|
|
What makes French a Latin-Germanic mixed language
<<Leasnam, didn't you know that latin-based words also have "derivatives"?
countring them of not doesn't change the proportion in favor of germanic origins - it might probably be the inverse*)
>>
The point is your ill-attempt to spin the numbers to make it seem French has fewer words or Germanic derivation than it actually does. Try again next time :-)
<<Secondly I didn't say (you would know it if you read my post well) that the number of Germanic words is 400 only. I don't know how much they are. But what I know it that the words with an attested germanic origin are 400 >>
Oh really? : guest guest Wed May 20, 2009 4:46 pm GMT
"The number of french words that are for sure of germanic origins is around 400, that is to say about 1-2%. Saying that they are more is pure speaculation, and can't be more than a absolute maximum of 15%. "
I think I read it well enough.
<<attested= it means words to which more or less similar words are found in known germanic languages, it does not even mean that they necessarily all COME from germanic - Cf previous discussions about "guerre">>
Wrong again. "Attested" means having been certified, especially with verifiable proof, as in written documents, literature, etc. You're just doing great today aren't you! Your bogosity is amazing!
Magnus es, domine, et laudabilis valde: magna virtus tua, et sapientiae tuae non est numerus. et laudare te vult homo, aliqua portio creaturae tuae, et homo circumferens mortalitem suam, circumferens testimonium peccati sui et testimonium, quia superbis resistis: et tamen laudare te vult homo, aliqua portio creaturae tuae.tu excitas, ut laudare te delectet, quia fecisti nos ad te et inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat in te. da mihi, domine, scire et intellegere, utrum sit prius invocare te an laudare te, et scire te prius sit an invocare te. sed quis te invocat nesciens te? aliud enim pro alio potest invocare nesciens. an potius invocaris, ut sciaris? quomodo autem invocabunt, in quem non crediderunt? aut quomodo credent sine praedicante? et laudabunt dominum qui requirunt eum. quaerentes enim inveniunt eum et invenientes laudabunt eum. quaeram te, domine, invocans te, et invocem te credens in te: praedicatus enim es nobis. invocat te, domine, fides mea, quam dedisti mihi, quam inspirasti mihi per humanitatem filii tui, per ministerium praedicatoris tui.
<<This is old french. (1090) Look more latine than germanic. >>
No. It looks like a German trying to speak Latin.
<<I must say that in the list of 400 "officially attested" germanic words, many of them are not used, and often not even known by the majority of the native-speaking people (including myself): brant, fuere, rouche, lason, brandon, échanson, gonfanon, hanap, harangue, heame, sénéchal, vois, fange, garbe, houe, maris, troëne, alène, garance, etc. (and these are considered to be less frequent ones among those 400 words!) >>
guest guest,
I hope,you know French words such as "nord","sud","est","ouest","bleu",'gris","blanc" ,"maréchal","écran"?
<< Marsilies tint Guen[elun] par l'espalle;
Si li ad dit: «Mult par ies ber e sage.
Par cele lei que vos tenez plus salve,
f.12v
Guardez de nos ne turnez le curage.
De mun aveir vos voeill dunner grant masse:
muls cargez del plus fin or d'Arabe;
Jamais n'iert an, altretel ne vos face.
Tenez les clefs de ceste citet large,
655
Le grant aveir en presentez al rei Carles,
Pois me jugez Rollant a rereguarde.
Sel pois trover a port ne a passage,
Liverrai lui une mortel bataille.»
Guenes respunt: «Mei est vis que trop targe!»
660
Pois est munted, entret en sun veiage.
LIII
Li empereres aproismet sun repaire.
Venuz en est a la citet de Galne.
Li quens Rollant il l'ad e prise e fraite;
Puis icel jur en fut cent anz deserte.
665
De Guenelun atent li reis nuveles,
E le treüd d'Espaigne, la grant tere.
Par main en l'albe, si cum li jurz esclairet,
Guenes li quens est venuz as herberges. >>
no, look again. there are latin words.
"toujours" is a hybrid word, made up of two Latin derived words tout and jour on the same germanic model of English "always", Swedish "altid", Dutch "altijd". Latin for toujours is "semper"
_________________________
That is a typical example of what happened: Germanic constructions were translated 1 to 1 into what was thought to be "Latin". Other examples are "une fois" = "einmal", "bien venu" = "willkommen/welcome", "endormir" = "einschlafen". Latin construction "endormare" never existed...
Here is another sample texte en Français:
"Dans son Essai sur les mœurs et l’esprit des Nations, Voltaire affirme que « ce corps qui s’appelait et s’appelle encore le saint empire romain germanique n’était en aucune manière ni saint, ni romain, ni empire ». il pose ainsi le problème de la nature et de l’identité de cette entité, dont la qualification est plus que problématique.
Le saint empire romain germanique, ou Sacrum Romanorum Imperium, bien qu’il n’acquiert cette dénomination que plus tard, l’adjectif saint ne s’adjoint par exemple qu’en 1157, naît en 962 avec le couronnement d’Otton 1er par le pape Jean XII à Rome. Appelé en 961 par celui-ci pour défendre l’Eglise romaine face aux menaces du roi d’Italie Bérenger d’Ivrée, Otton reçoit la dignité impériale en récompense de sa protection, maître d’un territoire qui s’étend alors du nord de l’Allemagne jusqu’à la plaine du Pô, incluant la Flandre, le duché de Bourgogne, la Bohême-Moravie et la Silésie.
La naissance du saint empire romain germanique, que Schillinger, contrairement à Voltaire, considère comme germanique par son territoire, romain par sa naissance, saint par son couronnement, est souvent analysée comme la seconde renaissance de l’empire romain, véhiculant alors l’idée d’Imperium, une théorie selon laquelle l’empire, et par analogie, l’Empereur, sont prééminents de par leur possession de l’imperium, une force de commandement, sur tous les territoires qu’il regroupe.
Dès sa naissance, le saint empire romain germanique est marqué par une ambivalence, une pluralité de niveaux que nombre d’auteurs intègrent dans leurs analyses de cet empire, qui, pendant presque neuf cent ans, de 962 jusqu’à sa mort en 1806, constitua une réalité structurante de l’Europe centrale. R. Folz situe donc l’idée l’empire romain sur deux plans : premièrement, celui de la spéculation religieuse et philosophique, celui que Schillinger considère comme le niveau de l’idéologie impériale, qui reste forte depuis la chute de l’empire romain d’Occident à la chute du saint empire romain germanique. L’idée impériale ne cessa de croître sous l’influence du courant orienté depuis milieu du 9ème siècle vers la renovatio imperii romanorum, dérivant de la croyance en la continuité de l’empire Et deuxièmement, le plan des réalités politiques, ou de l’institution impériale pour Schillinger, qui interroge sur l’effectivité de cet Imperium, évoquant un pouvoir d’essence supérieure. Le saint empire romain germanique sera tout au long de son histoire marqué par cette dualité de niveaux, entre l’idée et la réalité, si bien qu’il est difficile d’appréhender à quel point, concernant le saint empire romain germanique, la réalité s’approchait de l’idée, du mythe véhiculé.
il semble en effet que l’idée impériale, héritée de l’empire romain, et qui fonde la légitimité du saint empire romain germanique, n’ait été qu’un mythe, une fiction, masquant la réalité d’un empire vide de pouvoir.
Malgré la persistance de l’idée impériale comme fondement du saint empire romain germanique (I), celle-ci ne semble correspondre que peu aux réalités du pouvoir de l’institution impériale (II). "
Not counting names, regions, nationalities, etc.
Germanic words:
nord
[re]groupe
marqué (2)
and an influenced/mixed word: semble (2)
*sembler* is usually cited as stemming from Latin *simulare* "to imitate, be like" a signification we clearly see in *ressembler*, but from Carolingian texts a second meaning is added signifying "seem, appear" possibly from influence or conflation of a Germanic root (cf. Gothic samjan "to please", AS seman "to be fitting, seem", Scand. soema "to seem")
Total = 4
" You do say garbe in French, and it's the same word. "
No. I don't say Garbe. All french speaker don't say it, and have no idea of what it could mean...
" I don't think Leasnam probably intended to say that the French word for garbage is "garbage" (that is simplistic thinking). But at one time in hisory, French used garbage and that's where English obtained it. "
well, I don't know where english "garbage" is coming from, but in french we don't have such a word. Sorry. It seems that the relation with a old french word "jarbage" is not even attested.
"but"/"bout" are not celtic my friend. They are germanic (Old Norse)
That "bout" exist in germanic languages doesn't change the fact that french word "bout" comes from celtic "bod". didn't you know that indo-European languages can have cognates even in different families?
"rater" is as well, from rat in *prendre un rat*. This is from OHG rato, English rat
"prendre un rat" ?? what on earth does that mean?! we don't have such an expression.
And, I'm sorry, "rater" has nothing to see with the english "rat" (et least not in the way you might think)... which anyway comes from latin "rattus"... while "rater" comes from "raptus" (to put off) that itself seem to be related to "rattus".
"toujours" is a hybrid word, made up of two Latin derived words tout and jour on the same germanic model of English "always", Swedish "altid", Dutch "altijd". Latin for toujours is "semper"
It is nothing like an hybrid word. made by 'tout' (all) and 'jour'(day)... All words of clearly latin etymology. That some germanic words are constructed the same way doesn't make it hydrid since it is completly different (we are here speaking of etymology).
"mépris" contains the germanic prefix "mé-, més-" (English mis-)
You have the right of seen germanic things everywhere, but you must known that not everything in English is germanic. In that case the prefix
"mé-/més" as you find in french comes from latin "minus".
Anyway, even in a world where those exemples were with germanic origin, it would make a total of 5 word germanic words in a total of 157 words... that is to say 3%... that is precicely what we call a negligible influence.
" I would hardly call those sample adequately sufficient for comparison. "
I invite you to do the same exercive with a whole Zola book... If you have time to loose!
" and an influenced/mixed word: semble (2)
*sembler* is usually cited as stemming from Latin *simulare* "to imitate, be like" a signification we clearly see in *ressembler*, but from Carolingian texts a second meaning is added signifying "seem, appear" possibly from influence or conflation of a Germanic root (cf. Gothic samjan "to please", AS seman "to be fitting, seem", Scand. soema "to seem")"
I wouldn't consider it as influenced/mixed word.
Both meaning are quite similar: if you imitate something, you "seem" something.
the link simulare-sembrare-sembler (lat-it-fr) indicates a relation in both etymology and meaning. No need to relate to another root to explain the word. (french simuler/sembler sont considérés des doublets)
It is not becasue english "seem" is clearly related to "samjan/soema..." that french sembler does too. It might be possible that both latin and germanic be related in a common indo-european root. that is not uncommon.
" The point is your ill-attempt to spin the numbers to make it seem French has fewer words or Germanic derivation than it actually does. Try again next time :-) "
My friend, let me explain thing, if you seem not wishing to understand them...
If you have 400 words in a dictionnary of 30 000 words in which derivatives are not comptabilized; in proportion you wont have more germanic words in a dictionary of 60 000 words in which all derivatives are comptabilized...
" <<Secondly I didn't say (you would know it if you read my post well) that the number of Germanic words is 400 only. I don't know how much they are. But what I know it that the words with an attested germanic origin are 400 >>
Oh really? : guest guest Wed May 20, 2009 4:46 pm GMT
"The number of french words that are for sure of germanic origins is around 400, that is to say about 1-2%. Saying that they are more is pure speaculation, and can't be more than a absolute maximum of 15%. "
I think I read it well enough. "
You might read enought, but seem you didn't understood enough.
What I say is not that I think that there are only 400 germanic words in french vocabulary, but that 400 is about the minimum and that 15% is the absolute maximum. Since the "official" numbers are 400, adding other words in that group is what we call a speculation: something that is supposed without having evidences. Being a speculation doesn't always mean that it is not true, some speculation come to be tru when you find the proof, other no. Some speculation are possible, some are probable, others are fantasist.
If you want not understanding it is your choice, maybe I expressed myself not well because I don't have a good maitrise of English gramar, you know germanic syntax is hard to deal for me! ;)
" Wrong again. "Attested" means having been certified, especially with verifiable proof, as in written documents, literature, etc. You're just doing great today aren't you! Your bogosity is amazing! "
It depends who "attest", when and how.
well, you know science can (I must say should, because it is what makes it not a dogma) evolve. Once time ago it was attested that earth was flat, everybody agreed with that because no other valid explanation was yet found.
" guest guest,
I hope,you know French words such as "nord","sud","est","ouest","bleu",'gris","blanc" ,"maréchal","écran"? "
Well I know them, so it is 9 french word of germanic roots, Whaoo that is so much I can't believe !! (are you sure 'blanc' has germanic roots ;) )
these words are always again and again the same 'exemples' of the "proofs" of the so high level of germanicness of french... Can I laught? It is a reality that among those 400 "attested" words a big part of them are not used, and quite a lot are not even known by the majority of native people. Yes, Bleu, blanc, gris, etc... (maréchal not much!) are frequently used, but what about "brant, fuere, rouche, lason, brandon, échanson, gonfanon, hanap, harangue, heame, sénéchal, vois, fange, garbe, houe, maris, troëne, alène, garance, etc. "
No, nobody use these previous words, and I am sure than most people have no idea of what they mean.
I repeat, only about 400 french words are attested to have a germanic origin, among them a big part are unused, or even unknown words.
You can continue to dream that french has 40% of germanic-derived of more words if you want, that's wont change anything. Even if 70% of french words were Germanic, french won't be a germanic/romance mixed language, the same way English is not a latin/germanic mixed language.
I have just one last tiny point to make. If all this rambling about French being a germanic-latin mix or whatever has any validity, any validity at all, and is not fueled by political motives (or by twats that have no real understanding of history), then....
1. Why is this new "theory" not taught in any linguistics department anywhere that I know of (and I know of quite a lot, trust me)?
2. Why have most attempts at proving French's germanic "roots" been utterly disproved by romance linguists from all over the world?
Most linguists who have been trained for years to have an unbiased approach at describing languages have seen fit to change classifications for years. Korean has flopped from one language family to another. Basque has seen its share of being clumped here and there. French, however, has always been recognised as being romance and romance only.
Finally, to the person who showed their surprise that vulgar latin could have evolved so "quickly" in a few centuries. Well...all languages, especially those that are not written down do evolve very quickly. English, for example changed drastically from the time of Beowulf to Canturbury Tales. That didnt take 10 000 years, you know. Latin did have a very rigid written form, but you do need to be reminded that the vast majority of people in the empire had no clue how to read nor write. For them, the great works of the classical age were as strange and foreign as Old English or Old French literature. Their spoken language changed quickly and unevenly, given that the empire was so large.
And to those that keep going on and on about how vulgar latin popped out into existance during the "migration" period. Lets be serious here...you know good and well that a common spoken form of Latin existed much further back in time than during the "migration" period. We have many sources - literature, graffiti, anecdotal info (from Roman sources), that all attest to that. Trying to change history to suit your own weak arguments doesnt fly.
Finally, has germanic (especially Frankish) influenced the development of the langues d'oil? Yes, of course they have. They contributed many words, and affected the phonological system of the romance spoken in Gaul, and to that matter, most other romance languages. But to go as far as to say that French is a germanic-latin mix is pure nonsense. I'll put it to you this way: find me one person that has written a doctoral dissertation on this subject that has either passed its defence, and has been given support by any major linguistics journal/research institute in the world. I would love to see that.
I have a great idea. Given that German itself has had many many latinate borrowings, and Dutch (especially Flemish) is quite "latinised", and English wouldnt be English today without French, lets re-classify germanic languages! Or better yet, why dont we create a whole new language family: Romano-germanic or Germano-romance. Anyone out there up for it? Im sure there are some silly people who have nothing better to do than make laughing stocks out of themselves!
A dog is a dog. If you glue cat whiskers to it, and teach it to go in a litter box and train it to meow and ignore you all day, its still a dog. Cant change that. ;)
"That is a typical example of what happened: Germanic constructions were translated 1 to 1 into what was thought to be "Latin". Other examples are "une fois" = "einmal", "bien venu" = "willkommen/welcome", "endormir" = "einschlafen". Latin construction "endormare" never existed..."
--- err...yeah, no. "endormir" was from the latin: addormire. "une fois" well..thats of latin origin as well (im talking about the actual construction and usage, not just the origins of the word itself). "Bienvenue" finds its roots in the latin "benevenire".
Also, these words have either very similar or identical equivalents in most all romance languages, even those that had very little germanic contact.
And..."toujours"...latin had "totos dies", which had a slightly different meaning. I mean, "tête" came from "testa" which just meant "pot". Languages have a funny way of transforming meaning...its called morphology me thinks!
<<<< Marsilies tint Guen[elun] par l'espalle;
Si li ad dit: «Mult par ies ber e sage.
Par cele lei que vos tenez plus salve,
f.12v
Guardez de nos ne turnez le curage.
De mun aveir vos voeill dunner grant masse:
muls cargez del plus fin or d'Arabe;
Jamais n'iert an, altretel ne vos face.
Tenez les clefs de ceste citet large,
655
Le grant aveir en presentez al rei Carles,
Pois me jugez Rollant a rereguarde.
Sel pois trover a port ne a passage,
Liverrai lui une mortel bataille.»
Guenes respunt: «Mei est vis que trop targe!»
660
Pois est munted, entret en sun veiage.
LIII
Li empereres aproismet sun repaire.
Venuz en est a la citet de Galne.
Li quens Rollant il l'ad e prise e fraite;
Puis icel jur en fut cent anz deserte.
665
De Guenelun atent li reis nuveles,
E le treüd d'Espaigne, la grant tere.
Par main en l'albe, si cum li jurz esclairet,
Guenes li quens est venuz as herberges. >>
no, look again. there are latin words. >>
I see many Germanic words as well: France, blanche, Franceis, Guardez, Carles, Rollant, rereguarde, trop, targe, herberges...
I'm sure there are probably others I missed.
<<If you want not understanding it is your choice, maybe I expressed myself not well because I don't have a good maitrise of English gramar, you know germanic syntax is hard to deal for me! ;) >>
Actually, your English syntax is not bad. Quite good in fact.
<<French, however, has always been recognised as being romance and romance only. >>
What Ouest is saying is not anything to the contrary. No one is stating that French is a Germanic language, or that Romance Languages did not develop from Vulgar Latin or an Old Italic dialect. French is a Romance language, and Roamnce languages belong in their own Group. I think this is where many are losing it...
What Ouest is saying is that Romance languages form a distinct Group due to similarities they share, but that the genesis of this Group was forged in a furnace of a Vulgar Latin-Germanic contact environment. I believe he is right about that. No one with any historical or linguistic background can gainsay this.
Does this mean that Romance languages are Germanic? No. They are not Germanic, they are Romance. They may or may not have apprehended some foreign characteristics in their development. That is always a possibilty. I beleive that's all that's trying to be put forth here, but against much resistance.
<<I'll put it to you this way: find me one person that has written a doctoral dissertation on this subject that has either passed its defence, and has been given support by any major linguistics journal/research institute in the world. I would love to see that. >>
I dug up an old thread here at Antimoon you might find interesting. As you can see, this debate has been raging for some years now.
__________________________________________________________
From "gaining grammatical complexities" Feb 2008
"<<What sources can be found for this statement? >>
"Spanish Words of Germanic Origin" by Eugen H. Mueller and Bernard M. Dulsey
Here is an excerpt--
The Gothic invaders were less cruel than any of their barbarian predecessors who had penetrated the once great Roman empire. They had already been converted to Christianity and had been in what is now Italy. So they were not strangers to the laws and language of the Romans. Their own Gothic tongue never appeared in written form in Spain.
It is not generally realized by most students and teachers of Spanish that the Gothic invaders were responsible, in part at least, for three major innovations in the syntax of the Latin they found in use in fifth-century Spain. Every foreigner who learns Spanish should feel grateful to the Goths for what they did to the old Latin declensions which still persisted in the Iberian peninsula when the Goths entered in 411 A.D. As Ticknor says (p. 371), the Goths forced 'ille' to serve as their definite article and 'unus' as the indefinite article from which Spanish derives its 'el', 'la', 'un(o)' and 'una' respectively. Then with the use of prepositions and the newly formed articles the Goths ultimately did away with the old Latin declensions.
The Goths wrought two principal changes with the Latin verb: the use of the present perfect tense conjugated with the Latin verb 'habere' as auxilliary, and the use of a true passive voice conjugated with the auxilliary 'esse'. As a result, the Goths said 'habeo victus', instead of 'vici' and 'sum amatus' for the old Latin present passive 'amor' (Ticknor, p. 372)... "
______________________________________________________
<<Finally, has germanic (especially Frankish) influenced the development of the langues d'oil? Yes, of course they have. They contributed many words, and affected the phonological system of the romance spoken in Gaul, and to that matter, most other romance languages.>>
This is all that's being said.
<<Marsilies tint Guen[elun] par l'espalle;>>
<<Guenes li quens est venuz as herberges.>>
<<no, look again. there are latin words. >>
herberges,l'espalle,l'elme,murir,blanche,,espandre,rereguarde are of Gremanic origin,not latin.
And to those that keep going on and on about how vulgar latin popped out into existance during the "migration" period. Lets be serious here...you know good and well that a common spoken form of Latin existed much further back in time than during the "migration" period. We have many sources - literature, graffiti, anecdotal info (from Roman sources), that all attest to that. Trying to change history to suit your own weak arguments doesnt fly.
_____________________________________________
That a common spoken form of Latin was spoken in Rome is trivial. You surely want to state that this common spoken form of Latin was completely different from classical Latin regarding grammar, syntax, morphology etc. If so, please tell us some of the "many sources - literature, graffiti, anecdotal info that all attest that a common spoken form of Vulgar Latin (significantly different from Classical Latin) existed much further back in time than during the "migration" period. "
|