Englisc Language Resources [WIP]

[JacketOfGreen]

Ēalā mīn gebrōðor, iċ hātta Lēodfriþ and iċ wille leornian Englisc! Now, hopefully, if my research is correct, this says "Hello (or greetings) my brothers, I am called Léodfriþ and I want to learn Old-English!". So this is something I will hopefully invest a fair bit of time in. Now, I wanted to assemble a collection of useful resources for learning the Old-English language. This also includes some of my own work, hopefully, or work ported over from different websites. And, in theory, if I can keep this up long enough I will be able to learn a basic/comprehensive bit of Old-English! The intention of this post is to help, but also to be helped. That is I'm sure there are others who would like to learn the language, people like me, and then people who can help, who have a knowledge of the Old-English and would be willing to contribute! So, here it is. This is a very heavy work in progress and will definitely take a lot of time in building, and hopefully in building this I can help others, and myself too. Whether or not you think this is a good idea, let me know, especially considering how much of a newbie I am to Víkingr. But without further adieu, here it is.

| Resource 1 - Basic introduction into simple Old-English | Resource 2 - A very in depth guide to Old-English | Resource 3 - Heavy work in progress, Wikibook, some useful information. | Resource 4 - Old-English translator | Resource 5 - Corpus of Old-English Poems | Resource 6 - Anglo-Saxon Dictionary | Resource 7 - Old English Intro PDF |​

The picture above is the alphabet of the Old-English language. There are also different ways of drawing the letters - the G can be seen as using the Yogh (ᵹ) symbol or the G, similarly, the W can also be representd with a ƿ or a W. Once again, the same with the letter S. So your interpretation of hand drawn texts must always be conscious of the handwriting of the scribe. Concerning the modern interpretations of macrons and accents, as stated by Hroþa, is that older modernisations of Old-English use the acute accent (i.e. á) whereas more modern forms use macrons (i.e. ā).

'The scribes did use acute accents, but not in any consistent way, and not specifically to mark long vowels - they're more common in one-syllable words and sometimes appear on top of short vowels, perhaps expressing special emphasis or, god knows, maybe just for ornamental purposes! Occasionally, a scribe would use a double vowel to express length (i.e. "tiir" for "tír"), but that wasn't very common. For the most part, scribes didn't mark vowel length at all.

They did use macrons, but not to signify vowel length but as an abbreviation of a vowel + a nasal. Hence, the dative plural -um may appear as -ū in a manuscript. They also used several other abbreviations frequently, but modern editions, for the most part, do away with them.'

Hroþa Fyrninga, and his contribution here.​

In the post below, I will be adding Anglo-Saxon poetry and chronicles, along with an English translation beside it. These will be gathered from various sources, but I think that this will be a good comparison of the languages as they were and are, so that we can see the languages as they have changed, and so that we may also understand the history of the Anglo-Saxons and gain a knowledge of not just the language, but the context and the history.

 

[JacketOfGreen]

The Battle of Finnsburh​

…nas byrnað?" Hnæf hleoþrode ða,    heaþogeong cyning: "Ne ðis ne dagað eastan,    ne her draca ne fleogeð, ne her ðisse healle    hornas ne byrnað. Ac her forþ berað;    fugelas singað, gylleð græghama,    guðwudu hlynneð, scyld scefte oncwyð.    Nu scyneð þes mona waðol under wolcnum.    Nu arisað weadæda ðe ðisne folces nið    fremman willað. Ac onwacnigeað nu,    wigend mine, habbað eowre linda,    hicgeaþ on ellen, winnað on orde,    wesað onmode!" ða aras mænig goldhladen ðegn,    gyrde hine his swurde. ða to dura eodon    drihtlice cempan, Sigeferð and Eaha,    hyra sword getugon, and æt oþrum durum    Ordlaf and Guþlaf, and Hengest sylf    hwearf him on laste. ða gyt Garulf    Guðere styrde ðæt he swa freolic feorh    forman siþe to ðære healle durum    hyrsta ne bære, nu hyt niþa heard    anyman wolde, ac he frægn ofer eal    undearninga, deormod hæleþ,    hwa ða duru heolde. "Sigeferþ is min nama," cweþ he,    "ic eom Secgena leod, wreccea wide cuð;    fæla ic weana gebad, heardra hilda.    ðe is gyt her witod swæþer ðu sylf to me    secean wylle." ða wæs on healle    wælslihta gehlyn; sceolde cellod bord    cenum on handa, banhelm berstan    (buruhðelu dynede), oð æt ðære guðe    Garulf gecrang, ealra ærest    eorðbuendra, Guðlafes sunu,    ymbe hyne godra fæla, hwearflicra hræw.    Hræfen wandrode, sweart and sealobrun.    Swurdleoma stod, swylce eal Finnsburuh    fyrenu wære. Ne gefrægn ic næfre wurþlicor    æt wera hilde sixtig sigebeorna    sel gebæran, ne nefre swetne medo    sel forgyldan ðonne Hnæfe guldan    his hægstealdas. Hig fuhton fif dagas,    swa hyra nan ne feol drihtgesiða,    ac hig ða duru heoldon. ða gewat him wund hæleð    on wæg gangan, sæde þæt his byrne    abrocen wære, heresceorp unhror,    and eac wæs his helm ðyrel. ða hine sona frægn    folces hyrde, hu ða wigend hyra    wunda genæson, oððe hwæþer ðæra hyssa

…roofs burning?” Hnaef proclaimed then,    battle young king: “Not is this the eastern dawn,    nor here a dragon flies, nor here this hall’s    roofs burn. but here bear forth;    birds scream, the grey wolf howls,    battle-wood clashes, shield answers shaft.    Now shines this moon full under the clouds.    Now arises evil deeds that this folk    will suffer. But awaken now    my warriors take your shields,    have resolve and courage, fight with spear,    be high minded!” Then arose many gold laden thegns,    who secured his sword. Then to the door went    lordly champions, Sigeferth and Eaha,    their swords drawn, and at the other door    Ordlaf and Guthlaf, and Hengest by himself    behind them followed. Then yet Guthere    told Garulf that his noble life    he would lose if at first he to the hall    doors went, yet Garulf the gallant      to the hall-holders boldly called out his demand,    without secrecy, "which daring minded hero,    who then held the doors?" “Sigeferth is my name,” said he,    “I am a Secgan prince, warrior widely known;    many misfortunes I have endured at hard battle.    There is yet here an appointed task by yourself to me    that I will attain.” Then there was in the hall    a murderous noise; round board shields    called for hands, bone helmet burst    (fortress floor resounded), until at battle    Garulf fell, first of the lordly    land dwellers Guthlaf’s son,    around him many good, quick men’s corpses.    Raven wandered, dark and shadowy.    Sword light stood, such that all of Finnsburh    was burning. Not heard I ever worthier    at battle were sixty warriors    good bearing, never was sweet mead    so well repaid than to Hnaef    his servants gave. They fought five days,    so that none fell lordly companions,    but they the door held. Then knew he was wounded    withdrew and said that his chainmail    broken was, battle gear unready,    and also was his helmet broken. Then he soon asked    the folks’ protector, how many of the warriors    their wounds survived and whether the young men…

The Battle of Brununburh

Hēr Æðelstān cyning,    eorla drihten, beorna bēahgifa,    and his brōðor ēac, Ēadmund æðeling,    ealdorlangne tīr geslōgon æt sæcce    sweorda ecgum ymbe Brunanburh:    bordweall clufan, hēowan heaðolinde    hamora lāfum, eaforan Ēadweardes,    swā him geæðele wæs fram cnēomāgum,    ðæt hī æt campe oft wið laðra gehwæne    land ealgodon, hord and hāmas.    Hettend crungon Scotta lēode    and scipflotan, fǣge fēollan,    feld dennode secga swāte,    siþþan sunne ūpp on morgentīd,    mǣre tungol, glād ofer grundas,    Godes candel beorht, ēces Drihtnes,    oð sīo æðele gesceaft sāh to setle.    Ðær læg secg monig gārum āgēted,    guma Norðerna ofer scyld scoten,    swylce Scyttisc ēac, wērig wīges sæd.    Wesseaxe forð andlangne dæg    ēorodcystum on lāst legdon    lāðum ðēodum; hēowan hereflȳman    hindan ðearle mēcum mylenscearpum.    Myrce ne wyrndon heardes handplegan    hæleða nānum ðāra ðe mid Anlāfe    ofer ēargebland on lides bōsme    land gesōhton, fǣge tō gefeohte.    Fīfe lāgon on ðām campstede    cyningas geonge, sweordum āswefede,    swylce seofene ēac eorlas Anlāfes,    unrīm herges, flotena and Scotta.    Ðær geflȳmed wearð Norðmanna brego,    nēade gebǣded, tō lides stefne    lȳtle weorode: crēad cnear on flot,    cyning ūt gewāt on fealene flōd,    feorh generede. Swylce ðǣr ēac sē frōda    mid flēame cōm on his cȳþþe norð,    Costantīnus, hār hilderinc;    hrēman ne ðorfte mēca gemānan;    hē wæs his māga sceard, frēonda gefylled    on folcstede, beslægen æt sæcce,    and his sunu forlēt on wælstōwe    wundum forgrunden, geongne æt gūðe.    Gylpan ne ðorfte beorn blandenfeax    billgeslihtes, eald inwidda,    nē Anlāf ðȳ mā mid heora herelāfum    hlihhan ne ðorftun ðæt hī beaduweorca    beteran wurdon on campstede    cumbolgehnāstes, gārmittinge,    gumena gemōtes, wǣpemgewrīxles,    ðæs hī on wælfelda wið Ēadweardes    eaforan plegodon. Gewiton him þā Norðmenn    nægledcearrum, drēorig daroða lāf,    on Dinges mere ofer dēop wæter    Dyflin sēcan, and eft Īraland,    ǣwiscmōde. Swylce ðā gebrōðor    bēgen ætsomne, cyning and æðeling,    cȳþþe sōhton, Wesseaxena land,    wīges hrēmige. Lētan him behindan    hrā bryttigan salowigpādan,    ðone sweartan hræfn, hyrnednebban,    and ðone hasopādan, earn æftan hwīt,    ǣses brūcan, grǣdigne gūðhafoc,    and ðæt grǣge dēor, wulf on wealda.    Ne wearð wæl māre on ðȳs īglande    ǣfre gȳta folces gefylled    beforan ðyssum sweordes ecgum,    ðæs ðe ūs secgað bēc, ealde ūðwitan,    siþþan ēastan hider Engle and Seaxe    ūpp becōmon, ofer brāde brimu    Brytene sōhton, wlance wīgsmiðas,    Wēalas ofercōmon, eorlas ārhwate    eard begēatan.

Here King Æðelstán,    lord of warriors, ring-giver of men,    and also his brother, Prince Edmund,    struck life-long glory in battle,    with the edges of swords near Branunburh.    Broke the shieldwall, split the shields    with swords. Edward's sons,    the issue of princes from kingly kin,    oft on campaign their fatherland,    from foes defended, hoard and home.    Crushed the hated ones Scots-folk,    and ship-men, fated fell,    the field flowed with blood I have heard said,    from sun-rise in morningtime,    as mighty star, glided up overground,    God's bright candle, the eternal Lord's,    till that noble work, sank to its setting.    There lay scores of men destroyed by darts,    Danish warrior shot over shield.    So Scots also wearied of war.    West-Saxons went forth from morn till night    the mounted warriors pursued enemy people,    the fleeing forces were felled from behind  with swords new-sharpened.    The Mercians surned not  hard hand-play    with heroes that accompanied Anlaf  over sea's surge,    in ship's shelter    sought land, came fated to fight.    Five lay dead on the killing field,    young kinds put to sleep with the sword,    so also seven of Anlaf's eorls,    and unnumbered slain among sea-men and Scots.    So was routed the Northmen's lord,    by need forced to take ship    with few troops: compelled to sea,    the king set out on fallow flood,    saved his life. So also the wise one    fled away, to his Northern country,    Constantine, hoary battle-man;    he need not boast of that meeting of swords.    He was severed from king, forfeiting friends    on that field,    slain at war,    and his son left on the death-ground,    destroyed by his wounds, young warrior.    He need not brag, the white-haired warrior,    about sword-wielding, the artful one,    nor Anlaf either with their army smashed    they need not sneer that their battle-work    was better on the battlefield    where banners crashed and spears clashed    in that meeting of men, that weapon-wrestle,    when on the death-field with Edward's offspring    they played. The Northmen went off    in nail-bound ships, sad survivors of spears,    on Ding's mere, over deep water    seeking Dublin, Ireland again,    ashamed in their hearts. So brothers,    both together, King and Atheling,    their country sought, the land of Wessex,    in war exulting. They left behind them    sharing the lifeless the dusk-dressed one,    the dark raven, with the hard beak of horn,    and the hoar-coated one, white tailed eagle,    enjoying the carrion, greedy war-hawk,    and that grey beast, the wolf of the wood.    Nor was more slaughter on this isle    ever yet,    so many folk felled,    before this sword battle,    as say the books,    the old wise men,    since from the east    Angle and Saxon    arrived together    over broad briny    seeking Britain, proud warriors    overcoming the Welsh,    eager for glory,    and gained land.

 

[UlfrTheMighty]

great! but could you do the same for Old norse or would it be too much too ask for ?

 

[JacketOfGreen]

I think anyone with the time on their hands could do it as I have. Old Norse isn't something that really interests me like Old English. It's not too much to ask for but I think that anyone is capable of this. Especially if I, knowing very little, have made a thread like this then you should be able to as well.

 

[Éadric]

Hál Léodfriþ!

It is a delight to see people take an interest in Old English and I merrily encourage all those who do!

Having said that, I’m not sure your approach is the best. For one, I would focus on one introduction to keep an oversight. The (online and free) Electronic Introduction to Old English that Hróða linked you has all the beginner needs. Adding works in progress and writing an introduction yourself at such an early stage will likely confuse rather than help. Having tables and paradigms at hand is very useful, but for instance the one you made on verbs is very incomplete and therefore potentially misleading. I don’t mean the absence of the preterite, but the fact that there is not one type of verb, but four types of weak verbs and seven types of strong verbs, which much difference in endings between them in the present as well as the preterite.

So my suggestion would be that you restructure your thread into a strict listing of sources, adding tables and paradigms at a later stage when you are more familiar with the subject, and letting this thread serve as a place where learners can ask questions.



Electronic Introduction to Old English
A comprehensive beginner’s guide to Old English

An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary
Online version of the old and comprehensive dictionary of Old English by Bosworth and Toller. Despite its flaws it’s still the standard work.

The Complete Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Poetry
Lacking an introduction and much in the way of notes, it is nevertheless a good place to find any poem you might want to see. Note that no diacritics have been added to mark long vowels.



As for your opening sentence, it has a few errors. I would rather make it:

Éalá mín gebróðor, ic hátte Léodfriþ and ic wille leornian Englisc.

Most modern scholars use a macron to mark a long vowel, whereas I prefer using the accute accent. It’s merely a matter of convention and the latter is the older one in philology. Also, note that the word bróðor ‘brother’ has a very peculiar paradigm, where the nominative/accusative plural had various forms: bróðor, bróðer, bróðro, bróðru, gebróðor, etc. etc., yet no **bróðoras. 



I hope I don't sound too harsh or pedantic. I really like the idea of organised learning together and I applaude your effort and willingness to master this wonderful tongue.

Regards,

Éadríc

 

[Harkon Haakonson]

When I saw the thread title, I immediately imagined Éadric rushing to post in the thread licking his lips with anxiety.

 

[JacketOfGreen]

Thanks a lot Éadríc, I knew you would come to the rescue! Those links are very useful and I will do a lot more thorough research now so I can fix my mistakes. Thanks for the advice!

Since what I was gonna do was changed, I changed the 2nd post to be history/chronicles etc.

http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,247345.msg5914384.html#msg5914384

 

[hrotha]

Good to see you're willing to give OE a serious go! Don't be disheartened, it's actually pretty easy for a medieval Germanic language (Old Norse is much harder). In no time you'll be able to pick up simple prose texts and work through them without much effort. Poetry is of course harder.

You can remove the "Hroða's contribution" bit from the resources, by the way - Peter Baker's work is one of the standard guides for beginners, as far as I can tell, and it's widely known among OE students.

Some people may interpret the accents as the standard "´", that would be: "á, ǽ, é, í, ó, ú, ý". However others may use this version: "ā, ǣ, ē, ī, ū, ō, ȳ". They represent the same thing, as far as I can tell. Each different scribe uses a different form, so basically it all depends on your preference when using them too.

This isn't correct. Marking long vowels consistently is a modern editorial practice which wasn't done by scribes at the time. Almost all modern editions use macrons (i.e. ā), while older editions may use acute accents (i.e. á). The manuscripts however do not do this. The scribes did use acute accents, but not in any consistent way, and not specifically to mark long vowels - they're more common in one-syllable words and sometimes appear on top of short vowels, perhaps expressing special emphasis or, god knows, maybe just for ornamental purposes! Occasionally, a scribe would use a double vowel to express length (i.e. "tiir" for "tír"), but that wasn't very common. For the most part, scribes didn't mark vowel length at all.

They did use macrons, but not to signify vowel length but as an abbreviation of a vowel + a nasal. Hence, the dative plural -um may appear as -ū in a manuscript. They also used several other abbreviations frequently, but modern editions, for the most part, do away with them.

I don't usually mark vowel length at all when writing in Old English, as I think it's less authentic. However, if marking vowel length is useful, for example when talking about OE with beginners, I prefer to use macrons. Ideally. In practice, acute accents are easier to use, since I already have them in my keyboard.

 

[JacketOfGreen]

Good to see you're willing to give OE a serious go! Don't be disheartened, it's actually pretty easy for a medieval Germanic language (Old Norse is much harder). In no time you'll be able to pick up simple prose texts and work through them without much effort. Poetry is of course harder.

You can remove the "Hroða's contribution" bit from the resources, by the way - Peter Baker's work is one of the standard guides for beginners, as far as I can tell, and it's widely known among OE students.

Some people may interpret the accents as the standard "´", that would be: "á, ǽ, é, í, ó, ú, ý". However others may use this version: "ā, ǣ, ē, ī, ū, ō, ȳ". They represent the same thing, as far as I can tell. Each different scribe uses a different form, so basically it all depends on your preference when using them too.

This isn't correct. Marking long vowels consistently is a modern editorial practice which wasn't done by scribes at the time. Almost all modern editions use macrons (i.e. ā), while older editions may use acute accents (i.e. á). The manuscripts however do not do this. The scribes did use acute accents, but not in any consistent way, and not specifically to mark long vowels - they're more common in one-syllable words and sometimes appear on top of short vowels, perhaps expressing special emphasis or, god knows, maybe just for ornamental purposes! Occasionally, a scribe would use a double vowel to express length (i.e. "tiir" for "tír"), but that wasn't very common. For the most part, scribes didn't mark vowel length at all.

They did use macrons, but not to signify vowel length but as an abbreviation of a vowel + a nasal. Hence, the dative plural -um may appear as -ū in a manuscript. They also used several other abbreviations frequently, but modern editions, for the most part, do away with them.

I don't usually mark vowel length at all when writing in Old English, as I think it's less authentic. However, if marking vowel length is useful, for example when talking about OE with beginners, I prefer to use macrons. Ideally. In practice, acute accents are easier to use, since I already have them in my keyboard.

Thanks a lot for contribution! I skimmed a few probably less than trustworthy sites for information about the accute accents or macrons and there wasn't much info on them, just that each person uses a different one. They didn't mention any of what you had said, which would have been useful to me at the time of writing! I have amended it.

I ought to have referred to OE above all, that and Éadríc.

 

[hrotha]

No problem! Don't hesitate to ask if you have any questions or if you need help.

By the way, here you can see the manuscript we created for the last event. You'll see several common scribal practices used there, most notably the frequent abbreviations and the at first sight seemingly random (but scarce) use of acute accents, punctuation and capitalization.

 

[JacketOfGreen]

Actually that was what got me interested! I saw that and the Englisc thread Éadríc made and that sparked it all. Thanks again!

Something I found to be very interesting was this.

The use of abbreviations, such as the symbol of the thorn character and the t, together, for thæt (excuse the no thorn), and the new symbol altogether for and/ond. Those were interesting. Better still was punctuation, and the capitalization. In this extract the dots represent commas, whereas in others I have seen they represent commas. Also, the ; as a full stop was quite interesting, whether or not this was just an interpretation from here I don't know, but I think that this not so clearly set out use of capitalization or punctuation is very interesting.

That's an example where the dots are used as full stops and the ; as the modern semicolon. All very interesting!

 

[hrotha]

There's no exact equivalent between Anglo-Saxon and modern punctuation symbols, as they overlap to a fair degree (the dot is by far the most common symbol, and sometimes it's the equivalent of a comma, sometimes of a period).

Anyway, while I find all this stuff fascinating, I don't think it's the kind of stuff a beginner should worry about.
You'll mostly encounter texts with normalized spelling and modern punctuation and capitalization for now. In fact, reading actual manuscripts is extremely rare, and usually best left to the realm of paleography.

 

[JacketOfGreen]

Useful Phrases​

Before I start, it's important for you to know that gé is you plural, and þú is you singular - these would equate to what effectively became "Thee" and "Thou". That should make it a bit easier for you to understand some of the grammar or changes here. Anyway, here are some useful phrases I found in some videos and various sources. Some of the accents may be wrong, for example I know that a couple of the æ's lack an accent, hopefully the majority of this is right too and there aren't too many grammatical or spelling mistakes. If there are please let me know so that I can ammend it! Anyway, here are some useful phrases and some very basic Old-English grammar/verbs/whatever they are.

Basics
Géa/Gése - Yes.
Nó/Ná - No.
Ic - I.
Þú - You (singular, equivalent to more modern Thou)
Gé - You (plural, equivalent to more modern Thee)

Se - This approximates to the masculine "the", it is used, weirdly enough, before masculine words. That is, for example, "Se mann" which is the man.
Séo - This is the feminine version of "the", for example, "Séo wíf" - note that "wíf" also means wife, and if I am correct, then "Þæt wíf" would be used if it was referring to a wife, not a woman (in theory, this is -right. I hope so anyway!).
Þæt - The neutral version of "the".

It must be noted that there was no word for "a" or "an", as a result it was much more simplified, a man would be "Se mann" or "mann", not "a mann".

Wesan - To be.
Ic eom - I am
Þú eart - You are (looks like Thou art, eh? Oh the similarities!)
Gé sind/earon - You are pl.
Hé is - He is
Héo is - She is
Hit is - It is
Wé sind/eoron - We are
Híe sind/earon - They are

Greetings
Éalá - This is simple enough, it means hello! You may also see "Hál" which is used in the same context, that is as a greeting.
Wes þú hál - This is the singular version of "Be you well/healthy". It is used as a greeting, and can be used for hello or goodbye, to one person.
Wesaþ gé hále - This is the plural version of the above phrase. The italicization of the letter g shows that the word is pronounced as a y. This is common in modern writing!
Hú gæþ hit mid þé - This is the singular version of "How are you?".
Hú gæþ hit me éow - This is the plural version of the above.
Gæþ hit gód mé - Simply, "I am good" or "I am well". Unfortunately I have not stumbled upon "I am bad" so you're pretty screwed until then!

Pleasantries
Ic þancie þé - I thank you (singular). It should be noted that the pronunciation of the "ic" is roughly "ich", I don't have the dotted c to represent it, so I will use italics as I have for the g.
Ic þancie éow - I thank you (plural).
Ic bidde þé - Please. (I bid you, singular)
Ic bidde éow - Please, plural.
Hú hátst þú? - "What are you called", singular.
Hú hátaþ gé? - "What are you called", plural.
Ic hátte - "I am called" or another way would be to say "Ic eom" which is like "I am".

Voccabulary
Se mann - The man.
Séo wíf - The woman.
Þæt wíf - The wife.
Þæt cild - The child.
Se cnapa - The boy.
Séo mægð - The girl (looks like maid, right? Some Old-English is quite similar and mutually intelligible to Modern English!)
Þæt cynn - The kin/family. In a similar way, it can be suffixed to words to form something equivalent to kind or people. Like "Englecynn".
Se fæder - The father.
Séo módor - The mother.
Se bróðor - The brother.
Séo sweoster - The sister.

As you can see the family looks very similar to what it currently is in English!

Ic wille - I want
Ic mæg - I can
Ic lície - I like
Ic sceal - I must
Ic þearf - I need

Sorry, I don't know the infinitives of these. Hopefully someone will post them!

 

[hrotha]

Pretty sure "wíf" could only be neutre, not feminine.

Careful with "lícian". It doesn't really mean "to like", but "to please" - or, rather, it does mean "to like", but it's not used like its modern descendant: the thing you like is the subject, and you are the indirect object. Thus, and to quote that horrible "Beowulf" 3d movie: "Men þé lícaþ?" means "Do you like men?"

Modal verbs (so-called preterite-present verbs because of an ancient oddity in their conjugation) are tricky. The infinitives of those would be willan, *magan (not actually attested), sculan/sceolan and þurfan, but you won't use them often, because, unlike Modern German, Old English barely used compound verbal forms, and thus these modal/auxiliary verbs were seldom in the infinitive: they were conjugated.

Now, a word of advice: personally I don't think trying to learn Old English the way you would a modern language is very useful. It does work for some people, mind, but it's not how most students go about it, for the simple fact that you won't need to actually speak or write in this language. You only need to develop a passive knowledge. Sure, writing in Old English once you get there is lots of fun, but it's mostly that, fun. Personally I think it's much more useful to learn paradigms and go through actual texts to build up your knowledge of Old English, and things like phrasebooks are a bit of a waste of time.

That's my personal experience not only with Old English but with ancient languages in general, but others might disagree.

 

[Éadric]

Indeed, if you are learning Old English (or any other dead language) for academical purposes you would do best to focus on passive knowledge first and avoid busying yourself with phrases such as these. But if learning it is more of a pastime and you intend to actually use it (like in this wonderful game) then why not?

Anyway, it's not Brananburh (title) or Branunburh (line 5 of the translation), but Brunanburh, and that first vowel was probably long. 

 

[hrotha]

Yes, of course, do what suits you best to have fun! But I don't think there are any means to develop your active knowledge properly when you're still a beginner. It's not like you can have super basic conversations about what you did today even if you're an expert philologist, since there are so many gaps in the attested vocabulary it's actually easier to talk about elevated stuff than doing some small talk.

 

[JacketOfGreen]

Thanks for the advice guys! Could you perhaps suggest any ways that I could learn vocabulary? And are there any simple Old-English texts a beginner like me can start off on? How did you guys start?

 

[hrotha]

Personally I find the best way to learn is by reading actual Old English texts. Most introductions come with a selection of texts after all the grammar stuff - the printed version of Peter Baker's "Introduction to Old English" for example has a very nice selection. I learned with Mitchell and Robinson's "A Guide to Old English", which used the Old English translation of Ælfred's Colloquy on the Occupations as one of its first texts. It was originally written in Latin as a learning tool for Latin students, and then translated into Old English some time later, so it's very basic. Here you can find the complete version, without normalized spelling.

Biblical fragments are generally quite easy, too. You can give this fragment a try. Bear in mind these are relatively early translations from Latin, so the language used isn't always very natural or native-like, but it's a good starting point.

You might also find this workbook useful.

 

[JacketOfGreen]

Thanks a lot!

 

[JacketOfGreen]

Nominative and Accusative​

Hey there! I've been doing a lot of reading today and this is some of the stuff I've come across today. This is the first thing that the book I've been reading taught me, it taught me the difference in the cases and when they should be used. This here will display the use of the Nominative and the Accusative cases. At this point I'd just like to say I'm very sorry if there are any mistakes, I just wanted to update the thread with something which I found useful in this book here. If there are any mistakes or anything that is badly worded or something is overlooked, please feel free to say so! (Hróða and Éadríc! :þ). What I am doing here is shortening what is said in the book and putting into my own (and hopefully correct) words.

(1) Se guma slóh þone wyrm.
[The man slew the dragon.]​

"Se guma" is the subject of the sentence: "the man". Therefore "se" is used. This is the nominative case form. Because the dragon or "wyrm" is the object, it is the accusative case. Therefore the prefixed "the" would be "þone" and not "se". This is because it is the accusative masculine case of "the" used when attached to the dragon which is the object of the sentence - the object is something that is affected by the subject.

(2) Se wyrm slóh þone guman.
[The dragon slew the man.]​

This is slightly different: now the dragon is the subject and the man is the object. Therefore, the man is now also in the accusative form, which is "guman", meaning guman is a singular accusative masculine weak noun. This is identified also by the use of "þone". However as you may have noticed "wyrm" does not change as it is a masculine strong noun.

(3) Þone wyrm slóh se guma.
[It was the dragon that the man slew.]​

This example is much more different though. Because this time it is object, verb, then subject. Therefore it is the accusative noun (the object, which is the dragon) being slain by the nominative noun (which is the man). Though you would think that it'd effectively be the man slew the dragon, it is now different. Se guma shows how the man is the main part of the sentence. This is topicalization, it puts emphasis on the dragon and is actually closer to (1) than (2).

I must point out the bolded phrases are the subject whereas the italicized phrases are the object. For reference to the cases I am talking about, you will see them here! Once again, very sorry if there are mistakes, just posting some interesting finds of mine! If there's anything that needs adding too then let me know.

These are the cases in one form of their meanings in a very very simplified way.

Nominative: Subject of the sentence.
Accusative: Object of the sentence.
Genitive: Possesive - "'s" as well as possesive pronoun such as "his, theirs".
Dative: The indirect possessive. As explained better below with thanks to Hróða for his contribution!

The dative was used in expressions that are better translated with a possessive in Modern English (for example, 7 mearcode him on heafde halig rode tacen, literally “and [he] marked him on [the] head [with the] holy sign of [the] cross”, would be translated as “and he marked his head with the holy sign of the cross”). But that was an idiomatic, secondary use of the dative. Its main function was to express the indirect object. This, in the sentence “I give you the horse”, “I” is the subject, “the horse” is the direct object and “you” is the indirect object – in Old English, it would be “ic (subject, nominative) þe (indirect object, dative) gife þæt hors (direct object, accusative)”.