2008-01-14 <Shut up or shall... I be break other arm.>

[Slamlander]

Someone moderately conversant in French can't even slightly muddle through Spanish and Italian, though. Not ALOUD, anyways. On paper, they look so similar that it's fairly easy to muddle through.

^-^'

Interesting that you chose French, which is as much unlike the other two as possible. Knowing a bit of Spanish, I find it possible to muddle through Italian and vice verse. However, French doesn't unlock too many doors in either. French has too much Celtic (the other Empire) influence, whereas Italian and Spanish are both Saracen/Moorish influenced (El v Le, which corresponds to the arabic Al).

[Imp-Chan]

Well, of the three French is the only one I'm moderately conversant in (I probably sound like a two year old on crack, but I am moderately conversant). I have a smattering of Spanish gleaned from my mother and friends, but only enough to get myself in trouble. Latin I can only cope with when I'm singing it. French was really much more actively practiced in my household, and it's the one I took in school.

And, of course, now that I think about it more I recall listening to an opera on the radio when I was about eight years old, and my mother doing simultaneous semi-translation, even though she was conversant in Spanish not Italian. And then I feel silly for thinking one can't let you muddle through the other. Though my mother sang choral music for years, in a variety of languages as most choruses do, so I'm not sure if it should count.

-_-'

Edit: Okay, now I'm curious. I must know everyone's linguistic background!

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Trying to address some of the Spanish/Italian vs. Latin questions:

I have a great deal of exposure to Spanish and some to Classical Latin, and while it's certainly possible to see similarities, the languages would be mutually unintelligible and almost impossible to muddle through on paper for a speaker of one language. For instance, Spanish syntax functions very similarly to English; Latin syntax, on the other hand, depends entirely on cases and conjugations (i.e. the endings of nouns and verbs) that Spanish has almost completely lost. A Spanish speaker would most likely be able to understand some Latin vocabulary, but would find it almost impossible to make out the meaning of a sentence. The same, of course, goes for a Latin speaker trying to read Spanish.

Somebody earlier (page 2, I think) mentioned a Spanish-speaker with a little church latin. Now, Church Latin-speakers would be decently able to decipher Latin on paper, since the syntax is roughly the same; the only issue is keeping track of some more case endings and verb forms. Speaking would also be somewhat intelligible, although more difficult due to changes in pronunciation. To be honest, I don't think knowing any Spanish would help in this case except for some vocabulary, and the person's ability to read would depend almost entirely on how well he knew his church-speak.

[Neko7]

Someone moderately conversant in French can't even slightly muddle through Spanish and Italian, though. Not ALOUD, anyways. On paper, they look so similar that it's fairly easy to muddle through.

^-^'

Interesting that you chose French, which is as much unlike the other two as possible. Knowing a bit of Spanish, I find it possible to muddle through Italian and vice verse. However, French doesn't unlock too many doors in either. French has too much Celtic (the other Empire) influence, whereas Italian and Spanish are both Saracen/Moorish influenced (El v Le, which corresponds to the arabic Al).

(French is usually describe as a Latin language, but this description is more cultural than purely linguistic: During the XVI century french poete(La Pleiade) use a french-ification of latin word, language form and rule to renew the french language that was seen as vulgar and none-educate (latin was the language for the intellectual, scientific, artistic and educate french society). Modern french is, in fact, a mix of several influance latin of course, but also a lot of anglo-saxon , regional, and modern day other latine laguage, plus the evolution from within the language itself. Giving to the french language an happy mix of origin, influance, and diversity. French themself describe the origin of their language as a Latin/Anglo-saxon origin)

[Boss Out of Town]

Someone moderately conversant in French can't even slightly muddle through Spanish and Italian, though. Not ALOUD, anyways. On paper, they look so similar that it's fairly easy to muddle through.^-^'

Interesting that you chose French, which is as much unlike the other two as possible. Knowing a bit of Spanish, I find it possible to muddle through Italian and vice verse. However, French doesn't unlock too many doors in either. French has too much Celtic (the other Empire) influence, whereas Italian and Spanish are both Saracen/Moorish influenced (El v Le, which corresponds to the arabic Al).

(French is usually describe as a Latin language, but this description is more cultural than purely linguistic: During the XVI century french poete(La Pleiade) use a french-ification of latin word, language form and rule to renew the french language that was seen as vulgar and none-educate (latin was the language for the intellectual, scientific, artistic and educate french society). Modern french is, in fact, a mix of several influance latin of course, but also a lot of anglo-saxon , regional, and modern day other latine laguage, plus the evolution from within the language itself. Giving to the french language an happy mix of origin, influance, and diversity. French themself describe the origin of their language as a Latin/Anglo-saxon origin)

Cool. There's a new history of France out that talks about the amazing number of dialects (patois)among the French pays (villages) before the advent of the railroad and motor car. In some cases, nearly unintelligible dialects could be found in villages only a few miles apart.

Like most modern languages, French as a "national" language only dates back a hundred years or so. Before then, the government used a high-end Parisian dialect and everyone not dealing with the government spoke as they pleased, in some cases using dialects spoken by only a few hundred people and tracing their ancestry back before the Romans. The situation was similar in most other European nations. Without a government and economy that links people over long distances, any language will devolve into a hundred dialects, one for each river valley and isolated village.

[Sheik Yerbouti]

My understanding is that French and German were actually the same language until shortly after the reign of Charlemaigne.

Of course, that might be from Wikipedia, so a grain of salt might be in order.

[Slamlander]

My understanding is that French and German were actually the same language until shortly after the reign of Charlemaigne.

Of course, that might be from Wikipedia, so a grain of salt might be in order.

The same reasoning makes Italian=French=German. Eh? Just knowing two of those three, whomever wrote that is on some seriously good drugs. Maybe, American academics should be prohibited from commenting on other cultural/linguistic forms until they learn at least one other besides their own. Then again, the Brits I've met are almost as bad

Trying to address some of the Spanish/Italian vs. Latin questions:
...
To be honest, I don't think knowing any Spanish would help in this case except for some vocabulary, and the person's ability to read would depend almost entirely on how well he knew his church-speak.

You would be amazed at what an experienced polyglot can do. Mind you, we're not discussing academic level understanding here. Only the ability to extract the essence of the meaning.

[Absinthium Draconi]

My understanding is that French and German were actually the same language until shortly after the reign of Charlemaigne.

Of course, that might be from Wikipedia, so a grain of salt might be in order.

The same reasoning makes Italian=French=German. Eh? Just knowing two of those three, whomever wrote that is on some seriously good drugs. Maybe, American academics should be prohibited from commenting on other cultural/linguistic forms until they learn at least one other besides their own. Then again, the Brits I've met are almost as bad

Actually, that isn't as demented as it initially sounds. Way back in the day, there were three primary language groups in Europe: Latin, Celtic, and Germanic.
Celtic today exists as Welsh, and (as I best recall) a few other languages.
Germanic (or, more properly, Proto-German) has become German, Dutch, etc.
Latin has become Italian, Spanish, French, etc.

English sorta fits into both the Germanic and Latin branches. The majority of the words (something like 50%?) come either directly or indirectly (predominately via French) from Latin, a good number of words come from German, and a lot of the rest apparently come from Greek (for the same reason that some English words come directly from Latin: It's traditionally been considered more intellectual). Most of the rules, I think, are Germanic in origin. The rest is (as I best recall) a mishmash.

Back when the Germanic Migrations were going on, any Germanic could apparently understand any other Germanic reasonably well, for the same reason as Italians and Spaniards. There were apparently some differences between the various dialects, but they were still similar enough to be mutually intelligible. Even today, a native English speaker can recognize random German words without needing to know the language.

Bear in mind that while Wikipedia is my only source for those percentages, the rest I've heard confirmed in various places, ranging from the History Channel to my English teacher uncle. I don't know how French (as opposed to Frankish) came about, but the rest is fairly well known and documented.

[DarkIntruder]

I don't know how French (as opposed to Frankish) came about, but the rest is fairly well known and documented.

Well, since the Franks cam from the same "barbarian" stock as the Ostrogoths(Germanic), Vandals and Lombards, I would think that the French language would have come about as a mixture of Germanic, Latin from the Romans, and some Celtic from the Gauls. It evolved from there, with a mixture of the language of the Germanic Burgundians, as well as the Visigoths from Spain and the Iberian peninsula.

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Trying to address some of the Spanish/Italian vs. Latin questions:
...
To be honest, I don't think knowing any Spanish would help in this case except for some vocabulary, and the person's ability to read would depend almost entirely on how well he knew his church-speak.

You would be amazed at what an experienced polyglot can do. Mind you, we're not discussing academic level understanding here. Only the ability to extract the essence of the meaning.

The question, as I understood it, wasn't about an experienced polyglot but rather a Spaniard (presumably) who learned some church-latin in school, hence my answer. Of course, an experienced polyglot would have a much easier time of it; the guy who dug up Troy, for instance, reached the point where he could IIRC read and make sense of many languages without having learned them.