Les fameux 544 mots d'Henriette Walter sont des étymons *franciques* (anciens). Gaston Zink évalue l'apport *germanique* (ancien) au lexique de l'ancien français à 1.000 mots environ.
Are Romance languages some kind of Germano-Latin?
If you read polemic wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Spanish_words_of_Germanic_origin
some romance languages look like Germano-Latin.
some romance languages look like Germano-Latin.
Vocabulary has a tiny impact over the language as whole. If Spanish is Germano-Latin just because it has a bunch of German words , let's say around 900, it is also an arabic-romance hybrid since Spanish has 4000 words with Arabic roots.
Is vocabulary the only germanic element in Romance? I don't think so. Use of haber/avoir/etc as auxillaries for both perfect (passé composé in French) and future tenses (infinitive + habere) are also attributed to germanic.
Decomposition of Latinate grammar is too.
And in the case of French, the most germanic of all Romance languages [NOTE: I am not claiming that French is germanic. Romance languages by and large are mostly of Latin descent], phonemes, pronunciation and usage are also influenced --eg. "on" < 'hom(me)' in
"En France *on* (<'homme'-"man") parle Français" [i.e. 'In France *MAN* speaks French']
cf. German
"In Frankreich spricht *man* Franzoesisch"
also, interrogative inversion in
"As-tu un stylo?"
cf. German
"Hast du einen Kugel(schreiber)?"
this is also attributed to germanic influence
So when we compare apples to oranges, the comparison is clear:
English has a lot of vocab borrowed from other languages, largest from Latin; Romance languages have lower levels of vocab from germanic, but they contain other fundamental linguistic elements which can be used to support an argument for true hybridization (i.e. "Germano-Latin")
Decomposition of Latinate grammar is too.
And in the case of French, the most germanic of all Romance languages [NOTE: I am not claiming that French is germanic. Romance languages by and large are mostly of Latin descent], phonemes, pronunciation and usage are also influenced --eg. "on" < 'hom(me)' in
"En France *on* (<'homme'-"man") parle Français" [i.e. 'In France *MAN* speaks French']
cf. German
"In Frankreich spricht *man* Franzoesisch"
also, interrogative inversion in
"As-tu un stylo?"
cf. German
"Hast du einen Kugel(schreiber)?"
this is also attributed to germanic influence
So when we compare apples to oranges, the comparison is clear:
English has a lot of vocab borrowed from other languages, largest from Latin; Romance languages have lower levels of vocab from germanic, but they contain other fundamental linguistic elements which can be used to support an argument for true hybridization (i.e. "Germano-Latin")
<<<So when we compare apples to oranges, the comparison is clear:
English has a lot of vocab borrowed from other languages, largest from Latin; Romance languages have lower levels of vocab from germanic, but they contain other fundamental linguistic elements which can be used to support an argument for true hybridization (i.e. "Germano-Latin") >>>
This is a perfect summary of the situation! The answer to the question "Are Romance languages some kind of Germano-Latin?" can only be *yes*, and this is true not only for French, where this fact seems to be the most obvious.
English has a lot of vocab borrowed from other languages, largest from Latin; Romance languages have lower levels of vocab from germanic, but they contain other fundamental linguistic elements which can be used to support an argument for true hybridization (i.e. "Germano-Latin") >>>
This is a perfect summary of the situation! The answer to the question "Are Romance languages some kind of Germano-Latin?" can only be *yes*, and this is true not only for French, where this fact seems to be the most obvious.
Romance languages are a Latin-Germanic hybrid and English a Germanic language only, with more than the 60% of its vocabulary with Latin roots? That is a joke. And what about Romanian? It is a romance language, is it a Latin-Germanic hybrid too? Your ignorance , guys ,make me laugh .
<<< And what about Romanian? It is a romance language, is it a Latin-Germanic hybrid too? Your ignorance , guys ,make me laugh . >>>
Romanian is classified as being a Romance language because it descends from (vulgar?) Latin, but it is very different from Germano-Latin Western Romance languages like Walloon, Catalan or Lombard.
Romanian is classified as being a Romance language because it descends from (vulgar?) Latin, but it is very different from Germano-Latin Western Romance languages like Walloon, Catalan or Lombard.
Germano-Latin is not a branch used in Linguistics. There are not Germano-Latin romance languages.
<<And what about Romanian? It is a romance language, is it a Latin-Germanic hybrid too?>>
Romanian is also sometimes regarded as a hybrid language, but of wholly different components, being that germanic is swapped out for slavic.
<<Germano-Latin is not a branch used in Linguistics. There are not Germano-Latin romance languages. >>
The term "Germano-Latin" has not traditionally been used, but that does not negate its significance nor the fact that, at least from an actual truth-perspective, it should be.
There are clear socio-political reasons why this term would (and maybe should) be avoided, *especially* by those on the romance side. As long as it is understood that the western Romance languages share a recent common ancestor, and that ancestor was not Latin, but was a hybrid language formed out of Vulgar Latin (Oro-Latin) and others, notably germanic and celtic, I am fine with not using it.
The term "Germano-Roman(e)" however, does exist.
Romanian is also sometimes regarded as a hybrid language, but of wholly different components, being that germanic is swapped out for slavic.
<<Germano-Latin is not a branch used in Linguistics. There are not Germano-Latin romance languages. >>
The term "Germano-Latin" has not traditionally been used, but that does not negate its significance nor the fact that, at least from an actual truth-perspective, it should be.
There are clear socio-political reasons why this term would (and maybe should) be avoided, *especially* by those on the romance side. As long as it is understood that the western Romance languages share a recent common ancestor, and that ancestor was not Latin, but was a hybrid language formed out of Vulgar Latin (Oro-Latin) and others, notably germanic and celtic, I am fine with not using it.
The term "Germano-Roman(e)" however, does exist.
The ancestor of the Romance languages was Latin, but not Classical Latin. Even the Caesars didn't speak Classical Latin, it was a writen language only, hence it is difficult that any languages descended from it.
<<Romance languages are a Latin-Germanic hybrid and English a Germanic language only, with more than the 60% of its vocabulary with Latin roots? That is a joke. ... ... Your ignorance , guys ,make me laugh . >>
It's not a matter of ignorance.
You have definitely been educated to think, and what you believe to be true is in line with what you have been taught.
But I am challenging you to re-evaluate what you have learned, to make sure that it is true.
You may have been given some wooden nickels.
It's not a matter of ignorance.
You have definitely been educated to think, and what you believe to be true is in line with what you have been taught.
But I am challenging you to re-evaluate what you have learned, to make sure that it is true.
You may have been given some wooden nickels.
I think it happened this way
Years ago, professors and educators were sympathetic to the latin language; indeed latin was highly regarded in those days. Everyone wanted their language to be descended from it, even if it weren't, or was only partly so.
This bias in favor of the Roman language was passed on to younger generations who studied under them, and accepted without question...
Over several generations, this bias snowballed, growing stronger and stronger, as each subsequent generation was more influenced by the one before until we get to the current day.
I liken it to this. The color green.
latin is like the color green. The latin spoken in Rome was blue. Deep royal blue. This was real Latin. The language of Latinium. Hardy, rustic and robust. Over time, people added outside elements (yellow). Year after year latin accepted more yellow, turning it more and more green. Indeed, Mediaeval latin was quite yellowish green, almost greenish yellow, yet it was still possible to detect the faint hint of blue.
So now, the color blue ranges anywhere from the edge of purple to the color yellow. Fascinating.
Years ago, professors and educators were sympathetic to the latin language; indeed latin was highly regarded in those days. Everyone wanted their language to be descended from it, even if it weren't, or was only partly so.
This bias in favor of the Roman language was passed on to younger generations who studied under them, and accepted without question...
Over several generations, this bias snowballed, growing stronger and stronger, as each subsequent generation was more influenced by the one before until we get to the current day.
I liken it to this. The color green.
latin is like the color green. The latin spoken in Rome was blue. Deep royal blue. This was real Latin. The language of Latinium. Hardy, rustic and robust. Over time, people added outside elements (yellow). Year after year latin accepted more yellow, turning it more and more green. Indeed, Mediaeval latin was quite yellowish green, almost greenish yellow, yet it was still possible to detect the faint hint of blue.
So now, the color blue ranges anywhere from the edge of purple to the color yellow. Fascinating.
<<So now, the color blue ranges anywhere from the edge of purple to the color yellow. Fascinating. >>
WHAT?? the-...?
Dude ur strange
WHAT?? the-...?
Dude ur strange
Classical Latin is not more Latin than Vulgar Latin. Once again, nobody spoke Classical Latin, it was an artificial language used by writers to write . Vulgar Latin evolved and adopted words from Celtic languages and Germanic ones? Of course, it is normal and it does not prevent Romance languages from really descending from Latin. Te fact that Romanian suffered almost the same changes than Spanish or Italian proves that the Romance languages evolved by themselves from Latin because of the inherent tendence of Latin to arrive to that changes, but the influence of Celtic and Germanic languages were not the main reason.
<<Te fact that Romanian suffered almost the same changes than Spanish or Italian proves that the Romance languages evolved by themselves from Latin because of the inherent tendence of Latin to arrive to that changes>>
What changes please?
I have always viewed similarities between the romance languages, the western group in particular, to be due to mutual contact and arificial mimmicking by those wanting to keep them similar for whatever reason.
Isn't French a big recent influence on Romanian? I recently traveled to E Europe and spoke with a young man from Romanian who was very proud that the language he spoke was not Slavic but Romance. Does that type of impetus (the desire to be different from Slavic and more like other Romance) affect how one molds and shapes his own way of speaking?
Yes? No?
What changes please?
I have always viewed similarities between the romance languages, the western group in particular, to be due to mutual contact and arificial mimmicking by those wanting to keep them similar for whatever reason.
Isn't French a big recent influence on Romanian? I recently traveled to E Europe and spoke with a young man from Romanian who was very proud that the language he spoke was not Slavic but Romance. Does that type of impetus (the desire to be different from Slavic and more like other Romance) affect how one molds and shapes his own way of speaking?
Yes? No?