Are Romance languages some kind of Germano-Latin?
<<The Germans did not enslavered the native peoples , so what you say is a nonsense. >>
I did not say that they enslavered the local population, but that they regarded the locals as not being free men, because they had to pay taxes. Paying taxes was a sign of being unfree to Germans.
Speaking Latin was surely useful to them, but they only learned it half way, that's how Latin became Romance.
Local population had to pay taxes to the Roman administration too, and not, not all the Germans which arrived to the Roman Empire were part of the warrior elite, but free citizens just like the natives, which whom they mixed.
Yes, they learned it only half way, but they did all they best to learn Latin. They simply lacked ability to adquire it properly.
A minor correction: WITH whom the mixed.
the German which?? shouldn't this be The German who?
I think that you are correct, which is only used with things, isn't it?
Herbist wrote:
">Speaking Latin was surely useful to them, but they only learned it half way, that's how Latin became Romance.<"
A dubious assumption regarding the Romance languages. I'll grant that the Germanic tribes (visigoths / ostrogoths) learned the essentials of Latin to communicate & trade with the Romans, however, this does not imply that those people, the authentic romans, spoke in that manner until the Holy Roman Empire came into existence. Spain, Portugal, Romania were saved from Germano-influence to an extent, however, they acquired other traits from Arab or Slavic etc. peoples. Suffice to say
it would explain why those languages tend to have archaic vocabulary, pronunciation and verb-conjugation then that of Italian or French.
Spanish is the most similar living language to Old Latin
HUGE crap
Spanish is the most similar living language to Old Latin
Cazzate!
Domine
<<<A dubious assumption regarding the Romance languages. I'll grant that the Germanic tribes (visigoths / ostrogoths) learned the essentials of Latin to communicate & trade with the Romans, however, this does not imply that those people, the authentic romans, spoke in that manner until the Holy Roman Empire came into existence. >>>
Germanic tribes like the Franks, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Burgundians, Alans, Langobards, Suebi, Alamanni, Vandals and Normanni/Wikings did not only communicate & trade with the local but ruled, settled and mingle in large number in whole Western Europe and North Africa.
Domine
<<<Spain, Portugal, Romania were saved from Germano-influence to an extent, however, they acquired other traits from Arab or Slavic etc. peoples. Suffice to say it would explain why those languages tend to have archaic vocabulary, pronunciation and verb-conjugation then that of Italian or French. >>>
Spain and Portugal had the luck to be freed by Germanics twice since Germanic Visigoths, Suebi and Franks freed them first from Roman and then from Muslim domination.
The Visigoths did not free. Spain from anything. Roman provinces were much more developed than the original German settlement, and the Germanic invasions meant a great recession. Cities collapsed and a process of ruralization took place. Taxes increased heavily.
On the other hand, the Franks only conquered to the Muslims a small portion of the Iberian Peninsula comprising Northern Catalonia and the Spanish side of the Pyrenees. It was the Roman-Catholic peoples who migrated from Southern Spain and took refuge in Northwestern which slowly started to gain territories in detriment of the Muslims. These ones easily defeated the weak Visigoth State.
<<Cities collapsed and a process of ruralization took place. >>
Rural life was and is by far superior to the (decadent) life in cities based on slavery and exploitation.
<<Taxes increased heavily. >>
I never heard this, do you have some hint for me where this information comes from?
<<It was the Roman-Catholic peoples who migrated from Southern Spain and took refuge in Northwestern which slowly started to gain territories in detriment of the Muslims.>>
The Reconquista was a project of the Visigothic nobility and the Roman-Catholic peoples were a mix of 50%-Ibero-Roman and 50%-Germanic settlers.
Herbist : « Rural life was and is by far superior to the (decadent) life in cities based on slavery and exploitation. »
Un chapelet de jugements de valeur, comme si la paysannerie médiévale se réduisait à une bucolique image d'Épinal et était exempte de tout asservissement... C'est très romantique et puritain : Babylone opposée à une sorte d'angélisme très Marie-Antoinette.
greg
<<<
Un chapelet de jugements de valeur, comme si la paysannerie médiévale se réduisait à une bucolique image d'Épinal et était exempte de tout asservissement... C'est très romantique et puritain : Babylone opposée à une sorte d'angélisme très Marie-Antoinette.
>>>
That's true, the Germanic model of rural life was surely more productive and healthy than the Roman model of civil life characterized by plundering the provinces by heavy taxes, gladiators loosing their life in arenas, slaves crucified for trying to escape, adultery, lazy negotium and orgies. This was also the opinion of Tacitus, by the way...
Josh Lalonde, why did you delete the post in the English forum about the Germanic migrations ?