Hi, I don't speak Anglish, but I have some things I'd like to discuss about the formation of Anglish... First of all, I think the letters þ and ð and yogh should be restored. Maybe even wynn and æsh, but mainly þ and ð. It saddens me that they aren't used any more. Second, I'd like to restore inflections, such as verb conjugation and grammatical case. Also, our words shouldn't be just current words smacked together, but completely new words from Old English and Icelandic. I also think we should have some new spellings, of course "tung" and "iland", but also "igh" for the pronoun "I" (it does come from Old English ih after all). So... any thoughts?--{{SUBST:User:CrabKakeZ MD027/sig}} 05:25, March 20, 2013 (UTC)

English ( Inglish ) is the theidish speech of the English ( Inglish ) folk wherever they be found in the world. Hence it should be made up mostly of words which were in English ( Inglish ) before 1066 and have theidish ( germanic ) roots. Untheidish words ( mostly Latinish and Greekish ) should be overbrought into English ( Inglish ). The twixlandish speech which goes under the name of "English", but which is untheidish, should be known as AngloUS or Anglonic ( being a wordtwisting of "Algonkin" to acknowledge the greatness of the Americanly inflowing upon that twixlandish speech, both in its written and its spoken shapes ).

Should theidish English (Inglish), the speech of England/ Inglelond, be spelt with <k> for hard <c> and <j> for <y>, as in the other theidish speeches? Thus, kat, bakk, jou, jours, a.s.f..

I for one think that we should use <c> instead of <k>, since <c> was what was used in Old English. So, where <ck> is /k/, remove the <k>, and where <c> is pronounced /s/, it should be an < s>. Even though I hate using <y> as /j/, I think we should stick with it. Also, why do you not capitalize "theidish"? I think it should be capitalized, along with "Latinish" and "Greekish". ;) This is just an opinion, but I prefer "tongue" over "speech". :) What do you Anglish speakers think about using the particle "do" and the gerund? I think we shoudn't use them, since at least "do" is a borrowing, supposedly from Welsh. Sorry this wasn't in Anglish, I have yet to start learning it. >< Sjheiss 09:09, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe that the unfolding of our-timely theedish English deals foremost with the kinch of word-stock. I often gain-stand some outlandish spellings of English words (as by-spell, "tongue" for "tung"), but a thorough "washing" of English word-spelling would be, I feel, a needless loss of our work-might. For theedish English to be workable and yielding in the world of our-time, it needs to be open for common wielding. Even now, the tung sees hardship in common wielding in its righting of what are now all-some words, awakening unknown words and often making new ones from over-bringing untheedish tung-stocks. We do not need to make more hardship for the spread of the theedish tung bestanding on spellings from an eldth long dead. Surely, we do not need to make things harder for ourselves by needlessly framing more rules to follow on the field of thought-weaving (grammar), as in the wonder of headening (capitalizing) letters or what to do of the "gerund" kinch. Thought-wise and spelling-wise, English is fine as it is now; it is its now-timely word-stock that we have chosen to right with a theedish stock. 24.126.192.173 04:58, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

I must say this was quite a wonderful thing to find! I have for some years now tried off and on to use only words that are brought down from Old English. As my ken of Old English is not great, however, I've oft had to get by making note of oversettings from other tongues akin to English, besunders Icelandish, and besunders for building words like "talkwire" for "telephone", "flightacre" or "flightfield" for "airport/airfield" and like nowtimely thoughtmynds. Until last night, when I came across this stead, I'd thought that sikerly I'm alone in such doings. I have also found that it is much easier to do so in writing than in speech, though some of my newwords have flowed over into my daily speech, such as "firespout" (even though I do know that "lighter" is fullcomely good English and not at all an inbringing!).

On the fraign of spellings, I would say that though I am not keen on the nowtimely way of writing English words and that I would much rather see a way of writing that better shows how the word is spoken, I think it is better to put our work into wordbuilding.

The two "paragraphs" (what is the OE word akin to Icelandish "grein"?) above were written by me earlier today, before I had become a belongand here. XeniaC 04:35, September 19, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not wholly heedful of how your wordbook works, but some of the words are already fit Anglish(Theedish English or what have you) and they needn't overbringings for their stead. That said, I like the plan of this.OlykoekSlayer 04:04, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

• *On the fraign of spellings, I would say that though I am not keen on the nowtimely way of writing English words and that I would much rather see a way of writing that better shows how the word is spoken, I think it is better to put our work into wordbuilding.** Here, here, Im fully at one with those feelings linking to wordbuilding over spelling. One step at a time. Gallitrot 16:52, November 12, 2010 (UTC)

What do people think about the ethics of using words from published works in the Wordbook? I'm thinking specifically of Fr. Andrew Phillips's The Rebirth of England and English: The Vision of William Barnes and David Cowley's How We'd Talk If The English Had Won In 1066. Part of me would like to copy them into the Wordbook, but I worry about whether I'd be robbing the authors of some of their income if I did, since these books are still in print. --Nick xylas 16:51, August 2, 2011 (UTC)

With recently published works, I'm not sure. For public domain works, I have put the coiner's name in parenthesis. To byspell: 'birthbane' (William Tyndale). Gr8asb8 20:04, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Both works are still in print, I believe. Cowley's wordstock mostly consists of his own coinages. The Phillips book is more of a grey area, as he has collected Barnes's "Saxon English" words from a variety of sources. Barnes, of course, is in the public domain, but Phillips has done some work in collating his writings.--Nick xylas 19:41, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry if this is the wrong place to do this, or if it is not okay to have this at all, or if nobody is here anymore, but I wanted to know... is there a certain "symbol" that symbolizes Anglish, like a logo or flag or something? Because, most things like organizations trying to fix something have a logo or flag. If anyone thinks this is a good idea, I can show my ideas. Or, if this is a bad idea, just tell me. Also, sorry that I didn't use Anglish there; I don't speak it very much. {{SUBST:User:CrabKakeZ MD027/sig}} 21:05, February 10, 2013 (UTC)

Wikisource (and the Anglish Bible)

It may be of interest to some here that Wikisource appears to have some pre KJV Bible translations, I note that you have been trying to render an Anglish version on this wiki. This is appreciated.

In terms of finding Anglish renderings of Biblical tales, you might also want to consider the various 'Mysteries' cycles that existed. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:59, April 1, 2013 (UTC)

Translation Request/ Suggestion

If anyone is willing to undertake it, I'd really like to see an Anglish version of Chaucer. (Noting of course that the original is probably halfway there already.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:59, April 1, 2013 (UTC)

Old English to Anglish conversions?

In my personal attempts to use Anglish (sorry I'm not fully doing so in this note, I'm not that good yet), I've run into a few places where there are no good English words to swap, and where I'm unable to calque anything, but I have found the Old English word that was used before Latin took over.  However, I have no clue how to modernize it using any sort of rules or patterns.  (The bit in Methods only gives a few hints, rather than a complete guide--it might be suitable for someone with some Old English background, but I've got none.)  Any attempts to search for a page on how to do it turns up online translators, which is, of course, not at all helpful.  Does anyone have a how-to written or can find one to give us who have no Old English background some help with this sort of thing?  (All arguments for whether we should or shouldn't modernize Old English words aside, it can be fun even if it's just a personal word used only in writing for ourselves.)  Doranwen (talk) 08:47, April 4, 2013 (UTC)