A couple of thing to point out. Italin was *already* the official language of all Italian states before unification and had been for 300 years. Is really misleading to suggest it was *chosen* after unification. Second thing, the 3% the video mentioned is from a work of Tullio de Mauro and refers to the people who *primarily* spoke Italian, non anyone who was able to speak it but in their day to day lives used another dilect/language. The whole Manzoni debate was about minutiae, like preferring British or American spelling in Canada.
I don't know why but as a Spanish Speaker I think I can understand medieval Italian a lot easier than modern Italian. I've heard that the main difference between Spanish and Italian is that when we use modern words Italians see it as old. When they use modern words we see it as old.
I am a native portuguese speaker, and I agree with you about the italian language. However, in case of the portuguese-spanish comparison, I have the perception that various of the colloquial spanish words are used in portuguese in the formal speech (literature, laws, etc.), and vice-versa.
As an American who has worked for a couple decades in Italian restaurants, I've always been surprised by the facility Spanish speakers have understanding Italian. Many restaurant workers are native Spanish speakers here.
In addition, modern Spanish has shed some features present in medieval Spanish that other languages still have, e.g., the article before the possessive adjective, and the sonification of the 's' between vowels Mi casa, la mia casa, a minha casa, la meva casa
Yep. One of the main reasons i can understand spanish so well, is that a lot of words are kinda the same as in italian, but often they are (or sound) like "archaic" synonyms of other words
Another modern Spanish thing Italians consider old-fashioned or regional is the usage of the preterite tense. While in Spanish you can translate "I ate an apple" as "comí una manzana" in Italian you would literally say "I've eaten an apple" which is "ho mangiato una mela". If you say "mangai una mela" that sounds regional or very formal and not natural for many Italians.
«μαλάκας» (malákas) comes from the Ancient Greek word «μαλθακός» (malthakós) = “soft”, then later in koine Greek, it started taking on the meaning of “effeminate”. And in modern Greek it took on the meaning of “wanker”. In modern Greek, to this day, «μαλακός» (malakós) means “soft”.
Interesting that in the medieval Italian that Dante wrote, “esta” and “selva” are not used in modern Italian but are definitely used in Spanish to this day with the same meanings. Although “selva” in Spanish is closer to jungle than forest.
Standard Yiddish is an interesting case of standardization, as it was spoken over such a vast area, in dialects that differed significantly, in certain ways, so a standard that didn't really exist was created by mixing various elements from the main dialect areas.
That's nothing special, German also did that (you have "die Pappel", but "der Apfel", plus chimeras like "Binnenmarkt"). English also was formed that way.
@enysuntra1347 The changes under the High German consonant shift didn't apply universally across the High German dialects, & there was borrowing between the different dialects. Those could've just been cases where different words developed differently, naturally (but maybe not, I don't know). Many languages usually select a compromise dialect & then, sometimes, modify it a little, but Yiddish went full Frankenstein, & just created a compromise dialect. I know that some other languages do this (Filipino would maybe kind of be one, I guess), to an extent, but I haven't seen many cases where it's done as drastically/noticeably as it was for Yiddish (so it stands out to me as an interesting case), but I'm not any kind of professional, so I'm not above error. I am unaware of this having been done for English, though. From everything I've studied, English appears to've taken the "select-an-already-existing-dialect-as-standard" route. If I'm wrong about that, I'd love to read about what was actually done (I love to learn).
@James-o9e7y I hope TH-cam doesn't censor this comment. Martin Luther used Meißner Kanzleisprache (Meißen Chancellery), a Middle German language, while the Court language was Oberteutsch, Highland German. The Evangelic countries now took on the language of the Luther bible, while the Rome-Catholic ones standardised Oberteutsche Schriftsprache (Upper German script language). Sociological reasons now led to most printers being educated in evangelic countries. Cf Max Weber, Der Protestantismus und der Geist des Kapitalismus: If in any village a boy wanted to study theology, the whole community worked to make that possible (a direct line to pray for the redemption of their souls). Evangelic pastors were expected to marry and have children, which then would be able to study; thereby, in the 1600s and 1700s, most books written were by the evangelic educated middle class, which meant they were in Meißener Kanzleisprache. This led to Oberteutsche Schriftsprache aka Jesuit German assimilating to Meißner Kanzleisprache. As in English, there were words that quite coincidentally went into standard German, like the English eggs/eyren. Lat's say a book about apple orchard husbandry came from Bavaria, Switzerland, Alsace, Swabia, Badenia or Austria, so suddenly Apfel was used. "Binnen" is from Nederdüütsch (Saxonian), buten un bin(n)en, outside and inside. Not much phantasy needed why words about sailing like Binnenschiffahrt were taken from Nederdüütsch. In Falconery language, we know why it was taken from Dutch, the duke who ordered a German translation of "De Arte Venandi cum Avibus" (Von der Kunst, beim jagen zu vögeln) had Dutch falconeers who helped the translators with anatomical vocabulary (Staart - tail (SG Schwanz),...). That should be how substrate from other Germanic languages went into Midland German Standard High German.
In Greece, the diglossia between Katharevousa and Demotic is not much a thing anymore. But there are still regional accents, though with the unification of broadcasting and education, they are less marked than they used to be. Unfortunately also there is a bit of snobbery involved; especially toward northern Greek dialects. I’d say island dialects and especially Cretan are not so stigmatized while more rural Macedonian and Thracian, with their “dark” L and unaccented E and O shifting to I and U respectively, are definitely less prestigious. I remember being on a bus from Komotini to Thessaloniki, and as we came into town, an older man from a village, probably up near Didimoteixon, called his daughter to let her know that he had arrived. As an example, his pronunciation of Thessaloniki was more like “Thissalunyǐkyǐ (hard to render it correctly in latin letters)…anyway as he talked, so many on the bus were snickering at him... I guess it would have been to standard Greek as the most “backwoods” Appalachian English would have been to flat Midwestern. The upshot is that while in Italy and places like Germany, people love their local dialects and accents, in Greece they are mostly looked down upon or seen as a mark of lack of education, fine for older folks but you wouldn’t want your kid to talk that way. The same is true in Turkey where class is everything. Most people consider those other dialects quaint and “cute” (Aegean) to funny (Black Sea). Most younger people who have a distinctly eastern accent try to lose it as soon as possible when they move to the west, because of class/education perceptions but also politics.
AHAHHAAHAHAH if you think in Italy and in Germany dialects aren’t looked down upon in disgust by many people, it means you know too little about these countries to comment about them. I should know, cause I always try to use my dialect to speak with others, and it’s happened more than a few times that people tell me to stop doing it, that it’s insulting etc. I will never forget the time when a girl told me in a very very very strong Venetian accent (imagine something like someone speaking with a strong southern accent, or with a Scottish accent) “Do not speak in dialect! It’s vulgar!”. That was so ridiculous to me, because she was telling me to speak Italian, in a terrible Italian!
Katharevousa was never spoken. The Greek language question was always a pointless one. The issue only lied in Demotic’s literary and practical shortcomings, which a less archaic approach to enriching the greek language would suffice. A few neologisms and reborrowings from ancient vocabulary (without the ancient grammar) would be enough. At the end of the day, this is what happened with Standard Modern Greek. The entire controversy could have been avoided.
@@olbiomoiros Yes, the real problem was the fact that Demotic itself had not really been standardized. Teachers really didn’t know how to teach it in the beginning; they’re only guidance was, “teach like you speak.” But nobody writes exactly like they speak. It’s been a long time since I’ve actually lived in Greece, so I’m not extremely familiar with current language teaching practices.
@@serenissimarespublicavenet3945 I guess I should say that in Germany and Italy, many people at least appreciate their local dialects, even if some don’t. I do remember a woman cutting my hair telling me how her Bavarian accent was “really bad” (because she rolled her Rs) Yet there does seem to be a phenomenon, when young folks from a village who have spent time outside and speak more Hochdeutsch, some people see it as a bit “snooty” if they continue speaking formal German when they go back. Especially in Austria; I had one friend from Kitzbühel whose parents couldn’t even really speak Hochdeutsch, and his family and friends really didn’t like it if he spoke it. But he’d sort of slip back and forth. Then again people in Innsbruck didn’t speak all that standard either; but at least I could understand them as opposed to the mountain villagers; they may as well have been speaking another language!
@@olbiomoiros As a 4th generation pedagogue, I can confirm that in formal setting Katharevousa or at least Kathareuousa with the grammar of Demotic was definitely spoken by the educators and the upper classes in formal settings up until the 1980es at least. My grandfather a 2nd generation pedagogue spoke it fluently to me and occasionally to his wife, children and other grandchildren. Even I can write and speak it it quite fluently despite coming back to Greece as a ten year old and speaking very little Greek at the time, Demotic or not.
I think that Vulgar Latin is more of a description rather than a separate category but it does have a place. To this day, people who are highly educated do speak in a different way and do take different considerations when speaking. They may speak in way that respects the grammar more than most, use words that are more complex or archaic, and avoid new words. That would be the “classical” version of a language and it does happen in many countries. Most people do not bother with this level of perfection or conservatism. They may indulge more in wrong syntax or even conjugation. They may be less afraid to adapt new words. This would be considered “vulgar”. In addition, we are way more educated, so there is less gap between people but if there are education differences then it will be even more noticeable who speaks what. With this said, it is obvious that the Romance languages will have their roots in Classical Latin, especially because those who use it are the ones who can actually contribute the most to developing, recoding, and standardizing languages. The vulgar Latin could explain some of the processes and changes that happened to reach the final result but it isn’t something separate.
I've been learning Finnish for almost 10 years. I saw a comment in one of the groups I'm in that said when you start learning Finnish, you're essentially learning three or four languages; the kirjakieli (book language), the puhekieli (spoken language), a murre (dialect, if you so choose), and one other thing I can't remember. It's pretty accurate; the spoken language is very different from the standardized language used in official things, and the dialects can vary greatly. Dialects are so interesting to me because we don't really have any in Canadian English. Unless you count Newfoundland.
Those are just registers, it's what Metatron talks about when people mention vulgar Latin vs classic Latin. In some languages these registers are quite different but it's present in almost all languages. Language is used differently in newspapers and in a bar. Politicians in the parliament speak differently than people in low income neighbourhood. BTW English has lots of dialects, Canadian English being one of them.
Americans understand most Americans. But newscasters come train in the midwest to learn "uninflected" American english, or english "without an accent". The former or the latter aren't actually things, but you can tell when someone speaks American english "without" a regional accent.
Hey Metatron - I'd love you to check out some videos on the Tsakonian language. Its a divergent variety of modern greek with strong links to the doric dialect. I remember in a previous video that you said you speak greek.
10:59 As commonly defined today “Vulgar Latin” is the set of non-formal registers of Latin spoken from Antiquity onward. As such, there IS such a thing as Vulgar Latin.
In german language countries, the different dialects caused problems in diplomacy, trade and science. So at first Kanzleideutsch was used , but in 1873 scientists of Germany, Austria and Switzerland meet each other in ,Erste Deutsche Rechtschreibkonferenz' and created Standard German/ Hoch- or Schriftdeutsch. Because Standard German was created by scientists, and not grew naturally like dialects, this is often the reason, why Standard German is in some cases different to other germannic languages, in some cases the dialects are closer to other germannic languages, in some special points. A large influence had also Martin Luther with his bible translation.
Very interesting. I would love to see a series on this topic, going from country to country. Our language has also been standardized, and although regional dialects faded significantly in the course of last two centuries, there are still some differences prevailing. And modern standard Czech is a very different language than Czech dialects spoken in the 18th century before all these national revival movements. Thanks for the lesson on spoken/written Latin. That myth you referring to sounds like somebody imagining, that with the fall of the Roman Empire, all people who could read and write suddenly died without offsprings and all literature diseappered entirely. And at the same time assuming that there was no communication between classes. Or did baby Cesare speak classical Latin already in the craddle? I will definitely check out more of your videos on the subject of Latin. Very informative channel.
North Africa once had its own Latin Romance language prior to the spread of Islam and Arabic, it was spoken primarily in the urban centres like Carthage and coastal regions. afro-Roman Catholics from what’s now modern day Tunisia and Algeria had fled and resettled in Sardinia at about the time the Byzantine exarchate fell to the Arabs.
18:00 the Greeks had a common ethnic identity, but that was not something which was important to them politically speaking. It was only a cultural/religious/linguistic tie. In fact it is very likely that the Greeks stopped being unified due to the tyranny of the Mycenaeans
Sadly the German people ended up with High-German, because of their bible translation. Platt-Deutsch in the north is so much easier to understand for us Dutch.. :) and closer to Old English.
where i live the dialect changes from village to village even 1 km way can change how words are spoken ..... and im german but schools teach anybody standart german and also the tv and movie dubbing does its part but well we try to save our dialects at least some of us .... fun fact my german home dialect is spoken in parts of the usa
It could have been even worse - before the bible translation the most influential dialect was around vienna (which is upper german). Modern standard german is central german, sitting somewhere in between upper german and low german. The success of luthers bible translation also lay partly in that this dialect was more intelligble to people in the north than the upper german one of vienna.
21:30 Its the same in the UK, for example, where I am, in Bristol, you have the regional Dialect which shares many aspects with other regional dialects and is a form of English, that is older , I dont know what the name is, but its mostly saxon in its sound, and I assume origin . You have phrases like "owe Bist" which means, how are you? or how have you been? and is used as a greeting. A common response would be "Bista" meaning "not bad". I am not sure if they have written spellings, although its possible they do and its recorded/catalogued by someone, somewhere. This stuff has some links to Old English, and would be considered farmer language and is spoken even today but very rarely , but in pockets of the west country and a few old boys in some obscure tucked away Pubs in Bristol Then you have the accent and modern slang like "Maki" (very big) which has different pronunciations, north and south of the river. North its Mack-Ee and South its Mak-Eye, and then you have the "BBC" /Queens(Kings? now?) engish
He mentioned that for French Langue d'Oi was chosen as the lingua franca, but it was actually a dialect of Langue d'Oi spoken by the royal family and the nobility based on the dialect spoken in the Blois area. The Royals and Nobles would spend part of the year in the area which is how this lingua franca of government came to be. Of course due to it's higher status anyone in government with aspirations would learn it. The dialect was maintained as the language of government by the Republic, and then after the turmoil of the Napoleonic Empire as well as the empire of Napoleon III, the government would engage in a program of stomping out all other languages and dialects from continental France to prop up french with the excuse of promoting national unity.
The etymology of ”ciao” is very interesting! We have basically the same in Swedish! In Swedish a fairly common informal greeting is ”tjena” (also ”tjenare”) which comes from the Swedish word for servant. As in ”your humble servant so and so”.
Of course there is a difference between formal /formalized language and vernacular forms of language which are typically those that evolve through time. Dropping letters, changing vowels (like d to t or k to c or g) are all changes that happen in spoken aka vernacular language not in a more conservative or formalized (aka "classic") language that is typically written language..... The evolutionary part of language is mostly the spoken part which tends to later get formalized via literature and dictionaries.
From Cicero and Ovid etc to Cervantes, Dante Alleghieri and Ramon Llul etc The formalized that is mainly written language jumps in evolutionary steps while the spoken language slowly but continually evolves
I would have thought that another elephant in the room is that there would have been multiple "vulgar" Latins in different provinces, depending on the mix of formal Latin and pre-Roman languages. That is there would have been a divergence of dialects that preceeded the gradual demise of Classical Latin.
In the most part of the twentieth century the general Dutch language was referred to as Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands (General Civilized Dutch) From 1990s-2000s on the beschaafd was dropped from this discription. A large role in the standardization of Dutch was the translation of the Bible in Dutch, the Statenbijbel in 1637.
So Dante’s Italian (DI) and standardized Italian is not the same language because DI is medieval and antiquated but Vulgar Latin and Classical Latin is the same language? Can you walk me through the reasoning there?
Reviewing the video you don’t state that is a different language - but it was still so different that you wanted to specify that it was not DI they spoke - wanting to differentiate it from standard Italian, quite like the vulgar classical split.
Contemporary English speakers find Old English significantly less comprehensible than contemporary Italian speakers find Dante's Italian. Indeed, *La Commedia* could be considered nearly modern Italian, aside from certain archaic vocabulary and phrasing, and more significantly, its poetic form. The hendecasyllabic meter and terza rima render the language considerably less natural than everyday medieval Italian.
Thanks for your insights on Classical versus Vulgar Latin - what you said was new to me. I was born in Australia, where my mother tongue was Veneto Language till I learned English. So i followed with interest the small Veneto Express TH-cam Channel to get some insights. The presenter there said that Veneto language is related to the French/Spanish/Potugese branch of Latin, whereas Italian is more related to the other branch that includes Romanian. He also claimed that Italian was an artificial language - as it was not upper-class Florentine which was chosen as the official language, but rather upper-class Florentine as they believed it had been spoken centuries before (i.e. a purer form that no one actually spoke). In Paris, I couldn't understand much of what they said, till I'd been there a week watching dubbed American shows, and then I could. In Madrid I could understand about half of what they said, but they couldn't understand me at all.. In Lisbon I couldn't understand them at all, but I found I had no trouble reading their signs and labels, as they were very similar to Veneto. Must go to Romania one day. Regards
I wounder how much regional dialects of latin differd. Because I don´t think they all speaked the same from Hadrians wall to the most southern outpost of Egypt.
the standardization of turkish was a linguistic tragedy. early turkish republic had no idea about linguistics, to the point where their official position was that all languages come from turkish. look it up, it's called the sun language theory.
You mean Turanism? The “Ural-Altaic language family” that was supposed to encompass all Turkic, Mongolic, and Uralic languages-from Turkish to Uyghur, from Finno-Ugric European languages like Finnish and Hungarian to the languages of Siberia and Mongolia…although no linguistic connection across these diverse families was even proven…
The same thing happens in India too. Most of the "dialects" of Hindi are entirely different languages, all of them predating standard Hindi, which is understood by most people in Northern India.
@giulianopisciottano8302 Yes, but I think it is not comparable to what happens in Italy. Those languages in Italy didn't come from other countries, and I think that the communities that speak other languages in Brazil are very small, and in decades, they are speaking Portuguese. In my state, which is one of the oldest ones in Brazil, Portuguese is absolutely dominant. Brazil is so big that it is rare for a Brazilian to make contact with people of neighboring country.
i'm a beginner learning italian, with an additional interest in Corsica. I've heard that Corsican is very similar to Toscano but also was under control of other parts of Italy, then England, then France. Curious why it's not talked about like a dialect of Italian and instead a separate language
@@barrankobama4840 Corsicans don't seem to think of themselves as French. all my Corsican friends are anti-french lol. but they also don't love their time under the Republic of Genoa
The γλωσσικό ζήτημα (the linguistic issue) in Greece is an exciting part of 19th-and 20th-century modern Greek history, indicating the political role of the language and how it reflects the people who are actually the language users.
I agree with your take on vulgar Latin. However there are differences in written and spoken forms of any language I speak English and Finnish as my two first languages. But I'll use English as my main example to reach a broader audience. I would never use "gonna, or y'all " in a resume or paper for school. However I use those words regularly in spoken form as do the recipients of those resumes and school work in their spoken form being an American born from Finnish family. So I do see where the argument of the vulgar or spoken form had a greater influence on the subsequent languages that evolved from Latin. Especially after the already relatively low literacy rate of Rome plummeted after the western collapse. So words that existed in spoken form in one region that didn't in another became standard of the newly formed languages. Like imagine y'all from America 1000 years in the future evolving and becoming a standard word in the new language spoken in America and fair dinkum becoming standardized in the new Australian language. During the height of English being mutually intelligible among the Anglosphere neither of these words were considered "standard or literary English " as no American or Australian would want to put them in a resume or submit a serious academic paper with them unless the rare instances of context allowing for it.
When I learned Latin in highschool (only two years) I understood "vulgar Latin" as you explained the English, not as two languages, but more like two "dialects".
italy's situation is so different to spain's its so crazy, maybe its because theres no standard version of each regional language? like no standard sicilian or venetian
Possible, because after they decided Italian was the official language, they tried to destroy the regional languages and nobody could develop them, for example writing, or improving the grammar rules, they were mostly oral languages for the common people (quote from Cavour: "We made Italy now we must do Italians"). So, at school our teachers corrected us, and punished us for using some regional words, and on TV, in offices and institutions there was only standard Italian. Who talked a regional language was shamed, the regional languages acquired some dignity after some recent revival supporters, it is a new trend. Then, among the same region we could have different degrees of variations, for example, I heard that sicilian have strong differences between Messina, Palermo, Siracusa, at the point they can't understand each others. This is curious for me, because in Veneto we are more "standardized", I can easily understand the venetian from Treviso, Venice, or Verona... or even from Bergamo and Brescia (today in Lombardy, but in past part of the Venetian Republic) or Pordenone (today Friuli Venezia Giulia). Of course we have few alternative words, and a slight different stress on some vocals, but that's not much.
@@trattogatto i mean, in spain the languages are official but i dont thinktheres a single person who doesnt speak spanish, even the elderly (with some exceptions) the regional languages are facing a decline because spanish is just more convenient, people use them except in the big cities where its mostly spanish. Then again, some languages like mine (Aragonese) or Asturleonese arent official and are only spoken in some villages but theyre very castillianised, its so cool how in italy you preserve both with no issue
@@unoreversecard1o1o1o In Italy they are not official, only Italian is official. Then we have some associations trying to redeem them for example calling them "language" instead of "dialect", and starting some unofficial "academies" to teach them. Even if this matter is cultural, there is a controversy because the support for regional languages is politically charged (because we have regions calling for autonomy, and some factions want less central power and federalism). So, we have this clash of power between nationalists fiercely against these initiatives, and federalists against Rome and supporting their language, there is a conflict of interest broader than the language itself. Anyway, in general we have rural places where we talk our "dialect" very much, it is not uncommon, even among young people. I talk venetian to my coworkers, and customers, or at the supermarket, or post office, or at the town hall... it is just normal. We switch to Italian only for courtesy towards people who are not good at venetian, or in official situations. We all know Italian, so we are naturally bilingual, it is rare to find an old person stuck with a regional language.
@@trattogattothe quote is not from Cavour, is attributed to d'Azeglio, and anyway is false. Italian was chosen as the official language of the many Italian states centuries before unification.
@@barrankobama4840 Yes, my bad, it was Massimo D'Azeglio, but it is just a detail, and I don't understand why you say it is false. That sentence was very popular, and it was the mission of the new State after the unification of Italy in 1861. Italy was unified only on paper, but the majority of people had different cultures and spoke different languages, they could not understand each others (even in the first world war they had major problems receiving orders in the army), only a very small percentage of intellectuals knew Italian. Both D'Azeglio and Cavour and many other activists knew this problem in Italy, and a single language was instrumental to unify people. They had to push it. This is the meaning of the sentence. And in my opinion that process never ended, and there is still a lot of resistance in regions, because we are forced together, but we are not (we are united only when they play soccer). There is always a conflict of interest between regional interest and national interest, and federalism is not desirable for the dysfunctional regions (overcrowded of state employees, few productive areas, and bad infrastructure). If a productive region (Veneto) wants fiscal autonomy (meaning less money to Rome), this is a damage for the less productive regions (obviously against that autonomy). This issue is very actual.
Philippines also has standardized language, called "Filipino", which is actually based on Tagalog language. While the non-Tagalog languages, like Cebuano, Bicolano, Ilocano, Pangasinan, etc. are falsely called as "Dialects" (Italian: I dialetti). While in reality is, They are also languages.
A friend of mine studied abroad in Bologna and stated that she felt like everyone in northern Italy spoke Milanese. She rarely met anyone who spoke Udine.
13:52 In Portuguese we use both "selva" and "floresta"(which today have slightly different meaning and uses), which fuels my totally scientific and not subjective and biased at all theory that Portuguese is the superior romance language
What if we use vulgar latin when we mix languages like Spanish amd English being spanglish i would consider that and its many personal varieties to be vulgar versions of Spanish and English. But i am using vulgar to mean unrefined or unsophisticated here.
During the medieval period the latin of the common people was very different to the latin used by the nobility and the church. I think the terms vulgar and classical latin are valid for the medieval and renaissance periods. The vulgar latin was proto portuguese, spanish, catalan, french, italian, and romanian, that was spoken by the common people after the different kingdoms began to emerge.
Wouldn't saying "Dante's Itallian" be similar to when Europeans say, "Shakespeare's English"? Shakespeare molded the language substnatially and is given credit for influencing the development to modern English and is also understandable, but not modern in the same way this TH-camr is using "Dante's Itallian". C'mon, Metatron, this isn't an acedemic paper and he's simplifying the subject as a sort of intorduction to the topic. I'm aware, though, that you're doing a reaciton video and need to have some added value to the conversation, but your tone is possibly a bit too condescending. Let's get your subscriber numbers up by perhaps toning that down a little -- it's offputting. With that said, I do appreciate what you're trying to do. ;)
I've always wondered why so many European countries and their languages developed into outright minimally mutually intelligible dialects, while Modern English from England is pretty much standardized across England, as far as I can tell. England has radically different accents, but not actual dialects with largely differing vocabulary like you get with German, Italian, Scandinavian countries etc. There wasn't a concerted effort to make a standardized ConLang to enable people from one end of the country to communicate with people from the other.
Well the dialects of Italy are from a linguistic point of view seperate languages and many have long written histories. While English dialects are English dialects. If you see English as part of the larger West Germanic spectrum the diversity becomes larger. :)
@jasminekaram880 I wouldn't even say English has actual, proper _"dialects"._ The pronunciation of words might be very different in far flung regions of England, but they're fundamentally the same words being spoken, and they're written the same in both places. I guess it'd be because Modern English is a relatively young language, and didn't have enough time to develop in isolated areas since antiquity the way Latin did.
@@Unpainted_Huffhines English has dialects, that differ both phonetically and grammatically. In England many differ in very profound ways preserving many older features. :) For an example in vocabulary the dialects in Northen England like Yorkshire has stronger Old Norse infuense than Southern English. Some still use thou, and some still say bist instead of are. :)
Vulgar and Classical Latin existed, not as separate languages, but as you say, as two registers of the same language. The point is that we can see that the Romance languages are not descended from the Classical register, but from the Vulgar one, but Vulgar Latin was hardly written down compared to Classical Latin. Therefore we have had to reconstruct Vulgar Latin by working back from Romance. The entire concept of VL has been created on account of that reconstruction. Ultimately I think you're attacking a straw man here. The worst that someone could do in this situation is make out that Vulgar and Classical Latin are two separate languages.
How was Toscano chosen? Easy: The Betrothed was THAT popular and the final edition was written in Toscano. Standard Italian is basically a memetic mutation.
@@barrankobama4840 How exactly did a language that didn't even exist become the official language of a number of Italian states? I suppose you could make a case for the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, given Italian is basically Toscano, but no place else. You even had one whose official language was LATIN (specifically Church Latin. Take a guess which one it was), but none had Italian for the simple reason it wasn't a thing beyond literates pretending Dante's Toscano was it. During the unification there was a huge debate on what Italian should be, with some proposing to use Dante's Toscano, others a con-lang, others to use Romanesco (and that would have been hilarious), and then Manzoni wrote the second and third edition of his famous novel in Fiorentino, that is the Florence dialect of Toscano, and all of sudden the debate was forcibly settled because this guy's novel was just that popular. We even had a word for technobabble over a hundred years before Star Trek because Manzoni had already tackled the concept and named it Latinorum in the novel...
@@lordMartiya The language did exist. Italian replaced Latin as the official language of Italian states during the early XVI century. You can check the Editto di Rivoli (1561) for example.
@barrankobama4840 As I said, it was a pretense: only a few literates used Dante's Fiorentino dialect of Toscano as Lingua Franca. In fact, the ACTUAL Lingua Franca had a better claim, given sailors from all around Italy. The fact that after unification the standard Italian was based on CURRENT Fiorentino says enough.
@@barrankobama4840 As I said, it was only a pretense: Fiorentino Dialect of the Toscano Language as spoken in Dante's time was spoken only by a few literates as a lingua franca... While Venetian and the ACTUAL Lingua Franca were used by sailors and merchants everywhere for a long time. But since you want to be pedantic to the point of leaving stuff untranslated... The Edict of Rivoli only applied to the states ruled by the House of Savoy, established that "Italian" would be used only in the states east of the Alps while French would be used in the Duchy of Savoy proper and the County of Aosta, and IT WASN'T AN ITALIAN STATE, the House of Savoy had Imperial Immediacy and thus their states depended directly from the Holy Roman Emperor, without being part of the Kingdom of Italy. You can apply almost the same reasoning to Venice, as it wasn't part of the Kingdom of Italy by virtue of being a breakaway duchy of the Eastern Roman Empire and thus not part of the HRE at all.
I don’t have a problem with the term vulgar Latin. It just depends on how you define it. Vulgar Latin to me just means the different regional varieties. In my country we have standard Portuguese that we learn in school but if you go out in the streets people speak a different version of it depending on the region. From the set of pronouns to pronunciation. It’s all Portuguese, of course, and all mutually intelligible but I think it’s important to point out the difference between the standard language and the regional variations when we talk about language evolution. Saying it was a different language is wrong but there’s nothing wrong with using the term itself to group the different variations.
For those who would like to hear what Katharevousa Greek sounds like you may search for the last broadcast of the Athenian radio before the Germans occupied the city during WWII. It's both epic and eloquent. m.th-cam.com/video/u9N98TAopuY/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUZbGFzdCBicm9hZGNhc3Qgd3cyIGF0aGVucw%3D%3D
Selva is forest? Huh, in spanish forest is bosque, and selva is jungle, both are used becuase they have different meaning. I was not expecting you to correct that one word haha
By vulgar latin they just mean non standardised latin. Would you have a problem with this phrasing?(maybe with adding the specific region like iberian or italian, etc.)
The thing about Vulgar Latin is that this idea was pushed so much that the general public started to believe Vulgar Latin is a somewhat different language to Latin, as opposed to a simple register of speech that any language past or present has. I don't know why this notion of Vulgar Latin was pushed so hard in the first place. Most likely some classicists in the 19th century bonded together and decided that Latin was too refined and pure to have been "corrupted" into the Romance languages overtime so they invented this idea that Romance comes from an already corrupted colloquial speech, which was spoken by the uneducated masses.
Well We don't speak classical english, but Arabs speak classical arabic for literature, quran, TV and other stuff. Classical arabic though is not spoken in any of arabic countries as a vulgar languages. Correct me if needed.
You are wrong. Despite the political organisation of city states, the Greeks had a strong sense of belonging to the same ethnicity and they differentiated themselves from the rest whom they called Barbarians. Herodotus wrote the history of the Greeks and the Barbarians, as he says in the introduction. So does Thucydides. All Greeks participated in the Olympic Games, they worshipped the same gods and they spoke the same language despite the dialects, easily understood, though.
I disagree with your comparison to English in regards to "Vulgar Latin". Thre is, in fact, a "Vulgar English" equivalance. What you are failing to recognize is the amount of time involved. English has already broken into what we refer to as "Creole English", as I'm sure you are aware. WIthout getting into the semantics of these terms, my point is that, given more time, more creole will emerge in English (though, perhaps modern communication may supress that trend compared to antiquity). So, I think it all depends on how you dice it, and since I'm not a linguist, I don't know how this argument is shaped by differences, and degree of diferences, in the structure changes. I'd say, my hot take is that the term "Vulgar Latin" is a general term for deviations from Classical -- any regional deviation. So, as a fellow nitpicker, I'd say you are splitting nits here. It's a layman's term used to place a "cloud" around these variations -- as you say, a "can of worms". The can of worms is the cloud term being used when we say "Vulgar Latin". So, to summarize, using English as an an anology is deeply flawed, as it is, as a root of a language tree, fairly new compared to Latin based languages, and the term "Vulgar Latin" is a placeholder term to describe a loose affiliation of regional usage of Latin. Perhaps a better avenue of comparison would be modern German, where there is a sort of high German and common German, though I'm wandering a bit too far from my wheelhouse now.
Even when a common enemy appeared it wasn't certain that all Greek city-states or kingdoms would unite. Either for fear of the invader or to screw their neighbor. Thebes for example sided with the Persians.
neat topic, an always missunderstood one. i studied the creation of standard german, but this is different for every region, the british one is very dumb, the italien and french ones are quite solid. the anser is, you dont standardize, it is mostly derived from written language. so for highly educated and homogenized states language is pretty much standardized into the written language, which can be recalled to be used for everyday communication at will. there are many countries which dont have standardized languages, are multilingual or arent educated enough to teach everyone a "second" standard language. every region is different because of this, its pretty interesting. for the latin thing in special, written and spoken language is quite different, which is very important to understand many transformations of languages, but there is always a through and for, both spoken and written language competeted and still do in some form. the real battle was settled through modern writing, we here call it schiller and goethe deutsch, other europeans have their proto writings from where the language didnt change, later standardization did pick these works because everyone did already use this language. i like this topic because we germans, and i believe we arent alone, still carry very very old words which seemingly dont fit into our aparently static language, so we have questions. knowing where a word is from isnt that easy to determine ive heard, because veryone and theri mother spoke another language. this is very plausable, because the homogenization within a small group of humans was faster than every contact with other groups. probably noone in antique times spoke any language of their neighbours but was able to understand enough to communicate, so it was pretty normal to not speak perfect english but everything worked. also people were more fixed to spoken language than written, therefore they didnt have any issues to learn and speak close languages. as a german i find poetic german the most beautiful thing in the world, but this isnt a real term. i use this one for describing german that is used to not straight up tell information, so everything that uses methaphors and phrases, along oldish words and doubled meanings and it gets way deeper than that, deep german is awesome, but probably not accessable for non germans at all, but this stage is probably similar in every language. but yes, standard italian is pretty awesome and im as a german are envious because you people actually able to protect this, we cant. for my claims of older languages were closer, its pretty easy to read old german, old french and old british along side, this world wasnt that fast, so why wouldnt neighbours understand each other.
That is similar in modern standard Arabic MSA is based of Quraish dialect But is not Quraish dialect they took the base of the Quraish dialect but is not one to one Quraish dialect
You could make the divide between Spoken Latin and Written Latin and rightly make the claim that dialects are derived from the spoken varieties, but I don’t see the difference between that and dividing Latin between Vulgar and Classical. Vulgar just means Common and Common means the language as spoken by the people. I suppose is that Classical Latin may never have been a spoken language from the start and Vulgar Latin always existed with it side by side. But of course Vulgar Latin did become a written language after Classical ceased to be used at all. Now I am confused.
The amount of perpetuated incorrect information on TH-cam is getting out of hand, although the phenomenon is interesting in itself. I don't mean lies, I just mean "facts" that people believe are true because they see them repeated. It goes in waves. Often very well researched channels will make a video on a subject that is fairly niche. More popular channels looking for content will simplify the information and broadcast it to a wider audience. Errors in the original video are perpetuated, and new ones may be introduced by the simplification. Other content creators looking to see what subjects did well for their peers will crib the contents for their own video. There's also AI channels of course. Obviously incorrect information dies quickly due to feedback, but the errors in details may live on and spread. Eventually, some other well researched channel will notice the errors and debunk it. That debunking will be picked up by more popular channels and spread. And so the cycle continues. There's only so much fact to fill the TH-cam void, and I suspect what will happen is the cycle will repeat in waves, oscillating among areas where the information is less certain. Personally, I feel the most learned people will "win" because they can focus on doing react content debunking the incorrect information. I expect to see more real experts move into TH-cam because it is relatively easy money to just watch a video and correct it. Reaction to reaction to reaction may also become more common.
Dialects are everywhere in greece. Literally everywhere. The common greek language is that of athens. But each area of greece has it's own dialect. And in some times sounds like a completely different language. If my father speaks to me in his dialect i will probably understand next to nothing of what he said.
There is vulgar latin. Written language is „frozen“, it doesnt change and it reflects the language in a distinct time . The fluid language is the vulgar version
Vulgar Latin is there an academic term used to describe the variation of Latin diverge from Old Latin what we call now classical method don't blame him blame the system
How to do Standard Greek: Discard Katharevousa, replace every vowel with "i" (iotisation), and use English for everything that matters. Also, hate on Ancient Greek pronounciation, even though Koiné since the end of Katharevousa was the only Greek worth learning.
The fact that you are saying we removed the " i" sound when we LITERALLY inherited from the ancient Greek ι, ει, υ, η, and οι while we are using all sorts of Archaisms in every day speaking, tells a lot about your level of education Really dude? You know many people calling France Γαλλία or UK Anglia? Or Germany, germania before the Germans themselves?
@Pavlos_Charalambous No, I wrote that a lot of vowels turned into /i/ in modern Greek. This is called "iotisation", and you confirmed it when you gave a list of no less than five /i/-sounds which had quite different pronounciations in Koiné or Archaic.
@@enysuntra1347 Initially, you wrote consonants instead of vowels and you modified and corrected it. The point is that modern Greek is closer to ancient Greek than Italian or Spanish to Latin, modern English to old English, modern Indian languages to Sanscrit. Educated Greeks can easily understand Koine which is the language used in Church. A lot of modern ways of pronouncing vowels and consonants had already made their way in Koine.
@@DemetriosKongas Koiné Greek, pal, was not even spoken by the proper Greeks and was formulated by barbarians in the East. That is why the Χ is pronounced the way it is. And that is why all dipthongs were turned into /i/. We lost our language to the barbos of the East.
Link to the original video
th-cam.com/video/a-t0Oe0xuYo/w-d-xo.html
A couple of thing to point out.
Italin was *already* the official language of all Italian states before unification and had been for 300 years. Is really misleading to suggest it was *chosen* after unification.
Second thing, the 3% the video mentioned is from a work of Tullio de Mauro and refers to the people who *primarily* spoke Italian, non anyone who was able to speak it but in their day to day lives used another dilect/language.
The whole Manzoni debate was about minutiae, like preferring British or American spelling in Canada.
I don't know why but as a Spanish Speaker I think I can understand medieval Italian a lot easier than modern Italian. I've heard that the main difference between Spanish and Italian is that when we use modern words Italians see it as old. When they use modern words we see it as old.
I am a native portuguese speaker, and I agree with you about the italian language.
However, in case of the portuguese-spanish comparison, I have the perception that various of the colloquial spanish words are used in portuguese in the formal speech (literature, laws, etc.), and vice-versa.
As an American who has worked for a couple decades in Italian restaurants, I've always been surprised by the facility Spanish speakers have understanding Italian. Many restaurant workers are native Spanish speakers here.
In addition, modern Spanish has shed some features present in medieval Spanish that other languages still have, e.g., the article before the possessive adjective, and the sonification of the 's' between vowels
Mi casa, la mia casa, a minha casa, la meva casa
Yep. One of the main reasons i can understand spanish so well, is that a lot of words are kinda the same as in italian, but often they are (or sound) like "archaic" synonyms of other words
Another modern Spanish thing Italians consider old-fashioned or regional is the usage of the preterite tense. While in Spanish you can translate "I ate an apple" as "comí una manzana" in Italian you would literally say "I've eaten an apple" which is "ho mangiato una mela". If you say "mangai una mela" that sounds regional or very formal and not natural for many Italians.
«μαλάκας» (malákas) comes from the Ancient Greek word «μαλθακός» (malthakós) = “soft”, then later in koine Greek, it started taking on the meaning of “effeminate”. And in modern Greek it took on the meaning of “wanker”.
In modern Greek, to this day, «μαλακός» (malakós) means “soft”.
In Turkish, one way to describe an “effeminate” man would be “yumşak,” “soft.”
Σωστή η ανασκόπηση αλλά δεν απαντά στο καυτό ερώτημα ποιος τελικά ήταν ο περίφημος αυτός Μ που ανακάλυψε τα ομώνυμα στενά.
@ έλα ντε;!
The word was always an insult- just slightly different meanings.
Από το "μαλαξ" βγαίνει.
I laughed when he said vulgar Latin because I knew immediately we were gonna pause and talk about it. I wasn't disappointed haha
i laughed so hard remembering what he had just said lmao
@Duda286 "Can of worms it is" 😂
Interesting that in the medieval Italian that Dante wrote, “esta” and “selva” are not used in modern Italian but are definitely used in Spanish to this day with the same meanings. Although “selva” in Spanish is closer to jungle than forest.
Selva is still used in Italian, just not commonly because we dont have many selve anymore
Standard Yiddish is an interesting case of standardization, as it was spoken over such a vast area, in dialects that differed significantly, in certain ways, so a standard that didn't really exist was created by mixing various elements from the main dialect areas.
That's nothing special, German also did that (you have "die Pappel", but "der Apfel", plus chimeras like "Binnenmarkt"). English also was formed that way.
@enysuntra1347 The changes under the High German consonant shift didn't apply universally across the High German dialects, & there was borrowing between the different dialects. Those could've just been cases where different words developed differently, naturally (but maybe not, I don't know).
Many languages usually select a compromise dialect & then, sometimes, modify it a little, but Yiddish went full Frankenstein, & just created a compromise dialect. I know that some other languages do this (Filipino would maybe kind of be one, I guess), to an extent, but I haven't seen many cases where it's done as drastically/noticeably as it was for Yiddish (so it stands out to me as an interesting case), but I'm not any kind of professional, so I'm not above error.
I am unaware of this having been done for English, though. From everything I've studied, English appears to've taken the "select-an-already-existing-dialect-as-standard" route. If I'm wrong about that, I'd love to read about what was actually done (I love to learn).
@James-o9e7y I hope TH-cam doesn't censor this comment.
Martin Luther used Meißner Kanzleisprache (Meißen Chancellery), a Middle German language, while the Court language was Oberteutsch, Highland German. The Evangelic countries now took on the language of the Luther bible, while the Rome-Catholic ones standardised Oberteutsche Schriftsprache (Upper German script language).
Sociological reasons now led to most printers being educated in evangelic countries. Cf Max Weber, Der Protestantismus und der Geist des Kapitalismus: If in any village a boy wanted to study theology, the whole community worked to make that possible (a direct line to pray for the redemption of their souls). Evangelic pastors were expected to marry and have children, which then would be able to study; thereby, in the 1600s and 1700s, most books written were by the evangelic educated middle class, which meant they were in Meißener Kanzleisprache.
This led to Oberteutsche Schriftsprache aka Jesuit German assimilating to Meißner Kanzleisprache. As in English, there were words that quite coincidentally went into standard German, like the English eggs/eyren. Lat's say a book about apple orchard husbandry came from Bavaria, Switzerland, Alsace, Swabia, Badenia or Austria, so suddenly Apfel was used.
"Binnen" is from Nederdüütsch (Saxonian), buten un bin(n)en, outside and inside. Not much phantasy needed why words about sailing like Binnenschiffahrt were taken from Nederdüütsch. In Falconery language, we know why it was taken from Dutch, the duke who ordered a German translation of "De Arte Venandi cum Avibus" (Von der Kunst, beim jagen zu vögeln) had Dutch falconeers who helped the translators with anatomical vocabulary (Staart - tail (SG Schwanz),...). That should be how substrate from other Germanic languages went into Midland German Standard High German.
Thank You for the new video ! 😊
Yes! Dedicated video about the history of standard Italian!
In Greece, the diglossia between
Katharevousa and Demotic is not much a
thing anymore. But there are still regional accents, though with the unification of broadcasting and education, they are less marked than they used to be. Unfortunately also there is a bit of snobbery involved; especially toward northern Greek dialects. I’d say island dialects and especially Cretan are not so stigmatized while more rural Macedonian and Thracian, with their “dark” L and unaccented E and O shifting to I and U respectively, are definitely less prestigious. I remember being on a bus from Komotini to Thessaloniki, and as we came into town, an older man from a village, probably up near Didimoteixon, called his daughter to let her know that he had arrived. As an example, his pronunciation of Thessaloniki was more like “Thissalunyǐkyǐ (hard to render it correctly in latin letters)…anyway as he talked, so many on the bus were snickering at him... I guess it would have been to standard Greek as the most “backwoods” Appalachian English would have been to flat Midwestern. The upshot is that while in Italy
and places like Germany, people love their local dialects and accents, in Greece they are mostly looked down upon or seen as a mark of lack of education, fine for older folks but you wouldn’t want your kid to talk that way. The same is true in Turkey where class is everything. Most people consider those other dialects quaint and “cute” (Aegean) to funny (Black Sea). Most younger people who have a distinctly eastern accent try to lose it as soon as possible when they move to the west, because of class/education perceptions but also politics.
AHAHHAAHAHAH if you think in Italy and in Germany dialects aren’t looked down upon in disgust by many people, it means you know too little about these countries to comment about them. I should know, cause I always try to use my dialect to speak with others, and it’s happened more than a few times that people tell me to stop doing it, that it’s insulting etc. I will never forget the time when a girl told me in a very very very strong Venetian accent (imagine something like someone speaking with a strong southern accent, or with a Scottish accent) “Do not speak in dialect! It’s vulgar!”. That was so ridiculous to me, because she was telling me to speak Italian, in a terrible Italian!
Katharevousa was never spoken. The Greek language question was always a pointless one. The issue only lied in Demotic’s literary and practical shortcomings, which a less archaic approach to enriching the greek language would suffice. A few neologisms and reborrowings from ancient vocabulary (without the ancient grammar) would be enough. At the end of the day, this is what happened with Standard Modern Greek. The entire controversy could have been avoided.
@@olbiomoiros Yes, the real problem was the fact that Demotic itself had not really been standardized. Teachers really didn’t know how to teach it in the beginning; they’re only guidance was, “teach like you speak.” But nobody writes exactly like they speak. It’s been a long time since I’ve actually lived in Greece, so I’m not extremely familiar with current language teaching practices.
@@serenissimarespublicavenet3945 I guess I should say that in Germany and Italy, many people at least appreciate their local dialects, even if some don’t. I do remember a woman cutting my hair telling me how her Bavarian accent was “really bad” (because she rolled her Rs) Yet there does seem to be a phenomenon, when young folks from a village who have spent time outside and speak more Hochdeutsch, some people see it as a bit “snooty” if they continue speaking formal German when they go back. Especially in Austria; I had one friend from Kitzbühel whose parents couldn’t even really speak Hochdeutsch, and his family and friends really didn’t like it if he spoke it. But he’d sort of slip back and forth. Then again people in Innsbruck didn’t speak all that standard either; but at least I could understand them as opposed to the mountain villagers; they may as well have been speaking another language!
@@olbiomoiros As a 4th generation pedagogue, I can confirm that in formal setting Katharevousa or at least Kathareuousa with the grammar of Demotic was definitely spoken by the educators and the upper classes in formal settings up until the 1980es at least. My grandfather a 2nd generation pedagogue spoke it fluently to me and occasionally to his wife, children and other grandchildren. Even I can write and speak it it quite fluently despite coming back to Greece as a ten year old and speaking very little Greek at the time, Demotic or not.
You should definitely do research on the Greek language question I think you'll find it very interesting!
I think that Vulgar Latin is more of a description rather than a separate category but it does have a place.
To this day, people who are highly educated do speak in a different way and do take different considerations when speaking. They may speak in way that respects the grammar more than most, use words that are more complex or archaic, and avoid new words. That would be the “classical” version of a language and it does happen in many countries.
Most people do not bother with this level of perfection or conservatism. They may indulge more in wrong syntax or even conjugation. They may be less afraid to adapt new words. This would be considered “vulgar”. In addition, we are way more educated, so there is less gap between people but if there are education differences then it will be even more noticeable who speaks what.
With this said, it is obvious that the Romance languages will have their roots in Classical Latin, especially because those who use it are the ones who can actually contribute the most to developing, recoding, and standardizing languages. The vulgar Latin could explain some of the processes and changes that happened to reach the final result but it isn’t something separate.
guardo ogni video di KhAnubis ormai da qualche anno, è davvero bravo
I've been learning Finnish for almost 10 years. I saw a comment in one of the groups I'm in that said when you start learning Finnish, you're essentially learning three or four languages; the kirjakieli (book language), the puhekieli (spoken language), a murre (dialect, if you so choose), and one other thing I can't remember. It's pretty accurate; the spoken language is very different from the standardized language used in official things, and the dialects can vary greatly.
Dialects are so interesting to me because we don't really have any in Canadian English. Unless you count Newfoundland.
Because Canadian English is a dialect of English in itself.
Those are just registers, it's what Metatron talks about when people mention vulgar Latin vs classic Latin. In some languages these registers are quite different but it's present in almost all languages. Language is used differently in newspapers and in a bar. Politicians in the parliament speak differently than people in low income neighbourhood.
BTW English has lots of dialects, Canadian English being one of them.
In other words, EVERYBODY says "oot."
Americans understand most Americans. But newscasters come train in the midwest to learn "uninflected" American english, or english "without an accent". The former or the latter aren't actually things, but you can tell when someone speaks American english "without" a regional accent.
Hey Metatron - I'd love you to check out some videos on the Tsakonian language. Its a divergent variety of modern greek with strong links to the doric dialect. I remember in a previous video that you said you speak greek.
10:59 As commonly defined today “Vulgar Latin” is the set of non-formal registers of Latin spoken from Antiquity onward.
As such, there IS such a thing as Vulgar Latin.
In german language countries, the different dialects caused problems in diplomacy, trade and science. So at first Kanzleideutsch was used , but in 1873 scientists of Germany, Austria and Switzerland meet each other in ,Erste Deutsche Rechtschreibkonferenz' and created Standard German/ Hoch- or Schriftdeutsch. Because Standard German was created by scientists, and not grew naturally like dialects, this is often the reason, why Standard German is in some cases different to other germannic languages, in some cases the dialects are closer to other germannic languages, in some special points. A large influence had also Martin Luther with his bible translation.
Love metatron talking about Greek
Greece in the thumbnail? ...no sleep for me yet!
~18:00 I'll have you know that fighting each other is one of our national pastimes.
Thanks for saying it, so I don't have to 😄
The map he showed with the spread of latin was wrong. Greek areas remained greek-speaking throughout roman period. Metatron should have known that.
Very interesting. I would love to see a series on this topic, going from country to country. Our language has also been standardized, and although regional dialects faded significantly in the course of last two centuries, there are still some differences prevailing. And modern standard Czech is a very different language than Czech dialects spoken in the 18th century before all these national revival movements. Thanks for the lesson on spoken/written Latin. That myth you referring to sounds like somebody imagining, that with the fall of the Roman Empire, all people who could read and write suddenly died without offsprings and all literature diseappered entirely. And at the same time assuming that there was no communication between classes. Or did baby Cesare speak classical Latin already in the craddle? I will definitely check out more of your videos on the subject of Latin. Very informative channel.
North Africa once had its own Latin Romance language prior to the spread of Islam and Arabic, it was spoken primarily in the urban centres like Carthage and coastal regions. afro-Roman Catholics from what’s now modern day Tunisia and Algeria had fled and resettled in Sardinia at about the time the Byzantine exarchate fell to the Arabs.
18:00 the Greeks had a common ethnic identity, but that was not something which was important to them politically speaking. It was only a cultural/religious/linguistic tie. In fact it is very likely that the Greeks stopped being unified due to the tyranny of the Mycenaeans
Vulgar Latin jumpscare.
It's a myth that has been passed around FAR too often..
Sadly the German people ended up with High-German, because of their bible translation. Platt-Deutsch in the north is so much easier to understand for us Dutch.. :) and closer to Old English.
where i live the dialect changes from village to village even 1 km way can change how words are spoken ..... and im german but schools teach anybody standart german and also the tv and movie dubbing does its part but well we try to save our dialects at least some of us .... fun fact my german home dialect is spoken in parts of the usa
It could have been even worse - before the bible translation the most influential dialect was around vienna (which is upper german).
Modern standard german is central german, sitting somewhere in between upper german and low german. The success of luthers bible translation also lay partly in that this dialect was more intelligble to people in the north than the upper german one of vienna.
21:30 Its the same in the UK, for example, where I am, in Bristol, you have the regional Dialect which shares many aspects with other regional dialects and is a form of English, that is older , I dont know what the name is, but its mostly saxon in its sound, and I assume origin . You have phrases like "owe Bist" which means, how are you? or how have you been? and is used as a greeting. A common response would be "Bista" meaning "not bad". I am not sure if they have written spellings, although its possible they do and its recorded/catalogued by someone, somewhere. This stuff has some links to Old English, and would be considered farmer language and is spoken even today but very rarely , but in pockets of the west country and a few old boys in some obscure tucked away Pubs in Bristol
Then you have the accent and modern slang like "Maki" (very big) which has different pronunciations, north and south of the river. North its Mack-Ee and South its Mak-Eye,
and then you have the "BBC" /Queens(Kings? now?) engish
He mentioned that for French Langue d'Oi was chosen as the lingua franca, but it was actually a dialect of Langue d'Oi spoken by the royal family and the nobility based on the dialect spoken in the Blois area. The Royals and Nobles would spend part of the year in the area which is how this lingua franca of government came to be. Of course due to it's higher status anyone in government with aspirations would learn it. The dialect was maintained as the language of government by the Republic, and then after the turmoil of the Napoleonic Empire as well as the empire of Napoleon III, the government would engage in a program of stomping out all other languages and dialects from continental France to prop up french with the excuse of promoting national unity.
Greek mentioned 🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷🇬🇷
The etymology of ”ciao” is very interesting! We have basically the same in Swedish! In Swedish a fairly common informal greeting is ”tjena” (also ”tjenare”) which comes from the Swedish word for servant. As in ”your humble servant so and so”.
We must promote the unification of Italia and Grecia into a common federation.
nah this is a joke...
Of course there is a difference between formal /formalized language and vernacular forms of language which are typically those that evolve through time.
Dropping letters, changing vowels (like d to t or k to c or g) are all changes that happen in spoken aka vernacular language not in a more conservative or formalized (aka "classic") language that is typically written language.....
The evolutionary part of language is mostly the spoken part which tends to later get formalized via literature and dictionaries.
From Cicero and Ovid etc to Cervantes, Dante Alleghieri and Ramon Llul etc
The formalized that is mainly written language jumps in evolutionary steps while the spoken language slowly but continually evolves
I would have thought that another elephant in the room is that there would have been multiple "vulgar" Latins in different provinces, depending on the mix of formal Latin and pre-Roman languages. That is there would have been a divergence of dialects that preceeded the gradual demise of Classical Latin.
In the most part of the twentieth century the general Dutch language was referred to as Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands (General Civilized Dutch) From 1990s-2000s on the beschaafd was dropped from this discription. A large role in the standardization of Dutch was the translation of the Bible in Dutch, the Statenbijbel in 1637.
So Dante’s Italian (DI) and standardized Italian is not the same language because DI is medieval and antiquated but Vulgar Latin and Classical Latin is the same language? Can you walk me through the reasoning there?
Reviewing the video you don’t state that is a different language - but it was still so different that you wanted to specify that it was not DI they spoke - wanting to differentiate it from standard Italian, quite like the vulgar classical split.
No. Dante's Italian is Medieval. So it's different from MODERN Italian. Classical and "Vulgar" Latin are in the same time period. Apples and pears.
@@metatronacademyUnderstood, thanks for clarifying
Contemporary English speakers find Old English significantly less comprehensible than contemporary Italian speakers find Dante's Italian. Indeed, *La Commedia* could be considered nearly modern Italian, aside from certain archaic vocabulary and phrasing, and more significantly, its poetic form. The hendecasyllabic meter and terza rima render the language considerably less natural than everyday medieval Italian.
Thanks for your insights on Classical versus Vulgar Latin - what you said was new to me.
I was born in Australia, where my mother tongue was Veneto Language till I learned English. So i followed with interest the small Veneto Express TH-cam Channel to get some insights.
The presenter there said that Veneto language is related to the French/Spanish/Potugese branch of Latin, whereas Italian is more related to the other branch that includes Romanian.
He also claimed that Italian was an artificial language - as it was not upper-class Florentine which was chosen as the official language, but rather upper-class Florentine as they believed it had been spoken centuries before (i.e. a purer form that no one actually spoke).
In Paris, I couldn't understand much of what they said, till I'd been there a week watching dubbed American shows, and then I could. In Madrid I could understand about half of what they said, but they couldn't understand me at all.. In Lisbon I couldn't understand them at all, but I found I had no trouble reading their signs and labels, as they were very similar to Veneto. Must go to Romania one day.
Regards
A question by the way, do dialects in other counties than Germany also sound direktly like spoken by a farmer?
I wounder how much regional dialects of latin differd. Because I don´t think they all speaked the same from Hadrians wall to the most southern outpost of Egypt.
the standardization of turkish was a linguistic tragedy. early turkish republic had no idea about linguistics, to the point where their official position was that all languages come from turkish. look it up, it's called the sun language theory.
Do they really agree on that ?
I mean, even with 0 knowledge in linguistic, it is obvious that it is absurde.
What was there justification ?
You mean Turanism? The “Ural-Altaic language family” that was supposed to encompass all Turkic, Mongolic, and Uralic languages-from Turkish to Uyghur, from Finno-Ugric European languages like Finnish and Hungarian to the languages of Siberia and Mongolia…although no linguistic connection across these diverse families was even proven…
"Metraton's Academy Reacts"
Wow, I thought Italian was just Tuscan but with modern words added. Thanks for educating me
11:00 thanks for the clarification
The same thing happens in India too. Most of the "dialects" of Hindi are entirely different languages, all of them predating standard Hindi, which is understood by most people in Northern India.
It's so interesting this thing of linguisticsvariety in Italy. Here in Brazil, everybody speaks the same language. 😊
Dont you have talian, a german minority and a japanese minority? As well as bordering Spanish speaking countries.
@giulianopisciottano8302 Yes, but I think it is not comparable to what happens in Italy. Those languages in Italy didn't come from other countries, and I think that the communities that speak other languages in Brazil are very small, and in decades, they are speaking Portuguese. In my state, which is one of the oldest ones in Brazil, Portuguese is absolutely dominant. Brazil is so big that it is rare for a Brazilian to make contact with people of neighboring country.
i'm a beginner learning italian, with an additional interest in Corsica. I've heard that Corsican is very similar to Toscano but also was under control of other parts of Italy, then England, then France. Curious why it's not talked about like a dialect of Italian and instead a separate language
Power of French propaganda.
@@barrankobama4840 Corsicans don't seem to think of themselves as French. all my Corsican friends are anti-french lol. but they also don't love their time under the Republic of Genoa
The γλωσσικό ζήτημα (the linguistic issue) in Greece is an exciting part of 19th-and 20th-century modern Greek history, indicating the political role of the language and how it reflects the people who are actually the language users.
I’ve been typing this comment longer than this video has been live
first
Sad life, innit?
😂 sh**
I agree with your take on vulgar Latin. However there are differences in written and spoken forms of any language I speak English and Finnish as my two first languages. But I'll use English as my main example to reach a broader audience. I would never use "gonna, or y'all " in a resume or paper for school. However I use those words regularly in spoken form as do the recipients of those resumes and school work in their spoken form being an American born from Finnish family. So I do see where the argument of the vulgar or spoken form had a greater influence on the subsequent languages that evolved from Latin. Especially after the already relatively low literacy rate of Rome plummeted after the western collapse. So words that existed in spoken form in one region that didn't in another became standard of the newly formed languages. Like imagine y'all from America 1000 years in the future evolving and becoming a standard word in the new language spoken in America and fair dinkum becoming standardized in the new Australian language. During the height of English being mutually intelligible among the Anglosphere neither of these words were considered "standard or literary English " as no American or Australian would want to put them in a resume or submit a serious academic paper with them unless the rare instances of context allowing for it.
When I learned Latin in highschool (only two years) I understood "vulgar Latin" as you explained the English, not as two languages, but more like two "dialects".
His pronunciation of the Chinese city names are fantastic 💯
How to standardize a language.
Win at war.
italy's situation is so different to spain's its so crazy, maybe its because theres no standard version of each regional language? like no standard sicilian or venetian
Possible, because after they decided Italian was the official language, they tried to destroy the regional languages and nobody could develop them, for example writing, or improving the grammar rules, they were mostly oral languages for the common people (quote from Cavour: "We made Italy now we must do Italians"). So, at school our teachers corrected us, and punished us for using some regional words, and on TV, in offices and institutions there was only standard Italian. Who talked a regional language was shamed, the regional languages acquired some dignity after some recent revival supporters, it is a new trend.
Then, among the same region we could have different degrees of variations, for example, I heard that sicilian have strong differences between Messina, Palermo, Siracusa, at the point they can't understand each others. This is curious for me, because in Veneto we are more "standardized", I can easily understand the venetian from Treviso, Venice, or Verona... or even from Bergamo and Brescia (today in Lombardy, but in past part of the Venetian Republic) or Pordenone (today Friuli Venezia Giulia). Of course we have few alternative words, and a slight different stress on some vocals, but that's not much.
@@trattogatto i mean, in spain the languages are official but i dont thinktheres a single person who doesnt speak spanish, even the elderly (with some exceptions) the regional languages are facing a decline because spanish is just more convenient, people use them except in the big cities where its mostly spanish. Then again, some languages like mine (Aragonese) or Asturleonese arent official and are only spoken in some villages but theyre very castillianised, its so cool how in italy you preserve both with no issue
@@unoreversecard1o1o1o In Italy they are not official, only Italian is official. Then we have some associations trying to redeem them for example calling them "language" instead of "dialect", and starting some unofficial "academies" to teach them. Even if this matter is cultural, there is a controversy because the support for regional languages is politically charged (because we have regions calling for autonomy, and some factions want less central power and federalism). So, we have this clash of power between nationalists fiercely against these initiatives, and federalists against Rome and supporting their language, there is a conflict of interest broader than the language itself.
Anyway, in general we have rural places where we talk our "dialect" very much, it is not uncommon, even among young people.
I talk venetian to my coworkers, and customers, or at the supermarket, or post office, or at the town hall... it is just normal.
We switch to Italian only for courtesy towards people who are not good at venetian, or in official situations.
We all know Italian, so we are naturally bilingual, it is rare to find an old person stuck with a regional language.
@@trattogattothe quote is not from Cavour, is attributed to d'Azeglio, and anyway is false.
Italian was chosen as the official language of the many Italian states centuries before unification.
@@barrankobama4840 Yes, my bad, it was Massimo D'Azeglio, but it is just a detail, and I don't understand why you say it is false. That sentence was very popular, and it was the mission of the new State after the unification of Italy in 1861. Italy was unified only on paper, but the majority of people had different cultures and spoke different languages, they could not understand each others (even in the first world war they had major problems receiving orders in the army), only a very small percentage of intellectuals knew Italian.
Both D'Azeglio and Cavour and many other activists knew this problem in Italy, and a single language was instrumental to unify people. They had to push it. This is the meaning of the sentence. And in my opinion that process never ended, and there is still a lot of resistance in regions, because we are forced together, but we are not (we are united only when they play soccer). There is always a conflict of interest between regional interest and national interest, and federalism is not desirable for the dysfunctional regions (overcrowded of state employees, few productive areas, and bad infrastructure).
If a productive region (Veneto) wants fiscal autonomy (meaning less money to Rome), this is a damage for the less productive regions (obviously against that autonomy). This issue is very actual.
Philippines also has standardized language, called "Filipino", which is actually based on Tagalog language.
While the non-Tagalog languages, like Cebuano, Bicolano, Ilocano, Pangasinan, etc. are falsely called as "Dialects" (Italian: I dialetti).
While in reality is, They are also languages.
A friend of mine studied abroad in Bologna and stated that she felt like everyone in northern Italy spoke Milanese. She rarely met anyone who spoke Udine.
Please do a full video on dante italian vs standard I've been wondering for a while
13:52 In Portuguese we use both "selva" and "floresta"(which today have slightly different meaning and uses), which fuels my totally scientific and not subjective and biased at all theory that Portuguese is the superior romance language
What if we use vulgar latin when we mix languages like Spanish amd English being spanglish i would consider that and its many personal varieties to be vulgar versions of Spanish and English. But i am using vulgar to mean unrefined or unsophisticated here.
During the medieval period the latin of the common people was very different to the latin used by the nobility and the church. I think the terms vulgar and classical latin are valid for the medieval and renaissance periods. The vulgar latin was proto portuguese, spanish, catalan, french, italian, and romanian, that was spoken by the common people after the different kingdoms began to emerge.
CIAO comes from the milanese adaptation of the venetian sciao... I think I read something from academia della crusca
I've been told I have a Taiwan accent when I speak Mandarin
Wouldn't saying "Dante's Itallian" be similar to when Europeans say, "Shakespeare's English"? Shakespeare molded the language substnatially and is given credit for influencing the development to modern English and is also understandable, but not modern in the same way this TH-camr is using "Dante's Itallian". C'mon, Metatron, this isn't an acedemic paper and he's simplifying the subject as a sort of intorduction to the topic. I'm aware, though, that you're doing a reaciton video and need to have some added value to the conversation, but your tone is possibly a bit too condescending. Let's get your subscriber numbers up by perhaps toning that down a little -- it's offputting. With that said, I do appreciate what you're trying to do. ;)
Just in one minute here; you don't pick a dialect, a dialect picks you!
I've always wondered why so many European countries and their languages developed into outright minimally mutually intelligible dialects, while Modern English from England is pretty much standardized across England, as far as I can tell.
England has radically different accents, but not actual dialects with largely differing vocabulary like you get with German, Italian, Scandinavian countries etc.
There wasn't a concerted effort to make a standardized ConLang to enable people from one end of the country to communicate with people from the other.
Well the dialects of Italy are from a linguistic point of view seperate languages and many have long written histories. While English dialects are English dialects. If you see English as part of the larger West Germanic spectrum the diversity becomes larger. :)
@jasminekaram880 I wouldn't even say English has actual, proper _"dialects"._
The pronunciation of words might be very different in far flung regions of England, but they're fundamentally the same words being spoken, and they're written the same in both places.
I guess it'd be because Modern English is a relatively young language, and didn't have enough time to develop in isolated areas since antiquity the way Latin did.
Maybe the KJV and Shakespeare have a huge role in it.
@@Unpainted_Huffhines English has dialects, that differ both phonetically and grammatically. In England many differ in very profound ways preserving many older features.
:)
For an example in vocabulary the dialects in Northen England like Yorkshire has stronger Old Norse infuense than Southern English. Some still use thou, and some still say bist instead of are.
:)
@@jasminekaram880 Can you give me an example of different grammar between regions of England?
Unrelated, got any Italian channels you recommend for a Spanish speaker to learn Italian?
Vulgar and Classical Latin existed, not as separate languages, but as you say, as two registers of the same language.
The point is that we can see that the Romance languages are not descended from the Classical register, but from the Vulgar one, but Vulgar Latin was hardly written down compared to Classical Latin. Therefore we have had to reconstruct Vulgar Latin by working back from Romance. The entire concept of VL has been created on account of that reconstruction.
Ultimately I think you're attacking a straw man here. The worst that someone could do in this situation is make out that Vulgar and Classical Latin are two separate languages.
Ciao is quite similar to old good bayrisch "Servus!"
Yes because it comes from the venetian sciao, which means slave/servant just like servus
How was Toscano chosen? Easy: The Betrothed was THAT popular and the final edition was written in Toscano.
Standard Italian is basically a memetic mutation.
Italian had been the official language of all Italian states for 300 years before I Promessi Sposi was written.
@@barrankobama4840 How exactly did a language that didn't even exist become the official language of a number of Italian states?
I suppose you could make a case for the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, given Italian is basically Toscano, but no place else. You even had one whose official language was LATIN (specifically Church Latin. Take a guess which one it was), but none had Italian for the simple reason it wasn't a thing beyond literates pretending Dante's Toscano was it.
During the unification there was a huge debate on what Italian should be, with some proposing to use Dante's Toscano, others a con-lang, others to use Romanesco (and that would have been hilarious), and then Manzoni wrote the second and third edition of his famous novel in Fiorentino, that is the Florence dialect of Toscano, and all of sudden the debate was forcibly settled because this guy's novel was just that popular. We even had a word for technobabble over a hundred years before Star Trek because Manzoni had already tackled the concept and named it Latinorum in the novel...
@@lordMartiya The language did exist. Italian replaced Latin as the official language of Italian states during the early XVI century. You can check the Editto di Rivoli (1561) for example.
@barrankobama4840 As I said, it was a pretense: only a few literates used Dante's Fiorentino dialect of Toscano as Lingua Franca. In fact, the ACTUAL Lingua Franca had a better claim, given sailors from all around Italy.
The fact that after unification the standard Italian was based on CURRENT Fiorentino says enough.
@@barrankobama4840 As I said, it was only a pretense: Fiorentino Dialect of the Toscano Language as spoken in Dante's time was spoken only by a few literates as a lingua franca... While Venetian and the ACTUAL Lingua Franca were used by sailors and merchants everywhere for a long time.
But since you want to be pedantic to the point of leaving stuff untranslated... The Edict of Rivoli only applied to the states ruled by the House of Savoy, established that "Italian" would be used only in the states east of the Alps while French would be used in the Duchy of Savoy proper and the County of Aosta, and IT WASN'T AN ITALIAN STATE, the House of Savoy had Imperial Immediacy and thus their states depended directly from the Holy Roman Emperor, without being part of the Kingdom of Italy. You can apply almost the same reasoning to Venice, as it wasn't part of the Kingdom of Italy by virtue of being a breakaway duchy of the Eastern Roman Empire and thus not part of the HRE at all.
I don’t have a problem with the term vulgar Latin. It just depends on how you define it. Vulgar Latin to me just means the different regional varieties. In my country we have standard Portuguese that we learn in school but if you go out in the streets people speak a different version of it depending on the region. From the set of pronouns to pronunciation. It’s all Portuguese, of course, and all mutually intelligible but I think it’s important to point out the difference between the standard language and the regional variations when we talk about language evolution. Saying it was a different language is wrong but there’s nothing wrong with using the term itself to group the different variations.
For those who would like to hear what Katharevousa Greek sounds like you may search for the last broadcast of the Athenian radio before the Germans occupied the city during WWII.
It's both epic and eloquent.
m.th-cam.com/video/u9N98TAopuY/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUZbGFzdCBicm9hZGNhc3Qgd3cyIGF0aGVucw%3D%3D
Interesting.
Selva is forest? Huh, in spanish forest is bosque, and selva is jungle, both are used becuase they have different meaning. I was not expecting you to correct that one word haha
By vulgar latin they just mean non standardised latin. Would you have a problem with this phrasing?(maybe with adding the specific region like iberian or italian, etc.)
It's still not a separate language though.
The thing about Vulgar Latin is that this idea was pushed so much that the general public started to believe Vulgar Latin is a somewhat different language to Latin, as opposed to a simple register of speech that any language past or present has. I don't know why this notion of Vulgar Latin was pushed so hard in the first place. Most likely some classicists in the 19th century bonded together and decided that Latin was too refined and pure to have been "corrupted" into the Romance languages overtime so they invented this idea that Romance comes from an already corrupted colloquial speech, which was spoken by the uneducated masses.
Well We don't speak classical english, but Arabs speak classical arabic for literature, quran, TV and other stuff.
Classical arabic though is not spoken in any of arabic countries as a vulgar languages. Correct me if needed.
"to be a little pedantic here." Hey that's why we watch your videos so feel free. 🤣
You are wrong. Despite the political organisation of city states, the Greeks had a strong sense of belonging to the same ethnicity and they differentiated themselves from the rest whom they called Barbarians.
Herodotus wrote the history of the Greeks and the Barbarians, as he says in the introduction. So does Thucydides.
All Greeks participated in the Olympic Games, they worshipped the same gods and they spoke the same language despite the dialects, easily understood, though.
I literally said that. We agree man
I disagree with your comparison to English in regards to "Vulgar Latin". Thre is, in fact, a "Vulgar English" equivalance. What you are failing to recognize is the amount of time involved. English has already broken into what we refer to as "Creole English", as I'm sure you are aware. WIthout getting into the semantics of these terms, my point is that, given more time, more creole will emerge in English (though, perhaps modern communication may supress that trend compared to antiquity). So, I think it all depends on how you dice it, and since I'm not a linguist, I don't know how this argument is shaped by differences, and degree of diferences, in the structure changes. I'd say, my hot take is that the term "Vulgar Latin" is a general term for deviations from Classical -- any regional deviation. So, as a fellow nitpicker, I'd say you are splitting nits here. It's a layman's term used to place a "cloud" around these variations -- as you say, a "can of worms". The can of worms is the cloud term being used when we say "Vulgar Latin".
So, to summarize, using English as an an anology is deeply flawed, as it is, as a root of a language tree, fairly new compared to Latin based languages, and the term "Vulgar Latin" is a placeholder term to describe a loose affiliation of regional usage of Latin. Perhaps a better avenue of comparison would be modern German, where there is a sort of high German and common German, though I'm wandering a bit too far from my wheelhouse now.
Even when a common enemy appeared it wasn't certain that all Greek city-states or kingdoms would unite. Either for fear of the invader or to screw their neighbor. Thebes for example sided with the Persians.
neat topic, an always missunderstood one.
i studied the creation of standard german, but this is different for every region,
the british one is very dumb, the italien and french ones are quite solid.
the anser is, you dont standardize, it is mostly derived from written language.
so for highly educated and homogenized states language is pretty much standardized into the written language,
which can be recalled to be used for everyday communication at will.
there are many countries which dont have standardized languages, are multilingual or arent educated enough to teach everyone a "second" standard language.
every region is different because of this, its pretty interesting.
for the latin thing in special, written and spoken language is quite different, which is very important to understand many transformations of languages, but there is always a through and for, both spoken and written language competeted and still do in some form.
the real battle was settled through modern writing, we here call it schiller and goethe deutsch, other europeans have their proto writings from where the language didnt change, later standardization did pick these works because everyone did already use this language.
i like this topic because we germans, and i believe we arent alone, still carry very very old words which seemingly dont fit into our aparently static language, so we have questions.
knowing where a word is from isnt that easy to determine ive heard, because veryone and theri mother spoke another language.
this is very plausable, because the homogenization within a small group of humans was faster than every contact with other groups.
probably noone in antique times spoke any language of their neighbours but was able to understand enough to communicate, so it was pretty normal to not speak perfect english but everything worked.
also people were more fixed to spoken language than written, therefore they didnt have any issues to learn and speak close languages.
as a german i find poetic german the most beautiful thing in the world, but this isnt a real term.
i use this one for describing german that is used to not straight up tell information, so everything that uses methaphors and phrases, along oldish words and doubled meanings and it gets way deeper than that, deep german is awesome, but probably not accessable for non germans at all, but this stage is probably similar in every language.
but yes, standard italian is pretty awesome and im as a german are envious because you people actually able to protect this,
we cant.
for my claims of older languages were closer, its pretty easy to read old german, old french and old british along side, this world wasnt that fast, so why wouldnt neighbours understand each other.
That is similar in modern standard Arabic MSA is based of Quraish dialect But is not Quraish dialect they took the base of the Quraish dialect but is not one to one Quraish dialect
You could make the divide between Spoken Latin and Written Latin and rightly make the claim that dialects are derived from the spoken varieties, but I don’t see the difference between that and dividing Latin between Vulgar and Classical. Vulgar just means Common and Common means the language as spoken by the people. I suppose is that Classical Latin may never have been a spoken language from the start and Vulgar Latin always existed with it side by side. But of course Vulgar Latin did become a written language after Classical ceased to be used at all. Now I am confused.
react to "interlingua" please
14:26 OMG Metatron 😂😂😂😂
The amount of perpetuated incorrect information on TH-cam is getting out of hand, although the phenomenon is interesting in itself. I don't mean lies, I just mean "facts" that people believe are true because they see them repeated. It goes in waves. Often very well researched channels will make a video on a subject that is fairly niche. More popular channels looking for content will simplify the information and broadcast it to a wider audience. Errors in the original video are perpetuated, and new ones may be introduced by the simplification. Other content creators looking to see what subjects did well for their peers will crib the contents for their own video. There's also AI channels of course. Obviously incorrect information dies quickly due to feedback, but the errors in details may live on and spread. Eventually, some other well researched channel will notice the errors and debunk it. That debunking will be picked up by more popular channels and spread. And so the cycle continues. There's only so much fact to fill the TH-cam void, and I suspect what will happen is the cycle will repeat in waves, oscillating among areas where the information is less certain.
Personally, I feel the most learned people will "win" because they can focus on doing react content debunking the incorrect information. I expect to see more real experts move into TH-cam because it is relatively easy money to just watch a video and correct it. Reaction to reaction to reaction may also become more common.
2:13
Ezio audetore da Firenze 🙂
10:42 "always has been"
Dialects are everywhere in greece. Literally everywhere.
The common greek language is that of athens. But each area of greece has it's own dialect. And in some times sounds like a completely different language.
If my father speaks to me in his dialect i will probably understand next to nothing of what he said.
This is day 20 of commenting on every new video until he does Cajun French and Louisiana Creole
AKA Vulgar Acadian. 😂
Sorry... As an Eastern Canadian I could not resist exploiting the "vulgar" debate.
I am Greek and I will like to say that the city states were like the USA states but a bit more violent
Metatron ma la tua pronuncia cinese è perfetta ahaha, hai studiato il mandarino?
Standard Italian is my favorite conspiracy theory
There is vulgar latin. Written language is „frozen“, it doesnt change and it reflects the language in a distinct time . The fluid language is the vulgar version
When it comes to vulgar latin and valssical latin celebrities speak standard English because English was standardize
Yeah right.
And the books that tell people to write COLUMNA instead of COLONNA must be my imagination.
Vulgar Latin is there an academic term used to describe the variation of Latin diverge from Old Latin what we call now classical method don't blame him blame the system
Medieval Italian reminds of spanish, sounds quite familiar to me😔
10:27 the English speakers your talking about could be speaking vulgar English. Depends on whats being said.
How to do Standard Greek: Discard Katharevousa, replace every vowel with "i" (iotisation), and use English for everything that matters. Also, hate on Ancient Greek pronounciation, even though Koiné since the end of Katharevousa was the only Greek worth learning.
Replace every consonant with "i"? What nonsense are you talking about? Consonants?
Greek has a, e, i, ou, o vowels.
The fact that you are saying we removed the " i" sound when we LITERALLY inherited from the ancient Greek ι, ει, υ, η, and οι while we are using all sorts of Archaisms in every day speaking, tells a lot about your level of education
Really dude? You know many people calling France Γαλλία or UK Anglia? Or Germany, germania before the Germans themselves?
@Pavlos_Charalambous No, I wrote that a lot of vowels turned into /i/ in modern Greek. This is called "iotisation", and you confirmed it when you gave a list of no less than five /i/-sounds which had quite different pronounciations in Koiné or Archaic.
@@enysuntra1347 Initially, you wrote consonants instead of vowels and you modified and corrected it.
The point is that modern Greek is closer to ancient Greek than Italian or Spanish to Latin, modern English to old English, modern Indian languages to Sanscrit.
Educated Greeks can easily understand Koine which is the language used in Church.
A lot of modern ways of pronouncing vowels and consonants had already made their way in Koine.
@@DemetriosKongas
Koiné Greek, pal, was not even spoken by the proper Greeks and was formulated by barbarians in the East.
That is why the Χ is pronounced the way it is.
And that is why all dipthongs were turned into /i/.
We lost our language to the barbos of the East.
HELLO NOBLE ONE 💥
I hear a lot of vulgar English where I'm from.