530ʶˡYouTube ʸ麽սPLUS ͥˤơԤ2ˤ錄ꡤֱѸ˴ؤѤʵפʤѸˤƳȡޤեʥζƣᤵȤȤˡ60ʬۤɤäƤޤ
Ԥ֡know K ϤʤȯʤֱѸˡפDZѸΥʥ狼۹ͣɬܡøѸϤϤ̸500̤ʾ֤꤬ñ"ƴ""ҿ"ѸѲꤷơ35ʬۤɤäޤưѤ֤ʤΤˡʲʸϤȤƤϤޤ
ΥȡȡԡˤǤϡѸˤ̥ϤؤӤΤ⤷ä˸Ѹ줬͡ʵʤ顤ƳŪ˲⤷Ƥޤhellog ɼԤγˤ⡤äȳڤǤƤȻפޤ
⤽ѸˤȤϡñ˱ѸȤˤɤǤϤޤθäƤ͡μҲʸˡĤޤˤ̩ܤ˷ӤĤ¤˱ʬǤϱѸˤϡֱѸפȡˡפǤȹͤƤޤ
ʤѸˤؤ֤ΤǤ礦ϡѸؽʤï⤬Ѥʵ䡤ȤСʤ3ñ -s ĤΤʤԵ§ưϤʤˤ¿ΤƤȤ櫓֤ʤѸֻȯϤۤɤޤǤ˿㤦ΤפȤä䤤ФơŪʻ¤䤫ͿƤ뤫Ǥ伫ȡˤΡ祤״Ф̥λ졤Ѹ˸ƻؤȿʤळȤˤʤޤȤǤϡΤ⤷ΰüǤ⤪ǤФȻפäƤޤ
ơȤ濴ŪȤʤäΤϡѸֻȯЪΥǤѸˤ1600ǯ֤ۤɤꡤޤ˸űѸ449--1100ǯˡѸ1100--1500ǯˡѸ1500--1900ǯˡѸ1500--ߡˤ4˶ʬޤѸǤСѤѸͥƥ֤ʤʤȤɲǽǤűѸ˻äƤϡѤƤʸۤʤꡤϤ䳰ˤʤǤ礦
ĹˤΤʤǡֻȯδ֤ˤ줬븶¿ޤȤǤϡװ3ĤۤɾҲ𤷤ޤ1ܤϡκǤäѸˤϡ¿ͤäƤɸפȤ٤Τ¸ߤޤǤλɸಽʤǤǡñֻϤȤѤ졤ȯ̤Ѥ롤Ȥ褦ʥߥޥåΤǤ㤨 busy /ˈbɪzi/ Ȥñ <u> ֻϥͳ褷/ɪ/ Ȥȯͳ褷ޤbuild <ui> Ȥֻ⡤ƱͤκʪǤ
2ܤϡͥγؼԤˤ֤ޯפʲѤǤ16ŵǤƥ䥮ꥷؤƴ줫顤ܤؼԤñθ츻ֻȿǤ褦Ȼߤޤη̡ȯʤʸ츻äưտŪ뤳ȤˤʤäΤǤŵŪ㤬 doubt <b> ʥƥ dubitāre ͳˤ receipt <p> ʥƥ recepta ͳˤǤɤ߽μʪäᡤηֻפΤȤ夷ƤޤޤΤ褦ֻϡ̤夫ؤȼѤ졤٤ȤƸ경Ƥޤֻױư깭뤳ȤФФ⤢ޤۤܤ٤Ƥ˸ߤ˻ޤ
3ܤϡʲѲǤknow knife θƬ <k> ȯʤΤϡǤĤƤ /kn/ ȯƤλҲϢ1718ˤƼޤꡤ䤬 /k/ βæޤβѲλֻ경ƤޤäƤᡤȯʤ <k> ֻˤƤϸ˻ޤǻ¸ƤȤ櫓Ǥ
ȤǤϡѸˤȤ櫓˭ֻΥꥨñȤ through ޤ䤬ĴȤǤϡñˤϼ¤516ֻޤޤűѸѸѤƤʸ <þ> (thorn) ʤ虜虜 <th> Ȥ2ʸȤ߹碌֤ƤޤäΤȤˤޤˤϡ1066ǯΥΥޥʹߤ˱Ѹήեñ줬äƤҿطޤեˤϤʤʸ <þ> ϡäפȤ졤ե <th> ѤΤ֤ޯפȸʤ褦ˤʤäΤǤѲȤϡɬǶưΤǤϤʤ֥եåפȤ٤Ūװˤ礭롤¤˿ʹֽĤߤʤΤǤ
Τ褦ˡѸˤɳȤǡѸԲIJ¦̤˸Ƥ뤳ȤǤޤѸˤμϡѸؽԤե饹ȥ졼ŪʹؤžϤäƤȤΤǤ
ȤϡѸˤƳȤơ뤤ϱѸȤؤδؿ뤭äȤơ¿ˤйǤ
ꥷ줬ѸͿŪƶϡƥեΤ٤ȸꤹ褦˻פ뤫⤷ʤºݤˤϤ礭äΤΤȤꡤष (word_formation) Ϳƶ礭ȤäۤŬڤ⤷ʤȤ櫓Ϣ (combining_form) ѤʳطϤʣηϡꥷΰʹǤ롥
Durkin (231) ϡѸˤˤ륮ꥷαƶˤĤơ鼡Τ褦˽Ҥ٤Ƥ롥
Between C5 and C8-9, the Greek liberal arts education was revived, first by the Ostrogoths, later by the Carolingians, and Greek gained special prestige. Writers liberally sprinkled their woks with Greek words, many of which found their way into other languages of Europe, including Old English. Particularly noteworthy are the glossarial poems from Canterbury with words like apoplexis, liturgia, spasmus. Since then, Greek medical doctrine and the terms associated with it became the major part of English medical lexis . . . . More general scientific vocabulary from Greek has mushroomed since C18 . . . .
. . . .
Greek influence on English, then, is restricted to the lexicon, (limited) derivation, and compounding. Words entered English initially through Roman borrowings, then through direct borrowing from Ancient Greek writers, more recently through word formation (combining roots and affixes) in English.
ꥷαѸؤαƶˤϡ3ѥ뤤3ʳäȤޤȤƤ褤
(1) ƥͳơ
(2) ľܥꥷ줫ʶʹߡ
(3) ꥷǡפѤѸǤ¤ʶʹߡä18ʹߡֲʳѸ쿷ŵŪʣ (neo-classical compounds) 뤤ϡֱפȸƤǤ褤
ΥѥˤĤƤ⡤ꥷդ줿ҿ (prestige) ȿǤƳؽѸ¤줬ŪǤ롥ϢȤơʲ hellog ⻲ȡ
#516. ľܤΥꥷѤ15 ([2010-09-25-1])
#552. combining form ([2010-10-31-1])
#616. Ѹβʳظäȯ ([2011-01-03-1])
#617. Ѹ5ʬθä̻ʬۡ ([2011-01-04-1])
#1694. ʳظäˤƥꥷǤ˱ɤͳ ([2013-12-16-1])
#3014. Ѹˤˤ륮ꥷο¸ߴ19 ([2017-07-28-1])
#3013. 19줿ŵŪʣ ([2017-07-27-1])
#3166. ȤƤβʳѸ ([2017-12-27-1])
#3179. ֿŵŪʣפֱפ ([2018-01-09-1])
#3368. ֥ƥϡüѤλȷϩ ([2018-07-17-1])
#4191. ʳѸΰ̣νؤŤˤĤơ ([2020-10-17-1])
#4449. ꥷαѸؤΥѥȡ ([2021-07-02-1])
#5718. ꥷͳμƬϢ ([2024-12-22-1])
Durkin, Philip. Borrowed Words: A History of Loanwords in English. Oxford: OUP, 2014.
ɸ˴ؤε#5346. Ѹ˱Ѹ̾Ƴ줿طʡ ([2023-12-16-1]) ȽŤʤʬ¿Clark (566--67) ˽Ѹ "by-name" פƳ뤳ȤˤʤäͳĤҤ٤Ƥ
The most salient contrast between the English personal-name patterns of ca 1100 and those of ca 1300 involves the universalisation of by-naming; for, whereas in tenth- and eleventh-century records by-names scarcely appeared except when needed for distinguishing between individuals of like idionym, late-thirteenth-century documentary practices seldom allowed any baptismal name to stand unqualified. As observed, several convergent causes were at work here: need to compensate for over-reliance on just a few of the baptismal names available, and that at a time when communities were expanding; growth of bureaucracy, and a consequent drive towards onomastic precision; and imitation of the new aristocracy's customs. The precise aetiology of the process is probably undiscoverable, in so far as virtually the only twelfth- and thirteenth-century usages accessible are administrative ones, from which the underlying colloquial ones have to be inferred . . . .
ȼΤ褦ˤʤ
̾褬˸¤Ƥꡤ by-name 䤦ɬפä
ƱΤ礷Ƥʤʤ¿ο̾͡Ƕ̤ɬפޤäˤä
Ū³̾Τ褦ˤʤä
²νоݤȤʤä
Ūʼ˸ŪװӼҲŪװʣŪ˺Ѥơby-name δΩƤäȤȤǤ롥
Clark, Cecily. "Onomastics." The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 2. Ed. Olga Fischer. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 542--606.
ε#5371. ػˤΥϥɥ֥åܼ ([2024-01-10-1]) ǾҲ𤷤 The Oxford Handbook of the History of Linguistics 15 "Vernaculars and the Idea of a Standard Language" Ƥߤθơޤ1Ĥˡʼ˶ˤ˱Ѹɸಽ (standardisation) ꡤܥ֥Ǥ͡ƤɸಽɸˤĤơΥϥɥ֥åǤϤɤΤ褦ʰʤƤ뤫Τä
Ƭ1ǤǤˤ⤷ɸפȤǰ϶衼åѤȯʤǤꡤ衼åѤǤϾܤ³ƤǤȤ
The greatest and most important phenomenon of the evolution of language in historic times has been the springing up of the great national common languages---Greek, French, English, German, etc.---the 'standard' languages.
So wrote Otto Jespersen . . . , and the idea of a standard language has undoubtedly been one of the most seductive in the history of European linguistic thought. It has resulted in some of the most heated of debates on language matters, drawing in both academic and non-academic actors, and ranging from the learned Questione della Lingua in Italy around the turn of the sixteenth century . . . to nineteenth-century debates on how best to standardise a newly independent Norwegian . . . , to the ongoing and often passionate discussions in homes and in bars throughout the modern world about 'right' and 'wrong' usage. The notion of a standard language has underpinned language teaching and learning since the Middle Ages, based as language teaching is on the acceptance that there is a right form of a language and a wrong form. The belief in a standard has motivated much of the grammar and dictionary writing, and has also been a central ideology in the emergence and reinforcement of the modern European nations. In the period following the Renaissance, national pride was expressed through the notion that the European vernaculars were as rich and as ordered as the Classical languages. Under the influence of Romanticism this idea of the richness of the 'national common languages' was increasingly linked to a sense of there being some sort of natural relationship between a people and their language, and indeed the perceived link between language and nation, for better or for worse, remains a strong one . . . . (359--60)
ѸˤˤɸಽˤĤƤϡ#4093. ɸѸλϤޤϥͥ ([2020-07-11-1]) ȡɸಽˤĤƤϡԤȤƴͿظɸಽͤ --- ʩоȸˡפλߡ罤ۡ2022ǯˤ˼äƤ (ܽˤĤƤδϢ gengo_no_hyojunka )

Linn, Andrew. "Vernaculars and the Idea of a Standard Language." Chapter 15 of The Oxford Handbook of the History of Linguistics. Ed. Keith Allan. Oxford: OUP, 2013. 359--74.
ԡ Ϻ δˡظɸಽͤ롡ʩоȸˡפλߡ١罤ۡ2022ǯ
ɸˤĤƤϡĤ hellog Ǽ夲Ƥ
#590. last name ϤĤ̳Ūˤʤä ([2010-12-08-1])
#2365. ΥޥαѸ̾κѡ ([2015-10-18-1])
#5231. űѸο̾ˤϲȷϤɽ魯 (family name) Ϥʤäɡ ([2023-08-23-1])
#5338. Ѹ˿̾ˤ⤿餵줿2ĤοȤλ ([2023-12-08-1])
Υޥ塤Ѹ̾ (last name, family name, surname, by-name) Ƴ줿طʤȤơŪˤ2ŦƤ롥1Ĥ first name μबꤵ줿̡ǤϸĿͤǤʤʤäȡ⤦1ĤϡǤˡŪ൭ܤ˴ؤŪνŪװǤ롥
⤦1դäʤСΥޥΦǤϡʤʬŪˤϥɤǤˤǤѤ뽬ˤϤäȤ¤ŦƤȤϽפǤ롥嵭ޤᤳդλˤĤơClark (553) ʷƤƤ롥
Patently, such baptismal-name patterns were scarcely adequate for social identification, far less for administrative and legal purposes. By-naming --- that is, supplementation of baptismal names by phrases specifying their bearers in genealogical, residential, occupational or characteristic terms --- became, in England as elsewhere, a general necessity. Such specifying phrases had been in occasional use among English people since well before the Conquest . . . , and all signs are that shrinkage of the name-stock would in any case have soon compelled their general adoption. The Norman Conquest may well, however, have acted as a catalyst to the process, in so far as it brought in a new aristocracy among whom, as is clear not only from Domesday Book but also from the early records surviving from the settlers' homelands in Normandy, France and Flanders, use of by-names, and of territorial ones especially, was already widespread, with even more tentative movements towards family naming . . . . The prestige thus accruing to use of a by-name would hardly have hindered wider adoption of them among the general native population.
ѤκǸˤ̤ꡤ²ѤȤˤ˰ҿ (prestige) Ϳ졤줬̱κѤ¥ȤˤʤäȤҲŪװ⡤⤦1ĤطʤȤƲƤȤǤ롥
Clark, Cecily. "Onomastics." The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 2. Ed. Olga Fischer. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 542--606.
Ѹäͤ륷diglossia ѼȤʬˤ5ƤȤʤ롥ޤǤΡ#5306. Ѹ켭ŵǤߤ diglossia (1) ([2023-11-06-1])#5311. Ѹ켭ŵǤߤ diglossia (2) ([2023-11-11-1])#5315. Ѹ켭ŵǤߤ diglossia (3) ([2023-11-15-1])#5326. Ѹ켭ŵǤߤ diglossia (4) ([2023-11-26-1]) ٤ʤ顤 Pearce αѸѸ켭ŵȤ (143--44) "diglossia" "polyglossia" ιܤȤꡤ̣ŪǤ롥
Polyglossia A situation in which two or more languages exist side by side in a multilingual society, but are used for different purposes. Typically, one of the languages (usually labelled the 'H' or 'high' variety) has greater prestige than the others, and is used in formal, public contexts such as education and administration. The other languages in a polyglossic situation (usually labelled the 'L' or 'low' varieties) tend to be used in informal, private contexts (and also in popular culture). England was a triglossic society, with English as the 'L' variety, and French and Latin as 'H' varieties. As French died out, England became diglossic in English and Latin (which was maintained as the language of education and the Church).
Ǹ˱Ѹˤˤ triglossia diglossia ʤ polyglossiaˤڤƤΤϡֱѸءѸ켭ŵǤ롥Ѹˤˤ polyglossia ݤˤϡΤ褦Ѹθ𤬻Ф뤳Ȥ¿ξ1դɬפǤ롥
Τ褦ʵǤϡѸΥɤ triglossia μҲȤƤȤ館뤳Ȥ¿Ѹ졤ե졤ƥ3Τ٤ƤΤϡԥߥåɤκǾؤνŪŪȤΤߤǤ롥Ѹȥե2λȤȤʤС⤦ԥߥåɤβޤDz뤬ȤƤԥߥåɤΤˤϵڤФʤĤޤꡤѸɼҲ3ع¤Υԥߥåɤؤơ뤯 triglossia diglossia ȤȤǤȤƤ⡤ɼҲιʤ뤤¿ˤʣ櫓ǤϤʤȤȤषѸΤߤΥ뤬Ū¿ȤȤõƤƤ褤
ǻפФΤϡŵŪ diglossia ҲξǤ롥ˤȡȤ櫓 H Ѽν٤ˤĤƤ٤κϤȤϤҲʤ뤤¿ˤ L H ΤθѼäȤäɥĸɸɥĸ졤쥢ӥȸŵӥ졤ϥ쥪ȥե㤬Ƥ
ŵŪ diglossia Ҳ˾Ȥ餹ȡѸɤ diglossia/triglossia ȸƤǤ褤ΤȤ䤬ͯˤѸȤϡdiglossia ȤǰγѤαפȤʤΤȤʤΤդ꤬ռǤ롥
Pearce, Michael. The Routledge Dictionary of English Language Studies. Abingdon: Routledge, 2007.
#5306. Ѹ켭ŵǤߤ diglossia (1) ([2023-11-06-1])#5311. Ѹ켭ŵǤߤ diglossia (2) ([2023-11-11-1])#5315. Ѹ켭ŵǤߤ diglossia (3) ([2023-11-15-1]) ³diglossia ѼȤʬˤ͡ʲɤ٤륷˸ؤѸ켭ŵܤѤ (45--46)
diglossia The situation in which a speech community has two or more varieties of the same language used by speakers under different conditions, characterized by certain traits (attributes) usually with one variety considered 'higher' and another variety 'lower'. Well-known examples are the high and low variants in Arabic, Modern Greek, Swiss German and Haitian Creole. Arabic diglossia is very old, stemming from the difference in the classical literary of the language of the Qur'an, on one side, and the modern colloquial varieties, on the other side. These languages just names have a superposed, high variety and a vernacular, lower variety, and each languages (sic) has names for their high and low varieties, which are specialized in their functions and most occur in mutually exclusive situations. To learn the languages properly, one must know when it is appropriate to use the high and when the low variety forms. Typically, the attitude is that the high variety is the proper, true form of the language, and the low variety is wrong or does not even exist. Often the feeling that the high variety is superior derives from its use within a religion, since often the high language is represented in a body of sacred texts or esteemed literature. Diglossia is associated with the American linguist Charles A. Ferguson. Sometimes, following Joshua Fishman, diglossia is extended to situations not of high and low variants of the same language, but to multilingual situations in which different languages are used in different domains, for example, English is regarded as 'high' in areas of India and of Africa and local languages as 'low' or vernacular. This usage for diglossia in multilingual situations is resisted by some scholars.
嵭2ŦH L 2Ѽ郎ˡθ춦ƱǤϡH θǤꡤL ϥ֥ԴѼȤߤʤ䤹ȤΤϡδΤǤ롥ƱΤˤȤäơH ˤϸҤδФտ路ƤΤ
⤦1ĤϡǸ˸ڤƤ褦ˡŵŪ˱Ƥε쿢̱ϤθҲˤơѸ줬ѼȤơϸ (vernacular) ѼȤѤƤ硤 diglossia Ƥ٤ǤϤ뤬ѸλȤ˰븦ԤȤ¤Ǥ롥diglossia ϡäʤΤ
Campbell, Lyle and Mauricio J. Mixco, eds. A Glossary of Historical Linguistics. Salt Lake City: U of Utah P, 2007.
֤ǡμͭӥ Mond ˴ƤϤμ5ۤɲޤǤͭޤ
(1) ɸɽʤѸüԤˤϡܿͤɰդʤΤǤ礦
(2) Ū˸ơָѲάפʤΤǤ礦
(3) ֥饸YouTubeʤɡ͡ʥǥ̤ƱѸˤ츻˴ؤȯƤä㤤ޤΥǥȤ˥ץ䥳ץȤѤƾƤޤ
(4) ʤ͡ϡʤĿͺϤɡ˥ꥹեʤɤΥȤ̥ŪɤȤ䥤ɤΥȤ̥ϤʤɤȤΤǤ礦
(5) Ѳϡɤ٤®٤ǵޤ㤨СդɽϡɤΤ餤٤ޤΤʤΤǤ礦
Mond ˴Ϥμ¿ͤǤܸȽȤӤȤμ䤬Ωޤ (1) (4) Υ°뤫ȻפޤͤˤȤä̤¸ߤǤꡤޤ˻פ줬ˡ¾θ٤ƤðۤäƤΤȺФƤޤȤФеޤȤ櫓ؤ̤οޤä¾ӤȤˡκΩäħܤդȤ¿̻֤ޤ
Ĺǯؤ˿Ƥи鴶뤳Ȥϡ̻ϱˤƹԤ뷹ȤȤǤΤ˳ơθˤϸͭħΤǡǤܸ㳰ǤϤʤΤǤܸΤߤ˴ѻħȤΤϡۤ¿櫓ǤϤʤźνϤϤ褽ĤΤǤѤʵ˴ؤľϡ뤳Ȥ⤢ޤȳ뤳Ȥ¿ΤǤ
5μΤ3ġ(1), (2), (4) ϡ֤äƤߤСˤޤĤ (language_myth) ˴ؤä褦˻פޤŪʹͻ̤ơβǤΤȤ⥨ƥǤ͡
ɸಽ (standardisation) ϡ1ĤѼˤҲŪ˰ҿΤѼȤߤʤơθҲ˹ƤǤ롥ȡ¾Τ٤ƤѼϡŪ˼ҲŪͤ㤯ʤꡤϰϤޤäƤȤˤʤ꤬̤ȤơɸѼϻ˻뤳Ȥ⤢
嵭θɸಽλδطɬŪʤΤǤϤʤɸಽʹԤƤĤ³뤳ȤϤ뤷ºݤ˱Ѹˤܸˤʬ̤ꡤĤäƤ롥ޤɸಽȤΩơǤȤ⤢뤫⤷ʤ
ȤϤɸಽλδ֤˲餫ΰ̴ط륱¿˰㤤ʤJones and Singh (100) ξԤ̯ʴطˤĤƼΤ褦˵Ƥ롥
It should be pointed out, of course, that the standardisation of a language does not automatically entail the loss of its associated dialects: English dialects are still spoken today, many centuries after the emergence of standard English. However, we will see that the rise of a standard is mainly the result of sociopolitical and cultural factors and that its purpose is to unite the speech community, through knowledge of a codified, uniform variety. The rise of a standard is therefore likely to have a hand in dialect death for although the elevation on one variety to the standard leaves the other dialects intact, the fact that the standard language is the only one deemed appropriate for 'official' functions such as the media, education and government and is ultimately regarded as a symbol of loyalty for the whole community means that its associated dialects are often felt to be 'inferior' by their speakers and come to be reserved for non-official functions, such as for use with family and friends. As upward mobility comes to be attached to the standard language, dialects cease to be transmitted to the next generation and eventually stop being spoken.
ϢƼε⻲Ȥ줿
#1786. 츢ȸλࡤλ ([2014-03-18-1])
#3457. ܤξǴ졦 ([2018-10-14-1])
#3666. ΤƤɸѤΤΤƱ ([2019-05-11-1])
#4256. ָλפεåȡ ([2020-12-21-1])
Jones, Mari C. and Ishtla Singh. Exploring Language Change. Abingdon: Routledge, 2005.
dialect ȤѸˤĤơī Voicy ֱѸθ츻ȤˤĤ饸 (heldio)פǼ夲#740. dialect פθ츻İ
ѸᤰäƤ hellog Ǥ#2752. dialect ȤѸˤĤơ ([2016-11-08-1]) #2753. dialect Ф language ȤѸˤĤơ ([2016-11-09-1]) ǹͤƤ
Ѹˤδ餪⤷Τϡ1Ĥθ͡ʸǤפγǰΤΤΤ褦ΤƤΤΡб dialect ȤѸϡ16ȾФˤʤäƤ褦䤯졤⤽줬ʵŪˤϥꥷ̤뤬˥ե졦ƥ줫μѸǤȤ¸ΤΤȻפŪʳǰФơŪijäѸݤ dialect Ƥ줿ȤΤ̣
16ȾФȤСѹͥΤޤäʤǤ롥դˤĤƤ⡤ƥ䥮ꥷʤɤθŵϤȤƶĤƤǤ롥ƱȾˤơռޤꡤʥ顼ǤѸŵιߤؾǤŤȤפƤѸɸಽ (standardisation) ϺǤ롥
ҿ (prestige) ΤѸɸ߽ФȤˤƤϡŪ˿ΰҿΤʤɸŪʱѸФƽ (stigma) Υåƥ뤬դ뤳Ȥˤʤ롥Ƥ䤬ơְΤɸפȡܤפȤΩŪʹޤƤ롥
¤ϤιΤϡ߿äְΤƥ졦ꥷСܤʥ顼פǤ롥ȤѸեʤɤγƥʥ顼Ȥƻ夲졤ɸ줬Ƥ˵ڤӡΩޤϡְΤɸСܤפؤȥ饤ɤΤǤ롥ǡΩޤθϤΤޤޤǤ뤳ȤդơΩθԡܤפƤ줿Ѹ줬 dialect(s) äȤȤǤϤʤΩ˿ѸƤäΤ⤷ʤ
פ餢ä dialect Ȥ̾Ϳ褦ȤưŤΤϡޤǥʥ顼ιռιޤäˤʤäƤ顤ȤȤǤϤʤȹͤƤ롥
Ϣơ#2580. Ѹιռʳ ([2016-05-20-1]) vernacular γƵȡ
ڥαѸˤ路 Horobin ˤȡ17αѸҲˤϽΥޥե٥åȤǤϤʤ̤ʸͰƤ褦ȤưƤ
16--17ˤ (orthoepy) ȯãȼäˡ (orthography) ؤδؿޤäǾ뤵줿Τϥޥե٥åȤԴäռΤȤǡʤŪʸηϤϺ뤳ȤˤʤäȤɬȤɬä17ʸιͰƤưˤϤ⤦1ġƱͭװäΤǤϤʤȤĹ餯衼åѼҲȤǧƤƥοǤ롥Ťסָפ줫ȤˡסʸפϺ褦ˤʤäȤΤϡήȤƤ⤷Horobin (25) Ѥ롥
Attempts have also been made to devise alphabets to overcome the difficulties caused by this mismatch between figura and potestas. In the seventeenth century, a number of scholars attempted to create a universal writing system which could be understood by everyone, irrespective of their native language. This determination was motivated in part by a dissatisfaction with the Latin alphabet, which was felt to be unfit for purpose because of its lack of sufficient letters and because of the differing ways it was employed by the various European languages. The seventeenth century also witnessed the loss of Latin as a universal language of scholarship, as scholars increasingly began to write in their native tongues. The result was the creation of linguistic barriers, hindering the dissemination of ideas. This could be overcome by the creation of a universal writing system in which characters represented concepts rather than sounds, thereby enabling scholars to read works composed in any language. This search for a universal writing system was prompted in part by the mistaken belief that the Egyptian system of hieroglyphics was designed to represent the true essence and meaning of an object, rather than the name used to refer to it. Some proponents of a universal system were inspired by the Chinese system of writing, although this was criticized by others on account of the large number of characters required and for the lack of correspondence between the shapes of the characters and the concepts they represent.
21θߡʸȤƤγʸԥȥ (pictogram) βǽܤƤ롥ˤȤ٤Ѹ줬17ΥƥΤ褦˿षƤ櫓ǤɬʤΤΡʸȤƤΥԥȥϺؤδؿޤäƤȤΤ϶̣17ȸξϤɤΤ褦оȤǤ
Ϣơ#2244. ԥȥβǽ ([2015-06-19-1])#422. ʸμ ([2010-06-23-1]) ȡ
Horobin, Simon. Does Spelling Matter? Oxford: OUP, 2013.
ۥӥˡ δˡإڥαѸˡ١˼2017ǯ
(linguistics) Ȥ㡼ȤϤʤݥåפ˹Τ˹Ƥ YouTube/Podcast ֤ͥإ饸114˸줿ǿǤϡ1β˰³<ghoti> /fɪʃ/ 濴˱Ѹֻȯ̯ʴطȤʤäƤޤˤĤƤϡ#5009. ʤСʡɡ硼ֻͥghoti = fishפ϶˴Τ ([2023-01-13-1]) ⻲ȡˡ2ˤ錄䤬ƽƤΤǤβ⤿ؤڤΤǤʿطԤ꤬Ȥޤˡ
ghoti, high, women, nation, debt ʤɤֻˤĤơٸη̯ޯæʥȡɤΤȥ֥ե֤졦ɮſߡ֤ͳճ롥ȯ2#194Ǥ
֥ե֤졦ɮſߡפȤե졼ǤѸֻˤΥĥܤΤ3¤ˤ⤷θƤɽȻפޤѸֻϡѸʹߤ˥եˤ֤줿ȤΤϻ¤ǤޤɮȤΤϼ̻ĿͤΰɮȤ櫓ǤϤޤüʻΤδϰɮȸ礬뤳ȤŦƤޤʺϽ (minim) ȤʤäƤޤˡſߤϡѹͥȽŤʤѸ˸ŵä˥ƥˤؤƴݤäȤؤƤޤ
ե줫֤ȡʥƥ˲ſߤϡưۤʤäƤϤޤҲŪˤСҿ (prestige) ؤܶȤƤȤ館뤳ȤǤޤϡѸֻˤ̤ƴѻ礭ĬήǤ
2Ρ֤إ饸פǼ夲줿˴ؤơ伫Ȥhellog~Ѹ˥֥סVoicy ֱѸθ츻ȤˤĤ饸 (heldio)YouTube ְͥʼδѸظإͥʤɤ̤ơ͡ȯƤƤޤ˥ޤȤѻˤʤꤽǤΤǡnote ߥڡ֤֡إ饸פ ghoti ˤޤĤĥäƤߤޤ碌Ƥ
ʤǿκǸΡ֤á줫衪פϡ#224. women ȯֻ (2) ([2009-12-07-1]) ΤȤǤ12ǯθĿŪʲʤȤⴶۡˤǡȼΤ˺Ƥޤ衤ʾСˡ
Voicy ѡʥƥꥹʡȤơ֤إ饸פ Voicy 뤳ȤҲ𤷤ƤȻפޤǿ֥ե֤졦ɮſߡ֤ͳճ롥#194Ǥ
줿 YouTube ְʼδѸظإͥκǿȤʤ81Ƥoften t ȯͤ÷ʤoften ꤷ often t ˤĤƹͻƤޤ
ȯ䤵줿إ˥¼ŵ6ˡ䤬ɮƤֱѸQ&AפȤबߤƤꡤ often ˤĤƤΥޤޤƤΤǡ YouTube ǤϤꤷ褦ȻפΩäǤcf. #4892. ͽΡإ˥¼ŵ6ǤοߥֱѸQ&AפξҲ ([2022-09-18-1])ˡYouTube μϿͤ˥塼뤷ϪܤβȤȤ⤢ޤơҤİƤФȡ
ǯ often /t/ spelling_pronunciation θ˽äƶȯƤƤȤäǤˤĤƤ hellog Ǥľܡܤ¿夲ƤޤʲȤ
#4146. ʤ often ϡ֥եȥפȯ뤳ȤΤǤ --- hellog 饸ǡ ([2020-09-02-1])
#379. often spelling pronunciation ([2010-05-11-1])
#211. spelling pronunciation ([2009-11-24-1])
#2121. Ѹˤˤ /t/ æ ([2015-02-16-1])
#380. often <t> ǤϤʤ <n> ⤷ ([2010-05-12-1])
#381. oft often ʬ̻ۤŪѲ ([2010-05-13-1])
#3662. "Recency Illusion" "Frequency Illusion" ([2019-05-07-1])
ͤޤǤ American Heritage Dictionary 5th ed. ˤ often Usage Note ѤƤޤŪʷаޤƤޤ
Usage Note: The pronunciation of often with a (t) is a classic example of what is known as a spelling pronunciation. During the 1500s and 1600s, English experienced a widespread loss of certain consonant sounds within consonant clusters, as the (d) in handsome and handkerchief, the (p) in consumption and raspberry, and the (t) in chestnut and often. In this way the consonant clusters were simplified and made easier to articulate. But with the rise of public education and literacy in the 1800s, people became more aware of spelling, and sounds that had become silent were sometimes restored. This is the case with the (t) in often, which is acceptably pronounced with or without the (t). In similar words, such as soften and listen, the t has generally remained silent.
ߤǤ¿αѸüԤ often ˤĤ /t/ ζʤŪȯȶŪȯξäƤ褦ǡä˸Ԥܤ (stigma) դƤ櫓ǤʤǤԤǰҿ (prestige) ΤȯȤռϤޤ¿ĤäƤ뤫⤷ޤŪȯ̱ˤϡ¿֤ΤǤ
Ǥ⤷Τϡ16--17ˤϤष /t/ ʤȯŪäȤǤơDobson (§405) θˤСºݤ˰ҿ㤫ä餷ΤǤ
§405. Loss of [t] after [f] is common only in often, where assimilation to the following [n̩] assists the loss, but occurs in other cases (see Wyld, p. 302, on Toft's and Shaftesbury). In often [t] is kept by Hart, Bullokar, Robinson, Gil, Hodges, and the shorthand-writer Hopkins (as often in PresE; Wyld, loc. cit., is surely wide of the mark in calling this 'a new-fangled innovation'), but shown as lost by the 'phonetically spelt' lists of Coles and his successors (Strong, Young, and Brown); despite its use by Queen Elizabeth, the pronunciation without [t] seems to have been avoided in careful speech in the seventeenth century, for record in these 'phonetically spelt' lists and nowhere else generally indicates a vulgarism.
ʤ18εȯηǤȤ#1456. John Walker A Critical Pronouncing Dictionary (1791) ([2013-04-22-1]) ˤС/t/ ʤȯΤߤǺܤƤޤ
Dobson, E. J. English Pronunciation 1500--1700. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Oxford: OUP, 1968.
#4952. ˤҿ (prestige) Ȥϡ ([2022-11-17-1]) ȡ#4953. ˤ (stigma) Ȥϡ ([2022-11-18-1]) ǡˤҿ (prestige) ƳѲˤʤΤǤꡤѸˤͤǤ⸰Ȥʤ복ǰѸǤ롥
üԡʽġˤϡܤͿƤΰҿꡤռŪ뤤̵ռŪˡθưƤ롥Ĥޤꡤΰҿ˶ŤȤꡤΰҿΥ֤Ȥ뤳ȤǡμҲˤΩ֤ͭˤ褦ȹưƤΤǤ롥η̤ȤƸѲ륱롥Τ褦ˤѲϡüԤռŪ˸ưƤˤ change from above ȸƤФ졤̵ռξˤ change from below ȸƤФ롥ռΡ־夫פѲʤΤֲפѲʤΤȤȤǤ롥
־夫פѲϼҲؤξνĤȷӤĤħָ뤳ȤꡤȿФˡֲפѲϼҲؤβνĤθħָ뤳Ȥ롥ĤޤꡤռΡ־岼פȼҲؤΡ־岼פϢư뤳Ȥ¿Labov ˤäƳ줿ꥸʥ "change from above" "change from below" ϡޤüԤΰռξ夫ȤܤǰѸǤ뤳ȤĴƤ
Trudgill Ѹ켭ŵꡤ줾Ѥ롥
change from above In terminology introduced by William Labov, linguistic changes which take place in a community above the level of conscious awareness, that is, when speakers have some awareness that they are making these changes. Very often, changes from above are made as a result of the influence of prestigious dialects with which the community is in contact, and the consequent stigmatisation of local dialect features. Changes from above therefore typically occur in the first instance in more closely monitored styles, and thus lead to style stratification. It is important to realise, however, that 'above' in this context does not refer to social class or status. It is not necessarily the case that such changes take place 'from above' socially. Change from above as a process is opposed by Labov to change from below.
change from below In terminology introduced by William Labov, linguistic changes which take place in a community below the level of conscious awareness, that is, when speakers are not consciously aware, unlike with changes from above, that such changes are taking place. Changes from below usually begin in one particular social class group, and thus lead to class stratification. While this particular social class group is very often not the highest class group in a society, it should be noted that change from below does not means change 'from below' in any social sense.
Trudgill, Peter. A Glossary of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
ε#4952. ˤҿ (prestige) Ȥϡ ([2022-11-17-1]) ³ơprestige ȿгǰȤʤ stigma ˤĤơɤʤΤǤȤꤢֽפȤƤ뤬֥ƥޡפȸƤǤΤ褤Τ⤷ʤΰҿΤȤǤ롥
prestige βΤ˻ȡѤ A Glossary of Historical Linguistics ǤСʤ stigma ⸫ФȤΩƤƤƧǤȤΤ stigma, stigmatization ȤƸФΩäƤΤ covert prestige, overt prestige, prestige ιܤФ졤˹ԤäƤߤ stigma stigmatization ƤʤȤפˡΰҿǤ뤳Ȥ碌ΤѶŪ˸ڤƤʤΤǤ롥
̤Ĵ٤ A Glossary of Sociolinguistics ˤ stigmatisation θФΩäƤѤ褦
stigmatisation Negative evaluation of linguistic forms. Work carried out in secular linguistics has shown that a linguistic change occurring in one of the lower sociolects in a speech community will often be negatively evaluated, because of its lack of association with higher status groups in the community, and the form resulting from the change will therefore come to be regarded as 'bad' or 'not correct'. Stigmatisation may subsequently lead to change from above, and the development of the form into a marker and possibly, eventually, into a stereotype.
ܤ stigma դ졤줬춦ƱΤ˹Τ褦ˤʤȡ͡ϤλѤռŪ褦ˤʤꡤȤ³Ƥͤ佸Ĥλ뤹褦ˤʤ롥̤λˤʤΤ stigma Ǥꡤstigma դǧΤƤ stigmatisation ȤȤˤʤ롥
Campbell, Lyle and Mauricio J. Mixco, eds. A Glossary of Historical Linguistics. Salt Lake City: U of Utah P, 2007.
Trudgill, Peter. A Glossary of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
ҲؤΥɤǤҿ (prestige) ˤĤƤϡhellog Ǥ⥿ȤꤷƤꡤΤ褦ѤƤǧƤߤ褦ȻפΩäŪˤϡ֥餵ס֥å褵פĶƤΤǰΤߤȻפä补
Ȥ긵μҲطϤѸ콸ʤɤϤȤճȸФΩäƤʤʬäơǽ˰ääΤ Lyle and Mixco ˸ؤѸ콸äʬˤΤ꤬ߤΤǡѤ뤳Ȥˤ褦 (155--56)
prestige In sociolinguistics, the positive value judgment or high status accorded certain languages, certain varieties and certain variables favored over other less prestigious languages, varieties or variables. The prestige accorded linguistic variables is a factor that often leads to linguistic change. The prestige of a language can lead speakers of other languages to take loanwords from it or to adopt the language outright in language shift. Overt prestige is the most common; it is the positive or high value attributed to variables, varieties and languages typically widely recognized as prestigious among the speakers of a language. The prestige varieties and variables are usually those recognized as belonging to the standard language or that are used by highly educated or influential people. Covert prestige refers to the positive evaluation given to non-standard, low-status or 'incorrect' forms of speech by some speakers, a hidden or unacknowledged prestige for non-standard variables that leads speakers to continue using them and sometimes causes such forms to spread to other speakers.
ʤۤɡprestige ȤϡѼ (variety) ˤĤƤȡѹ (variable) ˤĤƤ礬ȤΤϡΤˤѼˤĤƤ prestige ϥޥŪʳǰǤꡤ (language_shift) üѤ˴Ϳ롥ѹˤĤƤ prestige ϥߥŪǤꡤġθѲθưϤȤʤװǤ롥2Ĥϳǰ̤Ƥɬפ
ͤƤߤ prestige Ȥ켫Τե /prɛsˈtiːʒ/ ȯ졤prestigious ʶ롥ºݡե prestige ڤꤿΤǡΥեñ켫Τϥƥ praest(r)īgia(illusion) ͳ褹롥켫ΤαѸǤνФϡ17μԻ T. Blount Glossographia ǡǤθϡְҿפǤϤʤΡֺСפǤ ("deceits, impostures, delusions, cousening tricks") ְҿפȤǺǽѤ줿Τϡä٤1829ǯΤȤǤ롥
prestige ΤȤǤƥñθʪŪˡֶդפۤɤǤꡤǧŪŪʡָǡСפФơǸˡְҿפȤʤä«ŪްŪϤ۵̣ѲȤäƤ褯ηаΤ̣ĹǤ롥
Campbell, Lyle and Mauricio J. Mixco, eds. A Glossary of Historical Linguistics. Salt Lake City: U of Utah P, 2007.
ε#4817. standard θ츻 ([2022-07-05-1]) ˰³OED standard Ȥܤ롥ϡñȤƤ standard ɤạ̈Ѳεפɤꤿ *
褦ˡstandard Ѹ˽Фݤˤϡַפ̣ƤθϸߤǤĤäƤ롥θ塤15ˤʤȡ̹դδñ̡פθOED Ǥ A. III θˤȯãΥޥƥǤǤȯãƤΤ褦ǡѸȤƤ⤳ڤꤿȤȤ餷OED ǤϡΤ褦롥
The senses of branch A. III. originally arose in Britain. The first of these senses, denoting a legal weight or measure (see A. 15) is attested slightly earlier in Anglo-Norman and Latin than it is in English; compare (in this sense) post-classical Latin standardus (frequently from 13th cent. in British sources), Anglo-Norman estandard (a1280 as estaundart); this use may be a development of the sense 'military flag or banner' (see sense A. 1), with the royal standard taken as the symbol of royal authority, e.g. to impose the legal norms (compare also later sense A. 4).
ΰѤθȾʬŪǤ롥ַפȡָפζϡֲξħפǤ뤳ȤȤ
ơ褤˴ؤ standard θĤޤɸפо줹뤬ȤƤ϶äۤ٤1904ǯФǤ롥OED θ23ȤνѤ롥
23. A language variety of a country or other linguistic area which is by convention generally considered the most correct and acceptable form, esp. for written use. Cf. sense B. 3d.
. . . .
1904 Life 18 Feb. 167/1 Each one of these variations in tone and pronunciation is bound to give us some day a conglomerate which will not be pure in inflection or pronunciation unless we have a single, spoken standard, to which all who call themselves educated will seek to conform.
嵭ϡɸפ̣̾ȤƤνǤꡤƤƻɸŪʡפθˤĤƤСB. 3d θȤ11806ǯ˽ФƤ롥
d. Designating a language variety of a country or other linguistic area which is by convention generally considered the most correct and acceptable form (esp. for written use), as in Standard English, Standard American English, Modern Standard Arabic n., etc.
A standard language variety is often associated with or prescribed in various ways by formal institutions, including government, language academies, and education and national media.
1806 G. Chalmers in D. Lindsay Poet. Wks. I. 141 The Scottish dialect was formed, as the various dialects of England were formed, by retaining antiquated words and old orthography, while the standard English relinquished both, and adopted novelties.
ַסָפήθȡ˴ؤɸʸˡפθȯãطʤˤϡֹθҤ˻٤줿ͣϡסֹ̱äƽ٤ޤפȤäܵФǤ롥⤷ΰ̣ѲΥ롼ȤȤСˤĤƤ standard ϡ顤ñʤɸפȤ⡤ȥåץζֵϡפ˶ᤤ촶ȼäƤΤǤϤʤȵ롥ݡФǤʤǤˤäƤϡֵϡפץץƤΤ standard θ촶
Ϣơ#4777. ɸױѸΰ̣ --- ֳ̤Ѹפ֤餤Ѹءס ([2022-05-26-1]) ⻲ȡ
Ω̿ؤܹ Voicy ǻ̤ޤ621#386. ܹȤλ̡ۥӥαѸܤˤĤƸꤷƸޤäΤʤ夷Ƥ vernacular Ȥɤ˾ꡤ¼Ūˤ vernacular ȡȤʤޤ
ʸ塤vernacular ȤѸΤĥ˥奢äȿõäƤߤȻפĴٻϤƤޤ hellog Ǥ#4804. vernacular Ȥϲ ([2022-06-22-1])#4809. OED vernacular θΤ ([2022-06-27-1])#4812. vernacular Ф1601ǯλطʡ ([2022-06-30-1]) εƤޤvernacular ϡѸˤδ⡤νΥƥȤѸ (world_englishes) εؤȤĤʤ롤ιǰʤȻפ褦ˤʤޤ
vernacular ˤĤƱѸ˾δؿͭѤʸϡܻᤴȤˤʸǤαѸʸؤȥʥ顼ȤƤߡ硼졤Ƥɤޤʲܤ꤬ȤޤˡѸ꤫⤭ѸˤʸػˤѤǡ硼αѸѤؤȵʤǤޤ
66--67Ǥʲ1ɤߡ֥ʥ顼פδѸʻˡˤªƤߤȿȯꤽȻפޤ
֥ʥ顼פ̣γĥžѤϡʹѤߤǶ̣륺ûҤϥʥ顼ʸˤĤơ֤ȤʸäƤƤ⡤ʬϤɬߤʸΤ뤿θˤʤ롥ʥ顼ʸϸҤȢ˼ޤ뤳ȤʤϢ³Ѳʤ³ƤΡסviˤȽҤ٤롥ʥ顼ʸˤŪͻѲФʻ˾ޤ褦ޤĹëϥʥ顼ͭˤĤơ֡ҥʥ顼Ӥθ촶ˤȤʤ̣¿äϤȤϢۤŪʤΡ¿ʤΡ̤ΤΤȤäŪʥ˥奢αԤۡμή˷ڻ롦̵뤵ƤʸҲˤʸ̮˸Ƥ꤬ȤʤäƤס2018, 221ˤȻŦ롥
ѸϡָҤȢפ˼ޤ뤳ȤʤѲ³Ūʥ˥奢αԤפɵᤷƤǤ롥1500 ǯ˵ڤֱѸߤϡҼӤ濴ӡӤӤؤȻʥ顼ʤεפȤ褦Ѹθ餹аճ˱Ǥ뤬ϸ衼åäƤ˲ʤä
ѸȾϳΤˡָҤȢפ˼ޤäƤޤɸѸ (Standard English) ϤȢ˼ޤäƤޤȸ (prestige) ɸಽ (standardisation) 뤢äƤ⡤vernacular ȤΩǤ
Ϣơ Voicy ֱѸθ츻ȤˤĤ饸 (heldio)#397. դΥɤȤϲ --- ظɸಽͤ٤ؤΥȤ⤪İ
αѸʸؤȥʥ顼ȤƤߡ硼졤סΩ̿۸ʸ33.32022ǯ65--83.
ε#4776. оȸˤܤǤޤظɸಽͤ --- ʩоȸˡפλߡ١ ([2022-05-25-1]) ǾҲ𤷤ǤϡѸɸಽˤĤ2ܤͤǺܤƤ롥1Ĥϻ߷Ļرءˤˤ7ϡѸɸಽν --- 20ʹߤ濴ˡפǡ⤦1ĤΡ6ϡѸˤˤɸಽ١פǤ롥
⤽ɸѸ (Standard English) ȤϲȤŪˤĤƤϻ⤤ͤ³Ƥޤˤ褯ʬäƤʤʲεʤɤϡǺߤפȤ⤤롥
#1396. "Standard English" Ȥϲ ([2013-02-21-1])
#3499. "Standard English" "General English" ([2018-11-25-1])
#1237. ɸѸΥǥȱѸɸಽ ([2012-09-15-1])
#3232. ۲줿ŪѼȤƤɸ ([2018-03-03-1])
#4277. ɸȤͥ줿ΤȤǤϤʤҲŪʼΤȤǤ ([2021-01-11-1])
#1275. ɸѸȯȼҲкѡ ([2012-10-23-1])
#1228. ѸˤˤɸѸȯŸȳΩäơ ([2012-09-06-1])
衤ɸѸȤϡֳ̤Ѹפۤɤ̣Ѹ줫ϤޤäȻפ뤬ˤβǤĤΤޤˤҿ (prestige) ɤҲŪʼ깤ΤĤ֤餤ѸפȤϰ̤ˤؤäƤޤäΤ褦˻פ롥ɸפΰ̣ΩŪʤΤդΤΤƤƤޤäΤǤϤʤ餯Ƥ濴ϡѸ鸽ѸˤƤ
ƤHorobin (73--74) Jonathan Swift (1667--1745) Henry Cecil Wyld (1870--1945) ؤήΤʤ˸ƼäƤ롥
The application of the adjective standard to refer to language is first recorded in the eighteenth century, a development of its earlier use to refer to classical literature. A desire to associate English literature with the Classics prompted a wish to see the English language achieve a standard form. This ambition was most clearly articulated by Jonathan Swift: 'But the English Tongue is not arrived to such a degree of Perfection, as to make us apprehend any Thoughts of its Decay; and if it were once refined to a certain Standard, perhaps there might be Ways found out to fix it forever' (A Proposal for Correcting, Improving and Ascertaining the English Tongue, 1712). By the nineteenth century, the term Standard English referred specifically to a prestige variety, spoken only by the upper classes, yet viewed as a benchmark against which the majority of native English speakers were measured and accused of using their language incorrectly.
The identification of Standard English with the elite classes was overtly drawn by H. C. Wyld, one of the most influential academic linguists of the first half of the twentieth century. Despite embarking on his philological career as a neutral observer, for whom one variety was just as valuable as another, Wyld's later work clearly identified Standard English as the sole acceptable form of usage: 'It may be called Good English, Well-bred English, Upper-class English.' These applications of the phrase Standard English reveal a telling shift from the sense of standard signalling 'in general use' (as in the phrase 'standard issue') to the sense of a level of quality (as in the phrase 'to a high standard').
From this we may discern that Standard English is a relatively recent phenomenon, which grew out of an eighteenth-century anxiety about the status of English, and which prompted a concern for the codification and 'ascertaining', or fixing, of English. Before the eighteenth century, dialect variation was the norm, both in speech and in writing.
Horobin ¾ͤˤƤ⤽ʤΤWyld ȽĴǻդˤ⤷ʤȻפ
Horobin, Simon. How English Became English: A Short History of a Global Language. Oxford: OUP, 2016.
λˤˤƥե줬ҸäƤ2롥12--1317--18ԤˤĤƤϡ#2604. 13ΥեʸŪŪϰ̡ ([2016-06-13-1])ԤˤĤƤϡ#678. ƥ衼åŪ18ΥեѸ ([2011-03-06-1]) ʤɤǴñ˰äƤԤˤδˤĤƲƹͤƤߤ
(118--19) ϡ12--13˥ե줬ĶŪ˰ҿäƤ¤Τ褦̤Ƥ롥
ˤơեϤǤ˽Ϥι˶ƶϤڤܤϤƤΤȤϡե˥եλ۷ΩҤȤĤνʪäƤ롥ϰ졻ϻϻǯΥꥹǤ롥եϻɴǯ֤ˤ錄äƥꥹ˷פǿפĤά͡˲äơΥΥޥͤοάȤˤĤŤ塼ȤΰܽˤäơեϥꥢˤҤޤꡤˤϰ컰ǯޤǥʥݥϤݤäȤ櫓ϥץΥ쥢ʥڥݥͥȾˤ˥եܿǥեϽ˥奸ʥīθѸȤʤäޤƥΡץǤϡˤƥӥĿͤȡ֥ƥ͡פȤδ֤ޤ줿ʹ֤Ȥλ¹ؤͤեڤ˰äΤۤˤ⡤ѥ쥹ʤ䥷ꥢΤ褦ʥ衼åѤγˤϰˤĤƤϡޤǤʤǤϡեͤŪ̳Ƥᡤե줬ꥹȶζ̸Ȥʤä夵ä륵ȥƥǺ줿ˡὸϡե줬եθѸȤʤˡեβθѸ
ΥեΰҿϤɤ褿ΤʤΤ (120--21) ˤС1ĤϡեβηȺӡ衼åѤβȤɤΤĤʤȤȤ롥줬եڤͭƯȹͤ롥⤦1Ĥϡ䵳ƻʪɽեʸؤ¸ߤǤ롥ʸؤ̤¿θ˥եäήȤȤˡե켫Τ¸ߴ
13ˤʤȥեϿꤨϤᡤ14ȾФˤϹŪ¸ߴäեαƶϤȤ櫓äɤˤƤ顤14ˤϥեưפʤȤʤäƤΤǤcf. #2612. 14˥եǤϤʤѸǽȤ櫓 ([2016-06-21-1])) ƥեαɸ1뤬Ĥ
ɡˡë 𡦺 ľҡˡض̸ --- 衼åѽᤰء١ҡ2018ǯ
Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow