From: Brian M. Scott
Message: 59163
Date: 2008-06-09
> --- Carl Hult <Carl.Hult@...> wrote:The term 'medieval Latin' generally refers to post-Classical
>> It's me again...
>> Elof Hellquist says:
>> "kök, jfr fsv. kökia f., 1500-t. o. ofta
>> på 1600-t.: köke n., motsv. no. kjok, da.
>> kvkken, från mlty. koke, kokene = fhty.
>> kachina (ty. kliché), ägs. cycene (eng.
>> kitchen); från mlat. cucina (;> fra.
>> cui-sine), av lat. coqulna, till coquo (se
>> koka)."
>> Etymonline.com says:
>> "O.E. cycene, from W.Gmc. *kocina (cf. M.Du. cökene,
>> O.H.G. chuhhina, Ger. Küche, Dan. kjøkken), probably
>> borrowed from V.L. *cocina (cf. Fr. cuisine, Sp. cocina),
>> variant of L. coquina "kitchen," from fem. of coquinus
>> "of cooks," from coquus "cook," from coquere "to cook"
>> (see cook (n.))."
>> I want to know whether Hellquist considers medieval latin
>> to be the same as vulgar latin or a continuation of
>> vulgar latin.
> I don't know what Helquist says but my understanding
> is that Medieval Latin is essentially Classical Latin
> pronounced as Italian with loanwords to make it up to
> date, i.e. Church Latin.
> It depends on when Medieval times begin --at the fall ofBy and large historians nowadays eschew the term 'Dark
> the Roman Empire or at the end of the Dark Ages.