Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T10:35:02.420Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Special issue on Re-evaluating the Celtic hypothesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2009

MARKKU FILPPULA  and
JUHANI KLEMOLA
MARKKU FILPPULA
Affiliation:
University of Joensuu
JUHANI KLEMOLA
Affiliation:
University of Tampere
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Present-day historians of English are widely agreed that, throughout its recorded history, the English language has absorbed linguistic influences from other languages, most notably Latin, Scandinavian, and French. What may give rise to differing views is the nature and extent of these influences, not the existence of them. Against the backdrop of this unanimity, it seems remarkable that there is one group of languages for which no such consensus exists, despite a close coexistence between English and these languages in the British Isles spanning more than one and a half millennia. This group is, of course, the Insular Celtic languages, comprising the Brittonic subgroup of Welsh and Cornish and the Goidelic one comprising Irish, Manx, and Scottish Gaelic. The standard wisdom, repeated in textbooks on the history of English such as Baugh and Cable (1993), Pyles & Algeo (1993), and Strang (1970), holds that contact influences from Celtic have always been minimal and are mainly limited to Celtic-origin place names and river names and a mere handful of other words. Thus, Baugh & Cable (1993: 85) state that ‘outside of place-names the influence of Celtic upon the English language is almost negligible’; in a similar vein, Strang (1970) writes that ‘the extensive influence of Celtic can only be traced in place-names’ (1970: 391).

Type
Squib
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 13 , Issue 2: Re-evaluating the Celtic hypothesis , July 2009 , pp. 155 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baugh, Albert C. & Cable, Thomas. 1993. A history of the English language. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capelli, Cristian, Redhead, Nicola, Abernethy, Julia K., et al. . 2003. A Y chromosome consensus of the British Isles. Current Biology 13, 979–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani & Paulasto, Heli. 2008. English and Celtic in contact (Routledge Studies in Germanic Linguistics 13). New York and London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani & Pitkänen, Heli. 2002. Early contacts between English and the Celtic languages. In Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani & Pitkänen, Heli (eds.), The Celtic roots of English (Studies in Languages 37), 1–26. Joensuu: University of Joensuu.Google Scholar
Frantzen, Allen J. & Niles, John D.. 1997. Introduction: Anglo-Saxonism and medievalism. In Frantzen, Allen J. & Niles, John D. (eds.), Anglo-Saxonism and the construction of social identity, 1–14. Gainesville: University of Florida Press.Google Scholar
Härke, Heinrich. 2003. Population replacement or acculturation? An archaeological perspective on population and migration in post-Roman Britain. In Tristram (ed.), 13–28.Google Scholar
Härke, Heinrich. 2007. Invisible Britons, Gallo-Romans and Russians: Perspectives on culture change. In Higham, Nick (ed.), Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, 57–67. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.Google Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 1995. Early contact and parallels between English and Celtic. Vienna English Working Papers 4, 87–119.Google Scholar
Higham, Nicholas J. 1992. Rome, Britain and the Anglo-Saxons. London: Seaby.Google Scholar
Higham, Nicholas J. 1994. The English conquest: Gildas and Britain in the fifth century. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Hines, John. 1990. Philology, archaeology and the adventus Saxonum vel Anglorum. In Bammesberger, Alfred & Wollman, Alfred (eds.), Britain 400–600: Language and history, 17–36. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1905. Growth and structure of the English language. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar
Keller, Wolfgang. 1925. Keltisches im englischen Verbum. In Anglica: Untersuchungen zur englischen Philologie = Festschrift für Aloys Brandl, vol. 1, 55–66. Leipzig: Mayer & Müller.Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Siemund, Peter. 2000. The development of complex reflexives and intensifiers in English. Diachronica 17, 39–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poppe, Erich. 2003. Progress on the progressive? A report. In Tristram (ed.), 65–84.Google Scholar
Poussa, Patricia. 1990. A contact-universals origin for periphrastic do, with special consideration of OE-Celtic contact. In Adamson, Sylvia, Law, Vivien A., Vincent, Nigel & Wright, Susan (eds.), Papers from the 5th international conference on English historical linguistics, Cambridge, 6–9 April 1987 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 65), 407–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pyles, Thomas & Algeo, John. 1993. The origins and development of the English language, 4th edn.Fort Worth, Philadelphia, San Diego, etc.: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Schumacher, Stefan. 2007. Die Deutschen und die Nachbarstämme: Lexikalische und strukturelle Sprachkontaktphänomene entlang der keltisch-germanischen Übergangszone. In Hablitzel, Hans & Stifter, David (eds.), Johann Kaspar Zeuß im kultur- und sprachwissenschaftlichen Kontext (19. bis 21. Jahrhundert), Kronach 21.7.–23. 7. 2006, 167–207. Vienna: Praesens Verlag.Google Scholar
Strang, Barbara M. H. 1970. A history of English. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah Grey & Kaufman, Terrence. 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tristram, Hildegard L. C. 1999. How Celtic is standard English? ([Publications of the] Institut lingvisticeskich issledovanij, Rossijskoj akademii nauk). St Petersburg: Nauka.Google Scholar
Tristram, Hildegard L. C. (ed.). 2003. The Celtic Englishes, vol. III. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan & Genee, Inge. 2002. English do: On the convergence of languages and linguists. English Language and Linguistics 6, 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vennemann, Theo. 2001. Atlantis Semitica: Structural contact features in Celtic and English. In Brinton, Laurel (ed.), Historical linguistics 1999: Selected papers from the 14th international conference on historical linguistics (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 215), 351–69. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winford, Donald. 2003. An introduction to contact linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar