Philx, you were correct when you asserted that Italian is the closest language to Latin. You're also right when you said that Romanian was re-Latinized (probably to some extent, althought not completely). Philx, you said "By the way, Classical Latin was "NOT" a language in its true terms, it is only a form used for writing literacy, never used in the common life". I wholeheartedly agree. Classical Latin was never, ever the common speech of the Roman people. Hopefully, these truthful statements will put the blowhards who proclaim that Romanian is closest to Classical Latin out to pasture. Sorinescu-Ceausescu, are you paying attention?
Spanish CLOSER to Latin? What is your take Pt.2
Someone said: "Is very strange that Romanian is so close to South Italian dialects, but so far geographicaly, the conservation did work. "
It is not that strange. Emperor Trajanus started the invasion of Dacia, having his command center in Tarantum, Southern Italy, actual Taranta. Many of the locals (including all Southern Italy) were recruted for initial invasion, and also for bridge and road building. I know it is not quite close to Sicily, but still Southern Italy. The invasion path was over the Adriatical Sea and over Balkan peninsula, up to the Danube. If you measure the distance, you will see that it is not that far as it appears at a first look.
It is not that strange. Emperor Trajanus started the invasion of Dacia, having his command center in Tarantum, Southern Italy, actual Taranta. Many of the locals (including all Southern Italy) were recruted for initial invasion, and also for bridge and road building. I know it is not quite close to Sicily, but still Southern Italy. The invasion path was over the Adriatical Sea and over Balkan peninsula, up to the Danube. If you measure the distance, you will see that it is not that far as it appears at a first look.
Old Avatar, I'm not surprised. The Dacians must have received their language from people living in Italy at that time. In fact, Romanians appear to share many Mediterranean racial and ethnic features that Southern Italians have.
If you measure the distance between Tarantum (Taranto) and the Dacian capital, the result will be smth arround 700 km (in straight line). As a comparison, the distance between Taranto and Milano, for example, is more than 800 km...
In Wikipedia it is stated that Romanian is closest to classical latin. Example cited there:
Ea semper fenestram claudit antequam cenet. (Latin)
Ea închide întotdeauna fereastra înainte de a cina. (Romanian)
Ella (or lei) chiude sempre la finestra prima di cenare. (Italian)
Elle ferme toujours la fenêtre avant de dîner. (French)
Ella siempre cierra la ventana antes de cenar. (Spanish)
Ela fecha sempre a janela antes de jantar. (Portugese)
Sie schließt immer das Fenster vor dem Essen (German)
Only Romanian uses, analogue to classical Latin, a declination with nominativ, genitiv, dativ, akkusativ, vokativ, i. e.
fereastra. All other languages use la, a, and das in the example sentences above.
So Romanian grammar is closest to classical latin, while western romance grammars seem to be closer to (old) Germanic.
Ea semper fenestram claudit antequam cenet. (Latin)
Ea închide întotdeauna fereastra înainte de a cina. (Romanian)
Ella (or lei) chiude sempre la finestra prima di cenare. (Italian)
Elle ferme toujours la fenêtre avant de dîner. (French)
Ella siempre cierra la ventana antes de cenar. (Spanish)
Ela fecha sempre a janela antes de jantar. (Portugese)
Sie schließt immer das Fenster vor dem Essen (German)
Only Romanian uses, analogue to classical Latin, a declination with nominativ, genitiv, dativ, akkusativ, vokativ, i. e.
fereastra. All other languages use la, a, and das in the example sentences above.
So Romanian grammar is closest to classical latin, while western romance grammars seem to be closer to (old) Germanic.
Did you know? Romanian also has articles, they're just added to the word. Spanish could do the same, which it does in some cases.
Example: Danosle (Da nos le) Vamonos (vamos nos) Dimelo (Di me lo) etc.
Why not?
Ella siempre cierrala ventana antesde cenar. (Modified spanish)
Ella siempre cerrala fenestra antes de cenar. (Old-spanish)
Ea semper fenestram claudit ante quam cenet. (Modified latin)
Spanish is similar to Latin's grammar.
Romanian isn't the closest to Classical-latin, it may have some Classical-latin words, which is inconclusive. But that's it. Romanian's declination is an EASTERN-european attribute, all of the languages of Eastern-europe have the declination. Romanian is pretty much made up of Neologisms. and the reformation of the Cyrillic alphabet to the Latin one. Lastly it has changed it's phonetic structure to fit a more Latin feel, instead, of an nasal slavic one. Romanian is an inconclusive language, I always say. Always modifying and always changing it's language unnaturally. In a way, it's dissatisfied language.
Example: Danosle (Da nos le) Vamonos (vamos nos) Dimelo (Di me lo) etc.
Why not?
Ella siempre cierrala ventana antesde cenar. (Modified spanish)
Ella siempre cerrala fenestra antes de cenar. (Old-spanish)
Ea semper fenestram claudit ante quam cenet. (Modified latin)
Spanish is similar to Latin's grammar.
Romanian isn't the closest to Classical-latin, it may have some Classical-latin words, which is inconclusive. But that's it. Romanian's declination is an EASTERN-european attribute, all of the languages of Eastern-europe have the declination. Romanian is pretty much made up of Neologisms. and the reformation of the Cyrillic alphabet to the Latin one. Lastly it has changed it's phonetic structure to fit a more Latin feel, instead, of an nasal slavic one. Romanian is an inconclusive language, I always say. Always modifying and always changing it's language unnaturally. In a way, it's dissatisfied language.
"Ea închide întotdeauna fereastra înainte de a cina. (Romanian)"
There aren't any neologisms in the phrase above. More than that, there are not any Slavic words. All of the words from that phrase have Latin origin, inharited directly from Latin. A Romanian speaker from 1500, let's say, would say the phrase in exactly the same way. Probably with some accent, but exactly identical...
Best regards
There aren't any neologisms in the phrase above. More than that, there are not any Slavic words. All of the words from that phrase have Latin origin, inharited directly from Latin. A Romanian speaker from 1500, let's say, would say the phrase in exactly the same way. Probably with some accent, but exactly identical...
Best regards
"There aren't any neologisms in the phrase above. More than that, there are not any Slavic words. All of the words from that phrase have Latin origin, inharited directly from Latin. A Romanian speaker from 1500, let's say, would say the phrase in exactly the same way. Probably with some accent, but exactly identical... "
Show us evidence.
Show us evidence.
Due to its geographical isolation, Romanian is one of the most uniform languages in Europe. It developed independently with regard to the other Romance languages. It was influenced by Slavonic (due to migration/assimilation, and feudal/ecclesiastical relations), Greek (Byzantine, then Phanariote), Turkish, and Hungarian, while the other Romance languages adopted words and features of Germanic.
ea = She, Latin, feminine pronoune
închide, închidere = to close, from Latin "include, includere"
întotdeauna = always; în (Latin 'in") + tot (Latin "totus") + de + una (Latin "una"); the old form is "totdeuna", but still perfectly intelligible;
fereastra = window (Latin "fenestra");
înainte = before (Latin "in ab ante");
de = Latin "de";
a cina, cinare = dinner (Latin "cena");
When you think of Romanian, you should figure out a Romance language spoken especially by former Barbarians, so that's why some of the words suffered serious distortion, like "închide", for example. I have some doubts about "cina", I'm not sure about that, if it is a neologism or not. However, there isn't a single word included in Romanian Neologism's Dictionary.
Regards
închide, închidere = to close, from Latin "include, includere"
întotdeauna = always; în (Latin 'in") + tot (Latin "totus") + de + una (Latin "una"); the old form is "totdeuna", but still perfectly intelligible;
fereastra = window (Latin "fenestra");
înainte = before (Latin "in ab ante");
de = Latin "de";
a cina, cinare = dinner (Latin "cena");
When you think of Romanian, you should figure out a Romance language spoken especially by former Barbarians, so that's why some of the words suffered serious distortion, like "închide", for example. I have some doubts about "cina", I'm not sure about that, if it is a neologism or not. However, there isn't a single word included in Romanian Neologism's Dictionary.
Regards
"I have some doubts about "cina", I'm not sure about that, if it is a neologism or not. However, there isn't a single word included in Romanian Neologism's Dictionary."
Romanian is 30-40% made up of Neologisms derived from *mostly* French & Italian.
ea = She, Latin, feminine pronoune
închide, închidere = to close, from Latin "include, includere"
întotdeauna = always; în (Latin 'in") + tot (Latin "totus") + de + una (Latin "una"); the old form is "totdeuna", but still perfectly intelligible;
fereastra = window (Latin "fenestra");
înainte = before (Latin "in ab ante");
de = Latin "de";
a cina, cinare = dinner (Latin "cena");
Something tells me 'totdeauna / intotdeauna' is an neologism of "toujours". Why does Romanian included an "a" for dinner?? -a cina- ?{{illa cena?}}
Romanian is 30-40% made up of Neologisms derived from *mostly* French & Italian.
ea = She, Latin, feminine pronoune
închide, închidere = to close, from Latin "include, includere"
întotdeauna = always; în (Latin 'in") + tot (Latin "totus") + de + una (Latin "una"); the old form is "totdeuna", but still perfectly intelligible;
fereastra = window (Latin "fenestra");
înainte = before (Latin "in ab ante");
de = Latin "de";
a cina, cinare = dinner (Latin "cena");
Something tells me 'totdeauna / intotdeauna' is an neologism of "toujours". Why does Romanian included an "a" for dinner?? -a cina- ?{{illa cena?}}
"a cina" is the infinitive verb form. In Romanian, every infinitive verb has this form "to do, for example: a face, facere".
You're quite right about 30% of French neologisms. That's why I mentioned that would be an authentic Romanian phrase, because it doesn't include any neologisms.
Regards
You're quite right about 30% of French neologisms. That's why I mentioned that would be an authentic Romanian phrase, because it doesn't include any neologisms.
Regards
"a cina" is the infinitive verb form. In Romanian, every infinitive verb has this form "to do, for example: a face, facere".
Oh, okay. Spanish too has something similar to this.
Example:
A comer! A callar! A practicar! etc.
Oh, okay. Spanish too has something similar to this.
Example:
A comer! A callar! A practicar! etc.
SPANISH IS THE CLOSEST TO LATIN BECAUSE IT IS JUST THAT WAY. ITALIAN IS SORT OF CLOSE BUT NOT REALLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN LOST. ROMANIAN IS NOT THAT CLOSE BECAUSE OF THERE COUNTRY SLAVIC HABITANTS. PORTUGUESE AND FRENCH ARE NEITHER CLOSE BECAUSE OF THEIR LACK OF CLEARNESS. THE MINORITIES DIALECTS LIKE CATALAN ARE NOT REALLY KNOWN THAT WELL AND FOR THIS REASON SPANISH IS THE CLOSEST LANGUAGE TO LATIN.
Spanish is the closest and that's why we were named Latinos and Latinas. That's why Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras,Nicaragua, Costa Rica,
Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, ETC are Latin American Nations.
Italian is Latin but not the real one.
Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, ETC are Latin American Nations.
Italian is Latin but not the real one.