head in hands I pity some of my co-workers when they have to call Glasgow. They haven’t had decades of PBS viewing to help them.
That is something up with which we cannot put!
It’s not fair to say that the inflection system vanished in the 10th century as you suggest. Through at least the early ME period, a considerable number of inflections remained that would later be lost, like in the title of the tract Ancrene Wisse, which translates roughly as “Knowledge of Anchoresses”, the word ancrene being inflected for the genitive plural. In general monosyllabic nouns of native origin kept more vestiges of the case system. As Old French vocabulary began to enter the language, the French declension tended to be followed for those word. It’s safe to say that ME was still considerably more inflected than Modern English (NE), if not nearly as much as OE.
While there wasn’t a Post Norman invasion, contacts between the British Isles and Scandinavia continued to flourish through the centuries. All these countries were navigating the North Atlantic extensively in search of fishing grounds; there was a great deal of interaction between the English and the other countries, occasionally skirmishes and piracy if one side thought the other was encroaching on its trade or fishing rights. It’s hard to imagine that the Norse influence on the language ceased after the Normans took over.
I’ll have to go back and check my ME textbook to be sure, but IIRC the 12th century is about when many Danish words came to replace many cognates. For example OE aeg (“egg”) had become ey by the early ME period as the terminal palatal fricative was lost. But in the late ME period egg, a Danish loanword, had replaced it. IIRC (once again) in Chaucer you can see both forms of the word for egg, presumably depending on the region from which each of the pilgrims came and hence the dialect.
The influence of Nordic languages on English should not be underestimated.
Not Scandinavian specifically, of course. But as significant as the influence of Norman French may be in terms of vocabulary, the Germanic quality of English pretty much steamrollered the Romance qualities of the loanwords, particularly with regard to pronunciation.
<Minor nitpick>
“Klonerne]s[/B angreb" tranlates directly as “The Clones’ Attack”. If it were “The Clone’s Attack”, the Danish title would be "Klonens** angreb”.
Klonernes = The Clones’ (plural genitive)
Klonens = The Clone’s (singular genitive)
</Minor nitpick>
That’s just a dialect. Plus I think ken is used wrongly here..
No – since most English speakers would have trouble understanding Scottish, I think it’s a separate language.
I should not post at work, sorry.
Hadn’t read John’s link yet. Apparently Lowland Scot is, debatably, regarded as 'Sister Language’to english.
No, that’s a correct use of ken, ye ken?
And we now rejoin the ongoing saga of What is a dialect? What is a language? In today’s episode, we will hear “Oh, that’s just a dialect” and “It can’t be a dialect of my language, I didn’t understand it at all.” Be sure to tune in tomorrow for the riveting argument about dialects with Armies and Navies.
Yeah, but at least politics is never involved. 
I thought English was a Western Germanic language like Dutch or Frisian? I certainly know that puzzling things out in written Dutch wasn’t very tough, even though I don’t have any training at all in Dutch.
The hard part wasn’t really the structure, it was the vocabulary and pronunciation of words.
For example, the word “koken” in Dutch is roughly pronounced and means the same thing as " cookin’ " in English, and I’d have never known that without a Dutch friend explaining that to me.
See post number 3.
Well, there are lots of cognates, but English and Dutch just aren’t close enough for any real level of mutual intelligibility. That’s somewhat subjective, of course, but I think it’s a fair assessment.
especially considering the normans were partly nordic themselves.
Hey look, I think we just lost another inflection.
Danish and Dutch are actually fairly close. Closer than Danish and German I think. Anyway, English is of course a Danish dialect. An ugly one, but still. We love all our children. Even the ugly skanky ones like English.
I don’t think this is a valid claim if we’re just talking about the language. IIRC the Normans quickly adopted the French language and pretty much forgot their own Nordic speech, within a century or so after they received the Duchy. True, some words of Norse origin were assimilated, and many of them can still be heard in Normandy today, but that’s not the same thing at all.
Forgive me if this has already been pointed out, but shouldn’t any two given languages be non-intelligible between themselves, by definition?
I doubt it, unless there was a lot of borrowing between the two. Dutch and German share a common ancestor, if you will, closer in time than either does with the Scandinavian languages.
I don’t know if you’re being serious or not, but English is not a Danish dialect.
SoP: In an ideal world, yes. But what gets defined as a “language” (as Monty noted upthread) is contentious, and not so clear cut in the real world.
Presumably you have to love the words we got from you, words like “ugly” and “skanky”.
I don’t know enough Danish to say good morning, but from what I do know it does bear some phonological similarities to Dutch, perhaps more so than to German. I think a major factor is that both languages have lost (or never had) the “-en” or “-n” ending for infinitives and strong past participles. In Dutch this ending is still required for correct spelling, but is rarely pronounced. Then, too, Dutch uses many more plurals in “-s” than German does, which makes it similar also to English in its general cadence. Yet notwithstanding all this, Dutch is more closely related to Standard German than to English.