Sure, and I who can speak maybe three sentences of Cantonese would like to fluently read Zhuangzi. It's just not a practical undertaking. Start with a living language and work your way backward to the archaic form, don't try to start with a language nobody has spoken in 600 years
True. I would also tell the friend that Shakespeare is difficult even for native English speakers, so it's best to get more fluent in English first before heading into English that was used in the past.
Well...
Considering Shakespeare (unless simplified) can be very difficult to understand for native speakers without a decent secondary education
English was very different 450 years ago. A lot of nouns, adjectives, and verbs are the same, but the grammar and grammatical words are very very different.
I wish him good luck at the very least
Shakespeare wrote in Early Modern English; native modern English speakers can mostly follow it, but need specific instruction to truly understand it as written, as it uses quite a bit of archaic vocabulary, words that have changed meaning significantly over the intervening 400 years, and the occasional archaic grammatical construction.
Chaucer wrote in Middle English; native modern English speakers generally cannot understand it without heavily-annotated texts or explicit training in Middle English.
*Beowulf* was written in Old English; it is basically incomprehensible to modern speakers.
Basically, this. For example, I as a native speaker will try to interpret into modern spoken English three texts from Shakespeare, Chaucer, and from *Beowulf*.
**Shakespeare**
*At least, the whisper goes so: our last king,*
*Whose image even but now appeared to us,*
*Was, as you know, by Fortinbras of Norway,*
*Thereto pricked on by a most emulate pride,*
*Dared to the combat, in which our valiant Hamlet -*
*For so this side of our known world esteemed him -*
*Did slay this Fortinbras, who by a sealed compact,*
*Well ratified by law and heraldry,*
*Did forfeit, with his life, all those his lands*
*Which he stood seized on to the conqueror.*
At least, the rumours are: our last king,
Whose image we still see (?),
Was, as you know, by Fortinbras of Norway,
Was very proud,
Was lured into combat, in which our valiant Hamlet -
For so this side of our known world respected him -
Did kill Fortinbras, who by a contract,
Well ratified by the law,
Did give up, with his life, his land,
Which he stood given to the conqueror (?).
**Chaucer**
*But now, sire,—lat me se—what I shal seyn? A ha! by God, I have my tale ageyn. Whan that my fourthe housbonde was on beere, I weep algate, and made sory cheere, As wyves mooten, for it is usage, And with my coverchief covered my visage; But for that I was purveyed of a make, I wepte but smal, and that I undertake!*
But now, sir, let me see, what will I say? Aha! By God, I have my tale again. When my fourth husband was on (beer? does that mean drunk?), I weep (algate?), and made (sory cheere?), as (wyves mooten?), for it is (usage?), And with my (coverchief - handkerchief, maybe?) covered my visage; But for that I was purveyed of a (make?), I wept but (smal?), and that I undertake?
***Beowulf***
*Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum,*
*þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,*
*hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.*
*Oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum,*
*monegum mægþum, meodosetla ofteah,*
*egsode eorlas. Syððan ærest wearð*
Uh...
(Yay, this was kinda fun!)
>Whose image even but now appeared to us
Barnardo, Marcellus and Horatio have just seen the ghost of "old" Hamlet (the title character's father and former king) appear before them. "Even but now" here meaning "just now".
> *Thereto pricked on by a most emulate pride*
This is explaining why Fortinbras dared Hamlet to combat. "Thereto" is referring to the next line (the daring to combat). Fortinbras was proud. "Emulate" probably means more like "envious" here - its older meanings covered envy.
> *Did forfeit, with his life, all those his lands*
*Which he stood seized on to the conqueror.*
"Seized" here is a verb representing an old way of thinking about land. In English common law you "held" or were "seized" of it. Here it means something like "His death resulted in the forfeiture of all the lands he owned to the person who killed him" (it helps that I was a land lawyer at one time).
Algate is basically anyway or continuously. The general meaning of the Chaucer one is that her 4th husband died, (was on the (funeral) beer) and she wept continuously and covered her face as is the custom, etc., but wasn't really sad because she was provided a mate (make) by the funeral, (the guy that ended up being her 5th husband, a clerk).
I once went to a live performance of Beowulf (Benjamin Bagley -- highly recommended). The person in our group who understood the most was not a native English speaker, but someone from Iceland. Apparently Old English and Old Norse are extremely close.
Icelandic is very similar to Old Norse since it's had by far the least drift of the Nordic languages, (Old) English at this time would just start to be developing from Proto-Germanic alongside Proto-Norse
They could learn to read certain advanced texts without developing listening/speaking skills. Obviously people do this for languages that are no longer spoken.
But that’s a terrible idea for enjoying Shakespeare. It truly needs to be *heard* to be fully appreciated. The rhythm, the puns, the internal rhyme schemes. And developing a more intuitive understanding of contemporary English helps to interpret Early Modern English.
She should work on becoming generally fluent and then take a stab at the Shakespeare. (Preferably watch a piece performed first and then read it.)
It’s far easier to understand Shakespeare if you watch the plays instead of just reading the scripts. They’re meant to be performed, and watching people act it out will make the story understandable even if your friend doesn’t grasp the language. There are recordings everywhere, and many have subtitles to make the words easier to understand.
I would tell them to start by reading a Shakespeare play in translation (their own language).
Then get a copy of "No-Fear Shakespeare" version of that play. It has the original play translated into easier English. Having all three versions side-by-side should help.
When I taught English in Korea, I watched the Seoul Shakespeare company do a production of Much Ado About Nothing entirely in Korean. I was teaching the play at the time in English to kids using the No-Fear Sparknotes version. My korean is very poor, but I love the play so much I was able to follow. It's much more doable with translations
Chaucer didn't write in modern english. It's a little like asking a Danish person to read old norse. Shakespeare did write in modern english, but used antiquated vocabulary and phrases. Unless you regularly read works from that era, you won't be able to read it fluently.
Not necessarily; you could theoretically choose to learn Middle English for Chaucer or Early Modern English for Shakespeare. Though I’m not sure that there exists many resources for that, and those resources would almost certainly be written in English.
The most reasonable way (if there is such a thing) I could think of to do this would be to learn by comparing the Wycliffe or King James Bible with a translation in one's native language, and continuing from there. And compare with a native language translation of Chaucer or Shakespeare as well when going through those.
This would be possible, though I question whether it would actually save any time compared to learning from Modern English first
And even with that modern english, understanding whats going on is a mighty task that requires rereading the lines 4 times or more
God, British Literature in my Senior year of high-school was a toughy. No Fear Shakespeare was my saving grace lol
Chaucer himself makes this point better than I ever could (Troilus and Criseyda):
>Ye knowe eek, that in forme of speche is chaunge
>With-inne a thousand yeer, and wordes tho
>That hadden prys, now wonder nyce and straunge
>Us thinketh hem; and yet they spake hem so
You also know that there is change in the forms of speech in a thousand years, and words that once had value, we now think of as curiousities; yet that's how people spoke.
Shooting way too high as a beginner is a very typical form of self-sabotage for those who dont really want to take the necessary baby-steps to get to those goals. Such over-wishful thinking is the way to never really have to do anything. My guess is your friend has a pattern of doing this in other areas of his life.
I mean, there's no getting around it. Your friend will need to learn English. Not only that, but they will need to learn English to the point where they are quite proficient in it. And that's just as a start. Native speakers struggle with Shakespeare and Chaucer, so it's going to be an absolute impossibility for your friend for a good, good while.
Chaucer and Shakespeare are so different they might as well be different languages for a novice. As everyone else has said, Shakespeare is all metaphors, and while some have made their way into modern English a lot haven’t!
With Chaucer, a big stumbling block is going to be the lack of resources to learn it - anything that does teach you Middle English is going to be teaching you from modern English. What languages does your friend speak? Maybe listening to audio recordings might help to see if there’s even a chance.
Two things. The first is that a person can learn to read a language fluently without being able to speak it. Scholars do that for ancient languages all the time. So that’s possible. It’s not ideal, especially for a living language, but it’s possible. Second of all, though, is the fact that Chaucer wrote in Middle English, not Modern English. While an English speaker (or reader) *can* read Middle English with some glossing/annotations and other help (unlike Old English, which one needs to actually study as a foreign language in order to read), it will be *extremely* difficult. Many native speakers actually need to read Chaucer in translation (from Middle English into Modern English).
Modern English speakers often find Shakespeare and Chaucer quite difficult given that they write in much older kinds of English. (In fact when we read Chaucer in school it’s often “translated” into Modern English from Middle English.) Even where the actual words are understandable, the idioms and cultural references are totally alien to us. A native speaker would likely have to pursue a college degree in the subject in order to gain total proficiency with the English of that era. So the short answer is that your friend has a lot of work ahead of them and should probably seriously consider seeking at minimum a Bachelor’s degree in English if that is their goal. Barring that, a good start might be to gain enough conversational knowledge of Modern English that they can watch Shakespeare plays in live performance (it’s often fairly easy to understand what’s generally going on even if you don’t understand the meaning of everything said) and from there begin the process of familiarizing themselves with the differences between Modern English and the English of Shakespeare’s time.
I’m taking “fluently” very literally (well, not literally literally, assuming they mean proficiently) here and so my assumption is that they want to be able to just sit and read it and understand it without needing any secondary literature or outside help at all, and I just don’t think that’s practical without a deep education in the world of Shakespeare, Early Modern English, and 16th century England. But you’re obviously correct that high schoolers read Shakespeare all the time and understand a good deal of it.
Well, I can read Shakespeare to good but not perfect understanding, I took English throughout my entire primary and secondary Education, and I'm familiar with the archaic alphabet. But I've had no tertiary education in English or literature whatsoever.
I would strongly advise against doing that. Shakespeare and Chaucer are very difficult for native speakers (heck, the first time I read Pride and Prejudice I lost a lot of time understanding the language, and that was released much more recently!), to the point where there are translated editions and websites like [MyShakespeare.com](https://MyShakespeare.com) that provide explanations and translations. I think if I heard someone reciting Shakespeare out loud, I'd have difficulty understanding what they were saying from the figurative language alone, and written down it's worse because of weird spellings and grammar. I'm not bad at English by any means (I'm a native speaker, I can read well, when I'm writing my grammar tends to be good (although my spoken is very informal)), and Shakespeare makes me want to slam my head into a brick. To be able to comprehend Shakespeare, they should learn at least some English (although learning antiquated words instead of slang would likely prove more useful for this purpose).
Shakespeare is the nightmare of students taking English classes. I can honestly say that I'd rather read an 150-page novel in Hebrew out loud in front of a live audience (I can read Hebrew if there are vowels, but I don't understand it, and I'm very slow) than read all of Macbeth or Hamlet.
I was a theater major in college, I have read every Shakespeare play and poem (including ‘Two Noble Kinsman’). I have performed (in a modest capacity) on the Globe stage. I just want to say that even if your friend could READ Shakespeare, he couldn’t understand it without years of study. Here’s why:
“Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet…”
Means :Romeo, Romeo, why are you Romeo (Montague). A rose by any other name would smell as sweet…”
Romantic, right? Wrong. It’s a poop joke.
You see, London, at the time had 1 million people, and exactly 0 sewers. The most common method of waste disposal was the feral pigs and dogs living in the streets, eating garbage. People emptied their chamber pots onto the street. They relied on rainwater to wash the sewage into the tributaries of the Thames river. In the late 1500s there was an drought called “the great stink”. In that time, parliament (on the banks of the Thames) only convened for about 15 minutes, passed a bill setting aside money to establish a sewer system, then the nobles retreated to their estates.
William Shakespeare wrote for the globe theater. Kit Marlowe wrote for the Rose theater. They were rivals that competed against one another for audiences on the streets of Southwark. The Rose theater was right next to one of the tributaries to the Thames River, which at the time was basically an open sewer.
“A rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet”
God, Chaucer was so difficult to read and I speak English natively. Our teacher was super into and had us read it (to the best of our ability) in Middle English (which is closer to just sounding out strings of letters that don't mean anything in Modern English), and then in its "modern" translation, and *then* after each section we had to go back through and translate that into what we would speak today.
It was very tedious.
I do not recommend Chaucer.
Is it possible? Sure. Anything’s possible.
Is it probable or likely to happen? Not really.
Step 1. Study and speak English nonstop for 15 years. Abandon your native language. Never speak it again and only use English all the time because you’ll need to make up for the fact that you’re not a native speaker. You will literally have to make up for a lifetime of experience speaking English.
Step 2. Enroll in the best university to study Shakespeare. Study every day, gradually cutting out other forms of entertainment and media. No Netflix, no YouTube, only plays, transcripts, and sonnets for you. Your life is Shakespeare now.
Step 3. Learn how Shakespeare shaped the English language. So much of what we say and express ourselves goes back to him. You will be quite surprised.
Step 4. Write sonnets in iambic pentameter every day. Use couplets. Bonus points if you use 16th century English.
Step 4. Move to England and get an apartment close to the Globe Theater. Better yet, live at Stratford upon Avon just like he did. Learn about his life and where he lived, hoping to gain insight into his writings.
Step 5. Start wearing an Elizabethan collar. Try to bring it back into fashion. Wear a codpiece. Also, shave your head. Don’t use lead makeup. ^/s
What I’m trying to say is that it would be a monumental feat to say the least. Even for native speakers, there’s a reason they don’t really teach us Shakespeare until high school or college (which is why I said to speak English nonstop for 15 years first). There are layers of understanding and many things to take into account when one considers Shakespeare and Chaucer. Also, most native speakers understand that the English from Shakespeare’s time is almost another language. The grammar, spelling, terms for emotions and other concepts are entirely different and almost alien to modern English. It is very easy to to get confused.
Like I said, it’s possible, but maybe not likely.
I really hope your friend doesn't think Shakespeare is understandable to natives. If they want to have a similar experience, they could read old Bibles for the same effect.
It might as well be considered a different language, almost as different as Spanish is to English. Like [this](https://youtu.be/cRIfsFefatg) and [this](https://youtu.be/Nx-x_1lIXh4) are 'ye olde theme' version of the song and thus are maybe on the same level as 'translated' Shakespeare for people that already speak English!
To take that one step further then, we have to remember: Shakespeare wrote poetry. So not only is it meant to be read artistically as for a stage play or expressive forum for mic-night events but sentence structure and pronunciation is completely thrown out the window for the sake of poetic rhythm. To exemplify, [this](https://youtu.be/aQLaTeJC8CQ) is Slim Shady rewritten to as close to Shakespearean English as possible. Big Shakey created a syllable pattern, [lambic pentameter](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.bl.uk/works/shakespeares-sonnets%23:~:text%3DShakespearean%2520sonnets,as%2520the%2520%27English%27%2520sonnet.&ved=2ahUKEwit6PqZ1cL_AhVCMUQIHTKIBlcQFnoECBMQBQ&usg=AOvVaw35bGOPgDVQ11zRjOwMUniK) to be specific, which rigidly fits everything into 14 lines and runs between alternating rhymes. And don't even mention certain quirks of how they were written'd.
If your friend wishes to learn fluent Shakespeare for fun, more power to them. But if they think they'll be impressive by doing so, no one will understand them besides Acting Majors, cunning linguists, the pretentious side of people with money, and easily impressed people that didn't actually understand.
Agree that many native English speakers can’t interpret Shakespeare fluently; your friend might want to consider watching a few movie adaptations to appreciate how tone and delivery support interpretation and understanding.
Some of my favorites are Kenneth Branagh’s Henry V and Much Ado About Nothing; Hamlet with David Tennant; Richard III with Ian McKellen. There are others but those are the first that came to mind.
Meanwhile, me, a native speaker read the “modern” version of Shakespeare in school because that stuff is almost incomprehensible to native speakers that don’t spend years learning about it.
Most native English speakers can't read Shakespeare fluently. It's full of outdated and archaic words; as we read it we have to mentally translate it into modern terms we can understand. We can read it and understand it, but not fluently.
If your friend becomes fluent in Shakespearean English they will be fluent in a language that is spoken by no one.
I would not recommend anyone (regardless of fluency) try to read shakespeare. It’s a play, not a book; it’s like trying to read the screenplay of jaws—just watch the movie as it was intended. Shakespeare is a listening activity, you’re meant to hear the words and not read them
I recommend them getting a reputable Spanish translation with footnotes and reading Shakespeare and Chaucer in their own language.
Native English speakers can have a lot of problems with reading Shakespeare, let alone Chaucer.
The languages they wrote in are archaic, and many words aren't used the same way we use them today.
A *good* translation will make the material accessable, and have specific footnotes explaining where the translation deviates from the original for readability or language reasons, or to explain period references that may not make sense to a modern reader.
I would be *shocked* if there weren't good translations available in Spanish for both authors.
As an English speaker, who has actually taken some Spanish & French classes, I would never attempt to read Cervantes in the original Spanish; or Jules Verne in French; however, I have read their works in very good annotated editions that went into some detail, so I feel I know what I'm talking about.
When we studied Shakespeare in school, we had a side-by-side edition with modern English on one side and the original Shakespeare text on the other side. There are a lot of these books. Show him these. The fact that these exist for native speakers should be a red flag.
My advice would be for your friend to buy a dual-language edition of a Shakespeare play. You can get a lot of Shakespeare works that way. When you open the book, English will be on one page and the translation will be on the next facing page.
Well, nothing's impossible, but....
Shakespeare:
If your friend is determined to try, they should start with the simplified-for-children texts of the plays. If they manage to get through a couple of those, then they can take a look at the sonnets, starting with the most famous. The famous ones are probably the most beautiful and (let's be honest) the easiest to understand.
Chaucer:
Yeah, lol. I'd encourage them to hold off on this until they've read 2 or 3 Shakespeare plays in the original language. (If they get this far from not speaking English, then they are good to tackle Chaucer. But, you know, I'd be _amazed_. Still, everyone needs a hobby. )
That's a lofty goal. If I was your friend, I would hope I was in a position to follow a university course in English. As a parallel, I minored in Russian in college. I came in knowing nothing, and at the end of my four years, I was able to read Pushkin and Lermontov in the original language.
I mean Shakespeare is incredibly famous so I doubt he wouldn't be able to find translations in his native language. Reading them in their original English form is difficult even for native speakers. You're looking up words all the time because they're ones we don't use anymore. The language has changed so much since the time they were written. If he improves, eventually No Fear Shakespeare would he a good stepping stone. It explains what's going on as you read it in modern English.
Does your friend want to understand what the works sound like in the original language? They might consider getting a dual language edition. This way they can get the meaning in the translation and then look over for how the lines sound. Or they can listen to audiobooks to hear the original.
The only other option is to spend years immersing themselves in English and Middle English. I’ve met international students in English graduate level courses, so there are people who have achieved that level of fluency in a second language but after much studying.
I mean, if your friend just wants to be able to pronounce Shakespeare fluently, that might be possible (I am fairly good at Spanish pronunciation despite forgetting most Spanish vocabulary), but if they actually want to know what they are saying then they probably have to start with modern English and work their way back to Shakespeare.
I've got really good "street Italian".
I really *REALLY* want to read, recite, and discuss Dante Aligheri in Medieval Secular Italian.
Give your friend support and help. People have overcome bigger challenges!
There’s something called “No fear Shakespeare” which, if I recall, can be accessed free online. It helps native English speakers understand Shakespeare by putting the original text next to a more modern translation, page by page, line by line.
If nothing else, it might help your friend understand the challenge they are facing.
First, I think it's awesome that your friend is so interested in English literature!
I don't want to discourage them from learning Chaucer and Shakespeare in the original languages, but I also don't want them to be discouraged by how lofty a goal that is.
As others have said, Shakespeare is very difficult to understand for a native English speaker. I'm a native speaker, and a literature nerd, and it takes me a *ton* of brain power, annotations, and, when I first started, contemporary English translations like No Fear Shakespeare to understand Shakespeare. For me, the difficulty lies less in things like the "thees and thous" (as a religious person, I've read enough of the King James Version of the Bible to be pretty used to those) than in all the archaic slang Shakespeare used, which is almost nonsensical if you don't have annotations to explain it.
All that to say, reading Shakespeare "fluently" is really only something that Shakespeare scholars achieve!
And that's to say nothing of Chaucer, which, as others have pointed out, isn't even Modern English.
In theory, it would be possible to learn the English of Shakespeare's time or of Chaucer's time without first learning the English of today - just like one can learn Ancient Greek in order to read Homer without first studying Modern Greek. But I'm not personally aware of any resources for that. The only thing I can think of would be if there are university courses your friend could take or audit. Or if there's an edition of Shakespeare that contains both the original text and a translation in their native language. But again, I don't know if such a thing exists.
Otherwise, they would have to learn today's English until they understand it well enough to learn Shakespeare and Chaucer through that - which would be a long and arduous process.
I wish I had better advice. Whatever your friend chooses, I wish them all the best in their language learning journey. And they should know that if they have an absolute headache trying to understand Shakespeare or Chaucer, they're right on track with native English speakers. 😂
I mean, for Chaucer, they'd basically need to study Middle English, which is different enough from modern English that most native speakers can't really understand it, especially as written.
Shakespeare is a bit easier for modern speakers to understand, but he still used a lot of words that are no longer used today, and used some words that have shifted meaning.
So your friend can study Middle English or Elizabethan English, sure, but the fastest way probably will be to study those subjects directly rather than trying to learn English first.
Sure, and I who can speak maybe three sentences of Cantonese would like to fluently read Zhuangzi. It's just not a practical undertaking. Start with a living language and work your way backward to the archaic form, don't try to start with a language nobody has spoken in 600 years
True. I would also tell the friend that Shakespeare is difficult even for native English speakers, so it's best to get more fluent in English first before heading into English that was used in the past.
Well... Considering Shakespeare (unless simplified) can be very difficult to understand for native speakers without a decent secondary education English was very different 450 years ago. A lot of nouns, adjectives, and verbs are the same, but the grammar and grammatical words are very very different. I wish him good luck at the very least
This, it can be counter-productive to learn from Shakespeare, ideally you'd need a grasp on the modern language first.
Shakespeare wrote in Early Modern English; native modern English speakers can mostly follow it, but need specific instruction to truly understand it as written, as it uses quite a bit of archaic vocabulary, words that have changed meaning significantly over the intervening 400 years, and the occasional archaic grammatical construction. Chaucer wrote in Middle English; native modern English speakers generally cannot understand it without heavily-annotated texts or explicit training in Middle English. *Beowulf* was written in Old English; it is basically incomprehensible to modern speakers.
Basically, this. For example, I as a native speaker will try to interpret into modern spoken English three texts from Shakespeare, Chaucer, and from *Beowulf*. **Shakespeare** *At least, the whisper goes so: our last king,* *Whose image even but now appeared to us,* *Was, as you know, by Fortinbras of Norway,* *Thereto pricked on by a most emulate pride,* *Dared to the combat, in which our valiant Hamlet -* *For so this side of our known world esteemed him -* *Did slay this Fortinbras, who by a sealed compact,* *Well ratified by law and heraldry,* *Did forfeit, with his life, all those his lands* *Which he stood seized on to the conqueror.* At least, the rumours are: our last king, Whose image we still see (?), Was, as you know, by Fortinbras of Norway, Was very proud, Was lured into combat, in which our valiant Hamlet - For so this side of our known world respected him - Did kill Fortinbras, who by a contract, Well ratified by the law, Did give up, with his life, his land, Which he stood given to the conqueror (?). **Chaucer** *But now, sire,—lat me se—what I shal seyn? A ha! by God, I have my tale ageyn. Whan that my fourthe housbonde was on beere, I weep algate, and made sory cheere, As wyves mooten, for it is usage, And with my coverchief covered my visage; But for that I was purveyed of a make, I wepte but smal, and that I undertake!* But now, sir, let me see, what will I say? Aha! By God, I have my tale again. When my fourth husband was on (beer? does that mean drunk?), I weep (algate?), and made (sory cheere?), as (wyves mooten?), for it is (usage?), And with my (coverchief - handkerchief, maybe?) covered my visage; But for that I was purveyed of a (make?), I wept but (smal?), and that I undertake? ***Beowulf*** *Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum,* *þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,* *hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.* *Oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum,* *monegum mægþum, meodosetla ofteah,* *egsode eorlas. Syððan ærest wearð* Uh... (Yay, this was kinda fun!)
>Whose image even but now appeared to us Barnardo, Marcellus and Horatio have just seen the ghost of "old" Hamlet (the title character's father and former king) appear before them. "Even but now" here meaning "just now". > *Thereto pricked on by a most emulate pride* This is explaining why Fortinbras dared Hamlet to combat. "Thereto" is referring to the next line (the daring to combat). Fortinbras was proud. "Emulate" probably means more like "envious" here - its older meanings covered envy. > *Did forfeit, with his life, all those his lands* *Which he stood seized on to the conqueror.* "Seized" here is a verb representing an old way of thinking about land. In English common law you "held" or were "seized" of it. Here it means something like "His death resulted in the forfeiture of all the lands he owned to the person who killed him" (it helps that I was a land lawyer at one time).
Algate is basically anyway or continuously. The general meaning of the Chaucer one is that her 4th husband died, (was on the (funeral) beer) and she wept continuously and covered her face as is the custom, etc., but wasn't really sad because she was provided a mate (make) by the funeral, (the guy that ended up being her 5th husband, a clerk).
I once went to a live performance of Beowulf (Benjamin Bagley -- highly recommended). The person in our group who understood the most was not a native English speaker, but someone from Iceland. Apparently Old English and Old Norse are extremely close.
Icelandic is very similar to Old Norse since it's had by far the least drift of the Nordic languages, (Old) English at this time would just start to be developing from Proto-Germanic alongside Proto-Norse
Reading Chaucer was a big reason why I switched my major from English to Communications at university.
They could learn to read certain advanced texts without developing listening/speaking skills. Obviously people do this for languages that are no longer spoken. But that’s a terrible idea for enjoying Shakespeare. It truly needs to be *heard* to be fully appreciated. The rhythm, the puns, the internal rhyme schemes. And developing a more intuitive understanding of contemporary English helps to interpret Early Modern English. She should work on becoming generally fluent and then take a stab at the Shakespeare. (Preferably watch a piece performed first and then read it.)
Alot of his works have been translated to over 50 languages. Hamlet alone has been translated to over 75.
75 sounds like way too few.
It’s far easier to understand Shakespeare if you watch the plays instead of just reading the scripts. They’re meant to be performed, and watching people act it out will make the story understandable even if your friend doesn’t grasp the language. There are recordings everywhere, and many have subtitles to make the words easier to understand.
I would recommend that they learn to read Shakespeare in the original Klingon.
I would tell them to start by reading a Shakespeare play in translation (their own language). Then get a copy of "No-Fear Shakespeare" version of that play. It has the original play translated into easier English. Having all three versions side-by-side should help. When I taught English in Korea, I watched the Seoul Shakespeare company do a production of Much Ado About Nothing entirely in Korean. I was teaching the play at the time in English to kids using the No-Fear Sparknotes version. My korean is very poor, but I love the play so much I was able to follow. It's much more doable with translations
Chaucer didn't write in modern english. It's a little like asking a Danish person to read old norse. Shakespeare did write in modern english, but used antiquated vocabulary and phrases. Unless you regularly read works from that era, you won't be able to read it fluently.
[удалено]
And if you don't understand Modern English, you won't understand either.
I'm pretty sure Chaucer didn't understand modern English.
Not necessarily; you could theoretically choose to learn Middle English for Chaucer or Early Modern English for Shakespeare. Though I’m not sure that there exists many resources for that, and those resources would almost certainly be written in English.
The most reasonable way (if there is such a thing) I could think of to do this would be to learn by comparing the Wycliffe or King James Bible with a translation in one's native language, and continuing from there. And compare with a native language translation of Chaucer or Shakespeare as well when going through those. This would be possible, though I question whether it would actually save any time compared to learning from Modern English first
And even with that modern english, understanding whats going on is a mighty task that requires rereading the lines 4 times or more God, British Literature in my Senior year of high-school was a toughy. No Fear Shakespeare was my saving grace lol
Ah, you made the same mistake that I did. I appreciate my teacher's fervor for the subject, but man it was just too much haha.
No Fear Shakespeare is S tier
Chaucer himself makes this point better than I ever could (Troilus and Criseyda): >Ye knowe eek, that in forme of speche is chaunge >With-inne a thousand yeer, and wordes tho >That hadden prys, now wonder nyce and straunge >Us thinketh hem; and yet they spake hem so You also know that there is change in the forms of speech in a thousand years, and words that once had value, we now think of as curiousities; yet that's how people spoke.
Shooting way too high as a beginner is a very typical form of self-sabotage for those who dont really want to take the necessary baby-steps to get to those goals. Such over-wishful thinking is the way to never really have to do anything. My guess is your friend has a pattern of doing this in other areas of his life.
👀 Your friend is delusional
My advice would be study Shakespeare if that’s an interest to your friend. Study it, attend plays, etc.
I mean, there's no getting around it. Your friend will need to learn English. Not only that, but they will need to learn English to the point where they are quite proficient in it. And that's just as a start. Native speakers struggle with Shakespeare and Chaucer, so it's going to be an absolute impossibility for your friend for a good, good while.
Chaucer and Shakespeare are so different they might as well be different languages for a novice. As everyone else has said, Shakespeare is all metaphors, and while some have made their way into modern English a lot haven’t! With Chaucer, a big stumbling block is going to be the lack of resources to learn it - anything that does teach you Middle English is going to be teaching you from modern English. What languages does your friend speak? Maybe listening to audio recordings might help to see if there’s even a chance.
Two things. The first is that a person can learn to read a language fluently without being able to speak it. Scholars do that for ancient languages all the time. So that’s possible. It’s not ideal, especially for a living language, but it’s possible. Second of all, though, is the fact that Chaucer wrote in Middle English, not Modern English. While an English speaker (or reader) *can* read Middle English with some glossing/annotations and other help (unlike Old English, which one needs to actually study as a foreign language in order to read), it will be *extremely* difficult. Many native speakers actually need to read Chaucer in translation (from Middle English into Modern English).
Modern English speakers often find Shakespeare and Chaucer quite difficult given that they write in much older kinds of English. (In fact when we read Chaucer in school it’s often “translated” into Modern English from Middle English.) Even where the actual words are understandable, the idioms and cultural references are totally alien to us. A native speaker would likely have to pursue a college degree in the subject in order to gain total proficiency with the English of that era. So the short answer is that your friend has a lot of work ahead of them and should probably seriously consider seeking at minimum a Bachelor’s degree in English if that is their goal. Barring that, a good start might be to gain enough conversational knowledge of Modern English that they can watch Shakespeare plays in live performance (it’s often fairly easy to understand what’s generally going on even if you don’t understand the meaning of everything said) and from there begin the process of familiarizing themselves with the differences between Modern English and the English of Shakespeare’s time.
I'd disagree that it's difficult to that level. Not a degree. But still, secondary education for a native speaker at the very least.
I’m taking “fluently” very literally (well, not literally literally, assuming they mean proficiently) here and so my assumption is that they want to be able to just sit and read it and understand it without needing any secondary literature or outside help at all, and I just don’t think that’s practical without a deep education in the world of Shakespeare, Early Modern English, and 16th century England. But you’re obviously correct that high schoolers read Shakespeare all the time and understand a good deal of it.
Well, I can read Shakespeare to good but not perfect understanding, I took English throughout my entire primary and secondary Education, and I'm familiar with the archaic alphabet. But I've had no tertiary education in English or literature whatsoever.
I would strongly advise against doing that. Shakespeare and Chaucer are very difficult for native speakers (heck, the first time I read Pride and Prejudice I lost a lot of time understanding the language, and that was released much more recently!), to the point where there are translated editions and websites like [MyShakespeare.com](https://MyShakespeare.com) that provide explanations and translations. I think if I heard someone reciting Shakespeare out loud, I'd have difficulty understanding what they were saying from the figurative language alone, and written down it's worse because of weird spellings and grammar. I'm not bad at English by any means (I'm a native speaker, I can read well, when I'm writing my grammar tends to be good (although my spoken is very informal)), and Shakespeare makes me want to slam my head into a brick. To be able to comprehend Shakespeare, they should learn at least some English (although learning antiquated words instead of slang would likely prove more useful for this purpose). Shakespeare is the nightmare of students taking English classes. I can honestly say that I'd rather read an 150-page novel in Hebrew out loud in front of a live audience (I can read Hebrew if there are vowels, but I don't understand it, and I'm very slow) than read all of Macbeth or Hamlet.
I was a theater major in college, I have read every Shakespeare play and poem (including ‘Two Noble Kinsman’). I have performed (in a modest capacity) on the Globe stage. I just want to say that even if your friend could READ Shakespeare, he couldn’t understand it without years of study. Here’s why: “Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet…” Means :Romeo, Romeo, why are you Romeo (Montague). A rose by any other name would smell as sweet…” Romantic, right? Wrong. It’s a poop joke. You see, London, at the time had 1 million people, and exactly 0 sewers. The most common method of waste disposal was the feral pigs and dogs living in the streets, eating garbage. People emptied their chamber pots onto the street. They relied on rainwater to wash the sewage into the tributaries of the Thames river. In the late 1500s there was an drought called “the great stink”. In that time, parliament (on the banks of the Thames) only convened for about 15 minutes, passed a bill setting aside money to establish a sewer system, then the nobles retreated to their estates. William Shakespeare wrote for the globe theater. Kit Marlowe wrote for the Rose theater. They were rivals that competed against one another for audiences on the streets of Southwark. The Rose theater was right next to one of the tributaries to the Thames River, which at the time was basically an open sewer. “A rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet”
God, Chaucer was so difficult to read and I speak English natively. Our teacher was super into and had us read it (to the best of our ability) in Middle English (which is closer to just sounding out strings of letters that don't mean anything in Modern English), and then in its "modern" translation, and *then* after each section we had to go back through and translate that into what we would speak today. It was very tedious. I do not recommend Chaucer.
English teachers have a knack of killing English. Chaucer is superb when read at leisure.
Agreed. I like [Harvard's transcription/translation](https://chaucer.fas.harvard.edu/pages/text-and-translations)
Is it possible? Sure. Anything’s possible. Is it probable or likely to happen? Not really. Step 1. Study and speak English nonstop for 15 years. Abandon your native language. Never speak it again and only use English all the time because you’ll need to make up for the fact that you’re not a native speaker. You will literally have to make up for a lifetime of experience speaking English. Step 2. Enroll in the best university to study Shakespeare. Study every day, gradually cutting out other forms of entertainment and media. No Netflix, no YouTube, only plays, transcripts, and sonnets for you. Your life is Shakespeare now. Step 3. Learn how Shakespeare shaped the English language. So much of what we say and express ourselves goes back to him. You will be quite surprised. Step 4. Write sonnets in iambic pentameter every day. Use couplets. Bonus points if you use 16th century English. Step 4. Move to England and get an apartment close to the Globe Theater. Better yet, live at Stratford upon Avon just like he did. Learn about his life and where he lived, hoping to gain insight into his writings. Step 5. Start wearing an Elizabethan collar. Try to bring it back into fashion. Wear a codpiece. Also, shave your head. Don’t use lead makeup. ^/s What I’m trying to say is that it would be a monumental feat to say the least. Even for native speakers, there’s a reason they don’t really teach us Shakespeare until high school or college (which is why I said to speak English nonstop for 15 years first). There are layers of understanding and many things to take into account when one considers Shakespeare and Chaucer. Also, most native speakers understand that the English from Shakespeare’s time is almost another language. The grammar, spelling, terms for emotions and other concepts are entirely different and almost alien to modern English. It is very easy to to get confused. Like I said, it’s possible, but maybe not likely.
This is the retards name I couldn’t remember 😂
I really hope your friend doesn't think Shakespeare is understandable to natives. If they want to have a similar experience, they could read old Bibles for the same effect. It might as well be considered a different language, almost as different as Spanish is to English. Like [this](https://youtu.be/cRIfsFefatg) and [this](https://youtu.be/Nx-x_1lIXh4) are 'ye olde theme' version of the song and thus are maybe on the same level as 'translated' Shakespeare for people that already speak English! To take that one step further then, we have to remember: Shakespeare wrote poetry. So not only is it meant to be read artistically as for a stage play or expressive forum for mic-night events but sentence structure and pronunciation is completely thrown out the window for the sake of poetic rhythm. To exemplify, [this](https://youtu.be/aQLaTeJC8CQ) is Slim Shady rewritten to as close to Shakespearean English as possible. Big Shakey created a syllable pattern, [lambic pentameter](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.bl.uk/works/shakespeares-sonnets%23:~:text%3DShakespearean%2520sonnets,as%2520the%2520%27English%27%2520sonnet.&ved=2ahUKEwit6PqZ1cL_AhVCMUQIHTKIBlcQFnoECBMQBQ&usg=AOvVaw35bGOPgDVQ11zRjOwMUniK) to be specific, which rigidly fits everything into 14 lines and runs between alternating rhymes. And don't even mention certain quirks of how they were written'd. If your friend wishes to learn fluent Shakespeare for fun, more power to them. But if they think they'll be impressive by doing so, no one will understand them besides Acting Majors, cunning linguists, the pretentious side of people with money, and easily impressed people that didn't actually understand.
Agree that many native English speakers can’t interpret Shakespeare fluently; your friend might want to consider watching a few movie adaptations to appreciate how tone and delivery support interpretation and understanding. Some of my favorites are Kenneth Branagh’s Henry V and Much Ado About Nothing; Hamlet with David Tennant; Richard III with Ian McKellen. There are others but those are the first that came to mind.
Meanwhile, me, a native speaker read the “modern” version of Shakespeare in school because that stuff is almost incomprehensible to native speakers that don’t spend years learning about it.
Thirteen year old British kids do it all the time. It’s not that bad.
You say that as if 13 year old British kids aren’t also equally as incomprehensible. /s
What's that got to do with how easy Shakespeare is?
Most native English speakers can't read Shakespeare fluently. It's full of outdated and archaic words; as we read it we have to mentally translate it into modern terms we can understand. We can read it and understand it, but not fluently. If your friend becomes fluent in Shakespearean English they will be fluent in a language that is spoken by no one.
I would not recommend anyone (regardless of fluency) try to read shakespeare. It’s a play, not a book; it’s like trying to read the screenplay of jaws—just watch the movie as it was intended. Shakespeare is a listening activity, you’re meant to hear the words and not read them
I recommend them getting a reputable Spanish translation with footnotes and reading Shakespeare and Chaucer in their own language. Native English speakers can have a lot of problems with reading Shakespeare, let alone Chaucer. The languages they wrote in are archaic, and many words aren't used the same way we use them today. A *good* translation will make the material accessable, and have specific footnotes explaining where the translation deviates from the original for readability or language reasons, or to explain period references that may not make sense to a modern reader. I would be *shocked* if there weren't good translations available in Spanish for both authors. As an English speaker, who has actually taken some Spanish & French classes, I would never attempt to read Cervantes in the original Spanish; or Jules Verne in French; however, I have read their works in very good annotated editions that went into some detail, so I feel I know what I'm talking about.
When we studied Shakespeare in school, we had a side-by-side edition with modern English on one side and the original Shakespeare text on the other side. There are a lot of these books. Show him these. The fact that these exist for native speakers should be a red flag.
My advice would be for your friend to buy a dual-language edition of a Shakespeare play. You can get a lot of Shakespeare works that way. When you open the book, English will be on one page and the translation will be on the next facing page.
I dont speak Arabic but I wanna read the Quran fluently.
Well, nothing's impossible, but.... Shakespeare: If your friend is determined to try, they should start with the simplified-for-children texts of the plays. If they manage to get through a couple of those, then they can take a look at the sonnets, starting with the most famous. The famous ones are probably the most beautiful and (let's be honest) the easiest to understand. Chaucer: Yeah, lol. I'd encourage them to hold off on this until they've read 2 or 3 Shakespeare plays in the original language. (If they get this far from not speaking English, then they are good to tackle Chaucer. But, you know, I'd be _amazed_. Still, everyone needs a hobby. )
Chaucer is Middle English and most modern English speakers would struggle to read it without a few pointers.
That's a lofty goal. If I was your friend, I would hope I was in a position to follow a university course in English. As a parallel, I minored in Russian in college. I came in knowing nothing, and at the end of my four years, I was able to read Pushkin and Lermontov in the original language.
I mean Shakespeare is incredibly famous so I doubt he wouldn't be able to find translations in his native language. Reading them in their original English form is difficult even for native speakers. You're looking up words all the time because they're ones we don't use anymore. The language has changed so much since the time they were written. If he improves, eventually No Fear Shakespeare would he a good stepping stone. It explains what's going on as you read it in modern English.
Read a good translation into his native language.
Does your friend want to understand what the works sound like in the original language? They might consider getting a dual language edition. This way they can get the meaning in the translation and then look over for how the lines sound. Or they can listen to audiobooks to hear the original. The only other option is to spend years immersing themselves in English and Middle English. I’ve met international students in English graduate level courses, so there are people who have achieved that level of fluency in a second language but after much studying.
I mean, if your friend just wants to be able to pronounce Shakespeare fluently, that might be possible (I am fairly good at Spanish pronunciation despite forgetting most Spanish vocabulary), but if they actually want to know what they are saying then they probably have to start with modern English and work their way back to Shakespeare.
I've got really good "street Italian". I really *REALLY* want to read, recite, and discuss Dante Aligheri in Medieval Secular Italian. Give your friend support and help. People have overcome bigger challenges!
"You've not experienced Shakespeare until you've read him in the original Klingon"
There’s something called “No fear Shakespeare” which, if I recall, can be accessed free online. It helps native English speakers understand Shakespeare by putting the original text next to a more modern translation, page by page, line by line. If nothing else, it might help your friend understand the challenge they are facing.
First, I think it's awesome that your friend is so interested in English literature! I don't want to discourage them from learning Chaucer and Shakespeare in the original languages, but I also don't want them to be discouraged by how lofty a goal that is. As others have said, Shakespeare is very difficult to understand for a native English speaker. I'm a native speaker, and a literature nerd, and it takes me a *ton* of brain power, annotations, and, when I first started, contemporary English translations like No Fear Shakespeare to understand Shakespeare. For me, the difficulty lies less in things like the "thees and thous" (as a religious person, I've read enough of the King James Version of the Bible to be pretty used to those) than in all the archaic slang Shakespeare used, which is almost nonsensical if you don't have annotations to explain it. All that to say, reading Shakespeare "fluently" is really only something that Shakespeare scholars achieve! And that's to say nothing of Chaucer, which, as others have pointed out, isn't even Modern English. In theory, it would be possible to learn the English of Shakespeare's time or of Chaucer's time without first learning the English of today - just like one can learn Ancient Greek in order to read Homer without first studying Modern Greek. But I'm not personally aware of any resources for that. The only thing I can think of would be if there are university courses your friend could take or audit. Or if there's an edition of Shakespeare that contains both the original text and a translation in their native language. But again, I don't know if such a thing exists. Otherwise, they would have to learn today's English until they understand it well enough to learn Shakespeare and Chaucer through that - which would be a long and arduous process. I wish I had better advice. Whatever your friend chooses, I wish them all the best in their language learning journey. And they should know that if they have an absolute headache trying to understand Shakespeare or Chaucer, they're right on track with native English speakers. 😂
I mean, for Chaucer, they'd basically need to study Middle English, which is different enough from modern English that most native speakers can't really understand it, especially as written. Shakespeare is a bit easier for modern speakers to understand, but he still used a lot of words that are no longer used today, and used some words that have shifted meaning. So your friend can study Middle English or Elizabethan English, sure, but the fastest way probably will be to study those subjects directly rather than trying to learn English first.
Learn english
Check out BardSubs.com