Foreign impact on the phonology and grammar of the english language

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Foreign impact on the phonology and grammar of the english language

Yulia Yasenchuk,

Assistant Lecturer at the Department of Foreign Philology and Translation Vinnytsia Institute of Trade and Economics of State University of Trade and Economics

The article investigates the influence of language contact on the development of the English language. It emphasizes that language contact has been a constant phenomenon throughout the history of language and that no language remains indifferent to external influences over time. Interaction between speakers of different languages or dialects leads to the transmission of language features, which is the main factor in language change.

The history of the English language is ofparticular interest to linguists and historians because of its developmentfrom the earliest known written works to its current status as the world's dominant language. The English language came into contact with various foreign languages during its development, and many linguists consider foreign influences, especially Latin and French, to be crucial in the history of the English language. English is often described as a «borrowed» language that constantly incorporates words from other languages.

The article aims to evaluate the impact of individual languages on the development of the English language. To understand the nature of the English language and its historical development, it is necessary to study the historical causes offoreign influences, their degree and role in the formation of the English language. language contact english

The influence of the French language on the English language is emphasized, especially during the period of the Norman Conquest, when French became the official language of England for several centuries. French borrowings and the presence of French scribes contributed to confusion in English spelling and pronunciation. Borrowing words from French and other languages alone may not have been sufficient to cause structural changes in English phonology, but they probably played a role.

The article also analyses the Great Vowel Shift, the main phonological change in the English language during the 15th and 17th centuries. This shift led to the raising and fronting of long vowels, which significantly changed the pronunciation of English. The causes of the great vowel shift are debated among scholars, with theories about the influence of French loanwords, the mixing of dialects in the London region, and migration due to the Black Death.

In general, the article presents an analysis of the influence of language contact and individual languages on the development of the English language, focusing on phonological and grammatical changes, as well as a large vowel shift.

Key words: development of the English language, English Grammar, English Phonology, Old English, Middle English, Modern English, the Great Vowel Shift.

Юлія ЯСЕНЧУК,

асистент кафедри іноземної філології та перекладу Вінницького торговельно-економічного інституту Державного торговельно-економічного університету (Вінниця, Україна)

ІНОЗЕМНИЙ ВПЛИВ НА ФОНОЛОГІЮ ТА ГРАМАТИКУ АНГЛІЙСЬКОЇ МОВИ

У статті досліджується вплив мовного контакту на розвиток англійської мови. У ній підкреслюється, що мовний контакт був постійним явищем протягом усієї історії мови і що жодна мова не залишається байдужою до зовнішнього впливу з часом. Взаємодія між носіями різних мов або діалектів призводить до передачі мовних особливостей, що є основним фактором зміни мови.

Історія англійської мови становить особливий інтерес для лінгвістів та істориків через її розвиток від найдавніших відомих письмових творів до її сучасного статусу домінуючої світової мови. Англійська мова вступала в контакт з різними іноземними мовами протягом свого розвитку, і багато лінгвістів вважають іноземний вплив, особливо латинської та французької мов, вирішальним в історії англійської мови. Англійську мову часто описують як «запозичену» мову, яка постійно включає слова з інших мов.

Стаття має на меті оцінити вплив окремих мов на розвиток англійської мови. Щоб зрозуміти природу англійської мови та її історичний розвиток, необхідно вивчити історичні причини іноземних впливів, їх ступінь і роль у формуванні англійської мови.

Підкреслено вплив французької мови на англійську мову, особливо в період норманського завоювання, коли французька мова стала офіційною мовою Англії на кілька століть. Французькі запозичення та присутність

французьких писарів сприяли плутанині в англійському написанні та вимові. Одного лише запозичення слів із французької та інших мов, можливо, було недостатньо, щоб спричинити структурні зміни в англійській фонології, але воно, ймовірно, відіграло свою роль.

У статті також аналізується Великий зсув голосних, головну фонологічну зміну в англійській мові протягом X-XVII століть. Це зрушення призвело до підвищення та передніх довгих голосних звуків, що значно змінило вимову англійської мови. Причини великого зсуву голосних обговорюються серед вчених, з теоріями про вплив французьких запозичених слів, змішання діалектів у лондонському регіоні та міграцію через чорну чуму.

Загалом у статті представлено аналіз впливу мовного контакту та окремих мов на розвиток англійської мови, зосереджуючи увагу на фонологічних та граматичний змінах, а також великому зсуві голосних.

Ключові слова: розвиток англійської мови, англійська граматика, англійська фонологія, давньоанглійський період, середньоанглійський період, новоанглійський період, Великий зсув голосних.

Problem statement. Languages have been in contact ever since human populations began spreading out into new territories and splitting into independent subgroups. No community in today's world is so isolated that its language remains untouched by outside influence over a long period of time. Thus, language contact is as old as language itself. This term refers to the social and linguistic phenomenon by which speakers of different languages (or different dialects of the same language) interact with one another, leading to a transfer of linguistic features. «Language contact is a major factor in language change,» notes S. Gram- ley. «Contact with other languages and other dialectal varieties of one language is a source of alternative pronunciations, grammatical structures, and vocabu- lary» (Gramley, 2012).

The history and development of English, from the earliest known writings to its status today as a dominant world language, is a subject of major importance to linguists and historians. From the earliest stages of its development, English came into contact with a number of foreign languages. The interaction of speakers of English with foreigners inevitably influenced the structure of the English language. Many linguists consider foreign influence, especially that of Latin and French, to be the most important factor in the history of English. English is considered a «borrowing» language. David Crystal, an authoritative expert on the history of the English language, claims that it «has always been a vacuum cleaner of a language, sucking in words from any other language that its speakers come into contact with» (Crystal, 2000: 21).

Research analysis. The problem of foreign influences on the historical development of the English language has been extensively studied by D. Crystal, J. Algeo, A. Baugh, R. Hogg, C. Millward, E. Gelderen, S. Lerer, L. Mugglestone, J. Smith,R. Hickeyand other scholars.

The aim of the article is to evaluate the impact of particular languages on the development of the English language. It can be explained by the fact that English began absorbing all influences in itself since it first appeared. To comprehend the nature of the English language and its historical development it is necessary to examine the historical causes of the foreign influences, their volume and role in the development of the English language.

Statement of basic materials. Phonology is the system of speech sounds of a language, especially at a given period or in a particular area. Phonology also refers to the scientific study of these sound systems. The phonetic alphabets were created to establish a common notation of human speech sounds, regardless of the language being transcribed (Millward, 2012: 65).

The sound system of English has undergone considerable change in the 1,500 years or so for which documents of the language exist. So great is this change that the earliest forms of the language are not readily comprehensible to speakers of English today. Major sound changes occurred every few centuries, continuously increasing the distance to earlier stages of the language. Some of the changes were motivated by reanalysis by language learners and some by gradual shifts in pronunciation by adult speakers. Both types of change are connected and form trajectories along which the sound system of English has moved for over a millennium and a half. In the history of the language there are further motivations for language change. Contact with other languages had a lasting influence until at least the late Middle Ages after which this influence was largely confined to the lexical area which was fed with items not gained through direct contact with speakers of other languages. From the 18th century onwards a further factor comes to the fore in language change: the prescriptivism which arose surrounding language use and education which concerned the rising middle classes in the late modern period (Hickey).

Old English retained all the consonants of Common Germanic, although the distribution of some of them had been altered by sound changes that occurred between the split-up of Common Germanic and the earliest surviving Old English texts. With a few exceptions, the Old English consonant inventory is the same as that of PDE. In addition, sound changes had given Old English three new sounds (/s, c, j /) that were phonemic by late Old English, if not earlier. In contrast to its vocalic (vowel) system, the Old English consonant system looks surprisingly modern; Present-Day English still has all the same phonemes, though it has since acquired a few new ones, and the distribution of some of the consonants has shifted (Millward, 2012: 87).

By far the most important and widespread vowel change between Germanic and Old English was front mutation (also known as umlaut or i/j mutation). This change predates written Old English and is shared by all West and North Germanic languages. Because the fourth-century Gothic texts show no evidence of it, we assume that it occurred afterward, probably in the sixth century. Under front mutation, if a stressed syllable was followed by an unstressed syllable containing /i/ or /j/, the vowel of the stressed syllable was fronted or raised; that is, the preceding stressed vowel partially assimilated to the following high front /i/ or /j/. Only low front and back vowels and diphthongs were affected (Millward, 2012: 90).

Because the Norman Conquest made French the official language of England for about three hundred years, English was written down relatively infrequently, especially during the period 1100-1200. Yet the English language was changing rapidly, and dialectal differences were becoming, if anything, even greater than during Anglo-Saxon times. By the time English was once again written down regularly, many changes had occurred in all aspects of the language. The match between the sound system and the spelling was much worse than in Old English. French scribes (most of them probably not even fluent in English, let alone being native speakers) and French loanwords had introduced a fair amount of confusion into the spelling system of English. For instance, Old English had used the grapheme /c/ to spell /k/ and /c/, and /s/ to spell /s/. Under French influence, /c/ came to bec spelled c, and c was used not only for /k/ but also for /s/ in loans from French (coat, city) and even in native English words (mice, since) (Millward, 2012: 149).

One pressure came from the great influx of loanwords. French already had a phonemic distinction between f and /v/, so, in English, the only difference between loans such as vine and fine or between the French loans vetch, view, and vile and English fetch, few, and file, respectively, would have been the voiced /v/. French, however, did not have /z/ in initial position, and it did not have the sounds /в/ or /д/ at all. Nor were the loanwords with contrasting /f/ and /v/ numerous. Besides, languages can easily tolerate a few homophones. Therefore, the French influence alone would scarcely have been adequate to effect a structural change in the English phonological system (Millward, 2012: 150).

The influence of French created additional confusion in the system during Middle English. By the 16th century, the effects of the Great Vowel Shift were making the English correspondence between vowel and vowel symbol very different from that of such Continental languages as French and Italian. Why a great interest in spelling reform should have occurred at this particular time is not certain. Probably it was partly a by-product of the Renaissance; people noticed the seeming consistency and standardization of Latin spelling and became unhappy with the chaotic conditions in English. An ongoing concern over the pronunciation of Greek perhaps also led to increased awareness of the inadequacies of English spelling. The contemporary French attempts to reform French orthography may have introduced a «keep up with the Joneses» element to the situation. One might even view the movement as an early harbinger of the conservatism and tidying-up impulses of the eighteenth century (Millward, 2012: 228).

The last major phonological change in English, the Great Vowel Shift, began only as the vast morphological alterations were ending and the morphology of English was settling down to what is essentially its present state (Millward, 2012: 16). It was a major factor which separates Middle English from Modern English and it was a radical change in pronunciation during the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries, as a result of which long vowel sounds began to be made higher and further forward in the mouth (short vowel sounds were largely unchanged). In fact, the shift probably started very gradually some centuries before 1400, and continued long after 1700 (some subtle changes arguably continue even to this day). Many languages have undergone vowel shifts, but the major changes of the English vowel shift occurred within the relatively short space of a century or two, quite a sudden and dramatic shift in linguistic terms. It was largely during this short period of time that English lost the purer vowel sounds of most European languages, as well as the phonetic pairing between long and short vowel sounds. Furthermore, the Great Vowel Shift and the various lengthening and shortening changes which preceded or followed it have also contributed to the development of complex morphophonological patterns in modern English (Mugglestone, 2006: 158).

Precise dating of the Great Vowel Shift is impossible and, in any case, varied from dialect to dialect. In general, the process began in late Middle English and was pretty much over by the end of the eighteenth century in Standard English (Millward, 2012: 248)

The great majority of words with short vowels had identical, or at least strongly similar, short vowels in late Middle English. There has been a general lowering of the high and mid short vowels, with a degree of centralization for the high ones, but the short vowel system has scarcely changed, apart from the innovation of /и/ versus /л/. The case of the long vowels, however, is much more complex: virtually all words in present-day English which have a long vowel, and which existed in the language in late Middle English, now have a different long vowel (Mug- glestone, 2006: 155).

The Great Vowel Shift was local in three respects. First, it never ran its course in all regional dialects: in the northern dialects it affected the front vowels but not all back vowels. Secondly, it did not proceed uniformly across the lexicon as one might expect a fully regular sound change to do, that is, it did not affect all the words that contained a sound that qualified for a given change. Finally, there are some developments in words containing long vowels with outcomes that could not have been predicted from their Middle English forms. Some of these «irregularities» in the southern mainstream variety may be attributed to dialect contact (Nevalainen, 2006: 120).

The exact cause of the Great Vowel Shift has been the subject of intense scholarly debate. One theory is that English changed due to the great influx of French loanwords. In a related vein, others believe that the loanwords from Romance languages helped change the sound of English vowels. We know that foreign loans are the reason why the final -e and inflections were lost from the English language, so there is a good reason to believe that foreign borrowing also influenced the phonology of English. Another theory is that the mass migrations to the southeast to find safe haven from the Black Plague of the 14th century caused speakers to modify their differences in accents and thus standardize their vowels. This mixing of different dialects in the London region and the rise of London English as the standardized dialect in the fifteenth century caused the change to spread outward from London.

Scholars do not agree on all the details, but it is likely that at least some of the changes took several generations to reach their final stage. For example, by Shakespeare's day, Middle English /і/ and /и/ were probably pronounced /зі/ and /зи/, respectively. The earliest changes must have been with the Middle English high vowels /і/ and /и/; after they had undergone a clearly perceptible shift, the next highest vowels, /ё/ and /о/, were free to move into the positions formerly held by Middle English /і/ and /и/. In other words, if Middle English /ё/ had changed before Middle English /і/, it would have coalesced with Middle English /і/, and Middle English words with /і/ and with /ё/ would both be pronounced with /аі/ today. This merger did not occur: Middle English bite «bite» and bete «beet» are still distinct in Present-day English.

The Great Vowel Shift gave rise to many of the oddities of English pronunciation, and now obscures the relationships between many English words and their foreign counterparts. The spellings of some words changed to reflect the change in pronunciation (e.g. stone from stan, rope from rap, dark from derk, barn from bern, heart from herte, etc), but most did not. In some cases, two separate forms with different meaning continued (e.g. parson, which is the old pronunciation of person). The effects of the vowel shift generally occurred earlier, and were more pronounced, in the south, and some northern words like uncouth and dour still retain their pre-vowel shift pronunciation («uncouth» and «door» rather than «uncowth» and «dowr»). Busy has kept its old West Midlands spelling, but an East Midlands/London pronunciation; bury has a West Midlands spelling but a Kentish pronunciation. It is also due to irregularities and regional variations in the vowel shift that we have ended up with inconsistencies in pronunciation such as food (as compared to good, stood, blood, etc.) and roof (which still has variable pronunciation), and the different pronunciations of the «o» in shove, move, hove, etc.

After the Great Vowel Shift, vowel length was no longer phonemic in English, and only qualitative differences distinguished most English vowels in most dialects. Actually, the long/short distinction was never crucial in English, or, in more technical terminology, it never carried a high functional load. Even in Old English, there were few minimal pairs, that is, word pairs like god «good» and god «God» distinguished in pronunciation only by the length of their vowels. In Middle English, the long/short distinction was seriously eroded when length became tied to syllable structure in many words and hence was often redundant. But the «pairing» of long and short vowels was still relatively easy in Middle English because they were qualitatively similar. However, the Great Vowel Shift destroyed this match (even though it was often retained in spelling). That is, for Middle English speakers, the vowels of bit /bit/ and bite /bit/ were still clearly similar, if not identical, except for length. After the Great Vowel Shift, these words were /bit/ and /bait/; the phonological relationship between the two vowels had been destroyed. Of course, Present- day English vowels do vary in their actual phonetic length - the vowel of bee is much longer than the vowel of beet - but the distinction today is no longer phonemic. It is allophonic only, conditioned by the environment of the vowel (Mugglestone, 2006: 160).

Speaking about English Grammar it is important to identify two parts of it: morphology and syntax. The story of the development of English morphology and syntax involves not only the history of the English language but also the history of England itself. The starting point of the English language is the language we call West Germanic, and the starting point of England is the arrival of West Germanic peoples in Britannia in the fifth century. These West Germanics were Angles, Saxons and Jutes, all speaking relatively close versions of West Germanic. West Germanic is itself a version of the ancient Germanic language which had arrived with the Germanic peoples in north-west Europe about 1000 BC. Germanic evolved into three separate languages: North Germanic, West Germanic, and East Germanic. The East Germanic languages have disappeared. The North Germanic languages exist today as Norwegian, Swedish, Danish and Icelandic. The West Germanic languages exist today as English, German, Dutch and their variants.

Morphology is the arrangement and relationships of the smallest meaningful units in a language. These minimum units of meaning are called morphemes. Although at first thought the word may seem to be the basic unit of meaning, words like fireproof and snowplow clearly consist of more than one meaningful element. Somewhat less obviously, the word joyous consists of a base word joy and a suffix morpheme -ous, which means something like «an adjective made from a noun» and appears on many other words, such as poisonous, grievous, and thunderous. The word unsightly consists of three morphemes: un-, sight, and -ly. Morphemes are not identical to syllables: the form don thas one syllable but two morphemes, do and not. Conversely, the word Wisconsin has three syllables but is a single morpheme (Millward, 2012: 2).

Syntax is the arrangement of words into phrases, clauses, and sentences; loosely speaking, it is word order. A simple example like the difference between I had stolen my car and I had my car stolen illustrates how crucial syntax is in English. English speakers have more options with respect to syntax than they do with respect to phonology or morphology. That is, they cannot expect to be understood if they refer to a canine mammal as a god instead of a dog; but they do have the option of saying either I like dogs or Dogs I like. This freedom is limited, however, they cannot say Like dogs I or Like I dogs. We will see that the word order of the major elements of English sentences has become, with a few exceptions, more rigid over time but that many basic patterns of modern English syntax were already established by Old English times (Millward, 2012: 3).

Compared with the present-day language, Old English was highly inflected. Nouns had four cases and three genders; verbs inflected for person and number and for the indicative and subjunctive moods. Where inflexions for any of these categories exist today, they either do so in a greatly altered form, as with the modern possessive, or are little more than relics of an older stage, as with, for example, the subjunctive.

Further, in the Old English noun phrase there was agreement between noun and modifying adjective rather as in present-day German. Like a language such as Latin, Old English also had noun (and adjective) declensions and verb conjugations. Compared with Latin, however, Old English appears somewhat degenerate in its inflexional systems; there is not the same richness in inflexions - fewer cases, fewer distinctions of tense, no genuine inflexional passive. The Old English inflexional system derived directly from that in Germanic, which, although different from that in Latin, shares the same Indo-European origin (but, of course, Latin and Germanic each have their own characteristics, especially amongst verbs, since they proceeded along divergent paths of linguistic development). But Old English begins to show the loss and simplification of inflexions which characterises the later stages of English and which eventually creates a language with remarkably few inflexions compared with most other Indo-European languages.

Throughout its history English has undergone a steady decrease in its inflectional affixes. Apart from the personal pronouns, Present-Day English has only two noun inflections (possessive and plural) and four verb inflections (third-person singular present indicative, past tense, past participle, and present participle). Compared to Present-Day English, Old English looks wealthy in its inflections, but this wealth is only relative. Beside the inflectional system of classical Greek or Latin, the Old English system seems meager. Further, the Old English system had a number of inherent weaknesses that would contribute to its ultimate loss (Millward, 2012: 98).

One of the reasons for the loss of Old English inflections is the influence of thousands of loanwords from two other inflecting languages - Old Norse and French - into English. The simplest solution was just to leave off inflections entirely, a procedure that had already been used to some extent with Latin words into Old English (Millward, 2012: 99).

From the year 400 to the year 800, Old English changed very little, but in the year 835, a great force for change arrived in the form of Viking invaders. While they were simply landing, looting and going home, they made no difference to English, but when they arrived to stay, settle, intermarry and have Anglo- Norse children, they made a considerable difference.

During the Middle English period, Norse pronouns such as they, them and their replaced former pronouns: hie, him or hem, and hire. These h-form pronouns seem to have become perceived deficient, and thus those in contact with Scandinavian speakers adopted their apparently more useful pronoun systems. Scandinavian infiltrated other aspects of English, most significantly grammar, presumably due to the necessity of communication between Scandinavian settlers and native Englishmen and women. Along with pronouns, Norse apparently also influenced the -s plural suffix on third person singular verbs, the substitution of the northern are for than southern sindon and the prepositions till, though, and fro, the latter of which developed into the Norse-influenced formulaic phrase to and fro. However, these Scandinavian influenced grammatical features seem relatively minor compared to another grammatical development partly attributed to Scandinavian-English interaction: the loss of grammatical gender. As Norse and English are Germanic languages, it has been claimed that there was some (limited) mutual intelligibility between their speakers, as many words had similar stems but used different suffixes to indicate gender, case, tense or number. Therefore, it can be surmised that, for increased mutual understanding, many endings became eradicated in the north-easterly regions and then these simplifications spread across England (Pardo, 2008-2009: 239-240).

The modern English third-person present tense takes forms such as he walks. The older form was he walketh. That change is probably a result of Norse influence. It may even be that the English way of forming a question by reversing the subject-verb order so that I am becomes Am I? is related to the same pattern in Norse. Although syntax, the way words are put together to form phrases and clauses, is something in which languages less often affect each other, we find traces of Scandinavian syntactic influence. Among the examples of Scandinavian syntactic influence we find the rules for the use of shall and will in Middle English. These rules were the same as in Scandinavian. Another example is the tendency to place a strong stress on a preposition, as in the sentence He has someone to work for. Since similar structures are not found in the other Germanic languages, but are shared by Scandinavian and English, we may assume an influence to have occurred.

There is considerable uncertainty about the exact nature of Norse influence on English because we have no ongoing written record by which to track them. Changes were beginning as early as the year 900 perhaps, but they do not become apparent for five and a half centuries. The reason for that was a single invasion that was even more significant than the very many Danish invasions. The great invasion was that of the Norman French in 1066.

In 1066, French-speaking invaders arrived in sufficient numbers with sufficient military power and they stayed for a sufficiently long time to bring about major changes in the grammar of English. Within three hundred years, Norman French had become blended with Old English, and the effects were startling. Grammatical gender was replaced by logical gender; most noun endings were lost; word order became paramount.

The grammar system in Middle English gradually but very quickly changed fundamentally: the Old English was a synthetic language, the Middle English at the end of the period - an analytical language. The principal grammatical means of the Old English were preserved, but were no longer principal. At the end of the Middle English period the analytical means, which began developing in Middle English, are predominant. They are:

analytical verb-forms (e.g. perfect - hath holpen (has helped); passive - engendered is (is born) used by Chaucer:);

the use of prepositions for grammatical purposes (e.g. drought of March (Chaucer));

a fixed word-order began to develop (Algeo, 2010: 59).

By the end of the Middle English period, English had only a handful of leftover inflections. Along with the loss of inflection came the loss of grammatical gender and its replacement by natural (or biological) gender. Nouns were reduced to two cases (possessive and nonpossessive). Adjectives lost most of their inflections. Personal endings of verbs were reduced, and mood distinctions blurred. Personal pronouns remained relatively intact, but the distinction between dual and plural number had vanished (Millward, 2012: 164-165).

There is no single, simple answer to the question why English should have renounced its Indo-European heritage and changed from a synthetic, inflecting language to an analytic language dependent on word order and particles for indicating the relationships among the words in a sentence. One of the standard explanations is that, exposed to and confused by the varying inflectional systems of three different languages (English, French, and Scandinavian), English speakers abandoned inflections entirely, in a kind of creolization of the language. This explanation is not sufficient. First, the process was well under way in English before the Conquest. French would, however, have tended to support - though not necessarily cause - inflectional loss in English because Old

French itself preserved only a distinction between singular and plural. What is more, the plural ended in -5, the same ending that was to become universal for the plural in English. Second, Scandinavian influence was heavy only in certain areas of the country; besides, the inflectional systems of Old Norse and Old English were quite similar for many classes of nouns and adjectives (verbal inflections differed more, but English lost fewer verbal inflections than noun and adjective inflections) (Millward, 2012: 165).

Among the factors that encouraged attempts to codify, clean up, and improve English grammar was the prevailing notion that language was of divine origin and that there existed a «universal» grammar from which contemporary languages had deteriorated. Greek and Latin were (wrongly) assumed to have deviated less from this original purity than had the various European vernaculars, and thus they (especially Latin) were regarded as models upon which an improved English grammar should be based (Millward, 2012: 238). Early Modern English is characterized by a further loss of inflections and an increase in the number of prepositions and auxiliaries (grammaticalization), as expected of a language becoming more analytic.

Conclusions

Considering all above mentioned we may say that English language is still developing and changing. It is clear that during all its historic periods it is strikes because of different wars and invasions on the territory of Great Britain. Also, it has a problem of using the English language as a national and native one. Due to all these changes in language also changes grammar and phonology. And as we can see, it has different forms of changes most of which we are using now. But despite all challenges English language becomes stronger and now makes its own influence on the other languages.

Bibliography

Algeo J. The Origins and Development of the English Language. Boston : Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. 347 p.

Crystal D. English as a Classical Language. Omnibus, 2000. Issue 42. P. 21-22.

Gramley S. The History of English: An Introduction. Abingdon :Routledge, 2012. 438 p.

Hickey R. Phonological Change in English URL: http://www.bris.ac.uk/german/hison/reading/hickey (date of application: 24.05.2023)

Millward C.M., Hayes M. A Biography of the English Language. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2012. 478 p.

Mugglestone L. Oxford History of English. Oxford University Press, 2006. 485 p. 30

Nevalainen T. An Introduction to Early Modern English. Edinburgh University Press, 2006. 176 p.

Pardo E. Compare and Contrast Influence on English of the Scandinavian Languages and French. Innervate : Leading Undergraduate Work in English Studies. 2008-2009. Vol. 1. P. 236-243

REFERENCES

Algeo J. The Origins and Development of the English Language. Boston : Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. 347 p.

Crystal D. English as a Classical Language. Omnibus, 2000. Issue 42. P. 21-22.

Gramley S. The History of English : An Introduction. Abingdon :Routledge, 2012. 438 p.

Hickey R. Phonological Change in English URL: http://www.bris.ac.uk/german/hison/reading/hickey (date of application: 24.05.2023)

Millward C.M., Hayes M. A Biography of the English Language. Boston : Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2012. 478 p.

Mugglestone L. Oxford History of English. Oxford University Press, 2006. 485 p. 30

Nevalainen T. An Introduction to Early Modern English. Edinburgh University Press, 2006. 176 p.

Pardo E. Compare and Contrast Influence on English of the Scandinavian Languages and French. Innervate : Leading Undergraduate Work in English Studies. 2008-2009. Vol. 1. P. 236-243

Размещено на Allbest.ru