What makes French a Latin-Germanic mixed language

<<The french are latin because they speak a romance language. The same way Tunisians are arabic because they speak arab (but not necesseraly descend from Arabia), the same way Mexicans are Hispanic because they speak Spanish (but do not necesseraly descend from Spain), the same way English or Germans are Germanic because they speak germanic languages (and not because they descent necesseraly from old germanic tribes from nordic countries), etc.
>>

No. Your assertions are based on ignorance.

The French are not one or the other, but a mix of all three. A harmonious blend, each individual part imparting its own character and strengths to the new whole.

Jamaicans speak English, or a dialect/creole of English (Patois). Are they therefore a Germanic people? They're Anglo-Saxons right? You idgeot.

" The French are not one or the other, but a mix of all three. A harmonious blend, each individual part imparting its own character and strengths to the new whole. "


No, our culture is not a mix of Celtic, Germanic and latin cultures.

You might some find elements of Germanic and celtic cultures (among many others more influent that you curiously forget to mention) but our culture as a whole is a latin one.

And, we as a people coming from a latin culture are considered a latin people, whatever how complex DNA root of the population might be, and whatever you wan't or doesn't want to accept (it seems to bother you that french culture is distant to Anglo-saxon ones while among all France neighbors, England, among with Germany is probably far away the further culturally distant, sorry).





If you can't understand, let's take an other exemple:

Would you consider that a Libanese is not an Arabic, or that "Arabic" label can't be used for them, but that he is as much Roman than Arabic? Put a Libanese in front of an Jordanian and an Italian, do you really think that the Italian man will be considered as much close to the libanese man than the Jordanian...

Accept it, if the Arab world exist it is not because a supposed common origin in terms in DNA, but of a common share culture that was brougt and spread and exchanged by the common Arab language.

If you want at all price think (as a 'race'-obsessed typical American) in DNA heritage terms you would be obliged to recognise that Lebanese people are probably closer to French people than to Jordanians in that way... Would it mean something significative? would it change how Libanese people think, speak, pray, sing, act and feel life? No.

In terms of DNA, nobody denies that french people (but also Spanish, Italians and others) have ancestors (far, far ancestors, dating back centuries of milleniums ago) that were coming from various cultural and linguistical groups (not only germanic and celtic as you might think), but also ligurian, greek, phenician, Mongol, Scandinavian, arabic, iberian, moor, hebraic, etc. All these groups have left DNA heritage on french territory, some much before the Germanic ones, some other long after. They have also left impact on language (especially Greek and Arabic) that can be considered more important than germanic impact.
Yes, we are genetically mixed, and have no problem to recognise it because for us our identity is not a question of ancestry but of actual culture. that I have Huns, scandinavian and Phenician ancestry doesn't change the fact that what defines me is my latin culture.


"Jamaicans speak English, or a dialect/creole of English (Patois). Are they therefore a Germanic people? They're Anglo-Saxons right? You idgeot."

Yes, of course jamaicans are part of English-speaking cultural world. there can be physical variety in the english speking world. jamaica is even commonwealth member, and thanks to their common language and cultural heritage both countries of England and Jamaica inter-influenced themselves reciprockely (you know England it not a pure "white" country, and jamaican sub-culture is also part of English culture... In England you have a lot of White or black rastas in all English cities, and yes they are English. Both Jamaica an England are Anglo-saxon countries the same way Spain, Argentina, Dominican republic and Mexico are Hispanic countries. And the same way Lebanon, sudan and Tunisia are Arabic countries despite having people with different lookings, they are considered arabic people.

There is a such thing as the English-speaking world. This you say is true.
But there is no such thing as "latin culture".

Please, define, what is "latin culture"? --and don't say the culture in all "latin" countries. That is not a definition.

<<they are considered arabic people>>

Tunisians are not Arab. Neither are the Sudanese.

An Arab is not anyone speaking Arabic. Otherwise, I could learn to speak Arabic, and learn the culture which you call "Arabic" and then I would be an Arab no?

And I am not an Arab.

Well, I don't consider then Arab

"""""""Have you read my text? I think you didn't. I never spoke about "our ancestors the Gauls" ?? I Spoke about "Gallo-romans". """""""""""""

You speak of Gallo-Romans and you mean by this term "your ancestors the Gauls" or "your ancestors the Gallo-Romans", don´t you? And this exactly is the 19th century national myth of France.


Average "Asterix" reading French do not realize that Goscinny and Uderzo just wanted to make a funny Comic and no history book. For example, wearing a chief on a buckler is a purely Germanic heritage, not Celtig/Gaulish/Gallo-Roman at all.

" You speak of Gallo-Romans and you mean by this term "your ancestors the Gauls" or "your ancestors the Gallo-Romans", don´t you? And this exactly is the 19th century national myth of France. "

Once again, please, read my post! I'm not at all saying this
I'm among those ones who precicely dislike the expression "nos ancetres les Gaulois" (fortunally it is not teached anymore in schools since the mid-20th century).

I dislike this sentence for further reasons:

- A lot of french people don't have at all any Gaul ancestor (some can have African, Asian, north African, East European, hebraic, ancestry, southern European northern European,etc. and being 100% french)

- Even people who have gaulish ancestry (well many probably have) have almost all probabilities to also have many other ancestors (this is what I said in previous post); including: Greeks, Ligurians, Phenicians, North Africans, Scandinavians, Franks, Burgondian, visigotic, slavic, hebraic, etc.

- What makes us today as a people is our culture, and it didn't come from the Gaul but mainly from the Romans. As some of you correctly said Gaulish culture was almost completly erased during the centuries of romanisation.

- I absolutly don't care about "what ancestry were a people's ancestors", what interest me more is "what culture did they have a land at a precise time"


Once again I repeat myself because it seem I wasn't understood:

" What does mean "Gallo-Roman"? it is NOT a question of "ethnics" or "dna" ancestry but it relates to the ROMAN culture of that particular place named "Gaul" before the arrival of the franks who renamed it later to "France". "

This is clear: I don't claim that french people descend from Gauls (even less that they "are" Gauls or celts), some do maybe partially, other do not and all of them don't derive their culture from Gauls but from Roman's.



" Average "Asterix" reading French do not realize that Goscinny and Uderzo just wanted to make a funny Comic and no history book. For example, wearing a chief on a buckler is a purely Germanic heritage, not Celtig/Gaulish/Gallo-Roman at all. "

Completly agree with that? I hate Asterix in that sens that it spread confusions in periods, civilisations and spread the wrong idea to many people that modern France is a "celtic" country, whose people are culturally and genetically Gaulish. This is absurd.
Said that the comics a pretty funny to read, but do not prevent to take serious history classes.

@Leasnam

maybe because the word is not "arabic" but "semitic". Arab is a semite language.

""""""""""- Even people who have gaulish ancestry (well many probably have) have almost all probabilities to also have many other ancestors (this is what I said in previous post); including: Greeks, Ligurians, Phenicians, North Africans, Scandinavians, Franks, Burgondian, visigotic, slavic, hebraic, etc. """""""

Again you repeat prpaganda of the 19th century.
1) you state that MANY French "probably" have gaulish ancestry, and this after having said previously that Gaulish ancestry never can exist since Gaulish were a culture and not DNA.
2) you claim that the majority, besides being mainly of Gaulish DNA, have some additional DNA from "many other ancestors" listing exotic DNA-ancestors like "Ligurians"(???) and Phenicians before Franks and Burgondians.

That is not only all in all illogical but additionally pure propaganda in the style of nationalist Fustel de Coulanges - good examples of big brother´s "doublethink" and "Newspeak" slogans "War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength."

Well, Ouest, can't you read?? or understand the words you read?


" you state that MANY French "probably" have gaulish ancestry, and this after having said previously that Gaulish ancestry never can exist since Gaulish were a culture and not DNA. "

What does not exist is not gaullish ancestry but gaullish DNA, do you understand? of course Gaullish ancestry exist, since the Gauls had children they have descendants. My point is their descendants are NOT Gauls themselves because being Gaulish, like being Romanic, Celtic, Germanic or whatever is not defined by the DNA but by the culture! And Gaulish culture diseappeared with roman colonisation... this is simple to understand.
Knowing that Gaulish people have lived on what is most of modern France (and more), and that there is very very few chances that those gauls have been all killed by other groups that went to that land we can advencture ourselves without much risk to say that most french people have at least some of their ancestors that were Gauls. Anyway that has not much importance since Gaulish people (hear "Gaulish culture" I you can't help yourself hearing "DNA herency") disseapeared and didn't brought much (close to nothing to me) to the french identity (which is a cultural thing, if you were tended to think that Gaulish identity can go to someone by its genetic code).




" you claim that the majority, besides being mainly of Gaulish DNA, have some additional DNA from "many other ancestors" listing exotic DNA-ancestors like "Ligurians"(???) and Phenicians before Franks and Burgondians. "

And??
All those peoples that once went to France didn't had children either?
I don't see in what way "ligurian" ancestry could be in any sense "exotic" from a french point of view since the native area of these people was actually located in areas in France and Italy, yes, since they were native to the land ligurians were less "exotic" than "franks" or "burgondians" which originally came from other areas situated hundred of kilometers more north.


" That is not only all in all illogical but additionally pure propaganda in the style of nationalist Fustel de Coulanges - good examples of big brother´s "doublethink" and "Newspeak" slogans "War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength." "

?? I don't understand. could you explain?



" But there is no such thing as "latin culture".

There are latin cultures. There is no reason for that it should bother you.
There is nothing bad not being in one of them, no reason to be ashamed. latin cultures are not in any way better than slavic germanic or arabic ones... Actually it is usually the inverse since most latin countries nowadays are generally relatively less developped than germanic ones.
every cultures have their positive and negative points. French culture is very far to be the best culture in the world, we don't think that way: for us being latin doesn't mean in any way that we are better. This idea that latinness is "superior" is spread only in the germanic speaking world (especially strongly in English-speaking cultures), because of the special status that had the french language in the English nobility and its usage in other courts of germanic Europe in 18th century. For us latiness is the average people's culture, there is not at all any "elitist" conotations in it as you might think.

<,There is no reason for that it should bother you.
There is nothing bad not being in one of them, no reason to be ashamed. >

this is so stupid

" <,There is no reason for that it should bother you.
There is nothing bad not being in one of them, no reason to be ashamed. >

this is so stupid "



So, you think one has a reason to be ashamed of its culture?
you think some cultures are superior to others?

" You describe perfectly the 19th century national myth of France that led to the great wars of the 20th century. "



These wars find their origins in the German nationalism my friend.

I think that the deep roots of Western culture are Latin-Greek. That is undeniable.

" I think that the deep roots of Western culture are Latin-Greek. That is undeniable "


There is no one "western culture". there are very different cultures in Europe and its heirs. Not much latin-greek in northern european cultures, at least much less than in arabo-muslim mediterranean cultures that have taken a lot from greeks and romans (same areas).