Let's go back to the beginning, shall we?

The first words about Anglish can be rewritten thus:

Anglish is a tongue made from today's English by drawing together words of Saxon stock and leaving out those which are outlandish.

Writing all in Saxon and Norse-root words isn't such a hardship, but...

I am reading two kinds of mistake about Anglish among the people posting. The first kind stems from laziness in thinking about meaningful speech: "all you blowhards should rather leave English alone," as though by speaking it we don't all have a hand in crafting it.

The second kind stems from laziness in rewriting English by using Saxon sounds without care for meaning. "Uncleftish springballs" is dumb and bewildering. "Great fireballs" when speaking of World War II would do much better: it is Saxon, straightforward, and strong.

Moreover, this bewilderingly dumb problem is heard again and again in the high-speech, low-speech nonsense in shows like those made by that "History" network. Some of the story is told in outlandish speech, and then the same thought is straight away retold in "low" English. This is meant to stand in for giving true insight.

However, for some really good Anglish, one needs look no further than Tolkien. Taut, thriving speech is best won by wielding the mightiest words ready to hand, and Tolkien was the wizard of all writers when it came to roots English.

As his amazing work tells, Anglish doesn't have to be boring, nor does English. Nor does English hurt much from leaving out outlandish speech. I love Latin and Greek, but today they are often used to hide rather than show true meaning. Writing in an Anglish way makes thoughts sharper and writing more trustworthy.