GalacticCactus Forum

Author Topic: What languages should I take?  (Read 5099 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rivka

  • Linguistic Anarchist
  • Übermember
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,155
    • View Profile
What languages should I take?
« Reply #25 on: April 23, 2008, 08:53:32 AM »
Does that mean the prophecy in Porter's sig has come to pass?
"Sometimes you need a weirdo to tell you that things have gotten weird. Your normal friends, neighbors, and coworkers won’t tell you."
-Aaron Kunin

Offline Neutros the Radioactive Dragon

  • Radiant Reptile
  • Dragons
  • Super Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,653
    • View Profile
    • scatterfilter
What languages should I take?
« Reply #26 on: April 23, 2008, 09:15:14 AM »
NOOOO!!!

Offline goofy

  • Veteran Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
    • http://
What languages should I take?
« Reply #27 on: April 23, 2008, 09:59:34 AM »
Quote
Quote
It seems that Romance is a subcategory of Italic.
That's strange. Shouldn't it be a subcategory of Latino-Faliscan? Ethnologue puts Latino-Faliscan and Romance as branches of Italic, which I don't believe is correct. It should go Italic > Latino-Faliscan > Romance or something similar.
why?

Offline Jonathon

  • Evil T-Rex
  • Administrator
  • Übermember
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,680
  • This is the darkest timeline
    • View Profile
    • GalacticCactus
What languages should I take?
« Reply #28 on: April 23, 2008, 10:07:00 AM »
Because the Romance languages come from Latin, which is a Latino-Faliscan language. The Romance languages are descendants of a Latino-Faliscan language, but Ethnologue shows Romance and Latino-Faliscan side-by-side.
You underestimate my ability to take things seriously!

Offline goofy

  • Veteran Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
    • http://
What languages should I take?
« Reply #29 on: April 23, 2008, 10:30:28 AM »
Quote
Because the Romance languages come from Latin, which is a Latino-Faliscan language. The Romance languages are descendants of a Latino-Faliscan language, but Ethnologue shows Romance and Latino-Faliscan side-by-side.
I'm just guessing, but maybe Ethnologue has that classification because the Romance languages aren't descended from Latin, they're descended from Vulgar Latin, and while Latin is Latino-Faliscan, Vulgar Latin is not. Sort of like how Hindi-Urdu is not descended from Sanskrit, it's from the Prakrits that existed alongside Sanskrit. maybe. I don't really know.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2008, 10:31:37 AM by goofy »

Offline Jonathon

  • Evil T-Rex
  • Administrator
  • Übermember
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,680
  • This is the darkest timeline
    • View Profile
    • GalacticCactus
What languages should I take?
« Reply #30 on: April 23, 2008, 03:25:01 PM »
Hmm. Possibly. I don't really know either.
You underestimate my ability to take things seriously!

Offline The Genuine

  • Ambcloacador of Right On
  • Super Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,570
    • View Profile
What languages should I take?
« Reply #31 on: April 23, 2008, 10:19:39 PM »
Is Italic a class of languages, or a language itself?
I think Jesse's right.

 -- Jonathon

Offline Jonathon

  • Evil T-Rex
  • Administrator
  • Übermember
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,680
  • This is the darkest timeline
    • View Profile
    • GalacticCactus
What languages should I take?
« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2008, 07:56:42 AM »
I've always seen it used to refer to a language subfamily, but presumably the members of that family trace their origins to a specific language. I don't know what it was called, but I'd that linguists refer to it as Proto-Italic.

Edit: Actually, that article does indeed refer to Proto-Italic, though the Proto-Italic article just redirects back to Italic.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2008, 08:50:35 AM by Jonathon »
You underestimate my ability to take things seriously!