Language/Accents

[Aethelwulf]

My mother's English ancestors were said to have lived in Kent. Anything notable about language or accents there?

Also can't help unhelpfully. What springs to mind about Kent? Well obviosuly first is Pop Larkin, then the White Cliffs, Canterbury, Battle of Britain (think that was generally SE but always think of Kent), long hot summers (probably a myth based on Pop Larkin). Don't actaully mind the modern remake of the darling buds of may, can't match the original but decent.

I would imagine back in the day there were some good accents and dialects down in that little corner, though suspect nowadays it's fallen under the london/essex chav accent.

Something more interesting I know but a bit niche is that there is a theory that sometime in the 6th/7th centuries the Frankish kings across the channel had some sort of authority over Kent and parts of the SE. Although just looked for more recent info (origanl theory was 80s I think) and seems that might not have been the case: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...111/emed.12481

[Pcdunn]

No bother, Pat.

Without wanting to contradict you too much, Kent is very much in the South of England.

I'm not so sure that the Jutes would be deemed to be Scandinavian. The Angles, Saxons and Jutes were closely related Germanic tribes.

It may be interesting to note that the idea that the Welsh, Scots and Irish are Celtic while the English are Anglo-Saxon, is a myth created by the Victorians who aimed to promote a super race distinct from other parts of the British Isles.

In fact, Ireland was settled by Vikings and Scotland was settled by Vikings and Anglo-Saxons also. Geneticists have uncovered that there is as much Celtic DNA in northern England as there is in Ireland or Scotland.

I believe that the Vikings who settled Ireland were Norwegian and so they certainly would be termed Scandinavian.

In terms of your ancestors in Kent, back around the 19th century people travelled all over the country for work, moving from one place to another as some industry closed down in one area and another industry opened up in another area. Had you ancestor lived in a town or city, then there's a good chance that person moved from a different part of the country. On the other hand, had your ancestor lived in a rural area, then there's a good chance that his or her ancestors had always lived in rural Kent and may have descended from the Jutes.

Thanks again for morr good information! Appreciate it all.

[Abby Normal]

question. i was always under the impression that no one in england used -son at the end there name (ex,johnson, henderson) until the vikings came over and mixed amd that this was strictly a viking tradition that didnt exist in engand previous to the viking invasions?

[Fleetwood Mac]

question. i was always under the impression that no one in england used -son at the end there name (ex,johnson, henderson) until the vikings came over and mixed amd that this was strictly a viking tradition that didnt exist in engand previous to the viking invasions?

Surnames became widely used in England after the Norman conquest in 1066, and so the vast majority of people prior to that wouldn't have had a surname.

But, for those who did have surnames, no, it wasn't an exclusively Viking practice. In fact, the practice of using fathers’ first names as children’s second names occurs in all European languages.

In England specifically, the practice began prior to the arrival of the Vikings.

The Anglo-Saxons used the genitive suffix: 'ing' (e.g. JR Ewing), meaning "descended from" and 'son' (the Anglo-Saxon version being "suna" or "sunu").

For example, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle included the name Hussan Sunu (meaning son of Hussan) in 603, long before the first Viking invasion.

[Fleetwood Mac]

By the way, Abby, there was a recent comprehensive genetic study undertaken by a professor at Oxford University and his team.

Long story short:

1) There isn't much Viking DNA in this country, they didn't make much of an impact.

2) The Anglo-Saxons were the only conquering force, around 400-500 AD, to substantially alter the country’s genetic makeup, making up around 30% of modern day DNA in England.

3) Most people in England have DNA derived from the Ancient Britons.

What they're working on is exactly where the Britons came from. It's believed that they were not a conquering force but rather Celtic tribes who migrated to England over a long period of time and in several waves. The Gauls in France were very similar to the Britons in language and customs and some may have come from there, but DNA analysis suggests some came from Northern Spain, a group of people known as the Celtiberians.

To go back to the Viking legacy, the biggest impact was in place names and language as opposed to assimilation with the existing population.

[Abby Normal]

By the way, Abby, there was a recent comprehensive genetic study undertaken by a professor at Oxford University and his team.

Long story short:

1) There isn't much Viking DNA in this country, they didn't make much of an impact.

2) The Anglo-Saxons were the only conquering force, around 400-500 AD, to substantially alter the country’s genetic makeup, making up around 30% of modern day DNA in England.

3) Most people in England have DNA derived from the Ancient Britons.

What they're working on is exactly where the Britons came from. It's believed that they were not a conquering force but rather Celtic tribes who migrated to England over a long period of time and in several waves. The Gauls in France were very similar to the Britons in language and customs and some may have come from there, but DNA analysis suggests some came from Northern Spain, a group of people known as the Celtiberians.

To go back to the Viking legacy, the biggest impact was in place names and language as opposed to assimilation with the existing population.

interesting fleetwood thanks. so the norman conquest didnt have a big impact genetically either?

[Fleetwood Mac]

interesting fleetwood thanks. so the norman conquest didnt have a big impact genetically either?

No. We do share DNA with the French but that is derived from thousands of years before the Norman conquest.

[Aethelwulf]

interesting fleetwood thanks. so the norman conquest didnt have a big impact genetically either?

William and his gang were Vikings a few generations back so would imagine the early Normans mightn't show up as french

• In the Middle Ages, the duke of Normandy was the ruler of the Duchy of Normandy in north-western France. The duchy arose out of a grant of land to the Viking leader Rollo by the French king Charles the Simple in 911. In 924 and again in 933, Normandy was expanded by royal grant. Rollo's male-line descendants continued to rule it until 1135

[Abby Normal]

William and his gang were Vikings a few generations back so would imagine the early Normans mightn't show up as french

• In the Middle Ages, the duke of Normandy was the ruler of the Duchy of Normandy in north-western France. The duchy arose out of a grant of land to the Viking leader Rollo by the French king Charles the Simple in 911. In 924 and again in 933, Normandy was expanded by royal grant. Rollo's male-line descendants continued to rule it until 1135

yeah but the normans were mixed with french but i guess were still mainly viking. its all such fascinating history.

[Scott Nelson]

What about Mabel Normand? She was too short?

[Fleetwood Mac]

What about Mabel Normand? She was too short?

Possibly. Who is this? How short was she?

[Wickerman]

Reminds me there are also some differences over very short distances further north. I lived for a few years in Newcastle and the born and bred geordies didn't know half the words some friends from further north in Northumberland used. Two that I remember are 'baree' for good, and somewhat unflatteringly 'mort' for a hot girl. Weird.

One of the oddities I wasn't aware of until I met the wife's family was how in Lancashire they say "for to" when we just say "to".
Like, "I caught the bus for to go to town", or "we went to't shop for to buy some cans".
I'm fascinated by how people talk, and how expressions change, not only from county to county in the UK, but between UK and North America. Some of the most common expressions well known in the UK are found distorted over here. Like, "oh, it's raining cats and ducks", instead of cats and dogs. There's loads of examples like that, just make me laugh.

[Pcdunn]

Possibly. Who is this? How short was she?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabel_Normand

American silent film actress for Mack Sennett, starred with Charlie Chaplin and others. Wikipedia doesn't list heights, sorry.

[Pcdunn]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabel_Normand

American silent film actress for Mack Sennett, starred with Charlie Chaplin and others. Wikipedia doesn't list heights, sorry.

I was wrong. Miss Normand was only 5'1 in height

[Aethelwulf]

One of the oddities I wasn't aware of until I met the wife's family was how in Lancashire they say "for to" when we just say "to".
Like, "I caught the bus for to go to town", or "we went to't shop for to buy some cans".
I'm fascinated by how people talk, and how expressions change, not only from county to county in the UK, but between UK and North America. Some of the most common expressions well known in the UK are found distorted over here. Like, "oh, it's raining cats and ducks", instead of cats and dogs. There's loads of examples like that, just make me laugh.

Yeah I think it's fascinating the variety in the UK for what is a relatively small island. That for to go sounds kind of old fashioned. Some other odd ones are in Devon. For wanting to know the location of something they say 'where's it to?' Also, only time I've be totally unable to understand English was a chat with two old boys at a bus stop in rural North Devon. Genuinely had no idea what the hell they were on about. I just grinned and made some weather related comment.