On 16 Jul, 07:03, "Mike stone" <mwst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "William Black" <william.bl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:g5iqng$pun$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> > Indeed it is possible that the English soldiers fighting for the Dutch
> will
> > go home and sign on with the Romans.
>
> > A reasonable pro****tion of them will speak Latin
>
> Officers maybe. Not the rank and file.
>
> OTOH, does anybody know how many of the troops are likely to have been
> _Welsh_? They could probably make themselves understood to native
Britons.
>
Sadly not; Brythonic Celtic underwent absolutely massive sound changes
just after the Romans left OTL*, deleting entire syllables, softening
consonants, modifying vowels and introducing the dreaded initial
mutations. You can get some idea of the magnitude of the changes by
looking at the modern forms of words borrowed from Latin during the
Roman occupation: _cysgu_ from _quiescere_, _plwyf_ from _plebs_,
_ysgol_ from both _schola_ and _scala_, _myfyrio_ from _memoria_.
Boudicca herself is 'Buddug' in the later Welsh tradition. I don't
think we have any connected sentences in Brythonic, but those quoted
for its near relative Gaulish in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaulish
are completely opaque to speakers of Modern Welsh.
Of course surviving Welsh exiles will probably join the Bretons in
enthusiastic study of Roman-era Brythonic, but they won't find it
particularly easy; and they will find they need their Latin, both as
an in initial common language with the Celts of Britannia and as an
aid in understanding the ancient grammar (complete with noun case
endings).
* At exactly the worst period for records in Britain. I have always
found this deeply suspicious!
|
