The relationships between the neo-Latin languages

LAA,

Please try to keep your discussions limited to languages and linguistics as much as possible. Sometimes linguistics overlaps with anthropology but be very careful. People's physical characteristics (eye, hair, skin color, height etc.) are some aspects of anthropology that have no bearing upon linguistics or languages, so I think you can always exclude them from forum discussions. On a positive note, I have seen evidence that you are a good forum conversationalist when you stick just to linguistics. Think about it.

--- Brenus - Moderator

the average of french is I think about 1,75m for male and 1,62m for female. When I said there wasn't much difference of height in Europe it was a generalisation, I thought especially outside of norterhn Europe, where there can be some exception such as in Scandinavia and Netherlands.


As for Catalan, it is an interesting language, although it sounds very different to both spanish and french, it can seem in many ways as an intermediary beetween both in its grammar and vocabulary.

I personally plan to move to Barcelona, that is why I had an iniciation to Catalan. Knowing Catalan is nice to be accepted by local catalan people because even if everybody is completly fluent in Castillan it can be percieved as offensive to not try at all to speak at least a little bit of catalan and do everything in castillan only. To make friends, to work or to study it is also quite necesary to know a bit of catalan.

>> The last theory that explains why Dutchmen are tall says that being people living under the level of the sea and the natural and evolutive process of growing of all form of life on earth have been during millions of years just over or at level of the sea. When such condition is broken, like living under the level of the sea, the atypical exposure to the magnetic field of earth at that level during many years eventually would affects the biological process of growing. It's like the plants which look for the sunlight in a dark environment, they tend to enlarge their stalks. Interesting isn't it ? <<

Sound like crap really. The Dutch have only been reclaiming land (thus living under sea level) for about 1700 years. The Dutch belonged to the smaller of the Europeans until about the 1930s. It was not until after the second world war they slowly became the tallest people on earth.

Various theories have been established to explain why, including one that claims that the Dutch started to grow faster when boys and girl schools were founded, this would have increased the amount of (growth) hormones and together with the Dutch diet (lots of vegetables and diary products) would have cause the a growth explosion.

Another theory says that Dutchmen being good farmers tended to use good amounts of fertilizer then mischief kids used to play barefoot over it resulting in an genetic alteration of growing. Interesting as well isn't it ?

And I think you are all forgetting one key point: Genetics. After all, height is still 90% heritable. It's only been recently that Dutch people have enjoyed a high standard of living, as in quality health care, good nutrition, etc. If other enviromental factors are all perfect, someone who has the genes for tallness will grow to be tall, because with proper enviromental factors, he will be able to reach his full potential for growth. Had living standards been as good in Northern Europe two hundred years ago, the Dutch would have been taller than Americans, because as is being seen now, the Dutch, so long as enviromental factors are good, are naturally very tall people.

Fab,
If you said that there wasn't a difference between heights in northern and southern Europe, then why are you now acknowledgeing that you are average in France, while you are considered a midget in Holland? That to me would seem to indicate a drastic difference in height.

I'm not the moderator, but I'd like to repeat Brennus' message in case it was missed: "People's physical characteristics (eye, hair, skin color, height etc.) are some aspects of anthropology that have no bearing upon linguistics or languages, so I think you can always exclude them from forum discussions."

Perhaps we can now return to the discussion of relationships between neo-Latin languages. I believe discussion was started on Catalan? I wish Jordi were here, as he knew more about them than anyone else (in my recollection).

Everybody in this forum,

The two posts above are not mine, the guest who was arguing with Brennus this morning, for two simple reasons: even being anonimous I wouldn't insult anyone, and I wouldn't use this place to post stupid jokes. I insist to stick to languages yet....

LAA
Find another good forum about anthropology please .
Africa is always forgotten the tallest or seconed tallest nation is the Maasai from Africa.(this depends who is doing the statistics.
This wouldn't be to important if it wasn't the fact that they are strict vegetarians.
Food for thought.

Let's returne to languages, we were talking about catalan

a lot of catalan words could seem between french and spanish :

for exemple "exit" is said "sortida", while "sortie" in french and "salida" in spanish.

Yes, but one thing is really interesting about Catalan: the periphrastic construction to express the equivalent to "passé simple" and "pretérito indefinido" in Fr and Sp, respectively.

je chanta
(yo) canté
(jo) vaig cantar (?)

There is an equivalent to the simple form, but it is nowadays restricted to literary style.
It is confusing if you are not used to it, because in Sp (and in Catalan itself!!), adding the preposition "a" (to), before the infinitive verb, you are expressing a periphrastic future: yo voy a cantar (yo cantaré).
In French I am not sure. What do you mean fab?

As far as I know, this is a unique feature among the Romance languages.

Let's return to languages, we were talking about catalan

a lot of catalan words could seem between french and spanish :

for exemple "exit" is said "sortida", while "sortie" in french and "salida" in spanish.

"je chantai" and not "je chanta". unfortunally the simple past "je chantai" can orally be confused with the imperfect "je chantais".

the perifrastic future in french is just "je vais chanter" (I will sing), it has not to be confused with the catalan "jo vaig cantar" (I sung), but means "jo vaig a cantar" (I will sing)

Hum isn't Portugese supposed to be in that place.

(Let's return to languages, we were talking about catalan

a lot of catalan words could seem between french and spanish :

for exemple "exit" is said "sortida", while "sortie" in french and "salida" in spanish.)

fab, sorry for the misspelling.
I think that it's a pity that passé simple has disapeared from spoken French. The same for the subjunctive past tense and its composed version. The replacements through j'ai chanté, je chante, j'aie chanté don't express an idea so colourfully as the original tenses. At least from my Spanish speaking perspective!!!...

What about the "formes surcompossées"?... what do they exactly express?

Hey Sérgio I like your name it´s a pitty you got her before me.