What makes French a Latin-Germanic mixed language

Yes, when today you hear french, spanish, portuguese or roumanian, you hear a modern way of speaking latin, evolved and changed separately in diffferent area with different realities. But the mentioned nations at a certain point of their history stopped talking their own language and adopted the language of Roman italy.Linguistically I don't think modern italian should be seen wth the same perspective. Most of italic peaple before Rome spoke Oscan, and proto latin was an oscan language spoken by latins wich were italics to. So italics (sammnites, hernici, laborini, volsc, latins etc.) was the populatin that was the classical rome (I repeate myself: Augustus defined that italy and Rome -italics and roman- was the same political and administrative reality, I. e. the same peaple. Now, that same peaple never stopped talking their foundamental original language.Trough the collapse of Rome untill today, separately, because politically divided, they have developped different dialects, but those dialects are the basic koine for modern toscan italian (exactly like oscan have been the basic element for latin. The same dynamic applies to old and new greece. We generally consider modern Greece the heir and testimony of ancient Greece (and that is ok), even if they to have been invaded and their popûlation have allways been by far smaller than the italian.This only because no other country speaks greec . Is that a reason
For all this I think Italy is the legitim cradle of the roman impire and the italian language can go bak at its roots: latin spoken NON STOP BY THE SAME PEAPLE. (All the other NEOlatin language have adopted latin. They have been part of the empire and played an important role within, but they cannot claim to be the modern latin speakin representative at the same level as Italian and Italy... Vales Italicus

According to Julius Caesar the Aquitanii were the Roman citizens who spoke Latin best.

<<Yes, when today you hear french, spanish, portuguese or roumanian, you hear a modern way of speaking latin, evolved and changed separately in diffferent area with different realities. But the mentioned nations at a certain point of their history stopped talking their own language and adopted the language of Roman italy.Linguistically I don't think modern italian should be seen wth the same perspective. >>

Lucca,
What you speak about here is substratum: i.e. the languages or dialects spoken by the leod, or people, who acquired V.Latin initially as a second language and affected it by way of their native speech habits.

Prior to Roman expansion, Northern Italy had a Celtic, Ligurian and Venetic substratums. Central Italy had an Etruscan, and Southern Italy a Greek.

But Italy has also seen superstatum effects: that is, languages that superimposed themselves on V.Latin, thus influencing it.

This happened especially in Northern Italy with the Lombards and also later during the Middle Ages when N. Italian was influenced by Gallo-Occitan. In the South, Normans also affected the language in Sicily.

So, Italian is in no way isolated and pure in the sense of evolution from V.Latin. Even though it may best represent the closest thing to it.

MY DEAR LEASNAN,
YOU TALKING NONSENSE YOU HAVEA BIG CONFUSION IN YOUR HEAD, i AM TALKING ABOUT OSC LANGUAGE WICH IS AT THE BASE OF MOST OF ITALICS LANGUAGES INCLUDIG LATIN, AND NOT A CONFUSE SUBSTRATUM, AS YOU ARE CALLING IT.i MENTION THE OSC KOINE AT THE BASE OF LATIN; DO YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS. iN ANY CASE THIS IS MY LAST INTERVENTION ON THE MATTER AND I SALUTE YOU IN A ROMAN TYPICAL WAY.....'AQUILA NO CAPTA MUSCA"........VALES... ITALICUS.............LOKLY YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT LATIN.

To Leasnam

Old English:

Fæder ūser þū sē eart on heofonum,
sī þīn nama gehālgod.
Tōbecume þīn rīce.
Gewurþe þīn willa
on eorþan swā swā on heofonum.
ūserne gedæghwǣmlīcan hlāf sele ūs tō dæg.
And forgief ūs ūsre gyltas,
swā swā wē forgiefaþ ūsrum gyltedum.
And ne gelǣd þū ūs on contnunga
ac ālȳs ūs of yfele.
Sōthlīce.

Old Saxon:
Fadar ûsa firiho barno,
thu bist an them hôhon himila rîkea,
geuuîhid sî thîn namo uuordo gehuuilico.
Cuma thîn craftag rîki.
Uuerða thîn uuilleo obar thesa uuerold alla,
sô sama an erðo, sô thar uppa ist
an them hôhon himilo rîkea.
Gef ûs dago gehuuilikes râd, drohtin the gôdo,
thîna hêlaga helpa, endi alât ûs, hebenes uuard,
managoro mênsculdio, al sô uue ôðrum mannum dôan.
Ne lât ûs farlêdean lêða uuihti
sô forð an iro uuilleon, sô uui uuirðige sind,
ac help ûs uuiðar allun ubilon dâdiun.

Surprise! Old English (Anglo-Saxon) and Old Saxon are NOT mutually intelligible too!

Italian comes from Vulgar Latin, so it's a vulgar language .

<<Surprise! Old English (Anglo-Saxon) and Old Saxon are NOT mutually intelligible too! >>

Perhaps, and?

What is your point?

The only language reported by Anglo-Saxon missionaries to be mutually intellible with Old English was Old Frisian. But Old Saxon was very close, and eath not hard for the Anglo-Saxons to master. They were able to preach to Frisians, Saxons and Germans with full enough range and clarity as to bring about conversion.

Old Saxon byspel:

"Forsaichistu diobolae?
et respondeat: ec forsacho diobolae.
end allum diobolgelde?
respondeat: end ec forsacho allum diobolgeldae.
end allum dioboles wercum?
respondeat: end ec forsacho allum dioboles wercum and wordum Thunaer ende Woden ende Saxnote ende allum them unholdum the hira genotas sint.

professio fidei.

Gelobistu in got alamehtigan fadaer?
ec gelobo in got alamehtigan fadaer.
gelobistu in crist godes suno?
ec gelobo in crist gotes suno.
gelobistu in halogan gast?
ec gelobo in halogan gast.

Retrieved from "http://wikisource.org/wiki/Abrenuntiatio_diaboli"

Even today I can understand with ease this Old Saxon andetting, and it's not even ENGLISH:

Forsakest though the devil?
I forsake the devil.
and all devil-geld ("geld, yielding to, tribute, worship")?
and I forsake all devil-geld.
and all the devil's works?
and I forsake all the devil's works and words, Thor and Wodin, and Saxnot and all the demons that their companions are.

Believest thou in God the Almighty Father?
...
Believest thou in Christ God's Son?
...
Believest thou in the Holy Ghost?

Mr. Leasnam.look to my posts in thread "Dutch People":

Wed Apr 29, 2009 1:41 pm GMT
Wed May 06, 2009 7:24 am GMT
Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:36 pm GMT

and to this:
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oudsaksische_doopgelofte
<<Over de taal waarin het stuk geschreven staat bestaat onduidelijkheid. Veel Nederlandse onderzoekers zien de tekst als een Oudnederfrankische taalvariant, in Duitsland wordt het als Oudsaksisch beschouwd.>>
I hope,you understand Dutch.
Old English,Old Frisian,Old Frankish,Old Saxon were mutually inelligible. Old English and Old Norse were mutually intelligible in less degree.

Don't you idiots realize what "mutually intelligible" means? That means cross-understanding without any study or knowledge of the language beforehand.

Guest Fri May 29, 2009 8:51 pm GMT
Italian comes from Vulgar Latin, so it's a vulgar language

Mr Guest!!!!!!!!!
Or no name individual..........Is that all you have to say? Obviosly this is a villain answer, so you deserve a roman answer for villains...
' The insult of a little mouse will never reach the Eagle.".... ....



Leasnam Fri May 29, 2009 9:43 pm GMT
<<Surprise! Old English (Anglo-Saxon) and Old Saxon are NOT mutually intelligible too

Old Saxon byspel:

"Forsaichistu diobolae?
et respondeat: ec forsacho diobolae.
end allum diobolgelde?
respondeat: end ec forsacho allum diobolgeldae.
end allum dioboles wercum?
respondeat: end ec forsacho allum dioboles wercum and wordum Thunaer ende Woden ende Saxnote ende allum them unholdum the hira genotas sint.

Baby leasnam,
and you still maintain that french is a germanic language or heavly germanized (creole). How about the text above that you are referring to, I am wrong or it look more like a badly written latin with same saxon latinized words???????

Wasnt it classical culture that gave us philosophy and mathematics and literature and arts (most of which were transfered to mediaeval society through the Arabs that preserved the teachings of antiquity)? Didn't Germanic society give us trial by order, illiteracy, witch hunts, and the feudal system?

Thank god for the renaissance in Italy and France that spread throughout the rest of Europe. ;)

I can almost picture two different but similar situations.

Antiquity: a woman has a mole on her neck. She is quite talented in maths and makes the best soup in the village. Her family thinks of the mole as a beauty mark, they brag about how smart she is, and pride themselves on her soup!

Germanic society in the 1200's: a woman has a mole on her neck. She is quite talented in maths and makes the best soup in the village. Her family accuses her of being a witch and they burn her at a stake, and cast her body into a river. It floats away, and they say "see...only a witch could float on water!"

hahaha

CID : « The title of this thread should read "What makes the Romance Languages Latin-Germanic mixtures" then. Why single out French, as it is only slightly more influenced by Germanic than the others. »

Absolument. Ce qui de toute manière aurait conduit à la même conclusion : les langues romanes sont... romanes !





rep : « Language policy (assimilation) in France is "patriotisme"? Most of inhabitants of Alsace and Lorraine are of German origin. »

Précision : je faisais référence à la seconde moitié du XIXe. À part une minorité non-négligeable, la plupart des Lorrains & Alsacos étaient des patriotes territoriaux et/ou républicains (= en faveur de la France, peu importe les subtilités linguistiques). Le "patriotisme" linguistique dont je parlais n'a rien à voir avec la loyauté politique des Alsacolorrains : c'était le fruit d'une construction intellectuelle émanant de spécialistes des langues — des Septentrionaux francophones maternels pour la plupart, en outre issus de l'« Intérieur » (France non-germanophone).





7782.2 : « In fact modern English was formed by Normans learning a basic English and lazily transplanting their own vocabulary into it. That doesn't make it make it a mixed language, unless "mixed" means having some foreign influence, in which case all languages can classified as such. »

C'est un raccourci très cliché. En fait l'anglais shakespearien (les débuts de l'anglais "moderne") provient d'une salade de fruits moyen-anglaise, **LAQUELLE** est en effet le produit ultime de l'impact des vétérofrancophones sur l'idiome indigène numériquement majoritaire d'Angleterre. En gros c'est [Chaucer→Shakespeare], précédé de [vétérofrançais→Chaucer].





Invité d'honneur : « Explique-t-il la ressemblance entre le latin et les langues romanes seulement par les emprunts d'icelles à icelui ? »

Non car il interprète la proximité lexicale comme la résultante de l'action combinée de deux facteurs principaux :
1] emprunts latin→roman ;
2] transmission par l'ancêtre italique commun à la branche latine et à la branche romane.





Invité d'honneur : « Parce que les ressemblances avec le latin dépassent quand même la simple question de vocabulaire. »

C'est sûr. D'ailleurs romanocentristes et latinocentristes s'accordent sur l'italicité des deux branches issues d'un même tronc. De même que germanistes et italicistes se retrouvent sur l'indo-européanité des deux familles.





Invité d'honneur : « Par exemple, la conjugaison du premier groupe au présent de l'indicatif : [...] ».

Complément :
↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓



ITALIQUE ROMAN

ARAGONAIS
canto
cantas
canta
cantamos
cantaz
cantan

ARANAIS
canti
cantes
cante
cantam
cantatz
canten

ASTURIEN
canto
cantes
canta
catamos
cantáis
canten

AUVERGNAT
chante
chantes
chanta
chantam
chantatz
chanton

BÉARNAIS
cantí
cantas
canta
cantam
cantatz
cantan

CASTILLAN
canto — kanto
cantas — kantas
canta — kanta
catamos — kantamos
cantáis — kantai̯s
cantan — kantan

CATALAN
canto, cant, cante, canti
cantes
canta
cantem
canteu
canten

CÉVENOL
cante
cantes
canto
cantan
cantas
càntou

ANCIEN FRANÇAIS
chant — t͡ʃãŋt
chantes — t͡ʃãŋtəs
chantet, chante, chanted — t͡ʃãŋtət, t͡ʃãŋtə, t͡ʃãŋtəd
chanton(s), chantom(s), chantomes, chantains — t͡ʃãŋtõŋ(s), t͡ʃãŋtõɱ(s), t͡ʃãŋtõɱəs, t͡ʃãŋtẽĩ̯ŋt͡s
chantez, chanteiz, chantoiz — t͡ʃãŋtet͡s, t͡ʃãŋtei̯t͡s, t͡ʃãŋtwɛt͡s
chantent — t͡ʃãŋtə̃ŋt
1] la présence du <t> final à la 3e p. pl., à l'instar du latin mais en complète opposition avec toutes les langues romanes (hormis le saintongeais et le wallon), n'interdit pas de considérer l'hypothèse d'une hypercorrection latinocentriste dès l'époque médiévale
2] Cortez attribue le <s> et le <t> finaux, aux 2e & 3e p. pl. respectivement, à une latinisation graphique avec alignement oral ultérieur (prononciation de /s/ & /t/) ; soit respectivement à l'origine : t͡ʃãŋtõŋ, t͡ʃãŋtõɱ & t͡ʃãŋtə̃ŋ, t͡ʃãŋtən

FRANÇAIS
chante — ʃɑ̃t
chantes — ʃɑ̃t
chante — ʃɑ̃t
chantons — ʃɑ̃tɔ̃
chantez — ʃɑ̃te
chantent — ʃɑ̃t

GALICIEN
canto
cantas
canta
catamos
cantades
cantan

GASCON
chanti
chantas
chanta
chantam
chantatz
chantan

ITALIEN
canto — kanto
canti — kanti
canta — kanta
cantiamo — kantjamo
cantate — kantate
cantano — kantano

LANGUEDOCIEN
canti — kanti
cantes — kantes
canta — kantɔ
cantam — kantɔm (?)
cantatz — kantas
cantan — kantɔn

LIMOUSIN
chante
chantas
chanta
chantam
chantatz
chantan

OCCITAN
canti, cante
cantas, cantes
canta
cantam
cantatz
cantan, canton

PICARD
cante
cante
cante
cantons
cantez
cant'te

PIEDMONTAIS
cant
càntes
canta
cantoma
cante
canto

PORTUGAIS
canto — kɐ̃tu
cantas — kɐ̃tɐʃ
canta — kɐ̃tɐ
catamos — kɐ̃tɐmuʃ
cantais — kɐ̃tajʃ
cantam — kɐ̃tɐ̃ʊ̯̃

PROVENÇAL
cante
cantes
canto
cantan, cantèn
cantas
canton

RHÉTOROMAN
chant
chantas
chanta
chantain
chantais
chantan

SAINTONGEAIS
chante
chantes
chante
chantun
chantéz
chantant

ROUMAIN
cânt
cânţi
cântă
cântăm
cântaţi
cântă

VÉNITIEN
canto
canti
canta
cantémo, canton
cantè
canta

VIVARO-ALPIN
chanto, chante, chanti
chantas
chanta
chantem, chantam
chantatz
chantan, chanton

WALLON
tchante
tchantes
tchante
tchantans, tchantons
tchantez, tchantoz
tchantèt, tchantant, tchantont, tchantnut

Merci à nos amis romanophones de corriger et compléter.




ITALIQUE NON-ROMAN

LATIN
canto — kantoː
cantas — kantaːs
cantat — kantat
catamus — kantaːmus
cantatis — kantaːtis
cantant — kantant





Pour apprécier les différences roman/latin, le plus intéressant serait d'avoir la conjugaison de l'ind. prés. de l'ancêtre italique commun au roman et au latin. Mais il y a peu de chances que nous l'obtenions jamais...

ANCIEN FRANÇAIS
chant — t͡ʃãŋt
chantes — t͡ʃãŋtəs
chantet, chante, chanted — t͡ʃãŋtət, t͡ʃãŋtə, t͡ʃãŋtəd
chanton(s), chantom(s), chantomes, chantains — t͡ʃãŋtõŋ(s), t͡ʃãŋtõɱ(s), t͡ʃãŋtõɱəs, t͡ʃãŋtẽĩ̯ŋt͡s
chantez, chanteiz, chantoiz — t͡ʃãŋtet͡s, t͡ʃãŋtei̯t͡s, t͡ʃãŋtwɛt͡s
chantent — t͡ʃãŋtə̃ŋt



CORRECTION
<chantomes> serait <t͡ʃãŋtõməs> et non pas *<t͡ʃãŋtõ*ɱəs> comme tapé par erreur.

Reinassance was born in Croatia. Laurana brothers, Giorgio da Sebenico, Giulio Clovio, Niccolò Fiorentino and Leonardo da Vinci were all Croats.

I'm basing this on my own personal experience and those of my colleagues working at an Alliance française in Germany. If French is, as some claim, so germanic in nature (some have claimed that French is 50% germanic), then why....

Do many Germans have difficulty with French word order?

Do many Germans misuse French reflexive pronouns?

Do many Germans have difficulty with French verb tenses (misusing past tenses, over-conjugating, over-use of auxilary verbs, etc)

Do many Germans have difficulty with distinguishing between a complément d'objet direct and indirect?

Do many Germans have difficulty with verbal prepositions?

Do many Germans have difficulty with French vocabulary?

The list could go on and on. Funny to note that most of these difficulties are shared with speakers of other Germanic languages.

When I taught French in Italy, most of the students had little or no troubles with these grammar points. The greatest challege for them was making the link between written words and pronunciation. Vocabulary was quite easy to teach, and I could use Italian grammar many many times to explain French grammar.

Interesting to see how such a "germanic" language would be so hard for German speakers to speak (not just to speak, but speak well).

Just a thought.