# Modern language closest to Latin in terms of vocabulary



## JLanguage

Thanks in advance,
-Jonathan.


----------



## Whodunit

My 2 cents:

Italian.


----------



## JLanguage

Whodunit said:
			
		

> My 2 cents:
> 
> Italian.


 
That's what I was thinking, but would like to hear from people who have studied multiple Romance languages and Latin.


----------



## Whodunit

JLanguage said:
			
		

> That's what I was thinking, but would like to hear from people who have studied multiple Romance languages and Latin.



I can speak for French: Just a few words are the same, and most French words are similar. The declensions are totally different from each other, except for "est" = il est and "es" = tu es.


----------



## timpeac

I heard Romanian was meant to be closest, but I have not studied it know for sure.


----------



## Whodunit

I found two different opinions:

#1
#2

#1 surprises me, because I have no idea what Faliscan is ...

EDIT: Faliscan is Old Italian, so the correct answer to your question, Jonathan, might be "Italian".


----------



## mirandolina

What about Sardinian.....
My professor at University in Scotland was very fond of Sardinia and offered a special option course on Sardinian language. He assured us he had heard one Sardinian say to another "Mea columba est in domus tua" which is almost pure Latin ("My dove is in your house") and "Ponemi tres panes in bertulla" which meant put three loaves in my saddle bag (bertulla is a kind of saddle bag used on a mule or donkey).


----------



## ILT

Once my cousin (who is a priest) and I were talking about Latin, as I was wondering if he agreed that Latin was one of the most difficult languages to learn.  During our conversation, he mentioned that when priests are sent to small towns where no Italian is spoken or if the priest does not speak Italian, the priest would speak Latin and that way be able to communicate with the townspeople.

Given this, I would say Italian is the language that shares the most words with Latin, but would really like to hear the opinion of an Italian native.

ILT


----------



## mirandolina

I don't know what kind of small town in Italy it could be where "no Italian is spoken", apart from the German-speaking areas in the north, but even there Italian is fairly well understood. The chances of a non Italian-speaking native of Sudtirol understanding Latin are pretty remote!
Even though certain parts of Italy have a strong local dialect (for example Naples, parts of the South and Sicily) that is impenetrable to Northern ears, they all understand standard Italian, thanks to radio and television... !!!

However, there are certainly a lot of words in Italian where you can easily identify the Latin root, so maybe it is the language closest to the original.
I've lived in Italy for over 30 years, but I'm not a native. Maybe I can invite some members of the Italan forum to join in....




			
				I love translating said:
			
		

> Once my cousin (who is a priest) and I were talking about Latin, as I was wondering if he agreed that Latin was one of the most difficult languages to learn. During our conversation, he mentioned that when priests are sent to small towns where no Italian is spoken or if the priest does not speak Italian, the priest would speak Latin and that way be able to communicate with the townspeople.
> 
> Given this, I would say Italian is the language that shares the most words with Latin, but would really like to hear the opinion of an Italian native.
> 
> ILT


----------



## Whodunit

mirandolina said:
			
		

> Maybe I can invite some members of the Italan forum to join in....



Yes, that's what we need here, best you invite an Italian speaking Latin learning member.


----------



## walnut

I love translating said:
			
		

> [...]he mentioned that when priests are sent to small towns where no Italian is spoken or if the priest does not speak Italian, the priest would speak Latin and that way be able to communicate with the townspeople.


Small town where no italian was spoken were still a majority before WWI, because Italy was a poor, rural country... but then things changed. A few exceptions still survive - as Mirandolina said -: German or French speaking areas, some villages like Kalispera in Puglia where a sort of ancient Greek is spoken, others where albanian is, etc.

A person who doesn't speak any italian, but can speak latin would be at "survival level" in Italy, I think. Speaking could be quite easy particularly with scholarized persons - but a spanish speaking person would be more easily understood. 
A friend of mine, which is Hungarian native and speaks lots of languages, brilliantly integrates his italian with latin when needed. The result is always fascinating, but I have no idea about the possible result in case of a non-latinized audience.

Did it help or confused ideas?  Ciao, Walnut


----------



## Silvia

I agree with Mirandolina and walnut.

I am a native Italian speaker quite familiar with other Romance languages.

The original question is: "Modern language closest to Latin in terms of vocabulary?"
No doubt it is Italian 

If your question had been Closest grammar or else, then I would have probably considered Romanian, which still uses declensions, unlike French, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian.

Special thanks to:
mirandolina for the invitation 
whodunit for the article by Giuseppe DeSicilia, who explained everything very well! Thinking of it... I could have written that article almost verbatim!


----------



## cuchuflete

For vocabulary, I would agree with those who propose Italian.  In terms of grammar, my vote goes to Portuguese.


----------



## Whodunit

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> For vocabulary, I would agree with those who propose Italian.  In terms of grammar, my vote goes to Portuguese.



Just thinking of the easiest phrases. Everyone understands them and these are the first ones I learned in Latin:

Britannia insula est.
(noun) (object) (verb)

Great Britan is an island.

----------------------------

Errare humanum est.
(noun) (object) (verb)

To err is human.

----------------------------

Is there any language out there that uses exactly the same structure?


----------



## Outsider

In my opinion, the original question wrongly assumes that there is a unique language closer to Latin in vocabulary than all others. I doubt that is true. All Romance languages share a great deal of Latin derived vocabulary among themselves. I bet it's more or less the same amount of words, except possibly in the case of Romanian, which acquired a lot of Slavic words.


----------



## Outsider

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Just thinking of the easiest phrases. Everyone understands them and these are the first ones I learned in Latin:
> 
> Britannia insula est.
> (noun) (object) (verb)
> 
> Great Britan is an island.
> 
> ----------------------------
> 
> Errare humanum est.
> (noun) (object) (verb)
> 
> To err is human.
> 
> ----------------------------
> 
> Is there any language out there that uses exactly the same structure?


As far as I know, all modern Romance languages use SVO syntax instead of classical Latin's SOV, so the answer is probably no.


----------



## LaSmarjeZ

It's the sardinians spoken in the central part of the island (lugudorese-nugorese) for grammar and vocabulary. The dialects spoked in the coast west and south (campidanesu) has been influenceed by spanish, catalan and italian, and the dialects in the north are italian dialects (gaddurese, sassarese)

I've always heard that the placement og the words in latin is not really important, I mean that you can say "Britannia est insula" or "Britannia insula est" and it's not a mistake


----------



## victoria luz

mirandolina said:
			
		

> Even though certain parts of Italy have a strong local dialect (for example Naples, parts of the South and Sicily) that is impenetrable to Northern ears, they all understand standard Italian, thanks to radio and television... !!!


 

Mirandolina, speaking a more or less impenetrable dialect doesn't mean by any means being unable to understand (sic) and speak standard Italian, radio and TV having little to do with it, at least in the last 50 years or so!
You know, there's school too...and strangely enough, teaching and textbooks have been in Italian since several decades now!  
Actually, under a linguistic perspective, speaking a dialect which is as far as it could from the standard language, helps to deactivate interferences (leakage of dialectal vocabulary/patterns into the standard language).



			
				walnut said:
			
		

> Small town where no italian was spoken were still a majority before WWI, because Italy was a poor, rural country... but then things changed. A few exceptions still survive - as Mirandolina said -: German or French speaking areas, some villages like Kalispera in Puglia where a sort of ancient Greek is spoken, others where albanian is, etc.
> Ciao, Walnut


 
Vic --> still laughing at the idea of Calimera (village of southern Apulia) as an enclave where no Italian is spoken  . Or the villages of Albanian origin in Calabria.

Walnut, which century are you talking about?

The griko (that sort of ancient greek spoken in Grecìa Salentina - province of Lecce) and the Albanian spoken in areas of the province of Cosenza are just used as DIALECT, and need a tough preservation work to avoid their total disappearance (which would be a huge loss for linguistic diversity) since they are hardly spoken even as such by young generations.

At times, when I read some posts, I can't help wondering what sort of idea will non native speakers possibly get from some information they can gather here.


----------



## Cnaeius

In my opinion, in order to evaluate a global closeness to Latin, a lot of considerations have to be done. The main ones:

Phonetic considerations
Vocabulary (the topic actually is on this)
Morphology
Syntax
Considering *all* these and giving a general, mean answer, I would say that the closest is Italian. But, obviously, this does not mean that the other Romance languages are far. They are however very close. I would say that, as example, Spanish and Italian are more similar than Italian and Latin or Spanish and Latin. 
Besides, considering one by one the above characteristics, the closeness can change: phonetic considerations could give reason to Sardianian and Italian (see _Mario Pei_ studies), vocabulary to Italian, Morphology to Romanian because it has retained declensions but to the other romance languages for verbal conjugations, syntax is a battle among Italian, Spanish, written French and Portuguese.
My answer is Italian, also for Geographical/linguistic consideration (think as example to La Spezia-Rimini line of separation between Romance languages, it springs in Italy). In any case, I have to admit, it can be difficult to say

Ciao


----------



## raspberry_tea

Romanian, I think.


----------



## jester.

But Romanian has assimilated so many Slavic influences that I think it is no longer very close to Latin.


----------



## LaSmarjeZ

*From wikipedia:*

*Il sardo logudorese è uno dei due principali gruppi dialettali della lingua sarda, parlato nella parte centrale e settentrionale della Sardegna. 
Comprende le varianti del "logudorese comune" e del sardo "nuorese", ed è considerata la più conservativa delle lingue neolatine, la più simile cioè al latino.

Sardu logudorese, or Logudorese, is a standardised dialect of Sardinian, often considered the most conservative of all Romance languages.

 




*


----------



## LaSmarjeZ

Cnaeius said:
			
		

> In my opinion, in order to evaluate a global closeness to Latin, a lot of considerations have to be done. The main ones:
> 
> Phonetic considerations
> Vocabulary (the topic actually is on this)
> Morphology
> Syntax
> Considering *all* these and giving a general, mean answer, I would say that the closest is Italian. But, obviously, this does not mean that the other Romance languages are far. They are however very close. I would say that, as example, Spanish and Italian are more similar than Italian and Latin or Spanish and Latin.
> Besides, considering one by one the above characteristics, the closeness can change: phonetic considerations could give reason to Sardianian and Italian (see _Mario Pei_ studies), vocabulary to Italian, Morphology to Romanian because it has retained declensions but to the other romance languages for verbal conjugations, syntax is a battle among Italian, Spanish, written French and Portuguese.
> My answer is Italian, also for Geographical/linguistic consideration (think as example to La Spezia-Rimini line of separation between Romance languages, it springs in Italy). In any case, I have to admit, it can be difficult to say
> 
> Ciao


 
Also about verbs: 

Latin:
Honorare
-honoro
-honoras
-honorat
-honoramus
-honoratis
-honorant

Sardinian:
Onorare
-Deu onoro
-tue onoras
-issu/issa onorat
-nosu onoramus
-bois onorais
-issus/issas onorant


----------



## parakseno

j3st3r said:
			
		

> But Romanian has assimilated so many Slavic influences that I think it is no longer very close to Latin.



   It is true that Romanian assimilated Slavic unfluences, but they were at vocabulary level. Furthermore, most of these words are becoming "deprecated" and are less commonly used in spoken-language. They give a somewhat "old" touch when used. Most date back to the Early Middle Ages when the orthodox rituals were held in Slavonic language and most of the religious texts entered the country through the Slavic channel. 
  Also, during the 18th and 19th century, a lot of Latin-derived words re-entered the language through French and Italian.
  Slavic influences in grammar are practically inexistant.
  So I would say that Slavic influence left little impact on Romanian overall, the most important being at vocabulary level.


----------



## jester.

Intersting. I didn't know all that, I don't speak Romanian myself.

But I am aware of one decisive feature which distinguishes Romanian from all other Romance languages and that is the article which goes behind the noun.

But I am not certain whether this is a slavic influence...


----------



## diegodbs

I think it is not a slavic influence, since Russian and Polish have no articles.


----------



## diegodbs

> Latin:
> Honorare
> -honoro
> -honoras
> -honorat
> -honoramus
> -honoratis
> -honorant
> 
> Sardinian:
> Onorare
> -Deu onoro
> -tue onoras
> -issu/issa onorat
> -nosu onoramus
> -bois onorais
> -issus/issas onorant


 
Spanish:

Honrar
- honro
- honras
- honra
- honramos
- honráis
- honran.


----------



## Pivra

how did Latin turned into these languages anyway???....


----------



## vince

From wikipedia:

_All Romance languages descend from Vulgar Latin, the language of soldiers, settlers, and slaves of the Roman Empire, which was substantially different from the Classical Latin of the Roman literati. Between 200 BC and 100 AD, the expansion of the Empire, coupled with administrative and educational policies of Rome, made Vulgar Latin the dominant native language over a wide area spanning from the Iberian Peninsula to the Western coast of the Black Sea. During the Empire's decadence and after its collapse and fragmentation in 5th century, Vulgar Latin began to evolve independently within each local area, and eventually diverged into dozens of distinct languages._


----------



## Juri

I'm convinced it is Italian.(But don't know about Portuguese)
A curiosity: Latin teaches us to use correctly the comma.There have been many phrases with dual meaning, depending of the right position of the comma.One is:
Ibis redibis, non morieris in bello.=If you return, you will not die in war.
Ibis redibis non, morieris in bello.= If you don't return, you will die in war.


----------



## Outsider

j3st3r said:
			
		

> But I am aware of one decisive feature which distinguishes Romanian from all other Romance languages and that is the article which goes behind the noun.
> 
> But I am not certain whether this is a slavic influence...


It's a feature common to many languages of the Balcans. Not all similarities between languages are genetic: _Sprachbund_.


----------



## laurika

hi, well, giving the answer to the question put at the heading: the Latin as already told is "mother" for Neolatin or Roman languages: Italian, Spanish, French, Portugese, Romanian. All of them developed from Latin, as VINCE wrote, and many non-Roman languages were influenced by LAtin: in terms od vocabulary, or grammatical features, or morphology, and pronunciation. In Slovak language we find: orať that means to plough, and comes from arare, and many other words. I find it very easy to learn Italian, as well as many words are of Latin origin, often the only thing I have to do is to change the suffix. But only talking about words. 
I´d say, in my opinion, the closest language to Latin in terms of vocabulary is Italian. But all of the European languages are more or less influenced by Latin thanks to historical facts that made the Latin spread also beyond the boundaries od Europe.

bye


----------



## Brazilian dude

diegodbs said:
			
		

> Spanish:
> 
> Honrar
> - honro
> - honras
> - honra
> - honramos
> - honráis
> - honran.


In Portuguese:
Honrar
honro
honras
honra
honramos
honrais
honram

I think Italian is the closest to Latin in terms of vocabulary, but I have the impression Portuguese verbs are the closest to Latin. 

Brazilian dude


----------



## kamome

I need to mostly agree to this: I am italian and a teacher of linguistics and language philosophy, my peculiar "technical/phonetical" studies' domain in glottology are the neo-latin idioms and languages, and I underline once more that the main and "most respectful to latin" speakings are to be found among the "minor neolatin languages" and in a wide amount of "dialects" - although this last definition can NEVER be considered correct in some 85% of the cases, being the dialect a modification/corruption of a MOTHER SPEAKING, whereas a LANGUAGE has a newborn grammar founded on the common MOTHER, but actually becoming a NEW L2...anyway, IMHO, italian seems to be the MAIN daughter to such a mother, even if french tenses and CONSECUTIO TEMPORUM are sometimes nearer to the latin "division/sequence of time". 



			
				I love translating said:
			
		

> Once my cousin (who is a priest) and I were talking about Latin, as I was wondering if he agreed that Latin was one of the most difficult languages to learn. During our conversation, he mentioned that when priests are sent to small towns where no Italian is spoken or if the priest does not speak Italian, the priest would speak Latin and that way be able to communicate with the townspeople.
> 
> Given this, I would say Italian is the language that shares the most words with Latin, but would really like to hear the opinion of an Italian native.
> 
> ILT


 
​


----------



## Qcumber

Among all Romance languages, French is the remotest from Latin because of the strong Celtic background and the stong Germanic influence.


----------



## vince

How about Romanian? It also looks really different from Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Occitan, and Italian (although the one it is least farthest from is Italian). I think it's the Slavic and Finno-Ugric influence.


----------



## Juri

Contacting Rumanians during Congresses,I came out that in the ancient Roman province Dacia, which became in the 6th/7th century a Romanic island in a Slavic sea, Latin was spoken.Of course it has been influenced by Slavic languages only in a not big vocabulary level. Slavic languages f.i.don't know article as Rumanian,Italian, French, Spanish,Portuguese.But did'nt Latin have article? Partially true. 
The italian definite articles "il,lo,la" come from Latin:_ille pater, illa mater,_ in ages transformed in _il pater, la mater._

Finno-ungric is only Hungarian and Finnic.


----------



## vince

estonian is also Finno-Ugric, as well as some minority languages spoken in northern Russia.

I believe Bulgaro-Macedonian also has articles, but this may be a case of Romanian influencing Slavic. But the fact that the article is placed after the noun instead of before the noun in other Romance languages is very peculiar.


----------



## linguist786

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Just thinking of the easiest phrases. Everyone understands them and these are the first ones I learned in Latin:
> 
> Britannia insula est.
> (noun) (object) (verb)
> 
> Great Britan is an island.
> 
> ----------------------------
> 
> Errare humanum est.
> (noun) (object) (verb)
> 
> To err is human.
> 
> ----------------------------
> 
> Is there any language out there that uses exactly the same structure?


Not that this has got anything to do with Latin, but Hindi and Gujarati has structure like that. (But i don't see how they're related!! maybe, you never know!)


----------



## jester.

vince said:
			
		

> estonian is also Finno-Ugric, as well as some minority languages spoken in northern Russia.
> 
> I believe Bulgaro-Macedonian also has articles, but this may be a case of Romanian influencing Slavic. But the fact that the article is placed after the noun instead of before the noun in other Romance languages is very peculiar.



@ juri:  I have to say that vince is absolutely right about the two points.


----------



## Outsider

Juri said:
			
		

> Contacting Rumanians during Congresses,I came out that in the ancient Roman province Dacia, which became in the 6th/7th century a Romanic island in a Slavic sea, Latin was spoken.Of course it has been influenced by Slavic languages only in a not big vocabulary level. Slavic languages f.i.don't know article as Rumanian,Italian, French, Spanish,Portuguese.But did'nt Latin have article? Partially true.
> The italian definite articles "il,lo,la" come from Latin:_ille pater, illa mater,_ in ages transformed in _il pater, la mater._
> 
> Finno-ungric is only Hungarian and Finnic.


Latin had no definite article. The definite articles of Romance languages are derived from demonstratives.

Slavic languages of the Balcanic _Sprachbund_, however, do have definite articles.


----------



## robbie_SWE

I don't know if it has anything to do with it, but Nordic languages put the definitive article after the noun, similar to Romanian. 

Swedish
en hund (a dog) = hunden (the dog)
en bil (a car) = bilen (the car)

How the Romanian language received this is an enigma. In my opinion, Italian and Romanian are closest to Latin. Because Romanian is my first language, it took me only a couple of months to learn Italian. N.B. only 10 % of Romanian vocabulary comes from Slavic languages and this number is decreasing. 

Cogito ergo sum ;-)


----------



## jester.

robbie_SWE said:
			
		

> How the Romanian language received this is an enigma.



Not quite. It's a typical feature of Balkan languages. You might want to have a look at the Wikipedia article on the Romanian language in order to find something about that phenomenon.


----------



## 涼宮

I agree that Italian is the closest to Latin in vocabulary, but Romanian in grammar, What about Occitan? It is a romance language too, How different it can be?


----------



## Alacritas

Cnaeius said:
			
		

> In my opinion, in order to evaluate a global closeness to Latin, a lot of considerations have to be done. The main ones:
> 
> *Phonetic* considerations
> 
> *Vocabulary* (the topic actually is on this)
> 
> *Morphology*
> 
> *Syntax*



This is really important, because a language could change drastically on a phonological level but be much more conservative as regards morphology/syntax/vocabulary. A good example would be Icelandic (which I know little about, so please correct me if I make a mistake here): from what I've heard, native Icelandic speakers can read Old Norse texts with relative ease (relative, compared to other speakers of North Germanic languages), but the pronunciation is radically different.

At any rate, comparing any of the Romance languages to Classical Latin is somewhat silly; it makes more sense to compare them to Vulgar Latin, as that is their more recent common ancestor. 

So if we're to look at each one of the above domains individually, comparing them with Vulgar Latin:

*Phonetics *-- that's probably Sardinian or Italian. They both obviously changed, but when compared to the others, they seem much closer. 

*Vocabulary* -- that would also be to Sardinian or Italian. Probably more sardinian. When I try to read Sardinian it always reminds me of Latin, much more than other Romance languages I don't know but try to read anyway. That's to say, when I try to read a Romance language that I haven't studied previously, my knowledge of other Romance languages helps more than my (smaller) knowledge of Latin. However, when I attempt to read Sardinian, my Latin knowledge seems to play a bigger role. This is obviously quite subjective...

*Morphology* -- this would go to either Romanian or Sardinian, considering the declensions in Romanian and the verb paradigms of Sardinian.

*Syntax* -- you got me, I have no clue which would be closer. My gut feeling tells me Sardinian, just from the bit of reading I've tried to do in it. Italian seems much closer to the popular Romance languages (French, Spanish, Portuguese, etc.).


Overall then I would go with Sardinian, with Italian (probably not standard, but some dialect, but that's just a feeling, not a very informed opinion) coming in second.

PS 
What would be fascinating is for a Romance specialist (who also is well versed in Latin, as the good ones should be) to come along and either tell us all what's up, or spell out how a formal study of the relationship between the Neo-Latin languages and Vulgar and/or Classical Latin would be done.


----------



## Kevin Beach

It's interesting to turn the question round and ask: How much (if any) of each modern Romance language would a native of the city of Rome (not the Provinces), used to Vulgar Latin, be able to understand in (a) the speech; and (b) the (upper case) writing?

My guess is that Italian would still come first, but I suspect that English would figure somewhere down the list so far as the writing is concerned.


----------



## IoanS

Romanian is the closest language to Latin. Although Italian is a close second, many only consider it the closest to classic Latin due to the fact the Latin was derived from the Latins in ancient Rome. Romanian shares many of the same grammar and vocabulary rules as classic Latin and the only reason why people forget to mention that is because Romanian is an "island" language, meaning that it has been cut off from its language relatives due to the breakup of the Roman Empire and constant warfare in between the areas of Italy and Romania. Romania is bordered by a few Slavic countries but it has only acquired few to no slavic loan words.
Example: from above written post-Romanian: Român este cel mai apropiat de limba latină. Deşi italian este un apropiat al doilea, multi considera doar cel mai apropiat de clasic latin, datorită faptului latin a fost derivat de la latinii din Roma antică. Romanian parts multe din aceeaşi gramatică şi vocabular ca regulile clasice Latină şi singurul motiv pentru care oamenii au uitat să menţionez că este românesc, deoarece este o "insulă" limbaj, ceea ce înseamnă că a fost tăiat de la rudele limba din cauza destramarea Imperiul Roman şi constantă în război între zone din Italia şi România. România se învecinează cu câteva ţări slave, dar le-a dobândit doar cateva cuvinte pentru a nu împrumut slave.
Latin:Romanian proxima est sermo Latin. Cum prope est Italian Secundo modo pluribus Existimo proxima classic Latin debetur, factum ex Latinis Latinos Strabonis. Romanian partes plures idem Grammatices praecepta vocabulary cum Latina classic Nee ob obliviscatur populus mentionem Nulla Romanian est "Insula" Language, id qui quod periit ab fratribus eius sermone debetur breakup of Romani regni constantibus bellis inter areas in Italia Romania. Romania est terminus Slavic paucis regionibus, sed acquirere tam paucis verbis mutuo Slavic.


----------



## Laranja

I find it tremendously difficult to see Romanian as the closest language to Latin. It's true that is has preserved the declensions, but the vocabulary seems quite different, or at least the words have suffered strong modifications.

I am able to comprehend, in a bigger or smaller degree, most of romance languages (Castillan, Catalan, French, Italian, Occitan, Sardinian...), and my understanding has improved since I began to take Latin classes. But I can't understand Romanian. But maybe it's only a matter to get used to...


----------



## relativamente

This question about which language is closest to Latin is very difficult or imposible to answer and all things i read here seem to me just personal opinions but not based in serious studies.All romance languages have preserved some features of Latin and have changed others. The vocabulary of Romanian has for example the word "alb" to say white which is exactly like classical Latin albus, while  other romance have changed to a non latin word derived from Germanic blank.Other words have changed their meaning like the word for man is "barbat" literally meaning "having a beard".
Regarding grammar, it is true that some cases have been preserved to a certain extend better than in other language and also the neuter gender, beeing somne new words neuter like taxi,whereas car is femenine.The plural neuter ending uri, example taxiuri is not typical of Latin.
But on the other hand de future is not from classical latin what also happens in other romance but in Romanian is different from the others and more complex, since there is more than one way to form the future.Also the subjunctive mode is almost desappeared and only applies to the third persons.Also the infinitive is different.


----------



## Copperknickers

Laranja said:


> I find it tremendously difficult to see Romanian as the closest language to Latin. It's true that is has preserved the declensions, but the vocabulary seems quite different, or at least the words have suffered strong modifications.
> 
> I am able to comprehend, in a bigger or smaller degree, most of romance languages (Castillan, Catalan, French, Italian, Occitan, Sardinian...), and my understanding has improved since I began to take Latin classes. But I can't understand Romanian. But maybe it's only a matter to get used to...



I can understand quite a bit being versed in French, Italian and Latin. A lot of the vocabulary is different in terms of different words, eg 'apropiat' is pretty clear in its Latin derivation, moreso than the French 'proche' to 'proxima'. Neither is more seperate from Latin, just the idiom has drifted more in Romanian.


----------



## timpeac

Copperknickers said:


> I can understand quite a bit being versed in French, Italian and Latin. A lot of the vocabulary is different in terms of different words, eg 'apropiat' is pretty clear in its Latin derivation, moreso than the French 'proche' to 'proxima'. Neither is more seperate from Latin, just the idiom has drifted more in Romanian.


But your point is still valid - the question was Modern language closest to Latin in terms of _vocabulary. _And so, in this instance, French would be closer than Romanian.


----------



## Ben Jamin

To all participants in this discussion: do not write what you think, the "subjective impression" may trick you. Try to find out the facts. They can be found in books and on the Internet. Start to look for "Swadesh list for the Romance langauges". (Swadesh list is a list of principal words in a language). Count the words in Latin and in the other languages. Search also for other sources.
And, the sources I have read state that Sardinian dialects are closest to Latin of all languages, both in respect to the number of words of Latin origin, to the pronunciation, and to the verbal endings.
Read also the Wikipedia article about Sardinian.


----------



## djfil

Just making a contribution:



IoanS said:


> Romanian is the closest language to Latin. Although Italian is a close second, many only consider it the closest to classic Latin due to the fact the Latin was derived from the Latins in ancient Rome. Romanian shares many of the same grammar and vocabulary rules as classic Latin and the only reason why people forget to mention that is because Romanian is an "island" language, meaning that it has been cut off from its language relatives due to the breakup of the Roman Empire and constant warfare in between the areas of Italy and Romania. Romania is bordered by a few Slavic countries but it has only acquired few to no slavic loan words.
> Example: from above written post-Romanian: Român este cel mai apropiat de limba latină. Deşi italian este un apropiat al doilea, multi considera doar cel mai apropiat de clasic latin, datorită faptului latin a fost derivat de la latinii din Roma antică. Romanian parts multe din aceeaşi gramatică şi vocabular ca regulile clasice Latină şi singurul motiv pentru care oamenii au uitat să menţionez că este românesc, deoarece este o "insulă" limbaj, ceea ce înseamnă că a fost tăiat de la rudele limba din cauza destramarea Imperiul Roman şi constantă în război între zone din Italia şi România. România se învecinează cu câteva ţări slave, dar le-a dobândit doar cateva cuvinte pentru a nu împrumut slave.
> Latin:Romanian proxima est sermo Latin. Cum prope est Italian Secundo modo pluribus Existimo proxima classic Latin debetur, factum ex Latinis Latinos Strabonis. Romanian partes plures idem Grammatices praecepta vocabulary cum Latina classic Nee ob obliviscatur populus mentionem Nulla Romanian est "Insula" Language, id qui quod periit ab fratribus eius sermone debetur *breakup* of Romani regni constantibus bellis inter areas in Italia Romania. Romania est terminus Slavic paucis regionibus, sed acquirere tam paucis verbis mutuo Slavic.



That doesn't belong there... Which makes me feel like mechanical translation...Anyway

From English to Portuguese (could be): Romeno é o sermão mais próximo ao Latim. Em proposito é seguido pelo italiano, considerado por muitos mais próximo do Latim clássico devido, ao facto deste derivar dos latinos na Roma antiga. O Romeno partilha muitas das regras gramáticais e vocabulário com Latim clássico e a única razão pela qual  se obliviam as populações de mencionar, é que o romeno é uma insular linguagem, o que permitiu separar-se dos sermões fraternos, devido à dissolução do Império Romano em constante guerra nas inter-áreas Italianas e Romenas. Roménia é términa com regiões eslavas, mas adquiriu tão poucas ou nenhumas palavras eslavas.

I speak Portuguese, Spanish, French, English, and am currently learning Italian. I do feel curious about Romanian and i have had some contact with it (it certainly does not sound close to latin). Also Italian is more between French and Spanish.
I would say that those who speak closer now a days to latin, would be Brazilians (they do not speak has European Portuguese), which might seem weird, but actually they have conserved more the phonetics from older European Portuguese speech, and given that they can share everything else from Portuguese.
And i would also would like to add that no one speaks like in the translated text, currently at least, it was adapted to use words more similar to those in the latin text. Nevertheless it's semantically correct, about syntax well it was 2 years ago but this is technical detail.

I have never heard anything about sardinian, though it seems closer than any other. Maybe someone could translate that text into sardinian and then others could have an idea.

Anyway, gl.


----------



## Ben Jamin

"Romania is bordered by a few Slavic countries but it has only acquired *few to **no** (**?!)** slavic *loan words."

Facts please, not nationalistic propaganda, please! Give the numbers. please!


----------



## robbie_SWE

Ben Jamin said:


> "Romania is bordered by a few Slavic countries but it has only acquired *few to **no** (**?!)**slavic *loan words."
> 
> Facts please, not nationalistic propaganda, please! Give the numbers. please!



    I agree Ben Jamin, the quote is strongly nationalistic and inaccurate. 

At most 85 % of modern Romanian vocabulary is from Latin (be it directly from Latin, through French and Italian or internal development), while appr. 10 % is of Slavic origin (mostly from Old Church Slavonic and Bulgarian)*. The remaining 5 % of the vocabulary is of Greek, Turkish, Hungarian etc. descent. 

If I'm to return to the subject, all Romance languages have more or less deviated from Latin (several linguists have analysed this development). Personally, I believe that Italian and Sardinian are closest to Vulgar Latin. Nonetheless, if we could bring back somebody from the Roman Empire they would almost certainly not be able to communicate with any Romance speaking person.

*N.B. a large part of this category is considered archaic by contemporary Romanians so this category is diminishing. 


Best Regards, 

 robbie


----------



## Ben Jamin

robbie_SWE said:


> I
> *N.B. a large part of this category is considered archaic by contemporary Romanians so this category is diminishing.



According to what I read in many sources this happens due to creation of latinate neologisms. 
According to Wikipedia, however, one fifth of everyday vocabulary in Romanian is still of Slavic origin.
Spaniards, on the other hand, have not tried to get rid neither of their Germanic or Arabic based vocabulary.


----------



## francisgranada

Examples that can give you some idea:

The conjugation of the verb "to sing" (present indicative):
Latin: canto cantas cantat cantamus cantatis cantant
Spanish: canto cantas canta cantamos cantais cantan
Portuguese: canto cantas canta cantamos cantais cantam
Italian: canto canti canta cantiamo cantate cantano
Sardinian: canto cantas cantat cantamus cantais cantant
Romanian: cânt cânţi cântă cântăm cântaţi cântă

The Lord's prayer:
Latin:
Pater noster qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum. Adveniat regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua in caelo et in terra. Panem nostrum cottidianum da nobis hodie. Et dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Et ne nos inducas in temptationem, sed libera nos a malo.  

Spanish:
Padre nuestro que estás en los cielos, santificado sea tu nombre. Venga tu Reino. Sea hecha tu voluntad, como en el cielo así en la tierra. Danos hoy nuestro pan de cada día (cotidiano), y perdónanos nuestras deudas, como también nosotros perdonamos a nuestros deudores. Y no nos metas en tentación, más líbranos del mal.

Portuguese:
Pai nosso que estás no céu, santificado seja o Vosso nome. Venha a nos o vosso reino. Seja feita a Vossa vontade, assim na terra, como no céu. O pão nosso de cada dia nos dá hoje. Perdoa-nos as nossas ofensas, assim como nós perdoamos a quem nos tem ofendidos. E não nos dexais cair em tentação, mas livra-nos do Mal.

Italian:
Padre nostro che sei nei cieli, sia santificato il tuo nome. Venga il tuo regno. Sia fatta la tua volontà, come in cielo così in terra. Dacci oggi il nostro pane quotidiano, rimetti a noi i nostri debiti, come noi li rimettiamo ai nostri debitori. E non ci indurre in tentazione, ma liberaci dal male.  

Sardinian Logudorese (19th century)
Babbu nostru qui ses in sos chelos, santificadu siat su nomen tou. Benzat a nois su regnu tou. Facta siat sa voluntade tua, comente in su chelu, et in sa terra. Su pane nostru de ogni die danoslu hoe, et perdonanos sos peccados nostros, comente et nois perdonamus ad sos inimigos nostros. Et non nos lexaes a ruere in tentatione, ma lìberanos dai male.

Romanian:
Tatăl nostru, Care eşti în ceruri, sfinţească-se numele Tău; Vie împărăţia Ta; facă-se voia Ta, precum în cer asa şi pe pămînt. Pîinea noastră cea spre fiinţă dă-ne-o nouă astăzi; Şi ne iartă nouă greşelile noastre, precum şi noi iertăm greşiţilor noştri; Şi nu ne duce pe noi în ispită, ci ne izbăveşte de cel rău.

(I don't have the feeling that the Romanian would be the nearest to Latin)


----------



## Penyafort

I agree with those who say either Sardinian or Italian, although both have also non-Latin substrata and posterior foreign influence. Not that there hasn't been Celtic, Arabic or Germanic influence in them too, but I'd say that, statistically, they probably have more Latin-based words than the rest of Western languages. Romanian has a large part of its lexicon derived from languages from Eastern Europe. 

By the closest I'm referring to quantity. Because there are many cases of older Latin terms being maintained in the peripheria (Portuguese/Asturian/Spanish and Romanian) while being changed in more central Romance languages for a later equivalent. Examples could be MENSA vs TABULA, FERVERE vs BULLIRE, VERA/VERANUS vs AESTATEM/AESTIVUS, etc, in which the central Italian, French and Catalan use the 2nd one, while the peripheral Portuguese, Spanish and Romanian use the 1st one.


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

IoanS said:


> Romanian is the closest language to Latin. Although Italian is a close second, many only consider it the closest to classic Latin due to the fact the Latin was derived from the Latins in ancient Rome. Romanian shares many of the same grammar and vocabulary rules as classic Latin and the only reason why people forget to mention that is because Romanian is an "island" language, meaning that it has been cut off from its language relatives due to the breakup of the Roman Empire and constant warfare in between the areas of Italy and Romania. Romania is bordered by a few Slavic countries but it has only acquired few to no slavic loan words.
> Example: from above written post-Romanian: Român este cel mai apropiat de limba latină. Deşi italian este un apropiat al doilea, multi considera doar cel mai apropiat de clasic latin, datorită faptului latin a fost derivat de la latinii din Roma antică. Romanian parts multe din aceeaşi gramatică şi vocabular ca regulile clasice Latină şi singurul motiv pentru care oamenii au uitat să menţionez că este românesc, deoarece este o "insulă" limbaj, ceea ce înseamnă că a fost tăiat de la rudele limba din cauza destramarea Imperiul Roman şi constantă în război între zone din Italia şi România. România se învecinează cu câteva ţări slave, dar le-a dobândit doar cateva cuvinte pentru a nu împrumut slave.
> Latin:Romanian proxima est sermo Latin. Cum prope est Italian Secundo modo pluribus Existimo proxima classic Latin debetur, factum ex Latinis Latinos Strabonis. Romanian partes plures idem Grammatices praecepta vocabulary cum Latina classic Nee ob obliviscatur populus mentionem Nulla Romanian est "Insula" Language, id qui quod periit ab fratribus eius sermone debetur breakup of Romani regni constantibus bellis inter areas in Italia Romania. Romania est terminus Slavic paucis regionibus, sed acquirere tam paucis verbis mutuo Slavic.



"Few to no" Slavic words appears an exageration to me. Even in this relatively scientific text the Romanian word for "warfare" is of Slavic origin. If I knew something more about the way Romanian phonetics developed I'd probably be able to pick out some more words, and in colloquial Romanian I think even if the number of Slavic loanwords has diminished, those words are quite visible and important: the verb "to love" (a iubi), the noun "love" (dragost... don't know the exact form), the word "time" (vremea), and there are even Slavic suffixes.


----------



## robbie_SWE

Angelo di fuoco said:


> "Few to no" Slavic words appears an exageration to me. Even in this relatively scientific text the Romanian word for "warfare" is of Slavic origin. If I knew something more about the way Romanian phonetics developed I'd probably be able to pick out some more words, and in colloquial Romanian I think even if the number of Slavic loanwords has diminished, those words are quite visible and important: the verb "to love" (a iubi), the noun "love" (dragost*e*... don't know the exact form), the word "time" (vremea), and there are even Slavic suffixes.



Just a minor correction: *timp *is the correct word for "time", *vreme *is most often used when referring to "weather". 

Robbie


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

francisgranada said:


> Romanian:
> Tatăl nostru, Care eşti în ceruri, sfinţească-se numele Tău; Vie împărăţia Ta; facă-se voia Ta, precum în cer asa şi pe pămînt. Pîinea noastră cea spre fiinţă dă-ne-o nouă astăzi; Şi ne iartă nouă greşelile noastre, precum şi noi iertăm greşiţilor noştri; Şi nu ne duce pe noi în ispită, ci ne izbăveşte de cel rău.
> 
> (I don't have the feeling that the Romanian would be the nearest to Latin)



I have the feeling the vocabulary is strongly imbued with words of Slavic origin or such that have received Slavic influence (marked red) that non-Romaninan (and non-Moldavian) native speakers of Romance languages would have great difficulties to understand, whereas I, being a native speaker of a Slavic languages, quite easily identify most of them - even if some of them have changed their meanings.
Maybe I've even missed one or two.


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

robbie_SWE said:


> Just a minor correction: *timp *is the correct word for "time", *vreme *is most often used when referring to "weather".
> 
> Robbie



Thaniks.


----------



## francisgranada

Hello Angelo di fuoco!

An other little correction: _care _is probably not of Slavic origin, but comes from the Latin _qualis _(see also _cer _from _caelum, _i.e. l>r) .  

Also, many words of Latin origin are used in Romanian in a different way/meaning as in Latin and in the other Romance languages. E.g.: pămînt (pavimentum) - terra/tierra,  împărăţia (imperium?) - regnum/regno/reino, rău (reus) - malo/mal/male etc ... And some other words, even if probably of Latin origin, are (at least for me) hardly understandable on a Latin/Romance basis, p.e.: fiinţă, iartă, precum.


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

francisgranada said:


> Hello Angelo di fuoco!
> 
> An other little correction: _care _is probably not of Slavic origin, but comes from the Latin _qualis _(see also _cer _from _caelum, _i.e. l>r) .
> 
> Also, many words of Latin origin are used in Romanian in a different way/meaning as in Latin and in the other Romance languages. E.g.: pămînt (pavimentum) - terra/tierra,  împărăţia (imperium?) - regnum/regno/reino, rău (reus) - malo/mal/male etc ... And some other words, even if probably of Latin origin, are (at least for me) hardly understandable on a Latin/Romance basis, p.e.: fiinţă, iartă, precum.



Now that you say it, I see I got the meaning wrong.

It would be great if some Romanian could give us the meaning of those words. Neither I can get anything out of them even on a Slavic basis.


----------



## robbie_SWE

Angelo di fuoco said:


> Now that you say it, I see I got the meaning wrong.
> 
> It would be great if some Romanian could give us the meaning of those words. Neither I can get anything out of them even on a Slavic basis.



Which words would you like to know the meaning of?


----------



## francisgranada

Another observation: the translation of any text, or the choice of the words, depends also on the person who makes the translation. So, for example, the Spanish and the Italian translations are nearer to each other than it seems at the "first glance". 

An example: the Latin "dimitte" (forgive) is translated to Spanish as "perdona" but in the Italian translation we have "rimetti". In fact, I've seen Italian translations also with the verb "perdona" and on the other hand in Spanish we could also say "remite" (both verbs are of Latin origin). The same is valid for "de cada dia" versus "cotidiano" (both possible in Spanish).

It would be interesting to see the opinion of the native speakers about the mutual understandibilty of the Romance versions of the Paternoster ...

P.S.The catalan version:
Pare nostre del cel, sigui santificat el teu nom. Vingui el teu Regne. Faci’s la teva voluntat, com al cel, així també a la terra. Dóna’ns avui el nostre pa de cada dia; i perdona’ns les nostres ofenses, com també nosaltres hem perdonat els qui ens ofenen; i no deixis que caiguem en la temptació, ans deslliura’ns del maligne.


----------



## robbie_SWE

francisgranada said:


> Another observation: the translation of any text, or the choice of the words, depends also on the person who makes the translation. So, for example, the Spanish and the Italian translations are nearer to each other than it seems at the "first glance".
> 
> An example: the Latin "dimitte" (forgive) is translated to Spanish as "perdona" but in the Italian translation we have "rimetti". In fact, I've seen Italian translations also with the verb "perdona" and on the other hand in Spanish we could also say "remite" (both verbs are of Latin origin). The same is valid for "de cada dia" versus "cotidiano" (both possible in Spanish).
> 
> It would be interesting to see the opinion of the native speakers about the mutual understandibilty of the Romance versions of the Paternoster ...
> 
> P.S.The catalan version:
> Pare nostre del cel, sigui santificat el teu nom. Vingui el teu Regne. Faci’s la teva voluntat, com al cel, així també a la terra. Dóna’ns avui el nostre pa de cada dia; i perdona’ns les nostres ofenses, com també nosaltres hem perdonat els qui ens ofenen; i no deixis que caiguem en la temptació, ans deslliura’ns del maligne.



The same thing could be said about the Romanian version as well; it strikes me how it somewhat is outdated. 

The one chosen as an example was older than the one used today according to _Evanghelia după Matei 6:9-13_: 

Tatăl nostru Care ești în ceruri, sfințească-se numele Tău, vie împărăția Ta, fie voia Ta, precum în cer așa și pe Pământ. Pâinea noastră cea spre ființă, dă-ne-o nouă astăzi și ne iartă nouă păcatele noastre precum iertăm și noi greșiților noștri și nu ne duce pe noi în ispită ci ne mântuiește de cel rău.

Robbie


----------



## francisgranada

robbie_SWE said:


> ...  The one chosen as an example was older than the one used today according to _Evanghelia după Matei 6:9-13_:
> 
> Tatăl nostru Care ești în ceruri, sfințească-se numele Tău, vie împărăția Ta, fie voia Ta, precum în cer așa și pe Pământ. Pâinea noastră cea spre ființă, dă-ne-o nouă astăzi și ne iartă nouă păcatele noastre precum iertăm și noi greșiților noștri și nu ne duce pe noi în ispită ci ne mântuiește de cel rău.
> 
> Robbie



I agree, of course, unfortunatelly I don't speak Romanian nor Catalan ... I've given the version I've found on the internet some years ago. However, I cannot see significant differences between the two versions from the point of view of our discussion. The main differences, I can notice at the moment, are: 

- some changes in orthography, e.g.  pâinea instead of pîinea, pământ instead of pămînt
- _păcatele _instead of _greşelile _(substitution of a Slavic word with a word of Romance origin)
- _mântuiește _instead of _izbăveşte _(substitution of a Slavic word with a word of Hungarian origin)

P.S. Thank you for the actual version of the Tatăl nostru.


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

robbie_SWE said:


> Which words would you like to know the meaning of?



The same ones whose meaning francisgranada wasn't able to tell: fiinţă, iartă, precum.


----------



## Favara

Just to complete:


francisgranada said:


> Examples that can give you some idea:
> The conjugation of the verb "to sing" (present indicative):
> Latin: canto cantas cantat cantamus cantatis cantant



Catalan: _canto/cante/cant cantes canta cantem canteu canten_



> The Lord's prayer:
> Latin:
> Pater noster qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum. Adveniat regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua in caelo et in terra. Panem nostrum cottidianum da nobis hodie. Et dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Et ne nos inducas in temptationem, sed libera nos a malo.


_Pare nostre qui ets en el cel, santifique's el teu nom. Avinga el teu regne. Faça's la teua voluntat en el cel i en la terra. El pa nostre de cada dia (quotidià) dóna'ns-el hui. I perdona'ns els nostres deutes, com nosaltres (nós) perdonem als nostres deutors. I no ens dugues (indugues) a la temptació, sinó lliura'ns del mal._
Words in parenthesis are somewhat cultivated/archaic. May have some dialectal tendence towards Southern Valencian, but everything's correct atleast in the AVL standard.
This is in no way an "official" translation used in churches and such, since the church doesn't use Catalan here in the south (maybe in Catalonia they do, not sure).


----------



## francisgranada

Hi Favara.

From the the point of view of a native Catalan speaker, which of the Romance versions of the Paternoster (including Latin) could you spontaneousely understand the best and which the worst?

( E.g.: 1. Catalan,  2. Spanish,  3. Portuguese,  4. ... in descending order)

P.S. The French version (maybe not the official one ...):
Notre Père, qui es aux cieux, que ton nom soit sanctifié. Que ton règne vienne. Que ta volonté soit faite sur la terre comme au ciel. Donne-nous aujourdhui notre pain de ce jour. Pardonne-nous nos offences comme nous pardonnons aussi à ceux qui nous ont offensés. Et ne nous soumets pas à la tentation, mais délivre-nous du mal.


----------



## Favara

I'd say...
1.Catalan 2.Spanish 3.French 4.Portuguese 5.Italian 6.Sardinian 7.Romanian

Some notes:
-Obviously I'm not a monolingual speaker, my level of Spanish is "almost native". I also have bilingual Catalan-French conversations often.
-I'm not all that sure about 4/5/6. Could understand all of them, word by word (except "benzat" in Sardinian). So I just picked the ones I could read faster.
-I've never studied Latin, yet it seemed way more intelligible than Romanian.
-I think we should try this with audio. Phonetics has a huge influence on mutual intelligibility, and all written Romance languages look almost the same anyway.

Oh, and here's a few more, taken from wikipedia:


> *Dalmatian (extinct)
> *Tuota nuester, che te sante intel sil, sait santificuot el naun to. Vigna el raigno to. Sait fuot la voluntuot toa, coisa in sil, coisa in tiara. Duote costa dai el pun nuester cotidiun. E remetiaj le nuestre debete, coisa nojiltri remetiaime a i nuestri debetuar. E naun ne menur in tentatiaun, miu deleberiajne dal mal.
> 
> *Friulian
> *Pari nestri che tu sês in cîl, che al sedi santifiât il to nom. Che al vegni il to ream. Che e sedi fate la tô volontât sicu in cîl cussì ancje in tiere. Danus vuê il nestri pan cotidian. E pardoninus i nestris debits sicu ancje nô ur ai pardonìn ai nestris debitôrs. E no stâ menânus in tentazion, ma liberinus dal mâl.
> 
> *Istro-Romanian
> *Ciace nostru car le şti en cer, neca se sveta nomelu teu. Neca venire craliestvo to. Neca fie volia ta, cum en cer, aşa şi pre pemânt. Pera nostre saca zi de nam astez. Odproste nam dutzan, ca şi noi odprostim a lu nostri dutznici. Neca nu na tu vezi en napastovanie, neca na zbăveşte de zvaca slabe.


On the list I'd put Friulian after Italian (not by much), Dalmatian after that, and Istro-Romanian at the end (even after Romanian).

*Occitan* would come right after Catalan, to me it looks just like Catalan but with an archaic feeling; while reading, I feel like I should be raising a sword or something.


> Paire nòstre que sès dins lo cèl,
> Que ton nom se santifique, que ton règne nos avenga,
> Que ta volontat se faga sus la tèrra coma dins lo cèl.
> Dona-nos uèi nòstre pan de cada jorn,
> Perdona-nos nòstres deutes
> Coma nosautres perdonam a nòstres debitors
> E fai que tombem pas dins la temptacion
> Mas deslliura-nos del mal.


----------



## robbie_SWE

Angelo di fuoco said:


> The same ones whose meaning francisgranada wasn't able to tell: fiinţă, iartă, precum.



Ok, here are the translations:

*fiinţă *= "(human) being"; from the verb *a fi* (from Latin _sum_, _*fui_, _*fire_) + suffix *-in**ţă* or Latin _fientia_.

*iartă *= "forgive", second person singular imperative tense of *a ierta*; from Latin _libertare_.

*precum *= "as well as, in addition to"; from *pre-* (from Latin _per-_) + *cum *(from Latin _quomo(do)_).

Hope it helped! Let me know if there are any other words in need of translation. 

Robbie


----------



## Penyafort

francisgranada said:


> From the the point of view of a native Catalan speaker, which of the Romance versions of the Paternoster (including Latin) could you spontaneousely understand the best and which the worst?
> 
> ( E.g.: 1. Catalan,  2. Spanish,  3. Portuguese,  4. ... in descending order)





Favara said:


> I'd say...
> 1.Catalan 2.Spanish 3.French 4.Portuguese 5.Italian 6.Sardinian 7.Romanian



In a theoretical world, in which Catalans were monolingual and they didn't know either Spanish or French, the two closest languages would clearly be Occitan (in its Southern Languedocian variety) and Aragonese (in its Eastern variety). Quite logical, after all, as they are the ones bordering with the Catalan-speaking area.


----------



## Favara

Yes, I think the order would then be Catalan>Occitan(Lengadocian)>Occitan(Other)/Aragonese>Spanish/French/Italian>Portuguese>Sardinian/Rhetoromance>Romanian


----------



## francisgranada

And where would you put the Latin ? 
(I guess before Romanian)


----------



## Favara

Yes, exactly.
And that's strange, because I've been able to have bilingual "simple" conversations with Romanian speakers, it's not THAT different from others. But when I read it I have to check a dictionary like every 2~3 words, might be because of orthography or something.


----------



## gabone

I am a native romanian speaker. I usually do not need subtitles while watching italian movies. I am able to understand 60% to 70% of the spoken words. The other I can guess. I have to say that I did not study italian language in school. This usually happens with spanish, but in a smaller amount. 
My former boss is italian. We were usually talking in english at work. Sometimes I was not able to find the right word in english to express myself, so I had to say it in romanian. We were both surprised that the romanian word was identical or similar to the italian one. I proposed him in a meeting that each of us should speak their native language and try to have a conversation to see if we can understand each other. Unfortunately we did not get the chance, but it would have been interesting.
I had a latin teacher in school that traveled to former Yugoslavia. She met there a group of aromanians and she tried to speak to them. She said that she was able to make a small conversation, but they understood better when she switched to latin. 
I relative of mine emigrated to Italy (Sicily) a couple of years ago. He did not even finish high school so I do not expect him to have much knowledge of foreign languages. He said that he was able to understand italian but not sicilian language. 
Some time ago we met a british couple in Greece. When they heard us the first time speaking romanian, they thought we were italians. I can say that, at that time, I was wearing a cap that said A.S. Roma. 

I read this topic and found it interesting, so I thought you might find this useful.
Gabriel


----------



## Mezzofanti

Spanish or Portuguese morphology is significantly closer to Latin than Italian is. All these claims that Italian is closest to Latin are based on assumptions or wishful thinking. Those of us who learnt latin first and then turned to tackle Spanish and Italian know which of those languages our Latin gave greatest help with.


----------



## wandle

Morphological change is not the only criterion by which the question might be addressed. Another is the number or proportion of words derived from Latin. Another is degree of change in grammar, that is, the retention or loss of Latin syntax.
I should have thought all these were measurable; and that they have probably already been assessed in one academic study or another.
My expectation, based on my uneven knowledge of French, Italian and Spanish, would be that on the three criteria taken together, Italian would be the closest.


----------



## Mezzofanti

Wandle, French isn't in it. As for vocabulary derivation, nearly all Italian and Spanish words are from Latin. Syntax is very hard to evaluate because Latin syntax itself gradually evolved and no modern romance language has syntax ressembling that of classical Latin. In my view that leaves us with morphology.  Spanish looks more like Latin than Italian does and its verbs conjugate more like Latin than Italian verbs do.


----------



## wandle

As I indicated, my knowledge of French, Italian and Spanish is uneven. I am aware that Italian retains more of Latin syntax than French. I am unable to make that comparison with Spanish.

Again, as I said, I expect the matter has been studied by scholars and the answer is probably to be found in the literature. If it is not in the literature, we have to wait for such studies to be done. Until such an answer materialises, my expectation would be that Italian is closest.

To make it clear once more: as I have shown, I am not in a position to judge and I have not offered a judgement.


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

Mezzofanti said:


> Wandle, French isn't in it. As for vocabulary derivation, nearly all Italian and Spanish words are from Latin. Syntax is very hard to evaluate because Latin syntax itself gradually evolved and no modern romance language has syntax ressembling that of classical Latin. In my view that leaves us with morphology.  Spanish looks more like Latin than Italian does and its verbs conjugate more like Latin than Italian verbs do.



Sorry to contradict you, your Eminence, but that's not as clear as this. From the point of view of one who first learned French and then almost at the same time started both Italian and Spanish (and later on Catalan & some Portuguese, without ever bothering to seriously studying Latin):
- Spanish, as all the Ibero-Romance languages, have a big part of their vocabulary coming from Arabic, most notably half of the nouns (my personal feeling) beginning with a. Southern Italian regional languages have more borrowings from Arabic than Standard Italian. E. g. Spanish ataúd & féretro (with a neat preference for the Arabism), Catalan taút & fèretre (I think there's also a preference for the Arabic loan word, but I didn't check), Napoletan tavuto (don't know if there's feretro), Italian feretro.
- Consonant sonorisation in Spanish is much more pronounced than in Italian and often leads to the disappearance of consonants, especially in intervocalic position (cf. Italian vedere, credere and Spanish ver, creer).
- Initial Latin and sometimes also intervocalic f often becomes silent h (e. g. Spanish humo, almohada - Port. fumo, almofada). Italian has fumo, but no almohada, only guanciale & cuscino (Spanish has cojín).
- It¡s easier to recognise Latin ovum, ova in Italian uovo, uova than in Spanish huevo, huevos, iocum in gioco than in juego and investire (equal in Latin and Italian) than embestir.

- In several aspects, Italian verbs conjugate more like Latin verbs, not the Spanish ones. Spanish has got rid of many - most - of the irregularities in the participles and the _pretérito indefinido_, whereas Italian has retained many, actually, most of the irregularities both in the _passato remoto_ and _participio perfetto_ forms. There are many vowel changes that make it uneasy to recognise some verbs (e. g. the e-i change in many -ir verbs, the aforementioned o-ue change and some others)
- Unfortunately, nowadays in Italian the 1st person plural present endings of both indicative and subjunctive/conjunctive mood are the same, which wasn't the case until at least the 15th century. Here Spanish is clearly nearer to Latin than Italian.
- Spanish has the fully-fledged negative imperative using the subjunctive forms, whereas Italian has retained it only for essere (non sii, sia, siamo, siate, siano), the negative imperative of the 2nd person singular using the infinitive and the subjunctive/conjunctive for the 2nd person plural being facultative (and rarely used, although I heard my Italian lecturer at the university use it quite often).


----------



## punctuate

wandle said:


> Morphological change is not the only criterion by which the question might be addressed. Another is the number or proportion of words derived from Latin. Another is degree of change in grammar, that is, the retention or loss of Latin syntax.
> I should have thought all these were measurable; and that they have probably already been assessed in one academic study or another.


Is the proportion of words derived from Latin really measurable? (I am not talking of the other two items, like the topic starter did not). Here, what puzzles is not the absence of measures, but their abundance. I could measure it by counting words in a dictionary; this way, the measure depends on the dictionary to choose. I could choose an already written dictionary or try to compose a new one using a specific principle. I could measure it by counting instances of words in a text: this way, the measure depends on the text to choose. All of those measures are possible, but it is not clear which question they answer. Also, even if we make the three items measurable, the three measures can't be put together, it would be like summing meters and kilograms. When trying to make a judgement, the first thing to do, I think, is to define the question: namely, to say, what does the question matter for? And then choose means to answer it or decide that an answer is impossible. I suppose, when people ask such a question, it usually matters for their feeling of similarity of two abstractions, of two languages, which feeling is a result of the mind's falling into a certain state ("When I try to read Sardinian it always reminds me of Latin", see #45) and is not defined, in the real life, by such statistic measures, which do not in fact matter for anything practical and well seen.


----------



## wandle

punctuate said:


> Is the proportion of words derived from Latin really measurable?


Yes. Dictionaries regularly tell us how many entries they contain. Granted, there are different ways of measuring, depending on how we define a word, but dictionaries nevertheless manage to convey to us a useful measure of how comprehensive they are. Computers now enable us to make word counts easily and rapidly.
Such measures can be used to answer the question about vocabulary. Unless or until such comparisons are done in a reasonably scholarly manner, any conclusion will be subjective. The judgement of someone with expert knowledge of Latin and the major Romance languages will, in the meantime, deserve respect.


> When trying to make a judgement, the first thing to do, I think, is to define the question: namely, to say, what does the question matter for?


The topic question is an interesting one to anyone interested in European languages. I should have thought it was also a useful one in assisting the scholarly enterprise of tracing the development of modern languages from Latin. That is why I would be surprised if no scholarly study had yet been done.


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

There have been studies and evaluations, I once even read a percentage where the big Romance languages were rated in percents how similar they were to Latin (I don't remember the exact criteria). Well, Italian was quite close... Spanish scored a bit lower, the language that scored lowest was, obviously, French.


----------



## wandle

That result does not surprise me.


----------



## punctuate

wandle said:


> Yes. Dictionaries regularly tell us how many entries they contain. Granted, there are different ways of measuring, depending on how we define a word, but dictionaries nevertheless manage to convey to us a useful measure of how comprehensive they are. Computers now enable us to make word counts easily and rapidly.


Comprehension is not the only quality of a dictionary; selection is also different. So, you take another dictionary, you get a different result. Also, is it not better, for instance, to exclude from counting a certain category of words, for example all learned words (scientific, high style...)? It may be or it may be not; according to such criteria, a new dictionary or a subdictionary may be made. Also, why count words one by one, is it not better take care of their frequencies and the character of documents they appear in? Well, we take texts, associate them with coefficients, count instances of words, of Latin and not of Latin origin. But then the results will depend on which texts were selected. A selection of prayers from the Bible, a selection of speeches by politicians and a selection of laws from the criminal codes could well lead to different results. Counting is relatively easy, drawing conclusions from it is not, both because there are so many ways of counting and because it is not clear how the results of the counting should relate to the subjective feelings of people, the real thing of concern. In addition, counting cannot account for meaning shifts, they also matter for those feelings.


> Such measures can be used to answer the question about vocabulary. Unless or until such comparisons are done in a reasonably scholarly manner, any conclusion will be subjective.


Another question is whether we need a subjective ("it reminds me a lot") or an objective conclusion: in the case of the similarity scales, the second means rather little for the first. I mean, the subjective feeling is what matters, objective evaluating is merely a game with no clear application for its results. So, if it means little for the subjective feeling, and its interpretation in terms of the subjective feelings is not clear, then why? I might well learn that a Royal dictionary of the language A had 70% of words from Latin (either borrowed or inherited), and a Royal dictionary of the language B had 60%. This does not tell me what I would feel about their vocabularies if, having learned pieces of Latin, I would learn and read these two languages or converse in them.


> I should have thought it was also a useful one in  assisting the scholarly enterprise of tracing the development of modern  languages from Latin.


Okay. So it appears we had different goals in mind. Not clear to me, though, what exactly question of history of the Romance languages the topic question might aid to resolve. Probably many questions; selecting a specific question might then help with choosing a method of counting, I imagine. But that should mean there is no one and single answer; there may be only many answers to many questions that are more specific than the title one.


----------

