Since most peasants in the Middle Ages were illiterate, can someone

they'd speak a variety of different dialects with strong regional accents, the more backwards areas might speak a different language like brittonic cumbric or anglo-saxon english, remnants of bygone ages

File: nemskop2 ENG.jpg (344KB, 1100x750px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1100x750px

>>2963252
they spoke whatever dialect was spoken in their village. Before the push for linguistic centralisation in many countries in Europe (France being the most major example), dialects were divergent to the point many could be considered their own languages; on the other hand, there are many languages where dialects still are highly divergent. The reason for the divergence were geographic barriers (mountains, swamps, forests, uncolonised wastelands) as the most contact was between the closest of communities due to the isolated/sedentiary nature of life in the time period. Depending on location (areas bordering other languages, certain cities, lands subject to colonisation), their language/dialect could be infused with a varying number of loanwords.

File: pepe.jpg (9KB, 236x190px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 236x190px

>>2963276
>>2963286
Very interesting, but does this even answer OP's question?

>>2963288
Of course we wouldn't know their exact vocabulary you dumb fuck, since they didn't write it down.

File: kek nass.jpg (89KB, 220x300px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 220x300px

>>2963290
BTFO

>>2963290
literates could have written about interactions with the illiterate, how they spoke, ect. you dumb fuck

>>2963252
In England, less Latin and more Anglo-Saxon and Norse vocabulary.

>>2963252
>>>2963252
>>2963252
>2963252
>>2963276
>>2963286
>>2963286
>
>>2963286
>>2963286
>
>>2963286
>>2963286
>>2963288
>
>>2963288
>>2963288
>>2963290
>>2963291
>>2963291
>
>>2963291
>>2963291
>>2963298
>>2963298
>
>>2963298
>
>>2963298
>
>>2963291
>>2963252
>
>>2963252
>
>>2963252
>>2963286
>>2963288
>
>>2963288
>
>>2963288
>
>>2963288
National languages before 14th century were very poor in... literally everything. Latin heavily influenced everything from grammar to vocabulary, and English without Latin today would be literally "I go to school yesteday an sheeeit"
Source: read any chronicle from your country, if it's not shit it will have occasional sentences in local language in latinised form
>>2963288
Nice dubs

>>2963368
Bod bless Bohemia with the very best language there is.

>>2963298
But they didn't.

How about this, did they talk more similar to like, say, the LOTR films where they all taked super formally, like "I am hamma, son of Hammond" yadda yadda.

Or did they talk more dirty and vulgar, with lots of 'm'lords' and 'fucks' and 'cunts'.

as someone from an uneducated rural farming community, a lot of non verbal communication, and very stunted vocabulary.

>>2963252
Some Swiss German dialects are more or less unchanged since the high medieval. while the grammar is somewhat simpler than modern high German, the vocabulary is rich.

>>2963368
>school
Latin word my friend.

>>2963368
Interestingly enough, Germanic languages like Icelandic, Swedish or German know considerably more words than Latin languages like French, Italian or Spanish.
Swedish for example has around 500K words, while Spanish has roughly 100K and French has 270K words.
So yeah, no, Latin doesn't help.

>>2964819
Icelandic, which is basically old Norse, has 610K+ words. So much for poor medieval vocabulary.

>>2964827
That's too many words. Nobody needs that many words. I have used some words in this multiple times with no problem whatsoever.

>>2964667
>I am hamma, son of Hammon
Yes. But that was just your name. Example 'fitz' means 'son of' as in john fitzgerald. It just sounds weird in English and because you aren't used to it.
>>2963252
I'm interested if song made the language any more verse like, because the major cultural pastimes would have involved singing and listening to songs quite regularly

>>2965104
Another example of that is mac or mc or mic, Means son of
Richard McDonald is "Richard son of Donald"

>>2965126
>Another example of that is mac or mc or mic, Means son of
One of the annoying things about Irish naming conventions is that they stop being literal patronyms at different points depending on what part of the country you're in. So someone with the surname Mac Phóil in Leinster in the 13th century might not be the son of Pól, but someone with the surname Mac Shéamuis in Connacht in the 18th century probably would be the son of Séamus.

Interestingly in modern Irish speaking areas patronyms like Mac and Ó are usually just implied. So you'd be more likely to have a guy called Eoghan Domhnaill Aonghus rather than Eoghan Mac Domhnaill Ó hAonghus

>>2964819
Thats what adverbs and adjetives are for.
In german they just add two words and you get another one.

>>2963252
>ay nigga y'all plantin' sum beans
>shit yeah nigga feast day comin' up
>awwwww yeeeaaahhhh nigga tryin' to fux wit dat nawmean?

>>2963252

think about how our slang changes from generation to generation. theirs did that, but with no standardized text to fall back on except for church latin and maybe some vernacular text only the poshos could read.

On the topic of names, I'm interested in how widespread the use of "house" names is around Europe; they're used in Slovenia and I've heard it was used somewhere else but I can't remember where anymore.
Basically, before surnames were first used in Venice, people would be identified by so-called house name - a name based on profession, geographical detail, some kind of personal characteristic etc. These names stayed with the house (so anyone new who moved into a house would still be known by the name) but it should be noted that people in Slovenia don't move around as much as in the US so I'd say the majority of the house names still belong to the same families. House names have survived until today, mostly in the rural areas. Along with nicknames which are also popular in the villages, you can know someone by a completely different name than what he's known as on paper.