Like the new nation, the new language that thus emerged
was composite; but it kept its Germanic framework.
Change would have come even without the Conquest. Lan-
guages do not stand still. During the same two centuries
( 1100-1300) French itself had changed. But in English the
change was more rapid for two reasons. Treated as an in-
ferior speech, and without sufficient use in literature to main-
tain a standard of correctness, it suffered more rapid changes
from oral use. Spoken language is always looser and freer
than written language. The seventeenth-century English of
Bunyan, for instance, which as he first wrote it down is
simply the colloquial speech of his time, is incorrect accord-
ing to the use of his contemporaries in writing. And since
in the two centuries after the Conquest there was no
written standard, no English literature of scope and dignity
enough to hold up a model of correct English, the inevitable
changes of language were hastened. The conspicuous
result was a general blurring of case-endings and tense-

Ƿat no Freynsche couþe seye.
Biginne ichil for her loue,
Bi Jesus leue þat sitt aboue,
On Inglische tel mi tale.

Arthour and Merlin, 21 - 29
(Early 14th century).

Literally rendered in modern English, this is:--

Right is that he English understand
Who was born in England.
French use these gentlemen;
But every Englishman English knows.
Many a noble have I seen
Who no French could say.
Begin I will for their love,
By Jesus' leave, who sits above,
In English to tell my tale.

-111-