What makes French a Latin-Germanic mixed language

guest guest   Fri May 22, 2009 3:39 am GMT
" plupart, bonheur, malheur, ainsi, peut-être, au-jour-d'hui are all like this
<<Anyway, even in a world where those exemples were with germanic origin>>
They are :) "

hehehehehe !!! I didn't know you were a funny man (or woman i don't know!)
if "bien", "heur", "venue", "mal", "au", "jour", "de"; "hui" are germanic words, then I agree with you french is germanic language !! :) !! very funny Leasman!




" Please, do some research before spouting off. guest guest, you too. "

hahahahah !!!! you definitly VERY funny tonight !!!

You could apply you wished to yourself before on others it would be nice for the quality of the discussion
I remind some of your recent claims ;
" (<--"garbage"=French germanic word) ".... hahahahaha, very well informed Leasnam!
I reminded me the time when you claimed that french adjectives went before the nouns, as a proof that french had a germanic syntax, while it was just the inverse!! hahaha !...


" Given the fact that the word shows the correct alteration in form of the PIE root in that the 'd' > 't' (red- > rat), and given the above passage, who wants to continue to contest? So Latin has 2 forms of the same PIE root, one with no change (i.e. "rodere") and one with? ("rattus")? Can you please explain why this is so, greg or guest guest? "

I won't lost my time on this point, which is insignificant, greg did it in another post.
You don't need to spend time dealing with such pointless controversy. You had better to interest yourself to the analysis you asked yourself: I remind you said:
"The only way to tell is to take a several samples of French, conversational or literary--whichever you choose to focus on--and analyse them."
Ok, I posted two samples of french a few pages ago... what are you expecting to give your analyse concerning the importance of words of germanic origins in french?? I'm waiting your conclusions of great linguist....





" By the way, guest guest, "prendre un rat" was an old French phrase as in "ce pistolet a pris un rat" = "the pistol misfired, missing fire", that gave rise to the verb 'rater'. I cannot believe that a foreigner has to explain this to you, a Frenchman/-woman. Please, learn something about your language before you come here and smugly lecture in baseless defense of it. "
You are pathetic. I'm sorry but I'm not a native old french speaker... And thank you but I'm also able to past-copy, I could do it in all english... And please I don't need this kind of comments from someone who don't understand french.




" Maybe this is where our disconnect lies. I actually expect you to already understnad these things without me having to spoon-feed them to you as an infant. I'm not a baby-sitter. I will have none of it. "

No comment. I thought you were funny tonight. I'm afraid you coming mad, Sorry.



" <<" "Observer : « "mépris" contains the germanic prefix "mé-, més-" (English mis-) »
Oui c'est bien connu : le préfixe français <mé#> n'a rien de roman. Itou pour <mesconéisser> en occitan. " "
Yes, and "menospreciar" (mépriser in Spanish), has nothing to see with menos (lat. minus/fr. més-)+ preciar... ;) >>
Again you display your lack of training, or perhaps your intentional attempt to frustrate. Let me teach you something: Forget the occurrences of this "assumed" prefix in other Romance languages. We are talking about French 'mé-, més-' from Olf French 'mes-, mis- [in Carolingian documents]' only (start with the source and work towards the present). "

Same than above. why don't you come the analysis of the whole text... not just discussing endlessly over 2 words...

And if you consider, like "observer", that there are not enough, you have the right to make the same exercice I did with this two samples with a whole book of Emile Zola if you want... since it seems you have time to loose... You'll give me the results of your research, I'm sure they would be intereting.



" <<Observer : « You do say garbe in French [...] ».
Inconnu au bataillon, désolé. >>
This word was listed in guest guest's list above:
"* derivatives of "blé, vois, fange, ***garbe***, haie,"

The objective of this list was precisely made to make you concious that a lot of there words are actually not used...
And that true "garbe" is for us "inconnu au bataillon", but is part of the 400 "attested" words with germanic root...








If you want more information of the subject this a the list of these words. Those with (?) are contested among linguits

French words of original germanic origins : about 400 words:
If we group them in three groups: 1. Not used, very rarely known / 2. Rarely used / 3. Current french

1. Not used, and not understood by today french speakers (I personally never have heard them): about 120 words:
alise, alleu, arroi, baboue, bau, bedeau, béton (lait), bief, bière (caisse), bondon, bongeau, bot, brachet, brai (piège), braise, brand, brandon, brème, buire, buron, chambellan, chaton (de bague), chétron, ciron, clenche, coche (bateau), cote (cabane), crafe, cramail (?), crape, drageon, écale, échauguette, échevin, échiffre, écofier, écot, élingue, empan, épeiche, éperlan, époule, espringale, estrif, éteuf, étoc, faude, feurre, fouarre, frette, freux, gaude, gaule (?), gerfaut, glouteron, gonfalon, gruau, gruyer, guède, guerdon, guiche, guimpe, haire, hait, hallier, hampe, hanap, haubert, haussière, haveron, havet, hétoudeau, hourd, houseau, laîche, lippe, litre (fem), losse (?), marc (poids), martre, mégis (?), rochet, taquet, targe, tassette, tette, touaille, troène, varenne, baud, blet, dehait, échif, galand, lige, madré, sur (acide), bâtir (coudre), baudir, brouir, éclisser, émeutir (fienter), étricher, étriver, fauder, flatir, fourbir, gauchir, grigner, grommeler, guiper, mâchurer, marrir, oudrir (?), rouir, sérancer, super, bélitre, flasque (madrie), foudre(tonneau), halecret, lansquenet.
2. Words that are actually used in specific speech (words that we generally know but that are not part of current vocabulary); about 60 words
affre, aigrette, aune, ban, baudrier, beffroi, brelan, bride, brouée, brouet, bru, cane (?), charivari (?), chopine, clapier, cotte (vêtement), crampon, échanson, échine, échoppe (boutique), épar, éperon, épieu, esclame, faîte, fanon, fourreau, frimas, garenne, grès, guise, harde (troupe), hâte, havre, heaume, héraut (?), héron, houe, huche, hulotte (?), if (?), lisse (palissade), marche (frontière), marsouin, maton, mésange (?), mitaine, mite, morille,
mulot, sénéchal, tourbe (charbon), trumeau (?), adouber, bramer, buer, aurochs, élan (cerf),
3. Words of current french vocabulary, that an average native speaker should know (about 225 words)
agace, anche, babine, balafre, balle, banc, bande (d'étoffe), bannière, bar, beignet, bille (boule), bloc, bois (?), borde, botte, (assemblage d'objets), bouc, bourg, brèche, brique, brosse, bûche (?), butin, caille, canif, carcan, chamois, chouette, clapet, coiffe, crabe (crustacé), crapaud (?), crèche, cresson, croupe, cruche, dard, duvet (?), écaille, écharpe,échasse, échelle (escadron), écran, écrevisse, écume, émail, émoi, épervier, esturgeon, étal, étalon, étau, étoffe, étrier, falaise, fauteuil, feutre, fief, flan, flot, frais, gage, gant, garou (loup-), gâteau (?), gaufre, gazon, gêne, gerbe, gifle (?), giron, grappe, griffe, groseille, guerre, guet, hache, haie, halle, hameau, hanche, hanneton, hareng, harpe, héberge, honte, hotte, housse, houx, jardin, latte, leurre, loge, loquet, lot, malle, marais, mare, maréchal, mât, meurtre, mitraille, moufle (gant), mousse, nord, orgueil, ouest, parc (?), patte (?), poche (?), quille (à jouer), rang, rat (?), regain, roseau, salle, sud, tache, taisson, tanière, tas (?), taudis (?), tique, tonne, touffe, toupet, toupie (?), trappe, trêve, trompe, troupe (?), tuyau, blafard, blanc, bleu, brun, esclame, fauve, fluet, frais, franc, gaillard (?), gris, laid, morne, riche, sale, avachir, bannir, bouter, broder (?), brouter, broyer, choisir, chopper (?), choquer (?), clapper, cracher, danser, déchirer, déguerpir, dérober, éblouir, éclater (?), effrayer, enhardir, épanouir, épargner, épeler, epier, estamper, farder (?), flatter, fournir, fourrer, gâcher, gagner, galoper (?), garder, garnir, glapir, glisser, gratter, graver, grimper, grincer, gripper, guérir, guider, haïr, haler, happer, hâter, heurter, honnir, lamper, laper, lécher, marquer, nantir, navrer, radoter, ramper, râper, regretter, rider, river, rôtir, saisir, souper, taper (frapper), taper (boucher), tapir (?), tarir, tirer, tomber, toucher, trébucher, trépigner, tricher (?), guère, trop (?), .blocus, boulevard, cric, dalle,


To those we can add the french words of more recent germanic origins, from 15th century, about 105 words:

1. Not used, and not understood by today french speakers (I personally never have heard them): about 55 words:
bondrée, brinde, bismuth, canapsa, carrousse, castine, éclanche, gulpe, hase, reître, rosse, trôler, crancelin, cromorne, dréger, étraque, havresac, vaguemestre, velte, banse, bérubleau, blende, bocambre, bocard, cran (raifort), drille (trépan), embérize, estrigue, feldspath, flinquer, gland (tenaille), gneiss, halde, heiduque, kirsch-wasser, lagre, losse, prame, quartier-mestre, sabretache, spalt, spath, velche, vermout, vidrecome; bichof, coprose, cuffat,
dolman, druse, guelte, schabraque, schlague, schlich

(Probably you cou teach me a lot about what those french words mean, because of your good knowledge of old french, and your native germanic language, I'm waiting)

2. Words that are actually used in specific speech (words that we generally know but that are not part of current vocabulary); about 14 words
arquebuse, coche (voiture), fifre, huguenot, potasse, hulot (hublot), traban, glaçure, loustic, vasistas, bock, mastoc, thalweg, tungstène

3. Words of current french vocabulary, that an average native speaker should know (about 35 words)
bière (boisson), bique (fam.), blottir, bogue (de châtaigne), burin, cale, clapet, espiègle, gueuse, halte, hutte, trinquer, bivouac, blinder, calèche, chenapan,
cible, estomper, gangue, gibelot, obus, sabre, valse, zigzag, zinc, cobalt, hamster, nouille, vampire, blague, blockhaus, bogue (anneau), chope, choucroute, gamin, képi




Well, to sum up and have a more precise idea of the importance of this vocabulary with germanic origins we could add the totals
- 260 french words of germanic origins are used and known by most of the native french speakers, in various frequencies.
- 74 french words of germanic origins are still used, but in much rescticted cases
- 175 words are completly unknown to most of the modern native french speakers.

when we think that english, has not enought of hundreds of thousands of attested latinates words to be considered a latin-germanic mixed language... french with about 400 words of "attested" germanic origins is quite far, no?
PARISIEN   Fri May 22, 2009 4:51 am GMT
Il y a bien plus de 400 mots germaniques en français, et si on incluait le vocabulaire des métiers (particulièrement ceux liés à la menuiserie, à la marine et à la chasse etc. on en trouverait facilement des milliers, sans compter les dérivés.

Les listes ci-dessus sont pleines de lacunes (me viennent immédiatement à l'esprit par ex. ruban, paquet, gazon, hanter, mannequin, démarrer etc.), et la plupart des mots cités sont connus de tout francophone même très moyennement cultivé. Par ex., "clenche" et ses dérivés (déclencher, enclencher). Sans parler de tout un vocabulaire familier : bouquin, reluquer


<< Oui c'est bien connu : le préfixe français <mé#> n'a rien de roman. Itou pour <mesconéisser> en occitan. " "
Yes, and "menospreciar" (mépriser in Spanish), has nothing to see with menos (lat. minus/fr. més-)+ preciar... ;) >>

-- Eh bien oui, le préfixe "mé(s)" est germanique, il faut être de mauvaise foi pour le rattacher à "moins". 'Médisant', ce n'est pas 'moins-disant'.
Ce préfixe existe en occitan mais moins souvent. En italien il est rare mais a bien conservé sa morphologie originelle : "misconoscere", "misleale', 'miscredente' .

Il est bon de rabattre le caquet de certains maniaques, mais il ne faut pas non plus déconner !
arithmetics   Fri May 22, 2009 7:10 am GMT
<<Il y a bien plus de 400 mots germaniques en français, et si on incluait le vocabulaire des métiers (particulièrement ceux liés à la menuiserie, à la marine et à la chasse etc. on en trouverait facilement des milliers, sans compter les dérivés.>>
<<FRENCH LANGUAGE
VOCABULARY
The French words which have developed from Latin are usually less recognisable than Italian words of Latin origin because as French evolved from Vulgar Latin, the unstressed final syllable of many words was dropped or elided into the following word.

It is estimated that 12% (4,200) of common French words found in a typical dictionary such as the Petit Larousse or Micro-Robert Plus (35,000 words) are of foreign origin. About 25% (1,054) of these foreign words come from English and are fairly recent borrowings. The others are some 707 words from Italian, 550 from ancient Germanic languages, 481 from ancient Gallo-Romance languages, 215 from Arabic, 164 from German, 160 from Celtic languages, 159 from Spanish, 153 from Dutch, 112 from Persian and Sanskrit, 101 from Native American languages, 89 from other Asian languages, 56 from other Afro-Asiatic languages, 55 from Slavic languages and Baltic languages, 10 for Basque and 144 — about three percent — from other languages>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_language
1054 from English+550 from ancient Germanic+164 from German+153 from Dutch= 1921
guest guest   Fri May 22, 2009 10:37 am GMT
" Il y a bien plus de 400 mots germaniques en français, et si on incluait le vocabulaire des métiers (particulièrement ceux liés à la menuiserie, à la marine et à la chasse etc. on en trouverait facilement des milliers, sans compter les dérivés."


Des milliers... Là tu t'avances beaucoup... mille ce serait déjà pas mal.

Evidement, si on inclue un vocabulaire ultra-spécifique (hors dictionnaire courant type larousse/robert on peut trouver ce que l'on veut). Si on inclue par exemple tous les mots liés au karaté, au judo ou à la fabrication des suchis on trouvera des milliers des mots Japonais...




" Les listes ci-dessus sont pleines de lacunes (me viennent immédiatement à l'esprit par ex. ruban, paquet, gazon, hanter, mannequin, démarrer etc.)"

gazon est dans la liste. Quand a paquet, mannequin, démarrer, ils ne forment pas partie du vocabulaire germanique initial lié aux invasions, mais proviennent probablement du Hollandais. Je pense qu n'ont du être comptabilisés dans les listes que les apports venant de l'Allemand. il faudrait corriger cette ommision (je pense à "boulevard" par exemple)

De toute façon ces apports "récents" (ne venant pas d'un vieux fond intial antérieur à la naissance de la langue française en tant que telle) n'ont pas de signification dans la démonstration qui nous concerne ici, a savoir que le français serait une langue mixte germano-latine. Il s'agit là d'imports de "borrowings", qu'on trouve aussi ailleurs, en Espagnol par exemple.




" et la plupart des mots cités sont connus de tout francophone même très moyennement cultivé."

Là vraiment tu exagères! ou bien ta vision est déformée par le fait de ne fréquenter que des linguistes. Ce n'est pas le cas de tout le monde, loin de là.

alleu, baboue, bau, bedeau, béton (lait), bief, bière (caisse), bondon, bongeau, brachet, brai (piège), buire, chambellan, chétron, ciron, crafe, cramail (?), drageon, échauguette, écofier, écot, élingue, empan, épeiche, époule, espringale, estrif, éteuf, étoc, faude, feurre, fouarre, frette, freux, gaude, gaule (?), gerfaut, glouteron, gonfalon, gruau, gruyer, guède, guerdon, guiche, guimpe, haire, hait, hallier, hampe, hanap, haubert, haussière, haveron, havet, hétoudeau, hourd, houseau, laîche, lippe, litre (fem), losse (?), marc (poids), martre, mégis (?), rochet, taquet, targe, tassette, tette, touaille, troène, varenne, baud, blet, dehait, échif, galand, lige, madré, sur (acide), bâtir (coudre), baudir, brouir, éclisser, émeutir (fienter), étricher, étriver, fauder, flatir, fourbir, gauchir, grigner, grommeler, guiper, mâchurer, marrir, oudrir (?), rouir, sérancer, super, bélitre, flasque (madrie), foudre(tonneau), halecret, lansquenet....

Je doute que la plupart des francophones, même moyennement cultivés, ne les connaissent tous. S'il ont pu en entendre quelques uns, il est très qu'il s'agit pour une bonne moitié d'entre eux de mots très peu usités.



" Par ex., "clenche" et ses dérivés (déclencher, enclencher). Sans parler de tout un vocabulaire familier : bouquin, reluquer "

Il s'agit aussi par ailleurs d'emprunts d'origine néerlandaise, là encore rien à voir avec une soi-disante identité fondementalement germano-latine du Français.
greg   Fri May 22, 2009 11:23 am GMT
bianca : « Is there any thing wrong with making citations from sources on this forum? I thought that was a good way to prove a point? »

Citer autrui ne pose aucun problème : mais les sources ultimes d'où proviennent les informations doivent être inspectées. Par exemple Wikipédia n'est pas une source fiable (en particulier le Wikipédia anglophone) → on l'a fait corriger sur plusieurs erreurs grossières (dont le taux de vocables germaniques initialement fixé à 15 % ! du total du lexique français).

Mais il y a tellement d'erreurs qu'il est vain de vouloir tout amender. Par exemple l'histoire de Mario Pei qui fixe des pourcentages d'écart "entre les langues romanes et le latin". Outre que ces chiffres, basés sur un corpus, ne concernent que l'évolution de certains phonèmes dans un certain environnement, tout le monde extrapole au système linguistique en général :
quelques phonèmes → tous les phonèmes
une infime partie de la phonologie → tous les aspects de la langue,
conduisant ainsi à l'établissement d'une légende.
Plus grave encore, la comparaison latin / langues romanes établie par Pei procède de la croyance latinocentriste : les lecteurs assidus de Wikipédia deviennent ainsi prisonniers d'une "pensée" unique circulaire auto-entretenue — en somme une vaste fumisterie.

Par exemple, à la page 75 → arithmetics : « http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_language » → recopiage du Wikipédia anglophone qui est un recopiage d'Henriette Walter qui est un recopiage des comparatistes latinocentristes germanopériphérisants du XIXe siècle.

Etymonline n'échappe pas à la critique même si les opinions présentées ont l'avantage d'être souvent mises en perspective, voire relativisées. Cependant il est un fait que ce site ne remet pas en cause la doxa filiatique latin→roman (ce qui est son droit) et ne semble pas s'émouvoir de la religion de l'emprunt au germanique (ce qui est son droit aussi). Mais c'est notre droit et notre devoir de signaler que la parti pris filiatique et empruntiste n'est basé sur rien de concret. Et qu'à ce titre il doit être dénoncé comme tel.





S. Malandrino : « Où est la preuve ? Tellement maintenant vous changez votre air quand il te convient faire ainsi. Vous êtes une feinte et un charlatan. »

Mais, justement, il n'y a aucune preuve, triple buse ! Ce qu'on combat ici c'est l'absence permanente de preuve érigée en vérité totalitaire.





PARISIEN : « Il y a bien plus de 400 mots germaniques en français [...] ».

Tu veux dire « réputés germaniques ». Qu'au final il y en ait 10 ou 150.000 qui soient effectivement germaniques, ça n'a aucune importance. Ce qui compte c'est de comprendre comment on passe du "réputé germanique" au "effectivement germanique". Et s'il le faut, on examinera les vocables un à un, du premier jusqu'au dernier. Il n'est pas question d'entériner des listes en vrac sans décortiquer les mécanismes qui permettent de distinguer le probablement vrai du probablement faux.





PARISIEN : « Eh bien oui, le préfixe "mé(s)" est germanique, il faut être de mauvaise foi pour le rattacher à "moins". 'Médisant', ce n'est pas 'moins-disant'.
Ce préfixe existe en occitan mais moins souvent. En italien il est rare mais a bien conservé sa morphologie originelle : "misconoscere", "misleale', 'miscredente' .
Il est bon de rabattre le caquet de certains maniaques, mais il ne faut pas non plus déconner ! »

Je ne rattache le préfixe français <mé(s)#> à aucun étymon latin puisqu'au contraire je soulignais sa parenté avec son cousin occitan. Tu indiques toi-même qu'un rapprochement avec l'italien est possible.

Un site étymologique italien dit ceci : « MISCONOSCERE — composto del prefisso <mis#> che ha un senso di "male", "poco" ». Autrement dit le sémantisme véhiculé est soit qualitatif (mal) soit quantitatif (peu). Ce qui nous rapproche de "moins" (quantitatif).

Le même site passe en revue ***LES*** étymologies proposées pour le préfixe italien <mis#> :
1 — latin <minus#>
2 — germanique <miss#>
3 — grec <μίσ(ος)#>
4 — latin <mis(er)#>
5 — grec < μίξ(ις)#>.
Tu vois bien que le débat est loin d'être tranché...

ancien français <mesconoistre> <mesqenoistre> etc
français classique <mesconnoistre>
français <méconnaître>
ancien toscan <mesconoscere>
italien <misconoscere>
occitan <mesconéisser> <mesconéguer> <mesconésquer>
piedmontais <sconòsse> → élision de <dis#>, <mis#> ?
saintongeais <méqueneùtre>
Copy Paste   Fri May 22, 2009 11:31 am GMT
from http://www.historynet.com/romes-barbarian-mercenaries.htm

For Sidonius Apollinaris and his beloved native city of Clermont, the year 471 could hardly have brought more misery. Goths surrounded the proud Roman city. Morale was low. Defeat seemed inevitable. ....
In his writings Sidonius might well have been justified in asking how a city in the great Roman Empire could have been left so defenseless. ..... Where was the Roman army? Sidonius never did pose that question because he already knew the answer: The Roman army had been there all along, made up of Goths.

How the “Roman” army came to be composed of barbarian troops of an often renegade nature is in many ways the story of Rome’s fall. It is the story of a people who seemingly lost confi­dence in themselves, a government that lost control of its army, and an army that lost control of its soldiers. It is a story of ambition, but also of miscalculation and finally failure.

In its heyday, the Roman army was composed of citizens and subjects—legionaries were recruited from the ranks of citizens, and subject states contributed the auxiliaries. Roman politicians commanded both types of soldiers, and the army represented a Romanizing force in the empire. All soldiers learned Latin, and those troops from the more barbarous subject states learned the civil ways of Rome. Excavations in northern England have revealed that even Rome’s most distant auxiliaries, Batavians, had adapted to the imperial style. They wrote letters in Latin and built forts that served as makeshift facsimiles of Roman urban life, complete with public baths.
....
But even while the imperial army Romanized its troops, the Romans themselves professed an ironic longing for the
barbarism of their enemies. Long before the barbarization of the late Roman army, Roman writers expressed admiration for the uncouth warriors who battled their legions. In the eyes of Tacitus, or even Julius Caesar, civilization made men soft. The fiercest fighters were those deemed least civilized.

Perhaps as a consequence of this conviction, Rome often deviated from its standard recruiting policies. For example, no close reader of Caesar could fail to observe that the legendary general was repeatedly saved, even at Alesia, by mounted German mercenaries whom he had hired for his war against Vercingetorix. Subsequently, Augustus established an imperial bodyguard, the custodes, composed entirely of Germans. Army recruitment took a similar path. Whereas Italy still supplied 65 percent of legionary troops during the reigns of Augustus, Tiberius, and Caligula, by the mid-second century the contribution of the Italian heartland had dwindled to less than 1 percent
....
Increasingly, however, the army filled its ranks by attracting volunteers from outside the empire. In the fourth century, huge numbers of Germans enlisted, and many of them attained high rank. The army itself—once the most powerful Romanizing force in the world—was rapidly becoming Germanized by its own recruits. German terminology and even German customs—such as the barritus, the old German battle cry—became widespread. Contemporary writers used the terms barbarus (barbarian) and miles (soldier) interchangeably.

The transition from a citizen’s army to a very nearly mercenary one did not go smoothly. To many Romans, the same barbarians so admired for their military prowess were also the enemy.
....
Increasingly, however, the army filled its ranks by attracting volunteers from outside the empire. In the fourth century, huge numbers of Germans enlisted, and many of them attained high rank. The army itself—once the most powerful Romanizing force in the world—was rapidly becoming Germanized by its own recruits. German terminology and even German customs—such as the barritus, the old German battle cry—became widespread. Contemporary writers used the terms barbarus (barbarian) and miles (soldier) interchangeably.

The transition from a citizen’s army to a very nearly mercenary one did not go smoothly. To many Romans, the same barbarians so admired for their military prowess were also the enemy. Since the early third century, the empire had been locked in a violent and essentially continuous struggle against barbarian raiders. Rome’s citizens, especially in the frontier provinces, had seen cities burned by barbarians. They had seen their fields pillaged, their treasures plundered, and their neighbors killed. If they felt a certain distrust of barbarian soldiers, they came by it naturally.

By the mid-fourth century, that distrust had begun to manifest itself in an open xenophobia. Roman responses to raids assumed a more brutal and punitive cast. When the Roman general Arinthaeus crossed the Danube in 367, he put a bounty on Goth heads and massacred even women and children. Within the empire a new law of 370 banned intermarriage between Romans and barbarians. But the most dangerous manifestations of late Roman xenophobia came a few years later, after the Germanic Goths had emerged as a dominant presence in the Roman world.
encore   Fri May 22, 2009 12:41 pm GMT
<<French words of original germanic origins : about 400 words:
If we group them in three groups: 1. Not used, very rarely known / 2. Rarely used / 3. Current french >>
Current French:
La newsletter
La newsbar
Le warrant
Le speeder
zoomin
Le podcast
Le cowboy
Le star
Les news
Le web
Le hot dog
and so on
guest guest   Fri May 22, 2009 1:46 pm GMT
" Current French:
La newsletter
La newsbar
Le warrant
Le speeder
zoom
Le podcast
Le cowboy
Le star
Les news
Le web
Le hot dog
and so on "


Oui, tout à fait d'accord, s'il on veut trouver beaucoup de mots d'origine germanique dans le français tel qu'il est effectivement utilisé c'est bien dans cette voie qu'il faut aller piocher...

cependant quelques corrections sur tes exemples:

Le warrant (on ne dit pas ça)
Le speeder (on dit "speeder" comme un verbe, pas en tant que nom)
Le star (on dit LA star, car étoile en français c'est féminin!)
encore   Fri May 22, 2009 2:15 pm GMT
<<Le speeder (on dit "speeder" comme un verbe, pas en tant que nom) >>

Look at this:
www.dailymotion.com/video/x86hxe_comment-construire-le-speeder-8000_fun
http://www.journaux.fr/revue.php?id=134996&collec=1
Le snowspeeder
Star Wars
guest guest   Fri May 22, 2009 2:32 pm GMT
Ok, I didn't this one. I probably didn't watched star wars enough...


"Speeder", we use it as a verb:

Je speede
Tu speedes
Il speede
Nous speedons
Vous speedez
Ils speedent

au passé simple it is a bit comic!

Je speedai
Tu speedas
Il Speeda
Nous speedâmes
Vous speedâtes
Ils Speedèrent
Guest   Fri May 22, 2009 3:22 pm GMT
<<if "bien", "heur", "venue", "mal", "au", "jour", "de"; "hui" are germanic words, then I agree with you french is germanic language !>>

guest guest, you are missing the point. They are not saying that the word elements are germanic, but that the process of *combining them to each other* is germanic.

<<(<--"garbage"=French germanic word)>>
English "garbage" *is* a French word of Germanic heritage. When we speak of French, if we do not specifically designate "Modern French", then we are including French languages in all stages of their history. At the time the English word was borrowed, the language was called "FRENCH".

<<I won't lost my time on this point, which is insignificant, greg did it in another post. >>

This is one of the most valid and compelling comments made, and were you a serious student of linguistics and not a person who throws gasoline on a kitchen fire, you would do well to heed it :)
encore   Fri May 22, 2009 3:37 pm GMT
<<"Speeder", we use it as a verb:>>

Other French people use it as a noun:

<<Le Speeder se décline en 3 types :

- Le Fun Speeder de couleur rouge, optimal pour les débutants et les courtes distances. Il pèse 7.0 grammes, a une portée d'environ 17 mètres et peut atteindre au maximum la vitesse de 260 km/h.

- Le Match Speeder de couleur jaune, qui convient pour les compétitions et les longues distances. Il pèse 9.0 grammes, a une portée d'environ 23 mètres et peut atteindre au maximum la vitesse de 290 km/h.

- Le Night Speeder de couleur jaune, qui s'utilise uniquement pour le jeu nocturne grâce aux Speedlights qui se placent dans la tête transparente du speeder. Il pèse 8.8 grammes, a une portée d'environ 23 mètres et peut atteindre au maximum la vitesse de 290 km/h.


le joueur touche le speeder avec une partie de son corps;
le joueur envoie le speeder en dehors du carré adverse; >>
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_Badminton
Leasnam   Fri May 22, 2009 3:58 pm GMT
<<1054 from English+550 from ancient Germanic+164 from German+153 from Dutch= 1921 >>

When we say "germanic origin", it usually means the first attested or most likely source (using compariative analysis in the absense of documentation due to the sociopolitical climate of upheaval at the time).

The arithmetics shown above are only direct sources--i.e. the language immediately bequeathing such to French. That will give an altogether different, and unfortunately, inaccurate result.

The reason why this is is because words travel *through* other languages to meet their destinations. A germanic word can travel *through* Italian before ending up in French. The above readout, however, will simply count that as an Italian loan. A specialist would count it as a Germanic root.

Additionally, many such Germanic roots fare *though* Medieval Latin and Classical Latin, to find their way to Romance Languages, French included.

French 'trêve', 'féodal', 'saisir', 'bison', 'allégeance', 'filtre', 'installer', 'savon' are just some examples of such words.
guest guest   Fri May 22, 2009 5:04 pm GMT
" The reason why this is is because words travel *through* other languages to meet their destinations. A germanic word can travel *through* Italian before ending up in French. The above readout, however, will simply count that as an Italian loan. A specialist would count it as a Germanic root. "


And a germanic that arrived in french, but that was originally from celtic, romance, greek or other indo-European origin would you substract it to the total... Or you might thing that because a words comes from germanic it is necessaly "purely germanic" ??
we know "purety" is a concept that had quite success among many germanic nations but how far should it goes?

If you want to demostrate that french has been originally created by the mix of latin and germanic (that is your theory I remind you), counting germanic borrowings that came into thru Italian 1000 years after the formation doesn't go in the direction of supporting your point. It inversely would support the idea that french had many influences from Italian.



PS: don't forget to analyse my texts !!! and doing the scientific work of analyse, and then you'll give me your conclusions about how important is germanic in an average french speech. I'm still waiting

ps/ it is not a problem if you don't know french for doing it, you can buy wourself a Larousse or consulting a serious onlin dictionnary word-by-word. Have a good time, it is a funny game!
ENCORE   Fri May 22, 2009 5:16 pm GMT
O.K. , guest guest,<le star> is Italian word,French word is <la star>.

About <le warrant>:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant