Luthic: Difference between revisions
Lëtzelúcia (talk | contribs) |
LavaSalt402 (talk | contribs) m fixed typo |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Featured | {{Featured | ||
|featured banner= Esto arteghio è ‘na rasda ascritta. Grazze þamma sina livella qaletadi, piosevoletadi gio capacitadi utilizza, fú gia ascritta votata.}} | |featured banner= Esto arteghio è ‘na rasda ascritta. Grazze þamma sina livella qaletadi, piosevoletadi gio capacitadi utilizza, fú gia ascritta votata.}} | ||
{{privatelang}} | {{privatelang}} | ||
{{Infobox language | {{Infobox language | ||
| Line 67: | Line 66: | ||
* Gotho-Luthic — Gotholúthica (500–1100) | * Gotho-Luthic — Gotholúthica (500–1100) | ||
* | * Medieval Luthic — Lúthica mezzevale (1100–1600) | ||
* Late | * Late Medieval Luthic — Lúthica siþumezzevale (1600–1740) | ||
Later, Lúcia Yamane proposed an even earlier stage, Proto-Luthic (oslúthica), dated to c. 325–500 AD. She argued that Proto-Luthic was not yet a distinct language, but rather a Vulgar Latin ethnolect spoken by Roman and Gothic communities during their prolonged coexistence in the Empire. No texts from this phase survive—if they ever existed, they were likely lost during the Gothic War (376–382) and the sack of Rome (410). As a linguistic construct, Proto-Luthic highlights the role of sociohistorical contact in shaping Luthic, moving beyond a model of simple divergence from Latin. | Later, Lúcia Yamane proposed an even earlier stage, Proto-Luthic (oslúthica), dated to c. 325–500 AD. She argued that Proto-Luthic was not yet a distinct language, but rather a Vulgar Latin ethnolect spoken by Roman and Gothic communities during their prolonged coexistence in the Empire. No texts from this phase survive—if they ever existed, they were likely lost during the Gothic War (376–382) and the sack of Rome (410). As a linguistic construct, Proto-Luthic highlights the role of sociohistorical contact in shaping Luthic, moving beyond a model of simple divergence from Latin. | ||
| Line 80: | Line 79: | ||
A civil code enacted under Theodoric the Great. While nominally covering the entire Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy, its focus was Ravenna, Theodoric’s favored capital. The Codex Ravennas was also written in the Gothic alphabet and, like the Codex Luthicus, shows signs of later scribal modification. It includes four additional leaves containing fragments of Romans 11–15, presented as a Luthic–Latin diglot. | A civil code enacted under Theodoric the Great. While nominally covering the entire Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy, its focus was Ravenna, Theodoric’s favored capital. The Codex Ravennas was also written in the Gothic alphabet and, like the Codex Luthicus, shows signs of later scribal modification. It includes four additional leaves containing fragments of Romans 11–15, presented as a Luthic–Latin diglot. | ||
During the | During the Medieval period, Luthic gradually diverged from both Latin and Gothic, taking shape as a distinct language. Latin remained the dominant written medium, but the limited Luthic texts that survive from this era were already transcribed in the Latin alphabet. Between the 7th and 16th centuries, Luthic underwent profound change under sustained contact with Old Italian, Langobardic, and Frankish. | ||
The Carolingian conquest of the Langobards (773–774) brought northern Italy under Frankish rule, cementing Frankish influence. Charlemagne’s renewal of the Donation of the Papal States further bound the region to the papacy, reinforcing Frankish as a prestige language. Yet, as Middle Francia fragmented, the authority of Lothair I became largely nominal, and the Middle Frankish Kingdom declined in importance. | The Carolingian conquest of the Langobards (773–774) brought northern Italy under Frankish rule, cementing Frankish influence. Charlemagne’s renewal of the Donation of the Papal States further bound the region to the papacy, reinforcing Frankish as a prestige language. Yet, as Middle Francia fragmented, the authority of Lothair I became largely nominal, and the Middle Frankish Kingdom declined in importance. | ||
| Line 90: | Line 89: | ||
Biagchi’s Luthicæ is widely regarded as foundational in Luthic linguistics. Beyond grammar, it addressed the relationship between Latin and the vernacular languages of Italy—an uncommon theme at the time—and introduced innovations such as diglot lemmata, enabling direct comparison of Latin and Luthic. His perspective was deeply influenced by Dante Alighieri, particularly Dante’s rejection of language as a fixed entity. Like Dante, Biagchi argued for a historical and evolutionary view of language, a principle that shaped both his scholarship and the subsequent development of Luthic. | Biagchi’s Luthicæ is widely regarded as foundational in Luthic linguistics. Beyond grammar, it addressed the relationship between Latin and the vernacular languages of Italy—an uncommon theme at the time—and introduced innovations such as diglot lemmata, enabling direct comparison of Latin and Luthic. His perspective was deeply influenced by Dante Alighieri, particularly Dante’s rejection of language as a fixed entity. Like Dante, Biagchi argued for a historical and evolutionary view of language, a principle that shaped both his scholarship and the subsequent development of Luthic. | ||
By the early 18th century, Luthic had undergone substantial changes in vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, and orthography. Around 1730, a standardised written form began to emerge, enriched by abstract vocabulary borrowed directly from | By the early 18th century, Luthic had undergone substantial changes in vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, and orthography. Around 1730, a standardised written form began to emerge, enriched by abstract vocabulary borrowed directly from Medieval Latin. This process culminated in the 1750s with the spread of printed prayer books and liturgical texts, which cemented Standard Ravennese Luthic as the prestige variety. | ||
The study of the Luthic language as an academic discipline can be traced back to Þiuþaricu’s pioneering work. Before Luthicæ, there had been no systematic attempt to analyse the language’s structure, history, and relationship with Latin and the Germanic languages. His writings laid the foundation for future scholarship, shaping the way Luthic was understood both in linguistic and cultural contexts. | The study of the Luthic language as an academic discipline can be traced back to Þiuþaricu’s pioneering work. Before Luthicæ, there had been no systematic attempt to analyse the language’s structure, history, and relationship with Latin and the Germanic languages. His writings laid the foundation for future scholarship, shaping the way Luthic was understood both in linguistic and cultural contexts. | ||
| Line 1,438: | Line 1,437: | ||
* (space) essa tazza è þina? → Is that cup (near the listener) yours? | * (space) essa tazza è þina? → Is that cup (near the listener) yours? | ||
* (time) esso domnico | * (time) esso domnico andraggio. → I’m going this Sunday. | ||
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; width:35%; table-layout:fixed;" | {| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; width:35%; table-layout:fixed;" | ||
| Line 2,987: | Line 2,986: | ||
* 6 years | * 6 years | ||
By this stage, children typically command an adult-like phonemic inventory. Their ability to produce complex phonotactic sequences and multisyllabic lexical items is largely established, though refinement continues throughout middle childhood. | By this stage, children typically command an adult-like phonemic inventory. Their ability to produce complex phonotactic sequences and multisyllabic lexical items is largely established, though refinement continues throughout middle childhood. | ||
==Typology== | |||
Luthic has right symmetry, as do other VO languages (verb before object) like English. | |||
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:left; width:75%; table-layout:fixed;" | |||
|+ Typological correlations | |||
! style="width:40%;" | Correlation | |||
! style="width:30%;" | VO language | |||
! style="width:30%;" | Examples | |||
|- | |||
! Adposition type | |||
| prepositions | |||
| of..., than..., on... | |||
|- | |||
! Order of noun and genitive | |||
| noun before genitive | |||
| father + of John | |||
|- | |||
! Order of adjective and standard of comparison | |||
| adjective before standard | |||
| taller + than Bob | |||
|- | |||
! Order of verb and adpositional phrase | |||
| verb before adpositional phrase | |||
| slept + on the floor | |||
|- | |||
! Order of verb and manner adverb | |||
| verb before manner adverb | |||
| ran + slowly | |||
|- | |||
! Order of copula and predicative | |||
| copula before predicate | |||
| is + a teacher | |||
|- | |||
! Order of auxiliary verb and content verb | |||
| auxiliary before content verb | |||
| want + to see Mary | |||
|- | |||
! Place of adverbial subordinator in clause | |||
| clause-initial subordinators | |||
| because + Bob has left | |||
|- | |||
! Order of noun and relative clause | |||
| noun before relative clause | |||
| movies + that we saw | |||
|} | |||
==Sample text== | |||
: Sacavano so vendu norde þata sòilo·vu, vaiu so forteso vá, van ienu pellegrinu, þamma acchia varma avviluppatu, anaqemò. | |||
: sac-av-ano so vend-u nord-e þata sòil-o=vu vai-u so fort-es-o vá van ien-u pellegrin-u þamma acchi-a varm-a avvilupp-at-u ana-qem-ò. | |||
: dispute-IPFV-3PL DEF.NOM.M.SG wind-NOM.SG north-NOM.SG DEF.NOM.N.SG sun-NOM.SG=CONJ which-NOM.SG DEF.NOM.M.SG strong-CMPR-NOM.M.SG be.PST.3SG when INDF.NOM.M.SG traveler-NOM.SG. DEF.DAT.M.SG cloak-DAT.SG warm-DAT.SG wrap-PTCP-NOM.M.SG on-come-PRF.3SG. | |||
: Disputed the North Wind the Sun-and, which the stronger was, when a traveler, (in) the cloak warm wrapped, arrived. | |||
: Sammirano i í, vaiu fromo þan’acchio þe pellegrini rimuovere magassi, so forteso þamm’aþera duomitu sarebbe. | |||
: samm-irano i í vai-u from-o þan=acchi-o þe pellegrin-i rimuov-ere mag-ass-i so fort-es-o þamm=aþer-a duom-it-u sar-ebbe. | |||
: agree-PRF.3PL 3PL.NOM COMP REL-NOM.SG. first-ADV DEF.ACC.M.SG=cloak-ACC.SG DEF.GEN.M.SG traveler-GEN.SG remove-INF able-IPFV.SBJV-3SG DEF.NOM.M.SG strong-CMPR-NOM.SG DEF.DAT.SG=other-DAT.SG judge-PTCP-NOM.M.SG be-COND.3SG. | |||
: Agreed they that, who first the cloak of-the traveler to-remove might/could, the stronger than-the other considered would-be. | |||
: Þan soffiò so vendu norde ardumente í, mageva, ac þan miese soffiava, þan miese servò so pellegrinu þan’acchio bi se. | |||
: Þan soffi-ò so vend-u nord-e ard-u-mente í mag-ev-a ac þan mies-e soffi-av-a þan mies-e serv-ò so pellegrin-u þan=acchi-o bi se. | |||
: then blow-PRF.3SG DEF.NOM.M.SG wind-NOM.SG north-NOM.SG hard-THM-ADV COMP able-IPFV-3SG but the more-ADV blow-IPFV-3SG the more-ADV fold-PRF.3SG DEF.NOM.M.SG traveler-NOM.SG DEF.ACC.M.SG=cloak-ACC.SG around REFL.DAT. | |||
: Then blew the wind north hard-ly as able-was, but the more blew, the more folded the traveler the=cloak around himself. | |||
: Gio angiamente aggevò so vendu norde þana sforzo. Þan scinò þata sòilo varmamente, gio immediatamente rimuové so pellegrinu þan’acchio. | |||
: Gio angi-a-mente aggev-ò so vend-u nord-e þana sforz-o þan scin-ò þata sòil-o varm-a-mente gio immediat-a-mente rimuov-é so pellegrin-u þan=acchi-o | |||
: and end-THM-ADV give.up-PRF.3SG DEF.NOM.M.SG wind-NOM.SG north-ADJ DEF.ACC.M.SG effort-ACC.SG then shine-PRF.3SG DEF.NOM.N.SG sun-NOM.SG warm-THM-ADV and immediate-THM-ADV remove-PRF.3SG DEF.NOM.M.SG traveler-NOM.SG DEF.ACC.M.SG=cloak-ACC.SG | |||
: And finally gave-up the wind north the effort. Then shone the sun warm-ly, and immediately removed the traveler the=cloak. | |||
: Sva obbligatu fú so vendu norde ad andetare í, þata sòilo so forteso tuaggi vá. | |||
: Sva obblig-at-u fú so vend-u nord-e ad andet-are í þata sòil-o so fort-es-o tu-aggi vá. | |||
: thus oblige-PTCP-NOM.M.SG be.PRF.3SG DEF.NOM.M.SG wind-NOM.SG north-ADJ to confess-INF COMP DEF.NOM.N.SG sun-NOM.SG DEF.NOM.M.SG strong-CMPR-NOM.SG two-GEN.PL be.PST.3SG | |||
: Thus obliged was the wind north to confess that, the sun the stronger of-two was. | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| Line 3,524: | Line 3,596: | ||
Wiener, L. | Wiener, L. | ||
* 1915 Commentary to the Germanic laws and | * 1915 Commentary to the Germanic laws and Medieval documents. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | ||
Winter, W. | Winter, W. | ||