Please remember I do not take without reserves what I read but this is why a such
forum as cybalist eixsts, to point out , to exchange arguments and to see what is
possible and what not.
The romans let us know about four languages. Lingua latina, lingua barbara and lingua
peregrina and lingua prisca.
The romans never (?) made a confusion among these languages. They knew exactly
what each of this language means. So , please fallow:
Lingua latina= classic latin, language spoken in senate, schools and so on
Lingua barbara= latina vulgata the language spoken by normaly folk
Lingua peregrina= a foreign language which has nothing to do with the latin language.
Lingua prisca= old latin spoken at the time of etruscans and before greeks influence in
the latin.( See u.o. Isiodorus from Sevillia regarding the language in the time of Janus
and Saturn)
Festus tells us about old priscian people who used the lingua prisca before Rome was
buildt.
Quintilianus explains what lingua barbara means. Lingua barbara means the latin
language where some vowels are missed or words are trunchiated phenomen known
today from the moder lingvists as "metatezis"
Quintilianus said hte folk in arenas and theaters make exclamations and use the lingua
barbara
Quintillianus affirm the greeks spoken a lingua peregrina, an absolut different language
from the latin .
Enninus ( 239-169 BC) tells us the people in Iberia speak lingua barbara. Please keep in
mind the romans just went in Iberia at that time so no way to speak about romanisation
of the iberian peoples.
Strabon tells us about celtic dialect from Galia to be similar to latin and that the thracian
and dacian ( whole balkan, including dalmatia, panonia, noricum) spoked the same
language
Diodorus Siculus calls the sicilian way to speak lingua barbara
Plautus calls everything outside of Latium "urbes barbaricaes" and the language spoken
there "lingua barbara"
Cicero affirms lingua barbara is the language spoken in the house of the citiziens and not
the latin spoken in senat
Gellius affirm too the same thing. If someone speak the lingua barbara, then this one
speaks the normal language which is spoken by citiziens home.
Titus Livius tells us that at 146 BC , after the romans defeat the Philip of Macedonia, they
read a declaration from the roman Senate to the macedonian folk without translator.
Veleius Paterculus wondered that in Panonia the language used there is too similar to
latin.
Priscus tells us that at the Court of Attila amond hunic language and gothic language was
spoken too the ausonic language. The ausionic language is a latin dialect , so a lingua
barbara
I dont put here the episodes with dacians in the roman senate, the episode with Maximus
Thrax , the fact that the plantes in heart of Latium have had dacian names and so on.
Here are just several sources, because George Kynsh was right to ask for.Neither I dont
want to go further with the lingvists which assume istro-romanian and aromanian are
NOT dialects of daco-romanian but separately languages and trought this way I can
speculate (wonder, but we can speculate it) these istro,melegno or aromanians are
maybe the last thracians enclaves in the slav mass from bulgaria and former Yugoslvia.
I dont know if this is enough, but I guess it should give a bit to think about
Best regards,
A. Moeller
______________________________________________________
250 Farb-Visitenkarten GRATIS*. In einem Wert von EUR 99,00!
http://www.vistaprint.de/vp/splash/lycosde.asp
Jetzt eigene Domains für 1,23 Euro/Monat
http://lycos.de.domainnames.com/default.asp?caller=lycos_d_footer