Rating: 
Summary: This is a companion to the PBS television series.
Review: After watching the series it is fun to see the information in print.Just about everything you ever wanted to know about the English Language is in this book. There are newer and older references but none so complete and at the same time readable. This book covers history, usage, almost usage and possible futures of the language. One of my favorite antidotes was the one about how the Advisory Committee on Spoken English (ACSE) discussed the word "canine": "Shaw brought up the word 'canine', and he wanted the recommendation to be 'cay-nine'... And somebody said 'Mr. Shaw, Mr. Chairman, I don't know why you bring this up, of course it's 'ca-nine'. Shaw said, 'I always pronounce things the way they are pronounced by people who use the word professionally every day.' And he said, 'My dentist always says (cay-nine)'. And somebody said, 'Well, in that case, Mr. Chairman, you must have an American dentist.' And he said, 'Of course, why do you think at 76 I have all my teeth!'" After reading about how English came about, the next book to read would be "Divided by a Common Language" by Christopher Davies, Jason Murphy
Rating:
Summary: This is a companion to the PBS television series.
Review: After watching the series it is fun to see the information in print. Just about everything you ever wanted to know about the English Language is in this book. There are newer and older references but none so complete and at the same time readable. This book covers history, usage, almost usage and possible futures of the language. One of my favorite antidotes was the one about how the Advisory Committee on Spoken English (ACSE) discussed the word "canine": "Shaw brought up the word 'canine', and he wanted the recommendation to be 'cay-nine'... And somebody said 'Mr. Shaw, Mr. Chairman, I don't know why you bring this up, of course it's 'ca-nine'. Shaw said, 'I always pronounce things the way they are pronounced by people who use the word professionally every day.' And he said, 'My dentist always says (cay-nine)'. And somebody said, 'Well, in that case, Mr. Chairman, you must have an American dentist.' And he said, 'Of course, why do you think at 76 I have all my teeth!'" After reading about how English came about, the next book to read would be "Divided by a Common Language" by Christopher Davies, Jason Murphy
Rating: 
Summary: Fun, fantastic failure
Review: Alas it is no surprise that a book written as the companion to a TV series would lack rigor and be poorly organized. The word "story" in the title should have warned me what I was in for, but is it by no means "the story," merely "a story." The authors no doubt were simply interested in producing something fun and interesting, and in this respect they may consider themselves to have succeeded. Perhaps his book is fine as a casual, light read. A lot of other reviewers here were satisfied, oblivious to the irony that a book about the language would be so poorly written. Being interested in the subject matter, I tried and tried not to be bothered by the shortcomings of this book as I forced myself to plow through it long after I began noticing problems. In the end I can only say it was a disappointment. The authors apparently spoke to many learned university professors and much information of substance can be gleaned from the book, especially with respect to the early centuries when the language was emerging. However, the section entitled "Notes and Sources" makes a mockery of the meaning of the words "note" and "source." Time and again they include quotes with no attribution or identification of the source. For example, on p. 319 they give us, "As early as 1820, one writer observed. . . .", "Another writer. . .spoke of. . . .", and "A third, a working man called Harris. . . ." In what passes for "Notes and Sources" in this book, the entries skip from p. 317 to p. 321! Perhaps we should be grateful that of the three sourceless quotes on the page, we are given a year for one and a name for another. It is also irritating that the authors capriciously dismiss many "apocryphal etymologies" while excitedly describing other word origins based on myth and legend when it suits them. This seems to be the result of the authors' fondness for accentuating the influence that various underprivileged peoples (Irish, blacks, etc.) have had on the mainstream language. The Black English pronunciation of "ask" as "aks" is mentioned, and even though "Notes and Sources" admits that Chaucer did it too, there is no discussion about this. The inescapable conclusion is not that Black English got it from Chaucer, but that it emerged independently. The authors apparently have no idea that "aks" can also be heard in the countryside of the American Midwest, but if they did I suspect they would credit it to Black English, even though it's only a coincidence. This suspicion is founded in the fact that there are countless other examples of simplified pronunciations in the New World which the authors heroically trace to Irish, Scots, German, Yiddish, or to anything they can possibly find to provide an explanation other than the most obvious: that these are the natural result when pronunciation becomes careless. Indeed, the authors dismiss the concept of "lazy" pronunciation out of hand. It's just not politically correct to call anybody lazy any more. I do sense that the authors are commendably trying not to be too England-centered, but in this they fail as well. The unequivocal denial of local linguistic variety within the US, within Canada, and within Australia betrays their bias, ignorance, and lack of research. We are told that there are four regional varieties of English in the US. Perhaps the local variations that do exist, being generally mutually intelligible, don't count. Then again, the same can be said of the four regional US dialects described. The only New World language variants the authors seem to be really interested in are those which they are able to trace through the centuries to specific areas of the British Isles. The authors also intermittently lose the ability to distinguish the difference in degree of importance between the addition of words to the vocabulary and actual changes to the syntax of the language. The former often happened simply because of the encounter with flora, fauna, and geographical features which did not exist in the British Isles. Sometimes the authors say as much and don't treat it as a significant event, but at other times they treat it as evidence of the "influence" of some group of people or another on the language. Aside from the politically correct bias that pervades the book, the basic problem is that the authors are trying too hard to make this an interesting story. For someone who already considers the history of the English language to be an interesting subject, much of the authors' efforts are gratuitous. Note: I read the 1992 edition published by Faber and Faber.
Rating:
Summary: Fun, fantastic failure
Review: Alas it is no surprise that a book written as the companion to a TV series would lack rigor and be poorly organized. The word "story" in the title should have warned me what I was in for, but is it by no means "the story," merely "a story." The authors no doubt were simply interested in producing something fun and interesting, and in this respect they may consider themselves to have succeeded. Perhaps his book is fine as a casual, light read. A lot of other reviewers here were satisfied, oblivious to the irony that a book about the language would be so poorly written. Being interested in the subject matter, I tried and tried not to be bothered by the shortcomings of this book as I forced myself to plow through it long after I began noticing problems. In the end I can only say it was a disappointment. The authors apparently spoke to many learned university professors and much information of substance can be gleaned from the book, especially with respect to the early centuries when the language was emerging. However, the section entitled "Notes and Sources" makes a mockery of the meaning of the words "note" and "source." Time and again they include quotes with no attribution or identification of the source. For example, on p. 319 they give us, "As early as 1820, one writer observed. . . .", "Another writer. . .spoke of. . . .", and "A third, a working man called Harris. . . ." In what passes for "Notes and Sources" in this book, the entries skip from p. 317 to p. 321! Perhaps we should be grateful that of the three sourceless quotes on the page, we are given a year for one and a name for another. It is also irritating that the authors capriciously dismiss many "apocryphal etymologies" while excitedly describing other word origins based on myth and legend when it suits them. This seems to be the result of the authors' fondness for accentuating the influence that various underprivileged peoples (Irish, blacks, etc.) have had on the mainstream language. The Black English pronunciation of "ask" as "aks" is mentioned, and even though "Notes and Sources" admits that Chaucer did it too, there is no discussion about this. The inescapable conclusion is not that Black English got it from Chaucer, but that it emerged independently. The authors apparently have no idea that "aks" can also be heard in the countryside of the American Midwest, but if they did I suspect they would credit it to Black English, even though it's only a coincidence. This suspicion is founded in the fact that there are countless other examples of simplified pronunciations in the New World which the authors heroically trace to Irish, Scots, German, Yiddish, or to anything they can possibly find to provide an explanation other than the most obvious: that these are the natural result when pronunciation becomes careless. Indeed, the authors dismiss the concept of "lazy" pronunciation out of hand. It's just not politically correct to call anybody lazy any more. I do sense that the authors are commendably trying not to be too England-centered, but in this they fail as well. The unequivocal denial of local linguistic variety within the US, within Canada, and within Australia betrays their bias, ignorance, and lack of research. We are told that there are four regional varieties of English in the US. Perhaps the local variations that do exist, being generally mutually intelligible, don't count. Then again, the same can be said of the four regional US dialects described. The only New World language variants the authors seem to be really interested in are those which they are able to trace through the centuries to specific areas of the British Isles. The authors also intermittently lose the ability to distinguish the difference in degree of importance between the addition of words to the vocabulary and actual changes to the syntax of the language. The former often happened simply because of the encounter with flora, fauna, and geographical features which did not exist in the British Isles. Sometimes the authors say as much and don't treat it as a significant event, but at other times they treat it as evidence of the "influence" of some group of people or another on the language. Aside from the politically correct bias that pervades the book, the basic problem is that the authors are trying too hard to make this an interesting story. For someone who already considers the history of the English language to be an interesting subject, much of the authors' efforts are gratuitous. Note: I read the 1992 edition published by Faber and Faber.
Rating:
Summary: Fun, fantastic failure
Review: Alas it is no surprise that a book written as the companion to a TV series would lack rigor and be poorly organized. The word "story" in the title should have warned me what I was in for, but is it by no means "the story," merely "a story." The authors no doubt were simply interested in producing something fun and interesting, and in this respect they may consider themselves to have succeeded. Perhaps his book is fine as a casual, light read. A lot of other reviewers here were satisfied, oblivious to the irony that a book about the language would be so poorly written. Being interested in the subject matter, I tried and tried not to be bothered by the shortcomings of this book as I forced myself to plow through it long after I began noticing problems. In the end I can only say it was a disappointment. The authors apparently spoke to many learned university professors and much information of substance can be gleaned from the book, especially with respect to the early centuries when the language was emerging. However, the section entitled "Notes and Sources" makes a mockery of the meaning of the words "note" and "source." Time and again they include quotes with no attribution or identification of the source. For example, on p. 319 they give us, "As early as 1820, one writer observed. . . .", "Another writer. . .spoke of. . . .", and "A third, a working man called Harris. . . ." In what passes for "Notes and Sources" in this book, the entries skip from p. 317 to p. 321! Perhaps we should be grateful that of the three sourceless quotes on the page, we are given a year for one and a name for another. It is also irritating that the authors capriciously dismiss many "apocryphal etymologies" while excitedly describing other word origins based on myth and legend when it suits them. This seems to be the result of the authors' fondness for accentuating the influence that various underprivileged peoples (Irish, blacks, etc.) have had on the mainstream language. The Black English pronunciation of "ask" as "aks" is mentioned, and even though "Notes and Sources" admits that Chaucer did it too, there is no discussion about this. The inescapable conclusion is not that Black English got it from Chaucer, but that it emerged independently. The authors apparently have no idea that "aks" can also be heard in the countryside of the American Midwest, but if they did I suspect they would credit it to Black English, even though it's only a coincidence. This suspicion is founded in the fact that there are countless other examples of simplified pronunciations in the New World which the authors heroically trace to Irish, Scots, German, Yiddish, or to anything they can possibly find to provide an explanation other than the most obvious: that these are the natural result when pronunciation becomes careless. Indeed, the authors dismiss the concept of "lazy" pronunciation out of hand. It's just not politically correct to call anybody lazy any more. I do sense that the authors are commendably trying not to be too England-centered, but in this they fail as well. The unequivocal denial of local linguistic variety within the US, within Canada, and within Australia betrays their bias, ignorance, and lack of research. We are told that there are four regional varieties of English in the US. Perhaps the local variations that do exist, being generally mutually intelligible, don't count. Then again, the same can be said of the four regional US dialects described. The only New World language variants the authors seem to be really interested in are those which they are able to trace through the centuries to specific areas of the British Isles. The authors also intermittently lose the ability to distinguish the difference in degree of importance between the addition of words to the vocabulary and actual changes to the syntax of the language. The former often happened simply because of the encounter with flora, fauna, and geographical features which did not exist in the British Isles. Sometimes the authors say as much and don't treat it as a significant event, but at other times they treat it as evidence of the "influence" of some group of people or another on the language. Aside from the politically correct bias that pervades the book, the basic problem is that the authors are trying too hard to make this an interesting story. For someone who already considers the history of the English language to be an interesting subject, much of the authors' efforts are gratuitous. Note: I read the 1992 edition published by Faber and Faber.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating
Review: I bought this book on a whim, and then spent the next two days finishing it, cover to cover. It was the most engrossing non-fiction book I have ever read. Of course, it helps to have an interest in the subject matter.
Rating:
Summary: The Story of English
Review: I first discovered this book at a local library's used-book sale. I found it fascinating and informative. As an elementary schoolteacher, I have used portions of it for reference and lessons. In this nation of immigrants, anyone with even a mild interest in language will find this book highly entertaining and educational!
Rating:
Summary: Highly recommended!
Review: I picked up this book out of a longstanding curiosity about the English language and I cannot put it down! I am not a native speaker of English -- although I had my first contact with (Brittish) English at the age of six -- and this book was a pleasant surprise! It reveals the multitudinous forces that have shaped the English language and its numerous variants since the very beginning until today. It also presents the relation between language and culture quite eloquently; the story of English is very interesting precisely because the story of its speakers throughout the world is so rich! Anyway, if you are curious like me, then pick the book up yourself and read it!
Rating:
Summary: Refreshing lack of triumphalism
Review: I read this book back in my 'English Conversation Teacher' days in Japan. Having been embrassed one to many times by students having to lecture me, their teacher, on the history of English, I figured I should do some 'catch-up reading.' I asked around for suggestions and was recommended 'The Story of English'. It is free of the linguistic jargon most general readers would find pedantic, and although it is aimed at the general reader it is never condescending. The first half of the book explains the historical development of English while the second half focues on modern English. Most refreshing though, is that it is free of the triumphalism found in many books of this kind. Reflecting the demographic reality of English today, it gives even-handed attention to the many contemporary varieties of English spoken around the world in places such as North America, Singapore, India, the Anglophone West Indies, and so on. 'The Story of English' is best suited to those who are curious about the origins as well as the future of English, and who want an easy-to-understand introduction to the subject.
Rating: 
Summary: Surprisingly pleased
Review: I started reading this out of sheer curiousity, but I ended up enjoying it more than I thought. I was amazed at how much I learned by the time I was done with the book. Tons of pages are turned over and many passages are marked. This is something which I will refer to frequently.
| 
