why.205.201.71.136 02:08, 30 Wēodmōnaþ 2006 (UTC) i agree. it's the same with the esperanto one. you might as well put one up with klingon!
[ādihtan] Why
These Wikipedias are a good idea for students. On the other hand, they must needs all come with a footnote, which arises from common sense: they are all written by students, of whom none speaks the language natively. Only through intense collaboration from intelligent people will these projects amount to anything. But we already have that on Wikipedia. --69.244.123.182 04:51, 10 Winterfylleþ 2006 (UTC) en:VKokielov
