Latin was widely used in English monasteries before the influx of French in 1066. Quite a few words have been there for well over a thousand years (although the majority are later arrivals).
Perce, no need to tell me: I have an MA in Medieval English. :) But it is an interesting topic, and I am sure others will enjoy it, too. But: English has not, neither through French nor any other way, acquired Latin roots. Its roots are undisputedly Germanic, and it has merely acquired a (sizable) number of Latinate lexemes (in many ways and over many centuries) -- or, to stay with the tree imagery, has grafted Latin/French branches.
it didn't influence directly the language, for instance, in Germany.
But how it has influenced German! Very ancient Latin loans in German seem so very "native" that we don't even notice them, for example Fenster , Pferd and even Kopf! (English, on the other hand, preserves "original" Germanic forms with window , horse and head .)
Yes, English massively changed after the Norman Conquest, but it didn't change just by borrowing heavily and taking a lot of loan words: The very structure of the language changed, and the syntax became drastically more analytic, thus prompting more "radical" linguists to even speak of a creolisation process (this is a bit too extreme to be widely accepted, but there likely are a few grains of truth to it). So, again, while English is certainly a Germanic language, its syntax isn't exactly typical of the family.
I don't mean to negate the amount of borrowing from French into English; it is massive. It's simply not true that that is where English has all its Latin from. There were earlier influences in pre-Norman times (like candle or castle, for example), and most modern familiar "scientific Latin" terms are much more recent and in some cases didn't even exist in Classical Latin but where coined for modern scientific usage (cf. the discussion on Americanus/-a a few sentences away from this. :))
It's not the same thing. Varkentje is right, English is not a Latin language, it's because English has been heavily influenced by French, and French being a Latin language, that it has acquired most of its Latin roots.
Latin has been used in monasteries in many Christian countries, and it didn't influence directly the language, for instance, in Germany.
If you compare the English language before the influx of French and after, it's a totally different language.
The law, religious, and medical vocabularies, are directly from Latin, as Latin was the law and science universal language, went directly from Latin to English, but they are very very few in comparaison of all the French roots in English. English language is the descend of French, as well of the descend of Saxon, it's the reason why it get its vocabulary from Anglo-Frisian, Saxon.. and Latin-French, and its grammatical structure and syntax purely from the Anglo-Frisian family, not Latin.
See, only in you comment, there is already several French words borrowed. "monastery" from French "monastère", and the French from Latin.
Arrival, from arriver. Majority from majorité (it's a common pattern, when it's "té" in French, it became "ty" in English), influx from the French influx. Remove the borrowed words, you'll remove most of the Latin presence in English.
I think it is naïve to assume that no English word comes directly from Latin. The language used to be the lingua franca and I have no doubt that the many words that appear to be direct adoptions from Latin are so.
French developed from the Celtic adoption of Latin. As the Celts accented the last syllable of a word, they lost the endings. Thus famille instead of familia and our family.
I am not assuming that "no English word comes directly from Latin", but this one certainly doesn't. It looks pretty much like its Germanic siblings (Bruder, bror, broer, etc.) than the Latin one, frater, even though they have this common PIE ancestor that I mentioned in my first comment.
But that's not the word "brother" anyway (what started the discussion) :) To suggest such a borrowing option would be even more naive. There is a law of regular phonetic correspondences and laws of changes of sounds in language.