Originally Posted By: zmjezhd
The fact that one can read Tom Jones or Tristam Shandy without too much trouble, except an occasional trip to the dictionary (I am speaking of the grammar of the the language thereto) puts the lie to your assertion.

Informed readers today have the advantage of having experienced 250-year-old (and newer, and older) English. We can see the connection across the centuries through the intermediates we've experienced. I'd be curious to see how well a reader from Fielding's era - the middle of the 18th Century - would cope with a Michael Crichton novel. Agreed that the underlying grammar has changed but little, but the poor fellow would be lost when it came to virtually every other aspect of the language he'd find there.

"I don't know which is worse: ignorance or apathy. And, frankly, I don't care." - Anonymous