16 décembre 2007
El català, el llati, Dante....Cortez
(Le journal El Temps de Catalogne m'a fait l'honneur de parler de mon livre) Extraits :
"Yves Cortez lingüista autodidacte acaba de publicar un livre( Le françaiis ne vient pas du latin) dedicat a demostrar que les llengües romàniques no son filles del llati, es a dir , que els invasors romans, no solament no parlaven llati, sino que ni tan sols parlaven llati vulgar, sino una llengua diferent que Cortez pensa que és un italià provinent de l'indoeuropeu.
Cortez hauria pogut invocar per reforçar la seva tesi que Dante no pensava que el llati fos la base llingüitica dels vulgars romanics sino una gramatica que certs pobles es van donar artificialment com a llengua de relatio estable en el temps i estesa en l'espai, i que se sostenia en els vulgars naturals. Es a dir que el llati va ser construit a partir dels vulgars romanics, que va ser inventat després d'haver-se format aquells vulgars.Aquesta situatio de coexistencia acronica de gramatica i vulgar, és a dir, de lengua escrita codificata (llàti) i llengua parlada (romanç) formava part del comu sentir de l'epoca . S'haura d'esperara l'humanista italià Flavio Blondo per a veure formulada en el plà teoric la visio alternativa que el vulgar va neixer de la transformatio del llati al segle VI . Aqueste visio ha tingut molt d'èxit , especialment entre els etimologistes, i contra aquesta visio lluita Yves Cortez " LLUIS BONADA
Merci aux catalans pour l'attention qu'ils portent à ma thèse.
Italian and french do not come from Latin
Italian and French do not come from Latin
Unlike what is taught in all the universities, it appears that Italian does not come from Latin, any more than any other Romance language such as Spanish, French or Rumanian comes from Latin.
Just as we thought for centuries that the sun rotated around the earth, based on our daily observations, common sense leads us naturally to think that Latin evolved into the different Romance languages.
However linguists, who are aware of substantial divergences between Latin and the Romance languages both in terms of syntax and glossary, have taken a first step towards supporting a different theory. They had to appeal to the concept of “Vulgar Latin”, which is supposed to be the spoken language resulting from Classical Latin. It is the former that is purported to have given rise to the Romance languages.
I agree with these linguists on one single point, namely that Classical Latin could not have evolved into the Romance languages, but I disagree on the rest:
- What we wrongly call “Vulgar Latin” is none other than Italian
- This Italian did not develop from Latin, but is a distinct Indo-European language
- So the Romans were bilingual, speaking Italian and writing Latin
- The Romans gave their Empire two languages: a spoken language which was Italian and a written one, Latin
Of course, to reach such conclusions I have carried out in-depth research that I summarised in my book entitled “Le français ne vient pas du latin” (Edition L’Harmattan, Paris 2007).
Some people block up their ears, when I state my conclusions, but those who take the time to read my book, do not remain indifferent. What I have written is not a pamphlet, but a thorough demonstration.
So I wish you enjoyable reading and look forward to discussing the issues with you.
Bordeaux, France