Talk:Modern English

Is this legitimate? — Hippietrail 15:38, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The term is legitimate. The boundary between Middle English and Modern English is somewhat arbitrary, and I've also seen the designation "Early Modern English" for English around Shakespeare's time -- basically what people colloquially call "Old English" because it's recognizably English but sounds "old". I would guess that Wikipedia could supply a consensus definition of these terms. -dmh 15:48, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Request for deletion

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Sum of parts. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Huh? (a) It's arguably the name of the language. if it is, then just as "Statue of Liberty" isn't SoP, whether we should have it or not, neither is this. But, ignoring that, (b) a more fundamental and definite reason to keep: modern is very general, whereas "Modern English" is very specific: English since the mid-16th century. There's no way to derive the definition of this term from its parts.​—msh210℠ 17:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Can't any language be prefixed with "Modern" though? How is this better than English-language and English-speaking that failed RFD in 2009. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Or French language. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Because Modern English is not the English of modern times (i.e., since the 1920s) or of modern times (i.e., since the Industrial Revolution) or of modern times (i.e., since roughly the start of the 16th century), but of modern times i.e., since roughly the mid-16th century). I really don't see how anyone can piece this phrase together from its parts.​—msh210℠ 18:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

[Edit confilct] Well, the question is is this just English that is modern, or is it Modern English a separate entity that isn't just the modern form of English. A similar question could be asked about American English, Canadian English etc. --Yair rand 18:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

And English language. If you're gonna go that way, would we exclude Modern French (archaic Modern French exists) or Canadian French, Quebec French français de Belgique (etc.) Mglovesfun (talk) 18:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Keep: not SOP; see w:Early Modern English and w:Modern English. † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 19:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Keep: it refers to English of a more or less specific period, like (deprecated template usage) Old English. Equinox ◑ 03:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, yes, keep per all arguments given. 50 Xylophone Players talk 03:38, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Keep as argued. Modern English refers to the English language since a very particular date and in a very particular form. If we eliminate this, then we'd have to remove Old English and Middle English. --EncycloPetey 03:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Kept. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)