Well Athena, you also profess nicely the WORLD'S OLDEST PROFESSION! ;)
Romanian a MADE up language
Sorin:
I never posted insults, get it in mind, neither nonsense.
i cited my sources.And even if you don't like it are accademic essays.
By the way, italian: Intellegi? = Capisci?
Not only rumenian.
Second if one doesn't support your nationalism, it is a troll.
I guess ''Ho intelletto tutto di te'' undestand how you act.
Let's put an example between italian and rumenian.
You translate into rumenian the veronese riddle, that you can find everywere in the internet:
Italian:
Se pareba boves
alba pratalia araba
albo versorio teneba
negro semen seminaba.
Latin:
Se boves parebat
Alba pratalia arabat
negrus semen seminabat.
Real spoken latin said however , not intellego but adhprendo, or cohnprendo.......You can find this everywere in internet or in the book i cited you.
I never posted insults, get it in mind, neither nonsense.
i cited my sources.And even if you don't like it are accademic essays.
By the way, italian: Intellegi? = Capisci?
Not only rumenian.
Second if one doesn't support your nationalism, it is a troll.
I guess ''Ho intelletto tutto di te'' undestand how you act.
Let's put an example between italian and rumenian.
You translate into rumenian the veronese riddle, that you can find everywere in the internet:
Italian:
Se pareba boves
alba pratalia araba
albo versorio teneba
negro semen seminaba.
Latin:
Se boves parebat
Alba pratalia arabat
negrus semen seminabat.
Real spoken latin said however , not intellego but adhprendo, or cohnprendo.......You can find this everywere in internet or in the book i cited you.
Spanish has two; Entender & comprender.
I'm sorry guest, your the one with the trama. Your the one here 24/7 defending some made up culture and language. And you can take that to the BANK!
I'm sorry guest, your the one with the trama. Your the one here 24/7 defending some made up culture and language. And you can take that to the BANK!
>>Real spoken latin said however , not intellego but adhprendo, or cohnprendo.......You can find this everywere in internet or in the book i cited you<<
Yes Vulgar Latin said adhprendo, or cohnprendo. Cicero said Intellego.
"Nam illud non intellego"
Oratio in Catilinam Altera Ad Populum
Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC),
It looks like you dont have a clue about classical latin. All you know is some medieval latin, a foreign language compared with clasical latin.
'Intellego' is a VERB in Classical latin and Romanian
"Intelletto" in Italian is not a VERB
Italian ="nostro intelletto si profonda tanto"
nostro intelletto=our understanding
Go and study Clasical Latin before posting your gossips
Yes Vulgar Latin said adhprendo, or cohnprendo. Cicero said Intellego.
"Nam illud non intellego"
Oratio in Catilinam Altera Ad Populum
Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC),
It looks like you dont have a clue about classical latin. All you know is some medieval latin, a foreign language compared with clasical latin.
'Intellego' is a VERB in Classical latin and Romanian
"Intelletto" in Italian is not a VERB
Italian ="nostro intelletto si profonda tanto"
nostro intelletto=our understanding
Go and study Clasical Latin before posting your gossips
Cicero
Please , i know classical latin very well to say this, cicero, when talking to friend didn't said intellego, then
intelegere in italian is a verb intelletto is the past participle....
Quoque Tu Cicero Abutere patientia mea? Quo More est istud ut litteratorem magister reprendat??
To show my capability to speak lainga latina......
By the way, Cicero
Classical latin was a Spoken language for you??
Please , i know classical latin very well to say this, cicero, when talking to friend didn't said intellego, then
intelegere in italian is a verb intelletto is the past participle....
Quoque Tu Cicero Abutere patientia mea? Quo More est istud ut litteratorem magister reprendat??
To show my capability to speak lainga latina......
By the way, Cicero
Classical latin was a Spoken language for you??
Romanian has not been "made up", it has just been slightly modified like many other languages.
Classical Latin was the language of the upper classes , politics, science, poetry and literature. It was diluted into Vulgar Latin by the uneducated and illiterate Romanic population.
Can you please answer me a question?
Why so many Romance linguists consider Romanian the closest to classical Latin?
“…scholars consider Romanian the most conservative Romance language in terms of grammar, the closest to Classical Latin."
“Despite this foreign influence, it is the closest to Latin, in a grammatical sense, of all the Romance languages”
To me it looks like you take a personal debate against Soren. Many Linguists consider that Romanian is the closest to Clasical latin.
How do you comment that?
Can you please answer me a question?
Why so many Romance linguists consider Romanian the closest to classical Latin?
“…scholars consider Romanian the most conservative Romance language in terms of grammar, the closest to Classical Latin."
“Despite this foreign influence, it is the closest to Latin, in a grammatical sense, of all the Romance languages”
To me it looks like you take a personal debate against Soren. Many Linguists consider that Romanian is the closest to Clasical latin.
How do you comment that?
Dear cicero
I'm not waging a war against Sorin or you, i'm saying only that not all international linguists think that romanian is closer to latin, i gave refernce and books of linguists that wrote essays on this subject.
By the way cicero didn't spoke classical latin but sermo cotidianus, a much simplier version of latin. If it is apppeared that i'm posting only insults and nonsense spam, then accept my apologies, but this it is not the truth.
I'm not waging a war against Sorin or you, i'm saying only that not all international linguists think that romanian is closer to latin, i gave refernce and books of linguists that wrote essays on this subject.
By the way cicero didn't spoke classical latin but sermo cotidianus, a much simplier version of latin. If it is apppeared that i'm posting only insults and nonsense spam, then accept my apologies, but this it is not the truth.
Romanian has not been "made up", it has just been VASTLY modified to an point that it wouldn't be understandable or readable from a moldavian or romanian person who 'spoke' it before the 19th century......Like the Philipinos.
--Romanian has not been "made up", it has just been VASTLY modified to an point that it wouldn't be understandable or readable from a moldavian or romanian person who 'spoke' it before the 19th century......Like the Philipinos.---
in other words, or in a sense. It's an artifical language, heheh.
in other words, or in a sense. It's an artifical language, heheh.
>I'm not waging a war against Sorin or you, i'm saying only that not all international linguists think that romanian is closer to latin<
But do you agree that most Romance linguists consider Romanian the closest to Classical Latin *at least the grammar*? Encyclopaedia Britannica has an article pointing at Romanian having the most conservative grammar and the closest to classical Latin.
Encyclopaedia Britannica is a very reputable and accurate source. I am sorry, but you don’t have any credibility regarding that matter, and I don’t think you are in position to discredit or combat so many linguists that support Romanian. Besides, your views are only supported by some deplorable trolls contaminating this forum.
But do you agree that most Romance linguists consider Romanian the closest to Classical Latin *at least the grammar*? Encyclopaedia Britannica has an article pointing at Romanian having the most conservative grammar and the closest to classical Latin.
Encyclopaedia Britannica is a very reputable and accurate source. I am sorry, but you don’t have any credibility regarding that matter, and I don’t think you are in position to discredit or combat so many linguists that support Romanian. Besides, your views are only supported by some deplorable trolls contaminating this forum.
Again, you don't understand me Cicero, I have cited refernces, those are linguists at world level fame, even if britannica does say that romanian is the closest, there are other linguists that say it doesn't
My credibility is well,I, Honestly think that i'm the one that understand fully latin at any extent on this forum,by the way how is yours?
Then saying that romanian is at the grammar closest to classcal latin it is including its syntax. Again i cite my soureces. If you don't like it or don't know you are them, just read more books.
Many linguists even think that romanian has heavily modified by the 19th century. They arrived to this conclusion esaminating texts written in romanian in the 16th century and in the 20th, finding discrepances and a wash out of any slavic interconnection.
Cited Work:
The reasons of latin, Roma 1987 Giglielmo della Croce, De amicis editore
Urbis et Orbis, Vittorio Tantucci. 1990 Poseidonia editore, bologna.
H,J Kaan. Latinsche, 1990 Frankfurt.
These are the most comprensible books of all, the others i've read are more rich of tehcnicisms.
My credibility is well,I, Honestly think that i'm the one that understand fully latin at any extent on this forum,by the way how is yours?
Then saying that romanian is at the grammar closest to classcal latin it is including its syntax. Again i cite my soureces. If you don't like it or don't know you are them, just read more books.
Many linguists even think that romanian has heavily modified by the 19th century. They arrived to this conclusion esaminating texts written in romanian in the 16th century and in the 20th, finding discrepances and a wash out of any slavic interconnection.
Cited Work:
The reasons of latin, Roma 1987 Giglielmo della Croce, De amicis editore
Urbis et Orbis, Vittorio Tantucci. 1990 Poseidonia editore, bologna.
H,J Kaan. Latinsche, 1990 Frankfurt.
These are the most comprensible books of all, the others i've read are more rich of tehcnicisms.
By the way you cite britannica, but britannica was compiled in the early 20th century, 1911 i guess, when the comparative linguistic was moving its first setps......
Well, seeing as I know none and have never debated any of the people you pointed out, I'd say your bizarre argument is a product of a type of logic the world has seen very little of. I haven't even taken part in this thread till you pulled my name out of some invisible hat. Bravo for putting that together. (Still in awe of logic such as this.)
What the hell are you all even arguing about?
What the hell are you all even arguing about?