Are Romance languages some kind of Germano-Latin?

I don't think it was stupid. Maybe some messages did, like in this one, but it was interesting to discuss about that subject. What about this thread were some people say that the Germans freed the roman people from living in cities while it really became much poorer and their standard of living in feudal villages was a complete disaster? OK, this forum is also off-topic and a shit, but for some reason it is interesting for you and you don't delete it. Very egoistic.

>>>You completely missed greg's point. Rural life in the Medieval era had just as much plundering as in the city. The vast majority of the population were serfs who had to give a portion of their crops to their lord and/or work on his farm for a certain number of days per year. <<<

Where did you got these details from? I have read Tacitus' Germania, and there was no plundering an serfs who had to give a portion of their crops to their lord mentioned. Taxes were unkown by Germanics!

Ok, you can ignore me. But you know well that if the thread in the English forum about the Germanic migrations to Great Britain should be deleted, this one too. The fact that you want to take part in this conversation and not in the other one, Josh, does not make this thread better, it is the contrary. This thread is off-topic because nobody is talking about languages, but about History, (just like the topic that you deleted) and what is worse, this one has much more false statements and childish interpretations like "the Germans freed the Roman citizens from a decadent culture", "the romans practiced orgies", "living in small villages under the feudal authorities was more healthy than in Roman cities",and crap like this. You are a shame as a moderator and I hope that you are ceased soon.

<<<This thread is off-topic because nobody is talking about languages, but about History>>>

I don`t think that this thread is off topic. The question is how Latin language became Romance languages, and since the migration of Germanic tribes and peoples into Western Europe happened at the same time that Romance was built, the might be a connection. Languages are spoken by peoples, and peoples have history.

You can connect languages with almost everything , but what Tacitus said about the Germans, admitedly has not direct relationship with languages.

Herbist : « That's true, the Germanic model of rural life was surely more productive and healthy than the Roman model of civil life characterized by plundering the provinces by heavy taxes, gladiators loosing their life in arenas, slaves crucified for trying to escape, adultery, lazy negotium and orgies. This was also the opinion of Tacitus, by the way... ».

Bon, et d'où provenaient les fruits et légumes que consommaient les Romains ? Du Sénat ? Ces denrées étaient probablement cultivées dans la campagne environnante... D'autre part les Germains n'étaient pas moins cruels que les Romains : il faut être naïf pour le croire. Les Romains étaient certainement plus sophistiqués que les Barbares : Rome était experte en raffinements de cruauté. Mais les victimes des hordes germaines n'avaient que faire de leur simplicité... Enfin il est curieux de qualifier les Romains de « paresseux », mais chacun voit midi à sa porte. Peux-tu étayer tes dires au sujet de Tacite stp ?

Tacitus' descriptions of the Germanic character are at times favorable in contrast to the opinions of the Romans of his day. He holds the strict monogamy and chastity of Germanic marriage customs worthy of the highest praise, in contrast to what he saw as the vice and immorality rampant in Roman society of his day (ch. 18), and he admires their open hospitality, their simplicity, and their bravery in battle.

Barbaric tribes tend to have te same characteristics: simplicity (obviously), hospitality towards the foreigners, since they are impressed by them and want to know about new techniques and ideas, and and a strict point of view about chastity and monogamy. When cultures evolve they inevitably tend to decadency, and the solid yet simple principles which made they a great culture are carelessly put into question because they are seen as archaic.
You can see for example this cultural evolution in the peoples with Germanic roots, once a healthy culture and now a decadent one (Holland, Sweden , etc are very decadent ).

<Holland, Sweden , etc are very decadent>

Or... You are a very conservative person.

I guess I'm conservative then. It's a double edged sword. Holland is open to others, but the people who get the gifts of their liberal society may actually hate their liberalism. I'm thinking of the van Gogh incident, but I don't want to get too political here. It's not my country anyway.

K.T.
Trust me, you're conservative.

To be conservative depends on the politic parameters they use in each country. I guess than for Sweden or Holland, almost 99% of worlwide population would be conservative. I'm amazed on how liberal they are in these countries.

Well, I'm not conservative like Rush Limbaugh in the United States or people who are out and out xenophobes, but I'm very conservative compared to my image of some Europeans.

Holland isn't a country.

I KNEW someone would bring that up! I used Holland because someone mentioned it. We use "Holland" in a lazy way in the US to mean "The Netherlands", but think it is really just a region of "The Netherlands".