Re: Creole Romance?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 22:08:43 +0200, alex <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Au XII ème siècle, l'occitan est langue littéraire, juridique et
>>> administrative, il côtoie le latin dans les textes religieux et
>>> scientifiques. La graphie et la grammaire sont une adaptation du
>>> latin".
>>
>> More irrelevancies. Occitan, like French --and Romanian-- is a
>> daughter language of Latin. It is not a pidgin, not a creole,

(in case you didn't noticed -> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>> and it doesn't have Gaulish morphology, so the existence of
>> Occitan has no relevance to the present topic of discussion,

Actually being even closer to Latin than French.

>> except perhaps very obliquely by the fact that it was -- and in
>> certain circles still is -- considered a "patois"

I don't think this is the case in nowdays France. Maybe some
retarded French minds would think like that, but most people
know that Occitan is a part of their "patrimoine". [They might
have woken up too late, even with their France 3 Sunday program
"Viure al pais": a language learned in school is no longer a
living language, that's really sad for Occitan. That is obviously
the result of...]

>> (one might say a "pidgin French"), and that the fascist
>> linguistic policies following on from Grégoire's 1794 report
>> ("Rapport sur la necessité et les moyens d'anéantir les patois
>> et d'universaliser l'usage de la langue française")

> Hm! Given their similar political situations, would you call
> Catalan a "Spanish pidgin"?

Miguel did not call Occitan "pidgin French", he just said some
people might consider it erroneously as such. This was a theory
characterizing also Italian dialects during Middle Ages and is,
by the same token, false. The same applies to Catalan with
respect to Spanish: it is not a pidgin but a language deriving
from Latin and having close ties with Occitan and Spanish.

As a general matter, you failed to produce any valid argument
in order to support your theory that Romances are a kind of
Latin pidgin/creole, offering only irelevent & false analogies.
OTOH, you didn't give an answer to relevant part of critics of
your position, you have just ignored them. That's not the usual
approach in science and reminds me some funny stories which I
won't mention here.

Cheers,
Marius Iacomi