How about modern rich Russian style?

Originally Posted by dkzzzz

Click to expand...

Are you serious? You think Anglo-Saksons use different language than Latins? It is the same Latin just more mangled.
This makes absolutely no sense.

Originally Posted by Lucky Strike

Click to expand...

This makes absolutely no sense.

Russian phonetically is not a roman language. English is, since english is nothing but mangled French and French is roman language.
Therefore anyone who sepaks roman language will have very similar difficulties learning Russian, which is not a roman language.
Therefore asking :"Are you Brits have easier tiome learning Russian than us Latin?" makes no sence.

Originally Posted by gdl203

Click to expand...

I just got back from the south of France and it's unbelievable how many rich Russians now vacation and spend their money there. St Tropez was the most surprising - Russian could be heard everywhere around the port and old town. The ratio of girls to men was about 4:1 and some of these chicks were hotter than August

It came full circle.

Originally Posted by dkzzzz

Click to expand...

english is nothing but mangled French
Maybe the way you speak and write it.

Since the Norman invasion ,the English language has been heavily influenced by the French language....
Sorry to upset the Anglo-Saxon mindset regarding worldwide language domination but that is a fact...

We can also point out the Roman influence during the Roman occupation and their influences on how local tribes speak and express themselves....

My question was broader than that....If you talk grammar ,Spanish is closer to French than English is....
My sister told me how difficult was to learn Mandarin and Russian...
I just wanted to have an inside view on Russian from a Anglo-Saxon point of view...

Originally Posted by lasbar

Click to expand...

Since the Norman invasion ,the English language has been heavily influenced by the French language....
Not denying that, but English is a Germanic language... and French might be too if it weren't for us, Frenchie, so watch it! (j/k)

Originally Posted by dkzzzz

Click to expand...

Russian phonetically is not a roman language. English is, since english is nothing but mangled French and French is roman language. Therefore anyone who sepaks roman language will have very similar difficulties learning Russian, which is not a roman language. Therefore asking :"Are you Brits have easier tiome learning Russian than us Latin?" makes no sence.
English is patently not a latin or roman language, but germanic, albeit with a lot of words and phrases borrowed from Greek, Latin and French. I agree that learning Russian would probably be equally difficult for a Frenchman or a brit.

Originally Posted by lasbar

Click to expand...

Since the Norman invasion ,the English language has been heavily influenced by the French language....
Sorry to upset the Anglo-Saxon mindset regarding worldwide language domination but that is a fact...

We can also point out the Roman influence during the Roman occupation and their influences on how local tribes speak and express themselves....

My question was broader than that....If you talk grammar ,Spanish is closer to French than English is....
My sister told me how difficult was to learn Mandarin and Russian...
I just wanted to have an inside view on Russian from a Anglo-Saxon point of view...

Not to mentioned French kings were ruling that island for centuries and French knights brought some sort of culture to those barbaric leftovers of Celts.
Without French culture Britain would still speak some sort of Celtic dialect.

Originally Posted by dkzzzz

Click to expand...

Not to mentioned French kings were ruling that island for centuries and French knights brought some sort of culture to those barbaric leftovers of Celts. Without French culture Briatin would still speak some sort of Celtic dialect.
The UK is arguably still occupied by the Norman French, and has been since 1066. Without the French-Norman influence, the predominant language in the UK would probably be English, or to be specific, Anglo-Saxon.

Anglo-Saxon is a collective term usually used to describe the culturally and linguistically similar peoples living in the south and east of the island of Great Britain (modern Great Britain/United Kingdom) from around the mid-5th century AD to the Norman conquest of 1066. They spoke Germanic dialects, and they are identified by Bede as the descendants of three powerful tribes, Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. It was perhaps under Offa of Mercia (reigned 757–796), or under Alfred the Great (reigned 871–899) and his successors, that the several kingdoms of the Anglo-Saxons existed. Under the reign of Athelstan (reigned 924–937) the Anglo-Saxon kingdom took shape in England.

Click to expand...

"Anglo-Saxon" is still used as a term for the original West Germanic component of the English language, which was later expanded and developed through the influence of the concept of Old Norse and Norman French, though linguists now more often refer to it as Old English. In the 19th century the term "Anglo-Saxon" was broadly used in philology, and it is still, to some degree, used this way nowadays.

Click to expand...

Now, can we please return to slagging off the nouveaux riches, please?

Originally Posted by dkzzzz

Click to expand...

Are you serious? You think Anglo-Saksons use different language than Latins? It is the same Latin just more mangled.

Huh???

Originally Posted by dkzzzz

Click to expand...

Are you serious? You think Anglo-Saksons use different language than Latins? It is the same Latin just more mangled.

Originally Posted by Teacher

Click to expand...

Huh???

I have a few friends who are Ph.D. linguists who also believe that English is a latin language. Of course, they are likely wrong as these two are about many other things. They are, however, able to come up with compelling arguments. Perhaps not compelling, but more cogent than "Huh???".

Originally Posted by dkzzzz

Click to expand...

Russian phonetically is not a roman language. English is, since english is nothing but mangled French and French is roman language.
Therefore anyone who sepaks roman language will have very similar difficulties learning Russian, which is not a roman language.
Therefore asking :"Are you Brits have easier tiome learning Russian than us Latin?" makes no sence.

Originally Posted by lasbar

Click to expand...

Since the Norman invasion ,the English language has been heavily influenced by the French language....
Sorry to upset the Anglo-Saxon mindset regarding worldwide language domination but that is a fact...

We can also point out the Roman influence during the Roman occupation and their influences on how local tribes speak and express themselves....

My question was broader than that....If you talk grammar ,Spanish is closer to French than English is....
My sister told me how difficult was to learn Mandarin and Russian...
I just wanted to have an inside view on Russian from a Anglo-Saxon point of view...

Ahem. Let's look at this from a historical-linguistic point of view. Norman French (certainly not Parisian French) -- which itself was heavily influenced by Old Norse, since it was they who conquered and established Normandy in the first place -- certainly did influence English. However, only courtisans spoke Norman...the common person probably knew a few words and that's it. Because of this, the Norman influence on English was at the lexical level only, and most words introduced had to do with law/government, food, and bodily functions/parts. They were also content words, not functors. Because over 99% of the Anglo-Saxon populace did not speak Norman, English syntax, morphology, and pronunciation were completely untouched and evolved seperately. This is extremely typical of vulgates that exist in a diglossia: the "upper crust" ignores them, they take on vocabulary but nothing else, and eventually the "upper crust" switches over to them anyway.

ADDENDUM: I forgot about lasbar's comment on Roman influence during their occupation. The Romans influenced the Celts (again, lexically, not grammatically or phonetically); there were no Germanics on the islands at that point. Some time around 350-400 AD (there is contention about the date), the Romans withdrew from the British Isles. Germanics began trickling in somewhere around that time, and in 449 AD (again, give or take), a full-scale Germanic invasion had begun. Therefore, there was no contact there. Meanwhile, the Romans never managed to conquer what they called Germania; only the Burgundians and Goths -- both extinct East Germanic languages (English is West Germanic) -- came under their influence.

Originally Posted by Trent Aldonado

Click to expand...

I have a few friends who are Ph.D. linguists who also believe that English is a latin language. Of course, they are likely wrong as these two are about many other things. They are, however, able to come up with compelling arguments. Perhaps not compelling, but more cogent than "Huh???".

Then see my answer above. Your friends are most certainly wrong. A quick Google search will give you a good start; a trip to your local university library will give you a more complete picture.

I have noticed the "gangster chic" look tends to prevail among Russian men, and so I see a lot of leather car coats and buzz cuts.

Scott Storch seems to be the best American representative of Russian nouveau riche style