From David Hulme
Seeing the 5th-century word “hrif” in David Robson’s article on how language might change (3 March, p 39) reminded me that it endures in the form of “midriff”. There must many other examples. The Deep Future special is what makes New Scientist great: mixing science with informed speculation.
From Valerie Moyses
Had two important cultural developments not happened, English might have been very different from today’s language. The printing press, introduced to England in the mid 15th century by William Caxton, boosted literacy and offered many examples of elite vocabulary. In the 20th century, broadcasting provided a model of spoken English which must have had a powerful effect on our language’s development, or lack of it.
The production of dictionaries and schoolbooks of English grammar must have restrained language change by providing a standard for children to emulate. With all these brakes, English must have changed far more between Beowulf, written around AD 1000, and Caxton than it has done since.
Advertisement
Soon, no doubt, we shall have computers linked to our brains, and a form of English will be chosen by whoever produces the hardware and software. The slog of learning grammar, syntax, vocabulary and spellings will be redundant, since the language will be implanted. And that, presumably, will be the end of the development of English forever.
Bloxham, Oxfordshire, UK
From Dewi Jones
It would be wrong to suppose that English has been changing steadily since the 9th-century days of King Alfred. An unusual and traumatic event, the Norman conquest, forced it to alter.
As for the centuries ahead, people may soon be able to record not just their words but their thoughts. That will enable those in the very distant future to commune with their ancestors as if they were alive, and will allow them to master the ancient languages easily.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, UK
Stockport, Greater Manchester, UK
