Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ravana2

can i always put " ye " instead " the " ?


the question = ye question

the beatles = ye beatles


a second question is about " hath " . what is a difference between " hath " and " has " ?

---

No, you are mixing them up. "Ye" is the old version of the word "You" and "hath" is the old version of the word "has". Ye people of the north is like You people of the north.
Thy = Your
Thou = formal word for You when addressing God or someone superior
Ye = Plural version of You
Read a little Shakespeare or the old King James Version of the Bible and you'll catch on eventually.

Wow, okay, I know you're heart is in the right place, but you need to do a bit more research.
You're not wrong, but you're not right, as funny as that sounds.

Yes, Ye has it's origins in Old English ge, and hath has its origins in hæfþ, which later dropped the f and by the Early Modern era often looked like Hath, which has been said by everyone who's answered the question so far.

However, many places made a mistake with not spelling þe correctly. Þe meaning the, changed from the Old English triple nominative forms se, seo, and þæt, though it's more likely that the word came from the plural þa since that was used for all genders, nominative and accusative. Anyway, the þ was reanalyzed as a y (for various reasons), and thus in some Modern parodies of the old, you will find Ye instead of Þe. Such as Ye Olde Shoppe, which a nearby shopping centre to me is called. Is it originally a mistake? Yes. But is the question valid? Yes.

Have you read the thread so far?

Oh, and Thou is actually informal singular, not formal at all. Informal is used to speak to God, and you'll see in Romance languages too, (tu) as well as Germanic ones (du). In fact you only use it with people who are NOT superior.
Thy and thine - both mean your, but the latter can also mean yours. (if you don't believe me, see Hamlet, to thine own self be true.)

Look it up.

Actually, I only just joined, so should probably have lurked for a while before putting in my opinion.
However, I do know that growing up using a different language than English (Platt Deutsch), my parents would use the language they considered more formal, in their case High German, in church. And we always used Du for informal use, but I said Sie to my grandparents out of respect. And I will check with my mother, but I am pretty sure we used the formal Sie for God too.

That's true, you probably should have, no offense.
Yes, High German would be more formal in some respects than Low. The word thou originally was þu, which was later þou, then thou. þu is a direct cognate to du.

Which form of Low German do you speak? All the variations I found of the Lord's prayer in Low German have the informal Du forms, or Dain, or Dein, etc.

Here:
Uns Vader, de is in Himmel.
Heiliget is dien Naam.
Dien Riek sall komen.
Dien Will doch doon,

Or
Unse Vader in' Himmel !
Laat hilligt warrn dienen Namen.
Laat kamen dien Riek.

Or
Vader iuse in'n Himmel.
Eheiligt were dain Name.
Dain Raik kume.

Or
Mogg doch dienen Namen ümmers hillig brukt wär'n.
Dien Riek laot to us kuemmen.

I don't know religion, but I know language. Especially Germanic ones. Now if you guys used Sie for God, I don't know why your Lord's prayer would use Du forms.

Black !

Someone invited me to this page . I fought that was you .

EnglishTheme • English Conversation Classes With Native-Speaking Teachers

Nope, I'm not involved with that site.

Can I say this if I use " th " .

She loveth cats .

She hateth cats .

Yes, but if you were to speak to the everyday English-speaker it'd sound very archaic. But it's common in Shakespeare and evenmore in Chaucer's times.

Except thou/th is it there anything specific in grammar of that time ?

What about idea to use " ye " as an acusative ?

Yeah, Ye is not accusative. It's in fact nominative. It's origin is ge, which was nominative, and the accusative and dative of which was eow, which is where "you" comes from.

That first question doesn't really make sense. There are other factors in both Shakespearean and Chauceran grammar that are different that Modern English, yes.

Can you tell me some of that differences that are still in use as archaic ?

that question kind of doesn't make sense, since archaic really means it's not in use, only heard occasionally usually as a joke or in a mocking way.
An example would be "methinks" which is a very old expression which goes back to Old English in the form of Impersonal verbs. These are similar to Spanish when you say "Me gusta" in the sense that the subject is actually an object (Spanish example "me gusta la guitarra" > "The guitar is pleasing to me"). Methinks, and all the similar forms, feel out of use and now are considered archaic and corny sounding.

How to spell " she looks " ?

She lookth or she looketh .

Well, Look is not a strong verb, and doesn't have I-umlaut. I would vote for Looketh, since that's closer to the historical forms, but the other one is possible and likely, since the -e- is likely not to be pronounced.

What about : thou were , she was . Any archaic form . Like she wath ? I know that th is present .

Or other auxiliary verbs .

Well, it would be, Thou wert, which is archaic, yes. She was is still she was, and it's been that way since the Old English era. The -th ending was a descendant of Old English -ð/-þ which was only in the present tense. The past tense had -de endings in weak verbs and no endings in strong verbs. AND the past tense of the verbs béon and wesan had the past of wæs in the singular, and wæron in the plural.

I think that now I know enough about verb " to be " . What about verb " to have " ?

It should be like this ?

I have .

Thou hast .

She hath .

What about archaism of " to have " in perfect and future ?

By the way I am also a male .

my next question is about " L " . I heard some british turists that speak like this :

international = inte(r)nationa(l) .

rock and roll = rock and ro(ll) .

football = footba(ll) .

they lose last l .

what region that could be ?

Okay, yeah, those look find for the present tense of the verb "to have" there's I have, thou hast, she/he/it hath/has. Has was used since before Shakespeare, but if you want it to sound archaic, use "hath". There were also lots of variations, and it was common to us "u" for "v" when inside a word, so you'd often find, "I haue," "you haue" "we haue" "they haue" but still pronounced like modern have. There were other major spelling differences too.

Well, the /l/ at the end of those words sometimes even sounds like it's swallowed up, but often times is still pronounced in one way or another. Dropping the /r/ is also common in British and American dialects, however dropping the /l/ is probably more not exactly what was going on. I think it's probably like French, where the ending sound might not sound like it's there, but if there were an ending like Internationally, you'd definitely hear it.

You have right . Doll was do(ll) but dolls were dolls . I see that you are from philadelphia but maybe you know in which region of england people do not like last " L " ?