Re: My version

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@...>
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@>
> wrote:
>
> > Wouldn't toscano, romanesco and romagnolo [sp?] be the only
> > co-dialects of standard Italian?
>
> Since a dialect cannot be regarded as a mere subpart or
> subdivision of a language, my reply is affirmative: standard
> Italian, which IS a type of artificially built 'national' language
> based on a variety of the Tuscan dialect depurated from some of
> the latter's typical phonological features (such as aspirates,
> spirants etc.), is definitely a co-dialect of most of other
> dialects spoken in Italy.

Sorry, Rick, I have misunderstood your query. I now realize you
meant to say that toscano, romanesco and romagnolo are the only
rightful co-dialects of standard Italian, which evolved from the
medieval dialect of Florence (Dante's language). This is true for
toscano and romanesco from a taxonomical pespective:

http://tinyurl.com/a9vr5a

Romanesco, which is much closer to Italian than most of other
dialects of Latium, was stronly influenced by variety of Tuscan
spoken in Rome by the end of the 15th century.

On the contrary, romagnolo is Gallo-Italian, and cannot, therefore,
be numbered among the closest dialectal relatives of Tuscan.

Cheers,
Francesco