Talk:Old English

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleOld English was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
April 28, 2006Good article nomineeListed
September 24, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article


is /ddʒ/ (the pronunciation of <cg>) supposed to be [d͡ːʒ] or [d.d͡ʒ]? bidoof 18:20, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Consistency between "Ænglisċ" and "Englisċ"[edit]

Wiktionary and this article use the spelling "Englisċ", but apparently Old English Wikipedia uses "Ænglisċ". What's up with that?

I feel like Wikimedia needs to be consistent about spelling. What's the general consensus among linguists? Dennis Dartman (talk) 01:57, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dennis Dartman, individual projects can make their own decisions. Ang:Mōtung:Ænglisc spræc says that Old English Wikipedia uses "ænglisc in cross-wiki links in order to distinguish it more clearly from modern english", even though englisc was more common in the manuscripts. TSventon (talk) 16:54, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. Dennis Dartman (talk) 16:55, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mistranslation on the translation that includes constructed cognates?[edit]

They seem to interpret fremedon as a plural of "freme" (meaning profit) when in actuality, fremedon is the plural to "fremman" (meaning perform or commit). The fremmen interpretation is much more accurate in context. Vulturevalentines (talk) 07:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Vulturevalentines: The current interpretation is a verb ("promote"), but if you think it isn't very accurate, you certainly can rephrase it. — Eru·tuon 19:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]