:D

Murat Karayilan you actually made me loled

My thoughts exactly, he sounds straight out of Britain. Particullary the way he says brown cow and milk her. Also I dont think "O.K." was an Old English word.

To me he does sound just Dutch

Farmer's thought bubble: "A nut who wants to buy a brown cow…"

true

The French King?

@@user-gw2zu5do2r No he was Holy Roman Emperor -200 yrs later than the french king

Broon coo

@@christiankalinkina239 cu

Evolution's natural counterbalance to our impatience.

ok groomer

What?

@@MaximusAwesomus2 I'm not sure what you expect with a single-worded question.

@@MaximusAwesomus2 ,-D

I was wondering if he was speaking one of the dialects I'm not familiar with or if he was just struggling with it

ikr English isn’t English in Old English, it’s Anglisc

*hilarious

@@alvallac2171 Oh shush; it was just a typo. You had no trouble understanding what I wrote.

@@DrCuriensapprentice Ænglisc and Englisc

If it hadn't been for William The Conqueror and his Normans (ex-Vikings turned 'French'!), the English tongue would sound much more familiar to us, here in Flanders (somewhat like German and Dutch, also sister-languages) than nowadays. But it seems that people living along the coast (in West-Flanders) can understand Frisian more easily, as it also derives from a kind of 'Northsea Germanic'.

What dialects find you the most difficult to understand?

Old English can be understood by Icelanders, from what I heard.

That's weird I can understand the Dialect of the British and frisian, frisian sounds like a German speaking English to me

@@saralampret9694 The Newcastle/Geordie English Dialect (though I am quite good with most UK accents really)

+TheValakyr Ge was muanschn des du mi it versteasch? ;)

+TheValakyr So true. Even Old Norwegian is easier to understand for German and English speakers. :D

+TheValakyr Are you from northern Germany?

as a dutch english germand dutch speaker this was super easy to understand XD

+dragnar12 as a Mexican Spanish and English speaker this is easy to understand. The old man pronounce the vowels like in Spanish and almost Latin/Romantic languages.

I laughed at this more than I should

lol, these are close but not correct.

It seems that 'meolċe' must be related to the english 'milch', as a milch cow is a dairy cow.

If he had spoken more modern englisch, he would be nearer to Frisian, because both dialects (yes, I treat them that way ;) ) had evolved in their sound shift. ;)

Sorry your translation in West Frisian is wrong I am from Heerenveen and I can prove that

+matthew steenburg That bit was a joke...

No you didn't

​@@laynejohnson3404 yes he did

It's similar to German buchen which is to collect money from an account but which also means to book something

@@tomroh96 Boeken is used in Dutch too. It is also the plural of books and it can mean to make a reservation.

@@tomroh96 The correct word in today's West-Frisian is "keapje", which is closer to the Dutch "kopen".

@@axionbuster Never heard cop used in modern english.

Yes i dont see much different between frisinan and dutch!!!

underrated comment

+Ayano Sugiura No body claimed they could use modern english to talk to frisians. Old english is what they used. As you know modern english evolved from old english... frisian is still the closest language to english alive.

You're missing the point. He's saying modern english has lost lots of the sounds/phonetics of old english that still remain in other germanic languages, so modern english speakers are worse at pronouncing old english than other germanic languages

UnshavenStatue Yes I understood. Modern english derrived from old english. Old english derrived directly from old frisian,.. It's irrelevant whether or not modern english speakers pronounce old english words diffrently, so do modern frisians.

Scots is the closest language to English that is still alive.

tanmay karthik Nope. Frisian has taken the official title

Yep it really is, but you can't forget we have tons of words that come directly from Old Norse in English as well. So in many ways some stuff was influenced by our cousins from Scandinavia. Every word starting with "Sk"comes from there. Sky, ski, etc I believe. But also we do have some similarities with Danish due to our close proximity to them since the Anglo-Saxons already come form that region between modern Denmark, Northern Germany and Netherlands. But now, the majority of our words do truly come from French and Latin, but the core of what we speak is still mostly Germanic. Until the age of 5, Native English speaking children exclusively speak Germanic words until they enter the school system. And then we have an explosion in our vocabulary. So if you speak at a level of a 5 year old, you can still pretty much exclusively speak Germanic but higher level ideals and complex theories will be hard to say.

What about other Dutch languages like Flemish, Afrikaans, Guyana Dutch and Indonesian Petjo? Would be interesting to know how much you can still understand those because of their similarity to Dutch 😀

@@littleolliebenjy very good question, I've only been to the neatherlands so far so I can't really comment on day to day comprehension but I assume flemish is quite similar understanding wise. Now ex colonial holdings will be proably less understandable, though I once met an South african and dutch person and they said they understood each other well enough.

Don't forget Low German.

@@littleolliebenjy petjo? Any petjo speaker live today?

that's not entirely true. We say: "Goeie molke en goeie tsiis." The pronounciation is almost the same but when you write it down, has some difference's

Ineke Amerens Yes; it only works when said out loud.

Ineke Amerens An in yola its "gooude mulke and gooude cheeze"

+Nh songs Gouden is also Dutch for Golden

Who speaks Yola nowadays - and *_where?_*

Your comment is 8 years old so this is definitely a LONG shot and not one I really expect an answer to but "Is there a good way to learn Frisian?" Duolingo has a lot of more well known languages but sadly Frisian didn't make the cut...or at least they've not added it yet. (Who knows, maybe a speaker hasn't joined their team to help.) You probably learned it from your family but surely you didn't JUST have them speaking to you, like maybe a book or a website you would frequent? I'd rather my source of education be free since I'm on the broke side (Hence why my first idea was to go to Duo despite it not being a great site for learning) but if I need to engage in some...illegitimate means, that's OK too.

@@TheGreatBackUpVIDEOS hi! I still use this account so I'm happy to answer! Learning Frisian sounds like a difficult task, especially for a foreigner. We have institutes here in the netherlands that promote the language, and you can study it at university and such, but I think Frisian is still more a spoken language than a written language and people who speak Frisian here, only 20% can write it too. I mean people who write Frisian often do it phonetically as the correct way contains a lot of circumflex (^) for instance. A tip I would give you is to look up the news channel Omrop Fryslan. They broadcast news completely in Frisian and use Frisian subtitles for english news items. Otherwise I know the company Afûk has a lot of Frisian books, I'm just not sure if its available internationally. Good luck!

@@MythicalinLove Actually, when waiting for a reply I discovered a site seeking to preserve the language by teaching it. If you wanna find it, I made a playlist for videos about the tongue and in the description of it, link various websites (That are in English) that I'll likely use. Not that a native speaker would need to know what the word for storm or cow (Ko) is but for the folk who are passing by the comment section!

How are you? It’s been 9 years

Have you been yet? Is it as easy to speak Eald Ænglisc with the Friesmen?

frisian is NOT dutch

@@eyzmin I know…

Omg you're here too!

Leornende Eald Englisc Dude, I just watched a video you made with HistorywithHilbert. What are the odds I would see your three year old comment?!

The Anglo-Saxons usually noted when they used translators to communicate with other peoples in their records, and they never really mentioned needing translators with speakers of Old Norse. Presumably they were able to communicate most of the time.

All English dialects have an element of continuity of Old English for some "very bizarre reason" /s

Agreed. The Dutchmen I know (from Utrecht) told me that Frisian sounds Scottish, which can certainly be said for Geordie as well.

Yes I'm a Georgie the accent is strong and we do sound very Germanic and look different from the Brythonic Celts of the Hen Ogleg (Native Brits)

Georie I'm gonna hame to see the wif, Ganna doon toon. That's old Germanic.

Geordie is an old Angle direct

You probably understand more of the Anglo-Saxon part I presume?

Boljarin Indeed, it seems like a mix of modern English and Danish flavoured with a bit of German or Dutch.

OE sommer we think the same about Danish :D

Old English is from Anglish in Anglia(Angeln/Angel) in modern day Southern Schleswig

@@xXxSkyViperxXx The region in and around Ribe and Frisia were populated by the same peoples

In west friesland spreken oude mensen ook nog iets dat op fries lijkt

The North of Northern-Holland is called 'West-Frisia'. My mother is a West-Frisian, and I have lived in Medemblik. I can understand that dialect and speak it still a bit. And yes, the Frisian roots is hard to deny. In case you don't believe me, look for Kees Stet on youtube it was an entertainer who speaks that dialect.

Don't like him calling it Friesland anyway, we have the official right to call ourselves Fryslân, and have as such opted to pick that as the official name too

Yup. It makes perfect sense if you're English. We call Netherlands Holland and Fryslân Friesland. Sorry about that. We like to rename places with something that makes no sense. You should hear what we call Japan and China.

@@timflatus That's not renaming it's just using existing names to refer to the wrong things.

As would I. If I had the means of getting to Friesland I might try. His pronunciation is weak and unendearing as well as mixed and incorrect. And it's more than just Frisians who say that Fries is more like English. English itself is an Ingvæonic language/West Germanic, and categorized as Anglo-Frisian. Fries, like Low German (including up north in certain areas of German where the Angles came from) didn't undergo many of the changes of the German Sound Shift, as Dutch had done, even though being WGerm.

Yeah, The Anglo-Frisian languages set thenselves apart from the other Germanic languages by the change of the K and G sounds when adjacent to certain vowels. A word with a Ch sound in English will have it in Frisian, but not in German or Dutch.

***** I believe in Frisian they don't quite make it a ch as in "cheese", but more a ts... as in "tsiis" which also means cheese.

baasmans English and Frisian together form a branch of "westgermanic" languages. Anglo-Frisian. so that answers your question. Frisian and English are closest. isn't it interesting that english is closer to frisian then to low german?

Scara However I think I am righting in saying that Frisian has been influenced by Dutch over the years, so it would be better if one were able to go back in time and see an Old English speaker with an Old Frisian speaker; I reckon they would understand each other and have a good conversation

Might want to ask the Groningers that, as Groninger dialect is super close to Frisian, and Friesland used to extend from North Holland all the way to Denmark, where in some places East-Frisian is still spoken. So yeah Groningen was part of the old Frisia region and the natives of Groningen might still have some Frisii heritage. The Frisian language that was spoken in the same time as Old English definitely had Groningen encompassed in it. History and language surpasses modern national and provincial borders.

I like your interest in foreign languages! I'd like to redirect you to History With Hilbert, a Frisian dude growing up in the UK

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeg_%27ns_Aaa :-)

***** Scots (Lallans) is actually intelligible to English speakers. It sounds a lot more like English than Friesen.

CusterFlux If the Danish Vikings had defeated Alfred and/or the Norse Vikings had defeated Harold Godwinson in 1066... it is likely the Old English of Anglo-Saxon England would have either survived longer and/or would've eventually morphed into an Anglo-Scandinavian dialect much closer to those Nordic languages. In any case... how England would've looked today had it remained under a Danish or Norse crown would be very interesting indeed.

+VredesStall Especially with all of Britain's former colonies like the *_FUCKING UNITED STATES_*

That's cute. Try being a Hungarian native speaker. Good luck

Nah the only reason we're so shit at languages is that we're not taught them properly as kids and never exposed to them as everyone wants to learn our language. We don't have any immediate neighbours like Norwegian/Swedish but we're definitely not isolated.

+Xaver Lustig yeah ... I found this for Old English: céapian Weak wv/t2 1. to bargain chaffer trade to contract for the purchase or sale of a thing 2. buy 3. to bribe endeavor to bribe giftum ~ to bribe with gifts

Yes! This and Modern English "keep" have the same root, even though the meaning of the word has changed since. so Eddie could have been 100% understood if they'd chosen the right word, or he'd been fluent with Old English enough to try synonyms.

+Xaver Lustig Well to buy in English is also to "shop" and this is undoubtedly the word connection you're seeking. I took a Swedish language course, and I had taken German before (my German is decent but nowhere near perfect) and the Swedes pronounce the k in "köpa", their word for to buy, as "sh-öpa."

In some modern vernaculars, the verb "cop" means to acquire A nice coincidence maybe

I would suspect that the english "cheap" is derived from the Old English céapian. As others have pointed out "to buy" is called "köpa" in Swedish, "kjøpe" in Norwegian and "købe" in Danish. As for "butjen" this is probably related to the Swedish "bjuda", which can means "to offer", to make an offer" or "to bid/"make a bid".

Like the word for milk?

@@servantofaeie1569 I think West Saxon said miltch and East Saxon milk.

Some people in the province of North Holland speak some kind of Frisian as well though.

In English we call Deutschland, Germany and in many places The Netherlands was always called Holland as far back as hundreds of years. Yes, we know now that Holland is a provence. Just as you may or may not know that Scotland is a country. I'm from Ireland and people in my community have always referred to the Netherlands as Holland, not meaning any disrespect to any Nederlanders, it's just what we call it. Of course things are changing now because so many Dutch speak English and are promoting their country as the Netherlands in English, so it's likely we'll all call it the Netherlands in the future.

Interesting that you don't consider Scots. Actually, in the last couple of centuries various dialects of English around the isles have died - Yola, for example. Also - the Normanisation of the English accent has changed the sounds that would be otherwise better understood by the Friesk. I think it's safe to say that in England, no-one wants to sound too much like a farmer, so these regional dialects are almost dead, as the vowels are all southern and urban. If Eddie tried a northern farmer's accent of 100 years ago he would have sounded more authentic.

emmetor I always find it interesting to hear our Scottish cousins speak their native tongue. I can understand a lot of it, but I'm from the south coast of Ireland, and our accent is very different, so they won't understand us easily, but they will be mutually intelligible with a northern Gaelic speaker. Even though the languages are not related, the Gaelic language sounds very similar to Norse -

As a Malay speaker, it's frustrating. If the Brunei or the Northern Malays speak slowly, we can understand them, but once they speak quickly, off you jet to NotUnderstand Land.

emmetor Do you mean Gaelic and Norse sound similar due to phonetic similarities, or do they actually share words and structure? They're both Indo-European so in theory they could share a fair amount. I would have expected English to sound closer to Norse than than Gaelic does, though, because they're both Germanic. Maybe it does and you just don't notice if you speak English yourself? Or could it be because of hundreds of years of influence from Scandinavian traders and invaders before the Anglo-Saxons arrived?

Of course. In fact, English is just a Frankish/Frisan dialect altered by interactions with Celtic languages, and by borrowing of French words... ^^

Wasn't expecting Korean! English folk learning Dutch also find it very easy. I tried Duolingo's Dutch course and it was very easy to understand.

+billy jack NO it's just the similarities between Frisian and English.

No. It is the similarities between GERMAN languages. this bullshit theory that ZOMG the ENGLISH ARE FRISIANS is a fucking joke.

***** I think he's one of those people who doesn't know the difference between German and Germanic, kind of how some people don't know the difference between Turk and Turkic. He says that he doesn't believe that English are descended from Frisians. Maybe not, but there's probably a common ancestry somewhere for a couple reasons: 1. Frisian and English are both Germanic languages. 2. West Frisian is English's closest living relative.

+James Vander Vegt The English are partly Saxons and the Saxon speak a Germanic language so...

phangirlable Yup there's that too...

Have you even LOOKED at the languages? The similarities are absolutely EVERYWHERE. Stone Dutch-Sten German and Norwegian-Stein Icelandic-Steinn Danish and Swedish-Sten Earth Dutch-Aarde German-Erde Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian-Jorden Icelandic-Jörð By comparison: Stone Irish Gaelic-Cloch Welsh-Cerrig Earth Irish Gaelic-Cré Welsh-Ddaear

***** Your opinion is wrong. It is very well known that Angles, Saxons and Jutes invaded the Isles and settled primarily in what is now England. The Celts, who were inferior in terms of technology and warfare were pushed into the Western and Northern corners or assimilated into the Anglo-Saxon culture. That is why we speak an Anglo-Saxon language. The farther North you go the more Scandinavian and Celtic influence remains. Even genetic evidence supports this. If your English, whether you like it or not you are mostly Germanic.

EcoCrat I would never tell a person it is wrong about something I did not experience personally if I were not absolutely convinced by mind, not by heart. This topic is a complicated one. All ancient sources are rubbish and to disbelieve, especially church exaggerations of the likes of Bedes phantasm and deliberate misuse of non-ethnic roman generalization clusters. There is a good recent german book out that challenges the origo gentis as a whole as what they are - absolute rubbish and early modern times inventions. You will find out this goes also out especially for the term "celtic" applied to britain, for it has NOTHING what so ever to do with ancient britons, who are unrelated to the historic celts. You try me to find a description of "Britons" being "celtic" please... one that is ancient, not bogus last two and an odd centuries. Genetic haplogroups do not provide a hint on ancient cultures, for the genetic foundations are much older, and even vary inside a group. The fact that britain, a country in the north-west has mostly north-western haplogroups does not come as a surprise, but is absolutely what it should be like. with or without "zhe Germans". More interesting are average genetic distances. And it turns out that relation, apart from the later modern Settler-Colonialism are correlating almost exactly with geographic(save mountain ranges and some seas). If the english were coming from northern -to central Germany, they would have to match northern or central-northern Germans most closely out of all people in europe. In fact, this is NOT the case by a far stretch. The english are closer related to all of their neighbours then to the northern germans, while comparing the northern germans with their surroundings (save polands ajustment which shows up), they are also exactly where to be expected, ruling out later genetic change. this is also proven by comparing the remains of graves with people living in the area today. Genetic makeup never changed as much as it does today back then, and the british are by norm related with the people lying in graves, as are the germans with those lying in theirs. and this relation is predating "invasions" as well. "identified" personal ethnic conception changes widely on the other hand. france is a good example. Just like language is not an indicator for genetics but for socio-politic indicators and dynamics (in britain also isolation) Further English is not an Anglo-Saxon Language, but a language classified as "Anglo Frisian". the Anglo means a quite new perception of english, and the frisian means that it is closest related with frisian and not with low saxon. The english are closer to the western dutch(no surprise especially the frisians) then to the lower germans of lower saxony and Schleswig-Holstein of the Angles and Saxons, and even closer to the Dutch then the southern danes. - reason being genetic distance; to no surprise -correlates with geographic distance. The english are most likely not of saxon or angle or X stock, but mostly mainly native ""english"", ""british"" and their inter-british differences can be explained perfectly normal without fairytales. Britain was excessively populized before and there is no indication of any genocide at all. A thing that would also be impossible, but somewhat necessary to the british mindest... for this I suggest you read "Race and Manifest Destiny" of Reginald Horsman. Harvard. The notion that the english are germanic is an unscientific one btw. "Germanic" is a language cluster that was rather recently created around the old german languages and is a simple grouping, nothing more. the germans/germanic people on the other hand are a group that existed in central-to central northern europe at a time and was for the first time used by Ceasar.. that is a historic term. It was already out of fashion in the 5th century. and thus the english are in no way germanic. as modern science is now, the myth of the full blooded Saxon English will die off in the next 50 years. It makes for good stories though and is very vivid for the imagination

Ancient Britons are known to have spoken A CELTIC language closely related to Gaulic and the Iberian Celtic language. I'm saying that there are haplogroup maps of the british Isles that show higher concentrations of haplogroups assoicated with the Celts in ireland, Wales, and South western England not to mention north-Western Scotland. I realize that English is an Anglo-Frisian language, but my point is that it's still Germanic. Almost all place names in England are Scandinavian or Anglic. How can you say that language has nothing to do with ethnicity when you then say that it's no surprise the British are most closely related to the West Dutch, who speak the language most closely related to English? How can you say that the British are mostly Inigenous if they're closer to the Dutch than the Irish? Britain was NOT excessively populized before and no one is saying that there was a genocide, but to deny that there was a huge wave of migration from the Germanic tribal regions is ludicrous, and there certainly was fighting. Why the hell would British architecture, language, and culture change to resemble those of Germanic tribes if the Germanic tribes did not dominate them? Your assertion that the British are in no way Germanic is intellectually dishonest- the language is Germanic, their clothing was Germanic, their religion was Germanic. But of course the british aren't Germanic... lol. there is no belief that the English are full blooded Saxons, but in the South East (the most densely populated part of England) They are certainly mostly Germanic ethnically.

EcoCrat As I told you you are confusing language with genetics and origins… I can only try to make this clear once again. The reason that two languages are related says nothing necessarily about the people using them. Nor do the English have to be Germanic in origin because they speak a language that got once classified as “Germanic” 200 and odd years ago by linguists as a cluster. I think you take the Grimms, who pioneered the term way too literal for today. it is maybe important to stress again that “the celts” as a historic phenomenon of central and central-western Europe have nothing to do with the people loosely called “celtic” in the british isles today, and there is no connection between the populations of say Austria and Scotland, meaning they have no common roots that stretch back to “the celts” as a common roots or element. Its the same bogus, and the term “celt” was never used for any people of the british isles before the 1800s, no matter what name linguists have given the cluster their language gets classified as. Such labels stem from times even pre ww1. originally the more fitting term "ancient british" was applied to the ""celts"" of Britain. You completely missed my point. I did not say that the English as a whole are more close to the Dutch then to the Irish! Listen to what I said. I said that they are closer to the Dutch then to the people living in the regions where the Angles and Saxons originate, because the Dutch are closer. Would England be an Anglo-Saxon exclave, with the people being descendants of Anglo-Saxons, the English would have to closer match northern and central Germany then the coastline of the Netherlands, which so happens to border to them. It is indeed true though, that the British as a whole are remarkably close to the Irish as well. The Germans however are closer to the Dutch then to the British, and the British are closer to the Dutch then to the northern Germans…. all speaking genetic, and not coincidental also distance Yes, England was populated excessively before. At the time of the “Anglo-Saxon arrival". Look at what you are saying… the british isles had a population of a couple of million people. Which is a lot in comparision to newcomers arriving by boat. speaking of dishonesty in arguments, you would search in vain for credible contemporary scientists who claim such a population bulk can be uprooted, and those who see a necessity, introduce dodgy argumentation in the likes of genocide or the odd wild native women taking a one sided fancy all over the country and getting it, causing "the bryton" to be bread out. You are very emotional, that is hard to bear because it colours your argumentation and taints your understanding. We know almost nothing about the languages spoken in Britain before. Even if the language gets classified as Germanic and even then, if it was spoken there before, as some assume, it would say nothing about the peoples roots… I struggle to see what you do not understand. Fashion changes. And it is often dictated by the ruling class. If people become subjects they mimic new trends. This is actually one of the most intriguing critical point about the Discourse on the Reihengräber phenomenon. Fashion almost always goes from top to bottom. Another example is trade and cultural influence(goes also for language, and would be a safe bet why its so close to Frisian). If you dug out a German civilian after WW2 and you had no idea what happened, you could have found him with American gum and American-style clothing, with american cigarets or american-style objects, and you would have concluded he must with all certainty be american. So what? France for instance underwent changes very quick without being isolated. As the romans conquered it, the gauls adopted a new culture and fashion, even language. And as the country wandered over in the hands of elites from east of the rhine and their comitati, they gradually abolished one culture and adopted influences from the next one. all that without a huge change in the genetic makeup. but they sure changed their ethnic perception. And france is a country in europe, and not isolated on an island !! But there are close guesses in varied directions. Oh man do not get me started on “Germanic architecture” haha. Hubert Fehr recently stressed in one of his publications that the same “undoubtedly Germanic house structures” that people in the last century used to cede the rural areas of north-western france to “the Germanic stock” on, are actually recently being found in the south of Italy and the Dalmatian coast as well. There is nothing waterproof “germanic”(does not exist in the time we talk about btw) about them at all. Although it would come to no surprise if the architecture of post-roman Britain would imitate continental architecture at all, or even if the Saxons that got to Britain sparked a revival of them, or the population looked on its neighbours for a new impulse. It is clear that the roman withdrawal was a time of reajustment that brought a dramatic cultural change to Britain.

North East England too!

@@pitmatix1457 Regular Dutch: kop/cup, mok/muck, school,/school gras/grass, "kom binnen."/come in(side), vinger/finger, voet/foot, schoen/shoe ect ect......

german and dutch are not mutually intelligible, they are very different, speakers of both language may pick up a few words from the other but they will not be able to wholly understand each other

@@yurashida its very easy to learn though, they are still very similar unlike some Dutch people like to claim :) For Dutch people it depends on whether they took German in high school or occasionally interacted with Germans. Lot of German tourism in big cities and on the Dutch coast and islands, and many of them still don't have great English so if youre from there youre probably gonna learn at least a bit

I have a German cousin. I talk Dutch, which he understands and he talks German back, which I understand. I can speak German if I practice, but with a Dutch accent and I haven't done it in ages. I tried it. He said: How old is your kid? I said nein. Lol oh wait neun, so then I just talked back in Dutch.

The further from London you are the more archaic features you'll find.

Scots itself is a descendant of the Northumbrian dialect of Old English with Celtic and Norse features, many of the soundshifts that happened in the south never quite reached the lowlands.

Wundervoll

@@frankishempire2322 aha! Ya!

Yes I agree I am a Georgie and out DNA is 7 times stronger Of Anglo Saxon than any were else in the whole of the UK the hole of the North East population is over 75% Anglo Saxon and 25% Brythonic Celt (Native Brits)

In Geordie we also say broon Coo

@@joannechisholm4501 is the same in East Anglia, the Five Boroughs, Yorkshire and in Wirral, the Angles and the Saxon overwhelmed the Celts in this areas, genetic studies proves it.

@@David-ru8xf what about The north east like north of England Newcastle

If you follow the roots back you can even find connections to Sanskrit, the oldest language in the world. Hence the name "Indo-Germanic languages".

You're a guy with a husband in Morocco?

@@kire929 I was back then. We are living in Vietnam now. And to be honest, people in Morocco are generally much more cosmopolitan than Europeans of Moroccan descent in Belgium. And I say this as a native Belgian of Arab and Persian descent. I never suffered homophobia in Morocco. In Brussels, all the time.

@@ixlnxs That's an interesting thing to know