This article is a featured language. It was voted featured thanks to its level of quality, plausibility and usage capabilities.
Þatha artighio ist aena rasda ascritta. Ia votauða ascritta grazie alla seina livella qualitadi, piausevelitadi e capacitadi di utilizza.
This article is private. The author requests that you do not make changes to this project without approval. By all means, please help fix spelling, grammar and organisation problems, thank you.
Luthic is the result of a prolonged contact among members of both regions after the Gothic raids towards the Roman Empire began, together with the later West Germanic merchants’ travels to and from the Western Roman Empire. These connections, the interactions between the Papal States and the conquest by the Germanic dynasties of the Roman Empire slowly formed a creole as a lingua franca for mutual communication.
As a standard form of the Gotho-Romance language, Luthic has similarities with other Italo-Dalmatian languages, Western Romance languages and Sardinian. The status of Luthic as the regional language of Ravenna and the existence there of a regulatory body have removed Luthic, at least in part, from the domain of Standard Italian, its traditional Dachsprache. It is also related to the Florentine dialect spoken by the Italians in the Italian city of Florence and its immediate surroundings.
Luthic is an inflectedfusional language, with four cases for nouns, pronouns, and adjectives (nominative, accusative, genitive, dative); three genders (masculine, feminine, neuter); and two numbers (singular, plural).
Chart of Romance languages based on structural and comparative criteria, not on socio-functional ones. FP: Franco-Provençal, IR: Istro-Romanian.
Luthic is an Indo-European language that belongs to the Gotho-Romance group of the Italic languages, however Luthic has great Germanic influence; where the Germanic languages are traditionally subdivided into three branches: North Germanic, East Germanic, and West Germanic. The first of these branches survives in modern Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Elfdalian, Faroese, and Icelandic, all of which are descended from Old Norse. The East Germanic languages are now extinct, and Gothic is the only language in this branch which survives in written texts; Luthic is the only surviving Indo-European language with extensive East Germanic derived vocabulary. The West Germanic languages, however, have undergone extensive dialectal subdivision and are now represented in modern languages such as English, German, Dutch, Yiddish, Afrikaans, and others.
Among the Romance languages, its classification has always been controversial, for example, it is one of the Italo-Dalmatian languages and most closely related to Istriot on the one hand and Tuscan-Italian on the other. Some authors include it among the Gallo-Italic languages, and according to others, it is not related to either one. Although both Ethnologue and Glottolog group Luthic into a new language group, the Gotho-Romance (opere citato) family.
Although the language region is surrounded by Gallo-Italic languages, Luthic does not share some traits with these immediate neighbours. For example, Luthic did not fully undergo vowel nasalisation, as vowels are only nasalised preceding a geminatenasal consonant, also lacking vowel fronting, as u/u/ tends to evolve as ü/y/, as in French and Occitan, and it preserved its final syllables. Some traits are further afield in Rhaeto-Romance languages. Modern Luthic is not a close relative of the extinct East Germanic languages, but some may still classify it as an East Germanic language, which is highly debated and enjoys the least academic favour.
Luthic has been influenced by Italian, Frankish, Gothic and Langobardic since its first attestation, the great influence of these languages on the vocabulary and grammar of Modern Luthic is widely acknowledged. Most specialists in language contact do consider Luthic to be a true mixed language. Luthic is classified as a Romance language because it shares innovations with other Romance languages such as Italian, French and Spanish.
¹ Discussions cover the different versions of Busbecq’s report, including scribal emendation and errors in printing and subsequent corrections. It seems that Busbecq’s understanding and documentation of Crimean Gothic were influenced by his Flemish background and possibly by German. He obtained his information from a Crimean Greek source who was knowledgeable in Crimean Gothic. The individual from Crimea who supplied the language information was either originally Greek or fluent in Crimean Gothic but more proficient in Greek than their own native language. In both cases, it’s likely that the pronunciation of Crimean Gothic words was influenced to some extent by the phonetics of the Greek language spoken in that area and time.
History
The Luthic philologist Aþalphonsu Silva divided the history of Luthic into a period from 500 AD to 1740 to be “Mediaeval Luthic”, which he subdivided into “Gothic Luthic” (500–1100), “Mediaeval Luthic” (1100–1600) and “late Mediaeval Luthic” (1600–1740).
An additional period was later created by Lúcia Yamane, from c. 325 AD to 500 AD to be called “Proto-Luthic”, which she believes to be an Vulgar Latinethnolect, spoken by the early Goths during its period of co-existence with the Roman Empire, no written records from such an early period survive, and if any ever existed, it was fully lost during the Gothic War (376–382) and during the Sack of Rome (410). Proto-Luthic ultimately is the result of the Romano-Germanic culture.
Romano-Germanic cultural contact begins as early as the first Roman accounts of the Germanic peoples. Roman influence is perceptible beyond the boundaries of the empire, in the Northern European Roman Iron Age of the first centuries AD. The nature of this cultural contact changes with the decline of the Roman Empire and the beginning Migration period in the wake of the crisis of the third century: the “barbarian” peoples of Germania Magna formerly known as mercenaries and traders now came as invaders and eventually as a new ruling elite, even in Italy itself, beginning with Odoacer’s rise to the rank of Dux Italiae in 476 AD.
The cultural syncretism was most pronounced in Francia. In West Francia, the nucleus of what was to become France, the Frankish language was eventually extinct, but not without leaving significant traces in the emerging Romance language. In East Francia on the other hand, the nucleus of what was to become the kingdom of Germany and ultimately German-speaking Europe, the syncretism was less pronounced since only its southernmost portion had ever been part of the Roman Empire, as Germania Superior: all territories on the right hand side of the Rhine remain Germanic-speaking. Those parts of the Germanic sphere extends along the left of the Rhine, including the Swiss plateau, the Alsace, the Rhineland and Flanders, are the parts where Romano-Germanic cultural contact remains most evident.
With a renewed close attention to the history and literature of ancient Rome in the 12th century, the mediaeval aristocracy saw itself mirrored in the accounts of ancient Roman nobility. Some made doubtful claims to direct descent from Roman aristocracy. In the 19th century, German, Luth and French mediaevalists worried about the origins of the great mediaeval families. Did the great families descend from the aristocracy of the Roman Empire or from the barbarian chieftains who invaded the Roman Empire between 400 and 600? Did the families originate in the Latin or Germanic world? Both, it seems. Mediaeval Western Europe was an amalgam of Roman and ‘Barbarian’ bloodlines. The cultural and genetic influence of the Visigoths, Franks, et al. is readily apparent in the socio-cultural and political framework of Mediaeval Europe. In spite of this, the legacy of Rome, both social-cultural and genetic pervaded every aspect of Mediaeval society – this was of course greatly assisted by the mediaeval Church.
The initial trouble for the later Roman Empire came from East Germanic speakers, with various tribal groups such as the Vandals and Burgundians traversing Europe. However, it was the Goths who notably contributed to the linguistic record of the East Germanic languages. Originating from the lower Vistula, they migrated to present-day Ukraine. Later, facing pressure from the Huns, they moved into the Balkans and eventually into Western Europe. Among them, the Visigoths settled in Spain, shaping its post-Roman state, while the Ostrogoths became custodians of the last Roman emperors in Italy. By the eighth century, linguistic assimilation into Romance-speaking populations had largely absorbed the Goths of Spain and Italy. Ulfilas, a prominent Christian missionary and later bishop of the Visigoths, translated the Bible into Gothic while they resided in the northeast Balkans, providing a significant linguistic record of Gothic and East Germanic. A small group of Ostrogoths left in Crimea resurfaced in the sixteenth century through a wordlist compiled by Ogier de Busbecq, the Holy Roman Emperor’s ambassador to the Sublime Porte. However, these Crimean Gothic speakers disappeared linguistically shortly after Busbecq documented their vocabulary.
Gothic Luthic
The earliest varieties of a Luthic language, collectively known as Gothic Luthic or “Gotho-Luthic”, evolved from the contact of Latin dialects and East Germanic languages. A considerable amount of East Germanic vocabulary was incorporated into Luthic over some five centuries. Approximately 1,200 uncompounded Luthic words are derived from Gothic and ultimately from Proto-Indo-European. Of these 1,200, 700 are nouns, 300 are verbs and 200 are adjectives. Luthic has also absorbed many loanwords, most of which were borrowed from West Germanic languages of the Early Middle Ages.
Only a few documents in Gothic Luthic have survived – not enough for a complete reconstruction of the language. Most Gothic Luthic-language sources are translations or glosses of other languages (namely, Greek and Latin), so foreign linguistic elements most certainly influenced the texts. Nevertheless, Gothic Luthic was probably very close to Gothic (it is known primarily from the Codex Argenteus, a 6th-century copy of a 4th-century Bible translation, and is the only East Germanic language with a sizeable text corpus). These are the primary sources:
Codex Luthicus (Ravenna), two parts: 87 leaves
It contains scattered passages from the New Testament (including parts of the gospels and the Epistles), from the Old Testament (Nehemiah), and some commentaries. The text likely had been somewhat modified by copyists. It was written using the Gothic alphabet, an alphabet used for writing the Gothic language. It was developed in the 4th century AD by Ulfilas (or *𐍅𐌿𐌻𐍆𐌹𐌻𐌰 (Wulfila)), a Gothic preacher of Cappadocian Greek descent, for the purpose of translating the Bible.
Detail of the Codex Luthicus, the word Luþiks is attested, referring to the Luths
Codex Ravennas (Ravenna), four parts: 140 leaves
A civil code enacted under Theodoric the Great. The code covered the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy, but mainly Ravenna, as Theodoric devoted most of his architectural attention to his capital, Ravenna. Codex Ravennas was also written using the Gothic alphabet. The text likely had been somewhat modified by copyists. Together with four leaves, fragments of Romans 11–15 (a Luthic–Latin diglot).
Mediaeval Luthic
The first sentence is: “Luthica unsara rasda ist, e scolamos defendere unsarǫ raihtǫ di usare la rasda fremente, l’italiano nogca sarat l’unsara rasda fragca, car gli italiani non unse rispetanno.” English: “Luthic is our language, and we must defend our right to use it freely, Italian will never be our language, as the Italians don’t respect us”
In the mediaeval period, Luthic emerged as a separate language from Latin and Gothic. The main written language was Latin, and the few Luthic-language texts preserved from this period are written in the Latin alphabet. From the 7th to the 16th centuries, Mediaeval Luthic gradually transformed through language contact with Old Italian, Langobardic and Frankish. During the Carolingian Empire (773–774), Charles conquered the Lombards and thus included northern Italy in his sphere of influence. He renewed the Vatican donation and the promise to the papacy of continued Frankish protection. Frankish was very strong, until Louis’ eldest surviving son Lothair I became Emperor in name but de facto only the ruler of the Middle Frankish Kingdom.
After the fall of Middle Francia and the rise of Holy Roman Empire, Louis II conquered Bari in 871 led to poor relations with the Eastern Roman Empire, which led to a lesser degree of the Greek influence present in Luthic. At this time, Luthic eventually dropped the Gothic alphabet and adopted the Latin alphabet, that still lacked some letters present in the Gothic script, such as ⟨j⟩ and ⟨w⟩, and there was no ⟨v⟩ as distinct from ⟨u⟩. Through the 810s, Luthic eventually borrowed ⟨þ⟩ into its orthography, displacing ⟨θ⟩ and ⟨ψ⟩, that were used in free variation to represent the voiceless dental fricative /θ/, in fact, the modern Luthic orthography still lacks ⟨j⟩, ⟨k⟩ and ⟨w⟩ for those reasons, in some manuscripts, ⟨y⟩ is found representing the voiced labiodental fricative /v/ and the voiced bilabial fricative /β/, probably influenced by the Gothic letter ⟨𐍅⟩.
Late Mediaeval Luthic
Fraugiani e Narri hanno rasda fre. “Lords and jesters have free speech.”
“
”
Giuseppe il Lûthicu, proverbs
Following the first Bible translation, the development of Luthic as a written language, as a language of religion, administration, and public discourse accelerated. In the second half of the 17th century, grammarians elaborated grammars of Luthic, first among them Þiudareicu Biagci’s 1657 Latin grammar De studio linguæ luthicæ. Late Mediaevel Luthic saw significant changes to its vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation and orthography. An eventual form of written Standard Luthic emerged c. 1730, and a large number of terms for abstract concepts were adopted directly from Mediaeval Latin (as adapted borrowings, rather than via the native form or Italian). What is known as Standard Ravennese Luthic began in the 1750s after the printing and wide distribution of prayer books and other kinds of liturgical books in Luthic, after the works of Þiudareicu and his essays about the Luthic language and its written form.
De Studio Linguæ Luthicæ
De Studio Linguæ Luthicæ, 1657, restored cover at the Luthic Community of Ravenna.
De Studio Linguæ Luthicæ (Luthic: Studia Rasde Lûthice[ˈstu.dja ˈraz.de ˈlu.ti.t͡ʃe]; English: On Study of the Luthic Language) often referred to as simply the Luthicæ (/lʌˈθiˌki, lʌθˈaɪˌki/lu-THEE-KEE), is a book by Þiudareicu Biagci that expounds Luthic grammar. The Luthicæ is written in Latin (specifically Neo-Latin) and comprises two volumes, it was authorised, imprimatur, by Pope Alexander VII, then head of the Catholic Church on 1956, and was first published on 9 September 1657.
The Luthicæ is considered one of the most importants in the history of Luthic linguistics. In the first book, Þiudareicu discusses the relationship between Latin and the vernacular languages within Italy. His work made new innovations, as it included diglot lemmata, and it was also significant how Þiudareicu approached this theme (a not so common topic at that time), the Luthicæ and the general opinion of Þiudareicu was greatly influenced by Dante Alighieri, as he agreed with Dante, that languages were not something to be considered static, but something that evolves and need historical contextualisation.
Book 1, De grammatica
Book 1, subtitled De grammatica (On grammar) concerns fundamental grammar features present in Luthic and how it changed from Latin, Þiudareicu takes on historical evolution of language, although his opinion was greatly affected by the building of the Tower of Babel, his ideas were not so far off what we know nowadays, however, he classified Uralic languages as Indo-European languages. It opens a collection of examples and Luthic–Latin diglot lemmata.
Book 2, De orthographia
Book 2, subtitled De orthographia (On orthography), is an exposition of the many vernacular orthographies Luthic had, and eventual suggestions for a universal orthography, he took inspiration from rhetorical essays written in Occitan, such as manuals of grammar and writting for troubadour poetry in order to elaborate his orthography, he was also familar with encyclopaedic dictionaries that influenced his work. He also deals with literary genres, and defends that Luthic must be also used as a vernacular for song and verse, in order to displace other vernacular languages, such as Occitan, Sicilian and Italian.
Etymology
The name of the Luths is hugely linked to the name of the Goths, itself one of the most discussed topics in Germanic philology. The autonym is attested as 𐌲𐌿𐍄𐌸𐌹𐌿𐌳𐌰 (gutþiuda) (the status of this word as a Gothic autonym prior to the Ostrogothic period is disputed) on the Gothic calendar (in the Codex Ambrosianus A): þize ana gutþiudai managaize marwtre jah friþareikeikeis. However, on the basis of parallel formations in Germanic (svíþjóð; angelþēod) and non-Germanic (Old Irish cruithen-tuath) indicates that it means “land of the Goths, Gothia”, instead of a more literal translation “Gothpeople”. The first element however may be also the same element attested on the Ring of Pietrossa ᚷᚢᛏᚨᚾᛁ (gutanī). Roman authors of late antiquity did not classify the Goths as Germani. While the Gutones, the Pomeranian precursors of the Goths, and the Vandili, the Silesian ancestors of the Vandals, were still considered part of Tacitean Germania, the later Goths, Vandals, and other East Germanic tribes were differentiated from the Germans and were referred to as Scythians, Goths, or some other special names. The sole exception are the Burgundians, who were considered German because they came to Gaul via Germania. In keeping with this classification, post-Tacitean Scandinavians were also no longer counted among the Germans, even though they were regarded as close relatives. The word for Luthic is first attested as 𐌻𐌿𐌸𐌹𐌺𐍃 (luþiks) on the Codex Luthicus, named after so. The name was probably first recorded via Greco-Roman writers, as *Lūthae, a formation similar to Getae, itself derived from *leuhtą. Ultimately meaning the lighters. 𐌻𐌿𐌸𐌹𐌺𐍃 is probably a corruption *leuhtą, *leuthą, *Lūthae, influenced by gothus, then reborrowed via a Germanic language, where *-th- > -þ-.
Luthic is spoken mainly in Emilia-Romagna, Italy, where it is primarily spoken in Ravenna and its adjacent communes. Although Luthic is spoken almost exclusively in Emilia-Romagna, it has also been spoken outside of Italy. Luth and general Italian emigrant communities (the largest of which are to be found in the Americas) sometimes employ Luthic as their primary language. The largest concentrations of Luthic speakers are found in the provinces of Ravenna, Ferrara and Bologna (Metropolitan City of Bologna). The people of Ravenna live in tetraglossia, as Romagnol, Emilian and Italian are spoken in those provinces alongside Luthic.
According to a census by ISTAT (The Italian National Institute of Statistics), Luthic is spoken by an estimated 250,000 people, however only 149,500 are considered de facto natives, and approximately 50,000 are monolinguals.
It is also spoken in South America by the descendants of Italian immigrants, specifically in Brazil, in a census by IBGE in collaboration with ISTAT, Luthic is spoken in São Paulo by roughly 5,000 people and some 45 of whom are monolinguals, the largest concentrations are found in the municipalities of São Paulo and the ABCD Region.
Status and usage
Geographical distribution of Luthic language by official status
As in most European countries, the minority languages are defined by legislation or constitutional documents and afforded some form of official support. In 1992, the Council of Europe adopted the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages to protect and promote historical regional and minority languages in Europe.
Luthic is regulated by the Council for the Luthic Language (Luthic: Gafaurdu faulla Rasda Lûthica[ɡɐˈɸɔr.du fɔl.lɐ ˈraz.dɐ ˈlu.ti.xɐ]) and the Luthic Community of Ravenna (Luthic: Gamaenescape Lûthica Ravenne[ɡɐˌmɛ.neˈska.ɸe ˈlu.ti.xɐ rɐˈβẽ.ne]). The existence of a regulatory body has removed Luthic, at least in part, from the domain of Standard Italian, its traditional Dachsprache, Luthic was considered an Italian dialect like many others until about World War II, but then it underwent ausbau.
Luthic geographical distribution in the commune of Ravenna
Diglossia and code-switching
Luthic is recognised as a minor language in Ravenna. Italy’s official language is Italian, as stated by the framework law no. 482/1999 and Trentino Alto-Adige’s special Statute, which is adopted with a constitutional law. Around the world there are an estimated 64 million native Italian speakers and another 21 million who use it as a second language. Italian is often natively spoken in a regional variety, not to be confused with Italy’s regional and minority languages; however, the establishment of a national education system led to a decrease in variation in the languages spoken across the country during the 20th century. Standardisation was further expanded in the 1950s and 1960s due to economic growth and the rise of mass media and television (the state broadcaster RAI helped set a standard Italian).
Code-switching between Luthic, Emilian dialects and Italian is frequent among Luthic speakers, in both informal and formal settings (such as on television).
Education
Education in Italy is free and mandatory from ages six to sixteen, and consists of five stages: kindergarten (scuola dell’infanzia), primary school (scuola primaria), lower secondary school (scuola secondaria di primo grado), upper secondary school (scuola secondaria di secondo grado), and university (università). Although mostly in Italian, education is Luthic has been implemented in 2018 by Ravenna University. In 2018, the Italian secondary education was evaluated as below the OECD average. Italy scored below the OECD average in reading and science, and near OECD average in mathematics. Mean performance in Italy declined in reading and science, and remained stable in mathematics. Trento and Bolzano scored at an above the national average in reading. Compared to school children in other OECD countries, children in Italy missed out on a greater amount of learning due to absences and indiscipline in classrooms. A wide gap exists between northern schools, which perform near average, and schools in the South, that had much poorer results. The 2018 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study ranks children in Italy 16th for reading. Compared to school children in other OECD countries, children in Italy missed out on a greater amount of learning due to absences and indiscipline in classrooms.
Most of the Luths also speak Italian, this is commoner for Luth elders, and most of the Luth elders may speak only Italian because of the influence from the Fascist period, as the Fascist government endorsed a stringent education policy in Italy aiming at eliminating illiteracy, which was a serious problem in Italy at the time, as well as improving the allegiance of Italians to the state. The Fascist government’s first minister of education from 1922 to 1924 Giovanni Gentile recommended that education policy should focus on indoctrination of students into Fascism and to educate youth to respect and be obedient to authority. In 1929, education policy took a major step towards being completely taken over by the agenda of indoctrination.> In that year, the Fascist government took control of the authorization of all textbooks, all secondary school teachers were required to take an oath of loyalty to Fascism and children began to be taught that they owed the same loyalty to Fascism as they did to God. In 1933, all university teachers were required to be members of the National Fascist Party. From the 1930s to 1940s, Italy’s education focused on the history of Italy displaying Italy as a force of civilization during the Roman era, displaying the rebirth of Italian nationalism and the struggle for Italian independence and unity during the Risorgimento. In the late 1930s, the Fascist government copied Nazi Germany’s education system on the issue of physical fitness and began an agenda that demanded that Italians become physically healthy. Intellectual talent in Italy was rewarded and promoted by the Fascist government through the Royal Academy of Italy which was created in 1926 to promote and coordinate Italy’s intellectual activity.
Films and music
Most films and songs are in vernacular Italian, Luthic is seldom spoken in television and radio. Some educational shows hosted by the Luthic Community of Ravenna and Ravenna University are often in Standard Luthic. Italian folk music is an important part of the country’ musical heritage, and spans a diverse array of regional styles, instruments and dances. Instrumental and vocal classical music is an iconic part of Italian identity, spanning experimental art music and international fusions to symphonic music and opera. Italian music has been held up in high esteem in history and many pieces of Italian music are considered high art. More than other elements of Italian culture, music is generally eclectic, but unique from other nations’ music. The country’s historical contributions to music are also an important part of national pride. The relatively recent history of Italy includes the development of an opera tradition that has spread throughout the world; prior to the development of Italian identity or a unified Italian state, the Italian peninsula contributed to important innovations in music including the development of musical notation and Gregorian chant.
Similar to the Canzone Napoletana, Le Canzoni Lûthice, sometimes referred to as Luthic songs, became a formal institution in the 1990s as Luthic became more researched by Ravenna University, a generic term for a traditional form of music sung in the Luthic language, ordinarily for male and female voice singing solo. An important factor in defining what makes a Luthic song is the matter of language. All these songs are written and performed in the Luthic language. Although the music is sung by a few non-Luthic singers, it is difficult to sing correctly without knowledge of the Luthic continua, which is crucial in obtaining the correct inflection.
Written media
A panel from the unofficial Luthic edition of Batman: Three Jokers. Notice that it is not written in Standard Ravennese Luthic.
Luthic is mostly found as written media, However newspapers usually use Italian and reserve Luthic for sarcastic commentaries and caricatures. Headlines in Luthic are common. The letter to the editor section often includes entire paragraphs in Luthic. Many newspapers also regularly publish personal columns in Luthic. Most comedies are written in Luthic. Comic books are often written in Luthic instead of Italian. Luthic also has many translated editions of American comic books, specifically the ones published by DC Comics. In novels and short stories, most of the Luth authors, write the dialogues in their Luthic dialects.
Within Luthic poetry, the iambic verse is a very popular choice together with trochaic verses, a very famous Luthic poem, known as Manu ad Amare “ready to love”, by Lúcia Yamane, is composed of two iambic quatrains, with a rhyme scheme of ABAB:
Manu ad Amare Il caldu nattu non ist scaunu... i meini occhi sondo biendi. E sei, il ciaelu stâþ lontanu, ac saeco bene, i astri fedi.
Il varmu dagu tan vicinu m’aprosto faur þuc, þeini piedi. La meina Teiva, casta e manu, sarebbi ic manu faur amardi?
English translation The cold night is not beautiful... my eyes are blind. And yes, the sky is far away, but I see well, the stars of faith.
The warm day so near I stand forth you, (and) your feet. My Goddess, pure and ready (but) would I be ready to love you?
Poetic translation Not wonderful is the cold night with mine eyes blinded. The sky far away is not a delight, but I see, the stars of faith, elevated.
So near is the warm light For thee and thy feet I standed My chaste Goddess, ready and bright Would I be ready to love thee prided?
The metric scheme:
il CAL-du NAT-tu NON ist SCAU-nu 1 2-3 4-5 6 7 8-nu i MEI-ni OC-chi SON-do BIEN-di 1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-di
e SEI il CIAE-lu STÂÞ lon-TA-nu 1 2 3 4-5 6 7-8-nu ac SAE-co BE-ne*i AS-tri FE-di 1 2-3 4-5 5 6-7 8-di
il VAR-mu DA-gu TAN vi-CI-nu
1 2-3 4-5 6 7-8-nu
m’a-PROS-to FAUR þuc ÞEI-ni PIE-di
1-2-3 4 5 6-7 8-di
Poetry in Luthic is often governed by decasyllabic verses, but the usage of octosyllabic verses has become commoner in modern and contemporaneous Luthic poetry. Modern Luthic poets often rely on synaloephae for better metrics.
Luthic lexicon is discrepant from those of other Romance languages, since most of the words present in Modern Luthic are ultimately of Germanic origin. The lexical differentiation was a big factor for the creation of an independent regulatory body. There were many attempts to assimilate Luthic into the Italian dialect continuum, as in recent centuries, the intermediate dialects between the major Romance languages have been moving toward extinction, as their speakers have switched to varieties closer to the more prestigious national standards. That has been most notable in France, owing to the French government’s refusal to recognise minority languages. For many decades since Italy’s unification, the attitude of the French government towards the ethnolinguistic minorities was copied by the Italian government. A movement called “Italianised Luthic Movement” (Luthic: Muovimento Lûthice Italianegiate; Italian: Movimento per il Lutico Italianeggiato) tried to italianase Luthic’s vocabulary and reduce the inherited Germanic vocabulary, in order to assimilate Luthic as an Italian derived language; modern Luthic orthography was affected by this movement.
Almost all of the Romance languages spoken in Italy are native to the area in which they are spoken. Apart from Standard Italian, these languages are often referred to as dialetti “dialects”, both colloquially and in scholarly usage; however, the term may coexist with other labels like “minority languages” or “vernaculars” for some of them. Italian was first declared to be Italy's official language during the Fascist period, more specifically through the R.D.l., adopted on 15 October 1925, with the name of Sull'Obbligo della lingua italiana in tutti gli uffici giudiziari del Regno, salvo le eccezioni stabilite nei trattati internazionali per la città di Fiume. According to UNESCO's Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger, there are 31 endangered languages in Italy.
Standard Luthic
The basis of Standard Luthic was developed by the popular language spoken by the Ravennese people, whose was highly influenced by Gothic, together with other East Germanic substrate, such as Vandalic and Burgundian and other ancient West Germanic languages, mainly Frankish and Langobardic. Standard Luthic orthography was further influenced by Italian. Increasing mobility of the population and the dissemination of the language through mass media such as radio and television are leading to a gradual standardisation towards a “Standard Luthic” through the process of koineization.
Alphabet
Luthic has a shallow orthography, meaning very regular spelling with an almost one-to-one correspondence between letters and sounds. In linguistic terms, the writing system is close to being a phonemic orthography. The most important of the few exceptions are the following:
The letter ⟨c⟩ represents the sound /k/ at the end of words and before the letters ⟨a⟩, ⟨o⟩, and ⟨u⟩ but represents the sound /t͡ʃ/ before the letters ⟨e⟩ and ⟨i⟩.
The letter ⟨g⟩ represents the sound /ɡ/ at the end of words and before the letters ⟨a⟩, ⟨o⟩, and ⟨u⟩ but represents the sound /d͡ʒ/ before the letters ⟨e⟩ and ⟨i⟩. It also represents the sound /ŋ/ before ⟨c⟩, ⟨q⟩ or ⟨g⟩.
Velar plosives after /ŋ/ are not further palatalised to /t͡ʃ/ or /d͡ʒ/.
For a palatalised /t͡ʃ/ or /d͡ʒ/ after a nasal, ⟨n⟩ shall be used instead.
/ɡʷ/ only happens before a nasal and is spelled as ⟨ggu⟩ /ŋɡʷ/, or inherited from Gothic -ggw- as a regular outcome of Germanic *ww: 𐍄𐍂𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍅𐍃 [triɡʷːs], tregguu [ˈtrɛɡ.ɡʷu]. The spelling ⟨gg⟩ stands for both /ŋɡ/ and /dd͡ʒ/, making it further confusing.
The cluster ⟨sc⟩ /sk/ before the letters ⟨e⟩ and ⟨i⟩ represents the sound /ʃ/, geminate if intervocalic.
The spellings ⟨ci⟩ and ⟨gi⟩ before another vowel represent only /t͡ʃ/ or /d͡ʒ/ with no /i/ ~ /j/ sound.
Unless ⟨c⟩ or ⟨g⟩ precede stressed /i/ (pharmacia /fɐr.mɐˈtʃi.ɐ/ ‘pharmacy’, biologia /bjo.loˈdʒi.ɐ/ ‘biology’), these may be optionally spelt as ⟨cï⟩ and ⟨gï⟩ (pharmacïa, biologïa).
The letter ⟨h⟩ is always silent. It is used to form a digraph with ⟨c⟩ or ⟨g⟩ to represent /k/ or /ɡ/ before ⟨e⟩ or ⟨i⟩. It is also used with ⟨p⟩ to represent /ɸ/ and is found in some Greco-Roman words with ⟨t⟩ for /t/ mostly for aesthetics only, however, when spelt as ⟨th⟩, it is never further spirantised to /θ/.
The spelling ⟨ch⟩ and ⟨gh⟩ always represent the sounds /k/ and /ɡ/.
The spelling ⟨gl(i)⟩ and ⟨gn(i)⟩ represent the palatals /ʎ/ and /ɲ/ retrospectively; always geminate if intervocalic.
Like ⟨ci⟩ and ⟨gi⟩, /i/ ~ /j/ are only pronounced if stressed and ⟨glï⟩ and ⟨gnï⟩ may be used instead.
If the clusters /ɡl/ and /ɡn/ are needed, they are spelt as ⟨gl⟩ and ⟨gn⟩ retrospectively, which may cause confusion.
Consider that all plosives are spirantised word-terminally.
In some monosyllabic verbs, the -t is spelt as -þ.
/kʷ/ is spelt ⟨q⟩ and ⟨qu⟩, the difference is ultimately etymological, as ⟨qu⟩ is only found in Latin and Italian loanwords.
The Luthic alphabet is considered to consist of 24 letters; ⟨j, k, w, x, y⟩ are excluded, and often avoided in loanwords, as tassi vs taxi, cenophobo vs xenofobo, geins vs jeans, Giorche vs York, Valsar vs Walsar.
The circumflex accent is used over vowels to indicate irregular stress.
The e and o with grave accent is found in Italian loanwords ⟨è, ò⟩.
The digraphs ⟨ae, au, ei⟩ are used to indicate /ɛ ɔ i/ retrospectively; ⟨ae, au, ei⟩ often stand for a stressed vowel.
It is important to note that /e/ and /o/ are often lowered to /ɛ/ and /ɔ/ in VCC, and the digraphs are not used in that case.
The diaeresis accent is used to distinguish from a digraph or a diphthong.
The letter ⟨s⟩ can symbolise voiced or voiceless consonants. ⟨s⟩ symbolises /s/ onset before a vowel, when clustered with a voiceless consonant (⟨p, f, c, q(u)⟩), and when doubled (geminate); it symbolises /z/ when between vowels and when clustered with voiced consonants.
Similarly, the letter ⟨z⟩ can symbolise voiced or voiceless consonants. ⟨z⟩ symbolises /t͡s/ onset before a vowel, when clustered with a voiceless consonant (⟨p, f, c, q(u)⟩), and when geminate; it symbolises /d͡z/ when between vowels (except in -zione suffixed nouns) and when clustered with voiced consonants. However, ⟨zz⟩ stands for both /tt͡s/ and /dd͡z/.
The letter ⟨þ⟩ can symbolise voiced or voiceless consonants. ⟨þ⟩ symbolises /θ/ in all cases, except when clustered with a voiced consonant, standing for /ð/.
The status of the letter ⟨ð⟩ is debatable, and is one of the main reasons for common misspellings in Luthic, however, it is only used for etymological reasons, or when /ð/ is needed in a position where Gorgia toscana can not affect /d/. Nevertheless, many writers and scholars just ignore the existence of it.
Luthic has geminate, or double, consonants, which are distinguished by length and intensity. Length is distinctive for all consonants except for /d͡z/, /ʎ/ and /ɲ/, which are always geminate when between vowels, and /z/, which is always single. Geminate plosive and affricates are realised as lengthened closures. Geminate fricatives, nasals, and /l/ are realised as lengthened continuants. When triggered by Gorgia toscana, voiceless fricatives are always constrictive, but voiced fricatives are not very constrictive and often closer to approximants.
Luthic has geminate, or double, consonants, which are distinguished by length and intensity. Length is distinctive for all consonants except for /d͡z/, /ʎ/ and /ɲ/, which are always geminate when between vowels, and /z/, which is always single. Geminate plosive and affricates are realised as lengthened closures. Geminate fricatives, nasals, and /l/ are realised as lengthened continuants. When triggered by Gorgia Toscana, voiceless fricatives are always constrictive, but voiced fricatives are not very constrictive and often closer to approximants.
Rune poetry
The historical letter names are recorded in a 11th century manuscript. Most of them seem to be Gothic forms of the names also appearing in the rune poems. With this evidence and the 9th century manuscript of Alcuin (Codex Vindobonensis 795) it is possible to reconstruct the Gothic forms and their meanings.
Rune poems
Order
Rune
Luthic name
Alcuin name
Gothic name
Luthic
English
1
𐌰
Asga
aza
*𐌰𐌶𐌲𐌰 (*azga) 𐌰𐌶𐌲𐍉 (azgō)
𐌰 Asga ist angio.
La vita brusciaut
allo allangio.
Ash is the end.
Life burns
everything completely.
2
𐌱
Baerca
bercna
*𐌱𐌰𐌹𐍂𐌺𐌰 (*bairka)
𐌱 Baerca gevaut scaðu.
Frescu il riposu,
e non baðu.
Birch makes shadow.
Cool is peace,
Not war.
3
𐌺
Cauno
chozma
*𐌺𐌰𐌿𐌽 (*kaun) *𐌺𐌰𐌿𐌽𐌶𐌰𐌼𐌰 (*kaunzama)¹
𐌺 Cauno ist fatale.
Ist svasve dauþa,
la dolore ancestrale.
Ulcer is fatal.
It is like death,
the ancestral pain.
4
𐌳
Dagu
daaz
𐌳𐌰𐌲𐍃 (dags)
𐌳 Il dagu sceinaut.
Ist scaunu e forte,
Il dagu ceinaut.
The day shines.
It is beautiful and strong,
The day germinates.
5
𐌴
Aecu
eyz
*𐌰𐌹𐍈𐍃 (*aiƕs) *𐌴𐌹𐍅𐍃 (*eiws)²
𐌴 Aecu ist snele.
Aenu forte fregiondu,
al manno fidele.
The horse is fast.
A strong friend,
Faithful to the man.
6
𐍆
Faeu
fe
𐍆𐌰𐌹𐌷𐌿 (faihu)
𐍆 Faeu corrompet lo manno.
Aena fonte di chaau,
Aeve faur aeno igganno.
Wealth corrupts the man.
A source of chaos,
always a deception.
7
𐌲
Geva
geuua
𐌲𐌹𐌱𐌰 (giba)
𐌲 Geva ist faullo gôðano e honore.
Faulla dignitade e passione,
ist aeve faull’amore.
Generosity is for the good and honour.
For the dignity and passion,
it is always for love.
8
𐌷
Haglu
haal
*𐌷𐌰𐌲𐌻𐍃 (*hagls)
𐌷 Il caldissimu haglu.
Il ventru ist vicinu,
il caldu ist repentagliu.
The coldest hail.
The winter is near,
the cold is a riss.
9
Eissu
iiz
*𐌴𐌹𐍃 (*eis)
𐌹 Eissu ist aeno specchio.
Rifiettet la luce,
l’augna meina solecchio.
Ice is a mirror.
Reflecting the light,
I cover my eyes.
|} From 𐍃𐌰𐌼𐌰 (sama). ² Yew.
====Phonetic respelling====
Pronunciation respellings system for Luthic have been developed primarily for use in dictionaries, as it is not always possible to predict with certainty the sound of some written Luthic words. So readers looking up an unfamiliar word in a dictionary may find, on seeing the pronunciation respelling, that the word is in fact known to them orally.
Respelling system
Respelt variant
IPA
Word
Example
gg
ŋɡ
creggu /ˈkreŋ.ɡu/
creggu
ggh(E)
ŋɡ before i j e ɛ
aggiu /ˈaŋ.ɡju/
agghiu
ggi(V)
dd͡ʒ
aggio /ˈad.d͡ʒo/
aggio
ggï(V)
dd͡ʒi/j
gaggia /ɡɐdˈd͡ʒi.ɐ/
gaggïa
ggu(V)
ŋɡʷ
segguare /seŋˈɡʷa.re/
segguare
ggü(V)
ɡɡʷ
biegguare /bjeɡˈɡʷa.re/
bieggüare
s
s
cosei /koˈsi/
cosei
z
z
casa /ˈka.zɐ/
caza
(t)ts
(t)t͡s
pizza /ˈpit.t͡sɐ/
pittsa
(d)dz
(d)d͡z
azzurru /ɐdˈd͡zur.ru/
addzurru
◌̂¹
ˈ
cremise /ˈkrɛ.mi.ze/
crâemize
◌́
ˌ
broþarscape /ˌbro.θɐrˈska.ɸe/
bróþarscape
◌̆
∅²
aegguale /ɛɡˈɡʷa.le/
ăeggüale
ae
ɛ
spechio /ˈspɛ.kjo/
spaechio
au
ɔ
domnu /ˈdɔm.nu/
daumnu
¹ Only used in words where the irregular stress is not naturally pointed out. ² Is used to mark an unstressed digraph. E = front vowel V = vowel
This system uses the previous mentioned ⟨cï⟩, ⟨gï⟩, ⟨glï⟩ and ⟨gnï⟩:
pharmacia /fɐr.mɐˈtʃi.ɐ/ pharmacïa;
biologia /bjo.loˈdʒi.ɐ/ biologïa;
agliare /ɐʎ.ʎiˈa.re/ (also /ɐʎˈʎiˈɐ.re/) aglïare;
compagnia /kom.pɐɲˈɲi.ɐ/ compagnïa.
===Phonology===
There is a maximum of 8 oral vowels, 5 nasal vowels, 2 semivowels and 31 consonants; though some varieties of the language have fewer phonemes. Gothic, Frankish, northern Suebi, Langobardic, Lepontic and Cisalpine Gaulish (Roman Gaul) influences were highly absorbed into the local Vulgar Latin dialect. An early form of Luthic was already spoken in the Ostrogothic Kingdom during Theodoric’s reign and by the year 600 Luthic had already become the vernacular of Ravenna. Luthic developed in the region of the former Ostrogothic capital of Ravenna, from Late Latin dialects and Vulgar Latin. As Theodoric emerged as the new ruler of Italy, he upheld a Roman legal administration and scholarly culture while promoting a major building program across Italy, his cultural and architectural attention to Ravenna led to a most conserved dialect, resulting in modern Luthic.
When the mid vowels /ε, ɔ/ precede a nasal, they become close [ẽ] rather than [ε̃] and [õ] rather than [ɔ̃].
/i/ is close front unrounded [i]. f1 =337 y f2 =2300; f1 =400 y f2 =2600 hz.
/ĩ/ is close front unrounded [ĩ]. f1 =337 y f2 =2300; f1 =400 y f2 =2600 hz.
/u/ is close back rounded [u]. f1 =350 y f1 =1185; f1 =400 y f2 =925 hz.
/ũ/ is close back rounded [ũ]. f1 =350 y f1 =1185; f1 =400 y f2 =925 hz.
/e/ is close-mid front unrounded [e]. f1 =475 hz y f2 =1700 hz.
/ẽ/ is close-mid front unrounded [ẽ]. f1 =475 hz y f2 =1700 hz.
/o/ is close-mid back rounded [o]. f1 =490 y f2 =1015; f1 =500 y f2=1075.
/õ/ is close-mid back rounded [õ]. f1 =490 y f2 =1015; f1 =500 y f2=1075.
/ɛ/ has been variously described as mid front unrounded [ɛ̝] and open-mid front unrounded [ɛ]. f1 =700 hz y f2 =1800 hz.
/ɔ/ is somewhat fronted open-mid back rounded [ɔ̟]. f1 =555 hz y f2 =1100; f1 =600 hz y f2 =1100 hz.
/ɐ/ is near-open central unrounded [ɐ]. f1 =700 y f2 =1300 hz; f1 =715 hz y f2 =1400 hz.
/ɐ̃/ is near-open central unrounded [ɐ̃]. f1 =700 y f2 =1300 hz; f1 =715 hz y f2 =1400 hz.
/a/ has been variously described as open front unrounded [a] and open central unrounded [ä]. f1 =700 y f2 =1350 hz; f1 =750 y f2 =1500 hz.
It has been registered that word-final /i, u/ are raised and end in a voiceless vowel: [ii̥, uu̥]. The voiceless vowels may sound almost like [ç] and [x] retrospectively, mainly around Lugo, it is also transcribed as [ii̥ᶜ̧, uu̥ˣ] or [iᶜ̧, uˣ]. In the same region, it is common to have interconsonantal laxed variants [i̽, u̽] and these laxed forms often have a schwa-like off-glide [i̽ə̯, u̽ə̯], that is further described as an extra short schwa-like off-glide [ə̯̆] ([i̽ə̯̆, u̽ə̯̆] or [i̽ᵊ, u̽ᵊ]). The status of [ɛ] and [ɔ] is up to debate, and it is often believed that the long vowel phonemes that were present in Gothic resulted in schwa-glides [ɛə̯̆, ɔə̯̆], or further fortified to a quasi-diphthong [ɛæ̯̆, ɔɒ̯̆] (henceforth only written ⟨[ɛ, ɔ]⟩ due to its questionable nature and for simplicity).
====Diphthongs and triphthongs====
Diphthongs
Endpoint
/j/
/w/
Start point
/a/
aj
aw
/ɐ/
ɐj
ɐw
/ɛ/
ɛj
ɛw
/e/
ej
ew
/i/
iw
/ɔ/
ɔj
/o/
oj
ow
/u/
uj
Triphthongs
Endpoint
/j/
/o/
Start point
/j/
jɐj
jɛj
jɔj
jwo
/w/
wɐj
wɛj
wɔj
=====Notes=====
Diphthongs starting in /i/ or /u/ such as /iw/ and /uj/ are in free variation with /ju/ and /wi/.
/ʎ/ is alveolo-palatal, always geminate when intervocalic.
====Historical phonology====
The phonological system of the Luthic language underwent many changes during the period of its existence. These included the palatalisation of velar consonants in many positions and subsequent lenitions. A number of phonological processes affected Luthic in the period before the earliest documentation. The processes took place chronologically in roughly the order described below (with uncertainty in ordering as noted).
=====Vowel system=====
The most sonorous elements of the syllable are vowels, which occupy the nuclear position. They are prototypical mora-bearing elements, with simple vowels monomoraic, and long vowels bimoraic. Latin vowels occurred with one of five qualities and one of two weights, that is short and long /i e a o u/. At first, weight was realised by means of longer or shorter duration, and any articulatory differences were negligible, with the short:long opposition stable. Subtle articulatory differences eventually grow and lead to the abandonment of length, and reanalysis of vocal contrast is shifted solely to quality rather than both quality and quantity; specifically, the manifestation of weight as length came to include differences in tongue height and tenseness, and quite early on, /ī, ū/ began to differ from /ĭ, ŭ/ articulatorily, as did /ē, ō/ from /ĕ, ŏ/. The long vowels were stable, but the short vowels came to be realised lower and laxer, with the result that /ĭ, ŭ/ opened to
[ɪ, ʊ], and /ĕ, ŏ/ opened to [ε, ɔ]. The result is the merger of Latin /ĭ, ŭ/ and /ē, ō/, since their contrast is now realised sufficiently be their distinct vowel quality, which would be easier to articulate and perceive than vowel duration.
Unstressed a resulted in a slightly raised a [ɐ]. In hiatus, unstressed front vowels become /j/, while unstressed back vowels become /w/. Unlike other Romance languages, the Luthic vowel system was not so affected by metaphony, such as /e/ raising to /i/ or /ɛ/ raising to /e/:
In addition to monophthongs, Luthic has diphthongs, which, however, are both phonemically and phonetically simply combinations of the other vowels. None of the diphthongs are, however, considered to have distinct phonemic status since their constituents do not behave differently from how they occur in isolation, unlike the diphthongs in other languages like English and German. Grammatical tradition distinguishes “falling” from “rising” diphthongs, but since rising diphthongs are composed of one semiconsonantal sound [j] or [w] and one vowel sound, they are not actually diphthongs. The practice of referring to them as “diphthongs” has been criticised by phoneticians like Alareicu Villavolfu.
Many vowels become /o/ due to the velarizing influence of the following [ɫ] in early Luthic.
======Monophthongization======
The diphthongs ⟨au⟩, ⟨ae⟩ and ⟨oe⟩ [au̯, ae̯, oe̯] were monophthongized (smoothed) to [ɔ, ɛ, e] by Gothic influence, as the Germanic diphthongs /ai̯/ and /au̯/ appear as digraphs written ⟨ai⟩ and ⟨au⟩ in Gothic. Researchers have disagreed over whether they were still pronounced as diphthongs /ai̯/ and /au̯/ in Ulfilas' time (4th century) or had become long open-mid vowels: /ɛː/ and /ɔː/: 𐌰𐌹𐌽𐍃 (ains) [ains] / [ɛːns] “one” (German eins, Icelandic einn), 𐌰𐌿𐌲𐍉 (augō) [auɣoː] / [ɔːɣoː] “eye” (German Auge, Icelandic auga). It is most likely that the latter view is correct, as it is indisputable that the digraphs ⟨ai⟩ and ⟨au⟩ represent the sounds /ɛː/ and /ɔː/ in some circumstances (see below), and ⟨aj⟩ and ⟨aw⟩ were available to unambiguously represent the sounds /ai̯/ and /au̯/. The digraph ⟨aw⟩ is in fact used to represent /au/ in foreign words (such as 𐍀𐌰𐍅𐌻𐌿𐍃 (Pawlus) “Paul”), and alternations between ⟨ai⟩/⟨aj⟩ and ⟨au⟩/⟨aw⟩ are scrupulously maintained in paradigms where both variants occur (e.g. 𐍄𐌰𐌿𐌾𐌰𐌽 (taujan) “to do” vs. past tense𐍄𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌳𐌰 (tawida) “did”). Evidence from transcriptions of Gothic names into Latin suggests that the sound change had occurred very recently when Gothic spelling was standardised: Gothic names with Germanic au are rendered with au in Latin until the 4th century and o later on (Austrogoti > Ostrogoti).
=====Consonant system=====
As Classical Latin developed into Proto-Romance and then Gotho-Romance it experienced various sound changes. An approximate summary of changes on the phonemic level is provided below. Their precise order is uncertain.
======Cluster smoothing======
Clusters such as -p.t- -k.t- -x.t- are always smoothed to -t.t-.
This is also valid for other CC clusters with similar manner or place.
======Absorption of nasals before fricatives======
This is the source of such alterations as modern Standard Luthic fimfe[ˈfĩ.ɸe] “five”, monþu[ˈmõ.θu] “mouth” versus Gothic 𐍆𐌹𐌼𐍆 (fimf) [ˈɸimɸ] “id.”, 𐌼𐌿𐌽𐌸𐍃 (munþs) [ˈmunθs] “id.” and German fünf[fʏnf] “id.”, Mund[mʊnt] “id.”.
======Palatalisation======
Early evidence of palatalised pronunciations of /tj kj/ appears as early as the 2nd–3rd centuries AD in the form of spelling mistakes interchanging ⟨ti⟩ and ⟨ci⟩ before a following vowel, as in ⟨tribunitiae⟩ for tribūnīciae. This is assumed to reflect the fronting of Latin /k/ in this environment to [c ~ t͡sʲ]. Palatalisation of the velar consonants /k/ and /ɡ/ occurred in certain environments, mostly involving front vowels; additional palatalisation is also found in dental consonants /t/, /d/, /l/ and /n/, however, these are often not palatalised in word initial environment.
======Lenition======
The Gotho-Romance family suffered very few lenitions, but in most cases the unstressed stops /p t k/ are lenited to /b d ɡ/ if not in onset position, before or after a sonorant or in intervocalic position as a geminate, but in general, stops are rather spirantised than sonorised due to Gorgia Toscana. A similar process happens with unstressed /b/ that is lenited to /v ~ β/ in the same conditions. The unstressed labio-velar /kʷ/ delabialises before hard vowels, as in:
Luthic is further affected by the Gorgia Toscana effect, where every plosive is spirantised (or further approximated if voiced). Plosives, however, are not affected if:
Geminate.
Labialised.
Nearby another fricative.
Nearby a rhotic, a lateral or nasal.
Stressed and anlaut.
Unstressed consonants between intervocalic boundaries are voiced.
Luthic finestra [fiˈnɛs.trɐ].
Luthic la finestra [lɐ viˈnɛs.trɐ].
Luthic tenace [teˈna.t͡ʃe]
Luthic felu tenace [ˈfe.lu deˈna.t͡ʃe]
but:
Luthic lo fumo [lo ˈfu.mo].
======Fortition======
In every case, /j/ and /w/ are fortified to /d͡ʒ/ and /v ~ β/, except when triggered by hiatus collapse. The Germanic /xʷ ~ hʷ ~ ʍ/ is also fortified to /kʷ/ in every position; which can be further lenited to /k ~ t͡ʃ/ in the environments given above. The Germanic /h ~ x/ is fortified to /k/ before a rhotic or a lateral, as in:
Furthermore, Luthic is affected by syntactic gemination, a common feature in Italian and Neapolitan as well, also known as raddoppiamento sintattico in Italian, and riddoppiamento sintattico in Luthic. Syntactic means that gemination spans word boundaries, as opposed to word-internal geminate consonants. Syntatic gemination is optionally appointed orthographically (for the sake of simplicity, not on this article), and it only happens before a trigger word, however, neither does doubling occur when the initial consonant is followed by another consonant or if is there a pause in between, both phonetically and orthographically, for example “giâ·mmeino haertene ist sfracellato” (now my heart is broken), but “giâ, meino haertene ist sfracellato” (now, my heart is broken). Trigger words include:
All feminine plural nouns, preceded by the feminine plural definite article, le.
All neuter singular nouns, preceded by the neuter singular definite article, atha.
Stressed monosyllabic words that end in a vowel, examples include giâ, þû, fiê, piê, etc.
The prepositions a, a, da, and the conjunctions au, e, né.
The first person singular conjugated forms stô, gô and other monosyllabic irregular verbs such as chiô.
The proximal demonstrative pronouns in the following forms: su, sa, þatha, þo, þa, þammo, þe.
La cittâ stâþ sporca/lɐ t͡ʃitˈta ˈstaθ ˈspor.kɐ/ > [lɐ t͡ʃitˈta.s‿ˈsta.s‿ˈspor.kɐ] (the citty is dirty), but never spelt as la cittâ·sstâ·ssporca, as explained in the syntactic gemination section above, even though this is a different phonological process.
======Deletion======
In some rare cases, the consonants are fully deleted (elision), as in the verb havere, akin to Italian avere, which followed a very similar paradigm and evolution:
1st person indicative present: Latin habeō, Gothic 𐌷𐌰𐌱𐌰 (haba), Luthic aggio (< */ajo/), Italian ho.
2nd person indicative present: Latin habēs, Gothic 𐌷𐌰𐌱𐌰𐌹𐍃 (habais), Luthic hais, Italian hai.
3rd person indicative present: Latin habet, Gothic 𐌷𐌰𐌱𐌰𐌹𐌸 (habaiþ), Luthic hâþ, Italian ha.
Vowels other than /ä/ are often syncopated in unstressed word-internal syllables, especially when in contact with liquid consonants:
In vulgar dialects where cases are fully ignored and prepositions are more used instead, it is very common to apocope the last vowel (except /ɐ/) after a sonorant (/m n l r/) in singular forms, this feature is also very used by poets and it is often considered a poetic characteristic of Luthic:
This is very common to happen with third-person plural verbal forms and infinitive verbal forms as well. Words ending in -N.CV- may result in apocope of the consonant as well:
====Phonotactics====
Luthic allows up to three consonants in syllable-initial position, though there are limitations. The syllable structure of Luthic is (C)(C)(C)(G)V(G)(C)(C). As with English, there exist many words that begin with three consonants. Luthic lacks bimoraic (diphthongs and long vowels), as the so-called diphthongs are composed of one semiconsonantal (glide) sound [j] or [w].
In Graeco-Roman words origin which are only partially assimilated, other combinations such as /pn/ (e.g. pneumaticu), /mn/ (e.g. mnemonicu), /tm/ (e.g. tmesi), and /ps/ (e.g. pseudo-) occur.
As an onset, the cluster /s/ + voiceless consonant is inherently unstable. Phonetically, word-internal s+C normally syllabifies as [s.C]. A competing analysis accepts that while the syllabification /s.C/ is accurate historically, modern retreat of i-prosthesis before word initial /s/+C (e.g. miþ isforzȧ “with effort” has generally given way to miþ sforza) suggests that the structure is now underdetermined, with occurrence of /s.C/ or /.sC/ variable “according to the context and the idiosyncratic behaviour of the speakers.”
The nucleus is the only mandatory part of a syllable and must be a vowel or a diphthong. In a falling diphthong the most common second elements are /i̯/ or /u̯/. Combinations of /j w/ with vowels are often labelled diphthongs, allowing for combinations of /j w/ with falling diphthongs to be called triphthongs. One view holds that it is more accurate to label /j w/ as consonants and /jV wV/ as consonant-vowel sequences rather than rising diphthongs. In that interpretation, Luthic has only falling diphthongs (phonemically at least, cf. synaeresis) and no triphthongs.
=====Prosody=====
Luthic is quasi-paroxytonic, meaning that most words receive stress on their penultimate (second-to-last) syllable. Monosyllabic words tend to lack stress in their only syllable, unless emphasised or accentuated. Enclitic and other unstressed personal pronouns do not affect stress patterns. Some monosyllabic words may have natural stress (even if not emphasised), but it is weaker than those in polysyllabic words.
Secondary stress is however often omitted by Italian influence. Tetrasyllabic (and beyond) words may have a very weak secondary stress in the fourth-to-last syllable (i.e. two syllables before the main or primary stress).
==Research==
Ravenna University’s arms
Luthic is a well-studied language, and multiple universities in Italy have departments devoted to Luthic or linguistics with active research projects on the language, mainly in Ravenna, such as the Linguistic Circle of Ravenna (Luthic: Creizzo Rasdavetascapetico Ravenne; Italian: Circolo Linguistico di Ravenna) at Ravenna University, and there are many dictionaries and technological resources on the language. The language council Gafaurdu faul·la Rasda Lûthica also publishes research on the language both nationally and internationally. Academic descriptions of the language are published both in Luthic, Italian and English. The most complete grammar is the Grammatica gli Lûthice Rasde (Grammar of the Luthic Language) by Alessandru Fiscar & Luca Vagnar, and it is written in Luthic and contains over 800 pages. Multiple corpora of Luthic language data are available. The Luthic Online Dictionary project provides a curated corpus of 35,000 words.
===History===
The Ravenna School of Linguistics evolved around Giuvanni Laggobardi and his developing theory of language in linguistic structuralism. Together with Soġnafreþo Rossi he founded the Circle of Linguistics of Ravenna in 1964, a group of linguists based on the model of the Prague Linguistic Circle. From 1970, Ravenna University offered courses in languages and philosophy but the students were unable to finish their studies without going to Accademia della Crusca for their final examinations.
Ravenna University Circle of Phonological Development (Luthic: Creizzo Sviluppi Phonologici gi’Universitadi Ravenna) was developed in 1990, however very little research has been done on the earliest stages of phonological development in Luthic.
Ravenna University Circle of Theology (Luthic: Creizzo Theologie gi’Universitadi Ravenna) was developed in 2000 in association with the Ravenna Cathedral or Metropolitan Cathedral of the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ (Luthic: Cathedrale metropolitana deï Osstassi Unsari Signori Giesaus Christi; Italian: Cattedrale metropolitana della Risurrezione di Nostro Signore Gesù Cristo; Duomo di Ravenna).
===Phonological development===
Phonological development refers to how children learn to organize sounds into meaning or language (phonology) during their stages of growth.
====Phoneme inventory and phonotactics====
Word-final consonants are rarely produced during the early stages of word production. Consonants are usually found in word-initial position, or in intervocalic position. At 6 months, infants are also able to make use of prosodic features of the ambient language to break the speech stream they are exposed to into meaningful units, e.g., they are better able to distinguish sounds that occur in stressed vs. unstressed syllables. This means that at 6 months infants have some knowledge of the stress patterns in the speech they are exposed and they have learned that these patterns are meaningful.
=====10 months=====
Most consonants are word-initial only: They are voiced stops /d/, /b/ and the nasal /m/. A presence of voiceless stops is also found as /t/, /p/ and rarely /k/; who can be allphones of each other. A preference for a front place of articulation is present. Clicks are also present, although mostly for imitative suckling sounds, blowing a raspberry has also a common register between toddlers.
Babbling becomes distinct from previous, less structured vocal play. Initially, syllable structure is limited to CVCV, called reduplicated babbling. Consonant clusters are still absent. Children’s first ten words appear around month 12, and take CVCV format, such as mama “mother”, papa “father” and dada “give me!”.
=====21 months=====
More phones now appear: the nasal /n/, the voiceless fricative /t͡ʃ/, who can be an allphone of /t ~ d/; as voice is still not a distinctive feature, and the liquid /l/. The preference for front articulation is still present, triggering palatalisation.
=====24 months=====
Fricatives may appear: /f ~ v/ and /s/ (who can be further palatalised to /ʃ/), primarily at intervocalic position. Voice may become a distinctive feature at this stage. Onomatopoeiae are also produced, such as /aw aw/ for dog’s barking; /ow/, or preferably /aj/ for denoting pain. Production of trisyllabic words begins, such as C₁VC₂VC₃V. Consonant clusters are now present and are often subject to consonant harmony, such as -mb-, -nd- and -dr-; however voiced-voiceless clusters are still rare, such as -mp- and -tr-.
=====30 months=====
Approximately equal numbers of phones are now produced in word-initial and intervocalic position. Additions to the phonetic inventory are the voiced stop /ɡ/ and a few consonant clusters. Co-articulations are perceived, such as labio-velar plosives. Alveolars and bilabials are the two most common places of articulation. Labiodental and postalveolar production increases throughout development, while velar production decreases. Luthic lenitions also become evident, as more fricatives and approximants are produced. Children develop syllabic segmentation awareness earlier than phonemic segmentation awareness.
=====Word processes=====
These phonological processes may happen within a range of 3 to 6 years.
Nasal assimilation: non-nasal sounds often become nasal sound due to a nasal sound in the word [ˈrɛn.dɐ] > [ˈnen.nɐ];
Weak syllable deletion: word-initial and word-terminal unstressed syllables are often omitted [bɐˈna.nɐ] > [ˈna.nɐ];
=====6 years=====
Children produce mostly adult-like segments. Their ability to produce complex sound sequences and multisyllabic words continues to improve throughout middle childhood.
===Typology===
Luthic’s link to other Indo-European languages
Luthic has right symmetry, as other VO languages (verb before object) like English.
Correlation
VO language
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
====WALS====
The Atlas of Language Structures (WALS) is a large database of structural (phonological, grammatical, lexical) properties of languages gathered from descriptive materials (such as reference grammars) by a team of 55 authors.
Morphophonological WALS Features
WALS
Luthic
Italian¹
Romanian¹
English
German
Icelandic¹
Headed
Mixed
Mixed
Mixed
Mixed
Mixed
Mixed
Typology
Analytic (partially)
Analytic (partially)
Analytic (partially)
Analytic (partially)
Analytic (partially)
Analytic (partially)
Isochrony
Syllable
Syllable
Stress
Stress
Stress
Syllable
Pro-drop
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Mostly (colloquial)
No
Consonant Inventories
1A
Moderately lalrge
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Vowel Quality Inventories
2A
Large (7-14)
Average (5-6)
Large (7-14)
Large (7-14)
Large (7-14)
Large (7-14)
Consonant-Vowel Ratio
3A
Moderately high
Average
Average
Low
Low
Low
Voicing in Plosives and Fricatives
4A
In both plosives and fricatives
In both plosives and fricatives
In both plosives and fricatives
In both plosives and fricatives
In both plosives and fricatives
In both plosives and fricatives
Voicing and Gaps in Plosive Systems
5A
None missing in /p t k b d g/
None missing in /p t k b d g/
None missing in /p t k b d g/
None missing in /p t k b d g/
None missing in /p t k b d g/
None missing in /p t k b d g/
Uvular Consonants
6A
None
None
None
None
Uvular continuants only
None
Glottalised Consonants
7A
No glottalised consonants
No glottalised consonants
No glottalised consonants
No glottalised consonants
No glottalised consonants
No glottalised consonants
Lateral Consonants
8A
/l/, no obstruent laterals
/l/, no obstruent laterals
/l/, no obstruent laterals
/l/, no obstruent laterals
/l/, no obstruent laterals
/l/, no obstruent laterals
The Velar Nasal
9A
No initial velar nasal
No velar nasal
No velar nasal
No initial velar nasal
No initial velar nasal
No initial velar nasal
Vowel Nasalisation
10A
Contrast present
Contrast absent
Contrast absent
Contrast absent
Contrast absent
Contrast absent
Front Rounded Vowels
11A
None
None
None
None
High and mid
High and mid
Syllable Structure
12A
Complex
Moderately complex
Moderately complex
Complex
Complex
Complex
Fixed Stress Locations
14A
No fixed stress
No fixed stress
No fixed stress
No fixed stress
No fixed stress
Initial
Weight-Sensitive Stress
15A
Right-oriented: One of the last three
Right-edge: Ultimate or penultimate
Right-edge: Ultimate or penultimate
Right-oriented: One of the last three
Right-oriented: One of the last three
Fixed stress (no weight-sensitivity)
Weight Factors in Weight-Sensitive Stress Systems
16A
Lexical stress
Lexical stress
Lexical stress
Long vowel or coda consonant
Coda consonant
No weight
Rhythm Types
17A
Undetermined
Undetermined
Undetermined
Trochaic
Trochaic
Trochaic
Absence of Common Consonants
18A
All present
All present
All present
All present
All present
All present
Presence of Uncommon Consonants
19A
‘Th’ sounds
None
None
‘Th’ sounds
None
‘Th’ sounds
Fusion of Selected Inflectional Formatives
20A
Exclusively concatenative
Exclusively concatenative
Exclusively concatenative
Exclusively concatenative
Exclusively concatenative
Exclusively concatenative
Exponence of Tense-Aspect-Mood Inflection
21B
TAM+agreement
TAM+agreement
TAM+agreement
Monoexponential TAM
Monoexponential TAM
Monoexponential TAM
Inflectional Synthesis of the Verb
22A
4-5 categories per word
4-5 categories per word
4-5 categories per word
2-3 categories per word
2-3 categories per word
2-3 categories per word
Locus of Marking in the Clause
23A
Double marking
Double marking
Double marking
Dependent marking
Dependent marking
Dependent marking
Locus of Marking in Possessive Noun Phrases
24A
Dependent marking
Dependent marking
Dependent marking
Dependent marking
Dependent marking
Dependent marking
Locus of Marking: Whole-language Typology
25A
Inconsistent or other
Inconsistent or other
Inconsistent or other
Dependent-marking
Dependent-marking
Dependent-marking
Zero Marking of A and P Arguments
25B
Non-zero marking
Non-zero marking
Non-zero marking
Non-zero marking
Non-zero marking
Non-zero marking
Prefixing vs. Suffixing in Inflectional Morphology
26A
Strongly suffixing
Strongly suffixing
Strongly suffixing
Strongly suffixing
Strongly suffixing
Strongly suffixing
Reduplication
27A
No productive reduplication
No productive reduplication
No productive reduplication
No productive reduplication
No productive reduplication
No productive reduplication
Case Syncretism
28A
Core and non-core
Core and non-core
Core and non-core
Core cases only
Core and non-core
Core and non-core
Syncretism in Verbal Person/Number Marking
29A
Syncretic
Syncretic
Syncretic
Syncretic
Syncretic
Syncretic
¹ Some features and values are stipulated due to lack of resources.
====Information rate====
The concept of “information density” relates to how languages convey semantic information within the speech signal. Essentially, a language is considered dense if it uses fewer speech elements to convey a given amount of semantic meaning compared to a sparser language. Units such as features or articulatory gestures involve complex multidimensional patterns (such as gestural scores or feature matrices) that are unsuitable for computing average information density during speech communication. In contrast, each speech sample can be described in terms of discrete sequences of segments or syllables, which are potential candidates, although their exact significance and role in communication remain uncertain. Therefore, this study opts to utilise syllables for both methodological and theoretical reasons.
Assuming that for each text Tk, composed of σk(L) syllables in language L, the over-all semantic content Sk is equivalent from one language to another, the average quantity of information per syllable for Tk and for language L is calculated as in 1.
Since Sk is language-independent, it was eliminated by computing a normalised information density (ID) using Vietnamese (VI) as the benchmark. For each text Tk and language L, IDkL resulted from a pairwise comparison of the text lengths (in terms of syllables) in L and VI respectively.
Next, the average information density IDL (in terms of linguistic information per syllable) with reference to VI is defined as the mean of IDkL evaluated for the K texts.
Language
IDL
Syllabic rate
Information rate
English
0.91
6.19
1.08
French
0.74
7.18
0.99
Italian
0.72
6.99
0.96
Spanish
0.63
7.82
0.98
German
0.79
5.67
0.90
Luthic
0.81
6.45
0.97
Vietnamese
1 (reference)
5.22
1 (reference)
Another factor is the syllabic complexity index, being measured in two ways: type and token.
Type complexity: considers each unique syllable only once when calculating the average complexity.
Token complexity: takes into account the frequency of occurrence of each unique syllable in the corpus by weighting the complexity accordingly.
Language
Syllable inventory size
Type complexity
Token complexity
English
7,931
3.70
2.48
French
5,646
3.50
2.21
Italian
2,719
3.50
2.30
Spanish
1,593
3.30
2.40
German
4,207
3.70
2.68
Luthic
4,129
3.60
2.40
====Etymological Dictionary of the Luthic Inherited Lexicon====
The EDLIL.
An entire etymological dictionary is provided. The Etymological Dictionary of the Luthic Inherited Lexicon (Luthic: Vaurdobuocu Etimologicu Lûthici Lessici Hereditati, abbreviated EDLIL / Luthic: VELLH). For every Luthic entry an etymology is given, together with many Indo-European cognates, in some cases, the history of etymological research is also provided; for every entry, translations in English, French, Spanish, Italian and German are provided, together with an IPA key for the Luthic pronunciation. An online version of the EDLIL is provided by Ravenna University.
===Mnemonics===
A mnemonic device (/nɪˈmɒnɪk/nih-MON-ik) or memory device is any learning technique that aids information retention or retrieval in the human memory, often by associating the information with something that is easier to remember.
A Luthic mnemonic verse or mnemonic rhyme is a mnemonic device for teaching and remembering Luthic grammar. Such mnemonics have been considered by teachers to be an effective technique for schoolchildren to learn the complex rules of Luthic accidence and syntax. Mnemonics may be helpful in learning foreign languages, for example by transposing difficult foreign words with words in a language the learner knows already, also called “cognates” which are very common in Romance languages and other Germanic languages. A useful such technique is to find linkwords, words that have the same pronunciation in a known language as the target word, and associate them visually or auditorially with the target word; such tecniques have been applied into Luthic learning for children, Italian and other dialleti speakers.
A Luthic rhyme for remembering the masculine nominative singular, masculine accusative singular and neuter nominato-accusative singular is given by many teachers during school first years:
<poem> buonu: veglio vessare buono: veglio stare ac atha buono? veglio mangiare!
Translated it into English as follows:
good: I want to be in a good place: I want to be in but what about the good food? I want to eat!
The Ravenna University Circle of Phonological Development also found out that mnemonics can be used in aiding children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and other neurodevelopmental disorders, patients with memory deficits that could be caused by head injuries, strokes, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis and other neurological conditions, however, in the case of stroke patients, the results did not reach statistical significance.
Grammar
Luthic Grammar is the body of rules describing the properties of the Luthic language. Luthic words can be divided into the following lexical categories: articles, nouns, adjectives, pronouns, verbs, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, and interjections.
Nouns
Luthic grammar is almost typical of the grammar of Romance languages in general. Cases exist for personal pronouns (nominative, accusative, dative, genitive), and unlike other Romance languages (except Romanian), they also exist for nouns, but are often ignored in common speech, mainly because of the Italian influence, a language who lacks noun cases. There are three basic classes of nouns in Luthic, referred to as genders, masculine, feminine and neuter. Masculine nouns typically end in -u, with plural marked by -i, feminine nouns typically end in -a, with plural marked by -e, and neuter nouns typically end in -o, with plural marked by -a. Some feminine nouns, together with masculine nouns, the so called u-stems may also typically end in -u, with the plural marked by -us, while neuter u-stems have the plural marked by -ua. A fifth category of nouns is unmarked for gender, ending in -e in the singular and -i in the plural; a variant of the unmarked declension is found ending in -r in the singular and -i in the plural, it lacks neuter nouns:
The declension paradigm of u-stems nouns is simplier than other nouns, since the nominative is identical to the accusative.
Number
Case
u-stem m
u-stem f
u-stem n
Singular
nom.
portu
manu
faeu
acc.
portu
manu
faeu
dat.
portau
manau
faeau
gen.
portaus
manaus
faeaus
Plural
nom.
portus
manus
faeua
acc.
portus
manus
faeua
dat.
portevo
manevo
faeevo
gen.
porteve
maneve
faeeve
A small class of quasi-irregular nouns is found, itself being a variant of the unmarked class. The nominative forms always are oxytones and hide their consonant stem -d-. These are often called d-stem:
Number
Case
d-stem unm
d-stem unm
d-stem unm
Singular
nom.
piê
fê
-tâ
acc.
piede
fede
-tade
dat.
piedi
fedi
-tadi
gen.
piedi
fedi
-tadi
Plural
nom.
piedi
fedi
-tadi
acc.
piedes
fedes
-tades
dat.
piedevo
fedevo
-tadevo
gen.
piede
fede
-tade
Pronouns
Luthic, like Latin and Gothic, inherited the full set of Indo-European pronouns: personal pronouns (including reflexive pronouns for each of the three grammatical persons), possessive pronouns, both simple and compound demonstratives, relative pronouns, interrogatives and indefinite pronouns. Each follows a particular pattern of inflection (partially mirroring the noun declension), much like other Indo-European languages. Although Luthic inherited a paradigm extremely close to Gothic (and Common Germanic), the Italic influence is visible in the genitive and plural formations.
Pronouns often become a clitic nearby verbs, mainly with imperative or after non-finite forms of verbs (often apocopating the terminal -e of infinitives), being applied as enclitics. A good example is faur þuc “for you” but (ic) dauþo·t “I kill you”. Paradigmata is given below:
Enclitic pronouns
Number
Case
1st person
2st person
3rd person
reflexive
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
acc.
mi ·m
ti ·t
lo ·l
la ·l
lo ·l
si ·s
dat.
mi ·m
ti ·t
gli ·gl
gli ·gl
gli ·gl
si ·s
gen.
—
—
ne ·n
ne ·n
ne ·n
ne ·n
Plural
acc.
ci
vi
los ·l
las ·l
la ·l
si ·s
dat.
ci
vi
li ·l
li ·l
li ·l
si ·s
gen.
—
—
ne ·n
ne ·n
ne ·n
ne ·n
Apocopated forms happen before or after (vide below) a vowel, e.g.:
(Ic) gevo·t lo chiaefo “I give you the bread”
(Vi) gevamos·ti lo chiaefo “we give you the bread
(Þû) gevas·mi lo chiaefo “you give me the bread”
(Eis) gevando·m lo chiaefo “they give me the bread”
Luthic has mesoclitic pronouns, which happen in compounded verbs with havere (vide § Verbs), i.e. the present conditionals active and passive and the future indicatives active and passive:
(Ic) gever·t’ô lo chiaefo “I will give you the bread”
(Ic) gever·vi·ô lo chiaefo “I will give you the bread”
(Vi) gever·l’êmos lo chiaefo “We will give him the bread”
Optionally, ti or ·t can be voiced to di or ·d after a voiced sonorant:
(Ic) gever·d’ô lo chiaefo “I will give you the bread”
Verbs that start with a vowel or ⟨h⟩ call for a proclitic, except for first and second person plural:
Proclitic pronouns
Number
Case
1st person
2st person
3rd person
reflexive
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
acc.
m’
t’
l’
l’
l’
s’
dat.
m’
t’
gl’
gl’
gl’
s’
gen.
—
—
n’
n’
n’
n’
Plural
acc.
—
—
l’
l’
l’
s’
dat.
—
—
l’
l’
l’
s’
gen.
—
—
n’
n’
n’
n’
(Ic) t’amo “I love you”
(Ic) t’hazo “I hate you”
(Eis) t’helpando “they help you”
Some Luthic speakers may have T–V distinction (the contextual use of different pronouns that exists in some languages and serves to convey formality or familiarity).
Unequal authority
Equal authority
Employer
Costumer
Parent
Elder sibling
T↓V ↑V
T↓V ↑V
T↓↑V
T↓↑V
Employee
Waiter
Child
Younger sibling
The superior has choice on T–V while the subordinate has not; except if talking to one another, then both subordinates can choice. In Luthic, þû is only used as an informal pronoun. It is only addressed to persons that one knows well, like family members and friends. It is also most commonly used among peers as a sign of equality, especially among young people. In formal situations with strangers and acquaintances, vôi is used instead. The pronoun gi was used in formal situations; this was once the abundant usage, but it has completely fallen out of use. In the plural form, gi is a T pronoun.
Possessive pronouns
Possessive pronouns of Standard Luthic
Number
Case
1st person singular
2st person singular
3rd person singular
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
nom.
meinu
meina
meino
þeinu
þeina
þeino
seinu
seina
seina
acc.
meino
meina
meino
þeino
þeina
þeino
seino
seina
seino
dat.
meina
meina
meina
þeina
þeina
þeina
seina
seina
seina
gen.
meini
meine
meini
þeini
þeine
þeini
seini
seine
seini
Plural
nom.
meini
meine
meina
þeini
þeine
þeina
seini
seine
seina
acc.
meinos
meinas
meina
þeinos
þeinas
þeina
seinos
seinas
seina
dat.
meinevo
meinevo
meinevo
þeinevo
þeinevo
þeinevo
seinevo
seinevo
seinevo
gen.
meinoro
meinaro
meinoro
þeinoro
þeinaro
þeinoro
seinoro
seinaro
seinoro
Possessive pronouns of Standard Luthic
Number
Case
1st person plural
2st person plural
3rd person plural
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
nom.
unsar
unsara
unsaro
isvar
isvara
isvaro
seinu
seina
seino
acc.
unsare
unsara
unsaro
isvare
isvara
isvaro
seino
seina
seino
dat.
unsari
unsara
unsara
isvari
isvara
isvara
seina
seina
seina
gen.
unsari
unsare
unsari
isvari
isvare
isvari
seini
seine
seini
Plural
nom.
unsari
unsare
unsara
isvari
isvare
isvara
seini
seine
seina
acc.
unsares
unsaras
unsara
isvares
isvaras
isvara
seinos
seinas
seina
dat.
unsarevo
unsarevo
unsarevo
isvarevo
isvarevo
isvarevo
seinevo
seinevo
seinevo
gen.
unsare
unsararo
unsaroro
isvare
isvararo
isvaroro
seinoro
seinaro
seinoro
The pronouns unsar, isvar have an irregular declension, being declined like an unmarked adjective in the masculine gender and marked in the other genders. Every possessive pronoun is declined like an o-stem adjective for masculine and neuter gender, while its feminine counterpart is declined as an a-stem adjective
Interrogative and indefinite pronouns
Interrogative pronouns of Standard Luthic
Number
Case
what, who
which
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
nom.
ce
ce
ce
carge
carge
carge
acc.
ci
ci
ci
cargi
cargi
cargi
dat.
ciammo
cise
ciammo
cargiammo
cargise
cargiammo
gen.
cis
cise
cis
cargis
cargise
cargis
Plural
nom.
ci
ce
cia
cargi
carge
cargia
acc.
ces
cias
cia
cargios
cargias
cargia
dat.
cevo
cevo
cevo
cargevo
cargevo
cargevo
gen.
coro
caro
coro
cargioro
cargiaro
cargioro
In the masculine singular, not agreeing with any other word: “who”.
As a predicate agreeing in gender and number with subject: “who”.
In the neuter singular, not agreing with any other word: “what”.
Accusative forms: “whom”.
Genitive forms: “whose”.
Indefinite pronouns of Standard Luthic
Number
Case
each, everyone, everything
every
whatever, whoever
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
nom.
casu
casa
caso
cargisu
cargisa
cargiso
cece
cece
cece
acc.
caso
casa
caso
cargiso
cargisa
cargiso
ceci
ceci
ceci
dat.
cammo
chise
cammo
cargiamme
cargise
cargiamme
ceciammo
cecise
ceciammo
gen.
chis
chise
chis
cargesu
cargesu
cargesu
cecis
cecise
cecis
Plural
nom.
—
—
—
—
—
—
ceci
cece
cecia
acc.
—
—
—
—
—
—
ceces
cecias
cecia
dat.
—
—
—
—
—
—
cecevo
cecevo
cecevo
gen.
—
—
—
—
—
—
cecoro
cecaro
cecoro
The relative pronoun ei is fully indeclinable, it is sometimes called “common relative particle”.
Demonstrative pronouns
Luthic has a Proximal-Medial-Distal demonstrative system:
Demonstrative pronouns of Standard Luthic
Number
Case
Proximal
Medial
Distal
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
nom.
su
sa
þatha
este
esta
esto
giaenu
giaena
giaeno
acc.
þo
þa
þatha
este
esta
esto
giaeno
giaena
giaeno
dat.
þammo
þise
þammo
esti
esta
esta
giaena
giaena
giaena
gen.
þis
þise
þis
esti
este
esti
giaeni
giaene
giaeni
Plural
nom.
þi
þe
þa
esti
este
esta
giaeni
giaene
giaena
acc.
þos
þas
þa
estes
estas
esta
giaenos
giaenas
giaena
dat.
þevo
þevo
þevo
estevo
estevo
estevo
giaenevo
giaenevo
giaenevo
gen.
þisoro
þisaro
þisoro
este
estaro
estoro
giaenoro
giaenaro
giaenoro
Articles
Luthic articles are used similarly to the English articles, a and the. However, they are declined differently according to the number, gender and case of their nouns.
Number
Case
Indefinite
Definite
masculine
feminine
neuter
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
nom.
aenu
aena
aeno
il
la
latha, atha
acc.
aeno
aena
aeno
lo
la
latha, atha
dat.
aena
aena
aena
la
la
la
gen.
aeni
aene
aeni
gli, i
gli, i
gli, i
Plural
nom.
aeni
aene
aena
gli, i
le
la
acc.
aenos
aenas
aena
los
las
la
dat.
aenevo
aenevo
aenevo
lom, levo
lam, levo
lom, levo
gen.
aenoro
aenaro
aenoro
loro
loro
loro
Adjectives
In Luthic, an adjective can be placed before or after the noun. The unmarked placement for most adjectives is after the noun. Placing the adjective after the noun can alter its meaning or indicate restrictiveness of reference.
Aenu buocu rossu “a red book” (unmarked)
Aenu rossu buocu “a book that is red” (marked)
Adjectives are inflected for case, gender and number, the paradigmata are identical to the nominal paradigmata.
Number
Case
o-stem m
a-stem f
o-stem n
i-stem unm
r-stem unm
Singular
nom.
rossu
rossa
rosso
felice
polchar
acc.
rosso
rossa
rosso
felice
polchare
dat.
rossa
rossa
rossa
felici
polchari
gen.
rossi
rosse
rossi
felici
polchari
Plural
nom.
rossi
rosse
rossa
felici
polchari
acc.
rossos
rossas
rossa
felices
polchares
dat.
rossevo
rossevo
rossevo
felicevo
polcharevo
gen.
rossoro
rossaro
rossoro
felice
polchare
Luthic has two grammatical constructions for expressing comparison: comparative and superlative. The suffixes -izu (the “comparative”) and -issimu (the “superlative”) are of Indo-European origin and are cognate with the Latin suffixes -ior and -issimus and Ancient Greek -ῑ́ων (-īōn) and -ῐστος (-istos). This system also contains a number of irregular forms, mainly because of suppletion.
Adverbial numbers are formed together with the noun vece: aena vece “once”, tve veci “twice”.
Multiplier numbers are formed together with the noun falþu: aenu falþu “single, onefold”, hondi falþi “centuple, hundredfold”. This noun was originally a suffix, compare Gothic 𐌰𐌹𐌽𐍆𐌰𐌻𐌸𐍃 (ainfalþs), English onefold, Icelandic einfaldur.
Distributive numbers are formed together with the adjective falþoleicu: þreis falþoleici “triply”.
Collective numbers are formed together with the adjective somu: tvelefe somi “dozen”.
Fractional numbers are formed together with the adjective integru: fidvor integri “quarter”.
Standard Luthic large numbers
#
Cardinal
Ordinal
Word
Declension
Word
Declension
200
tvihondi α
o-stem adjective, plurale tantum
tvihondêsimu β
o-stem adjective
500
fimfehondi γ
o-stem adjective, plurale tantum
fimfehondêsimu
o-stem adjective
1 000
mille
i-stem
millêsimu
o-stem adjective
2 000
tvimilli α
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
tvimillêsimu β
o-stem adjective
5 000
fimfemilli γ
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
fimfemillêsimu
o-stem adjective
10 000
ziumilli γ
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
ziumillêsimu
o-stem adjective
20 000
vintamilli γ
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
vintamillêsimu
o-stem adjective
50 000
fimfintamilli γ
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
fimfintamillêsimu
o-stem adjective
100 000
hondimilli α
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
hondimillêsimu β
o-stem adjective
200 000
tvihondimilli δ
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
tvihondimillêsimu β
o-stem adjective
500 000
fimfehondimilli ε
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
fimfehondimillêsimu β
o-stem adjective
106
millione
i-stem adjective
millionêsimu
o-stem adjective
2 x 106
tvimillioni α
i-stem adjective, plurale tantum
tvimillionêsimu β
o-stem adjective
109
milliarde
i-stem adjective
milliardêsimu
o-stem adjective
1012
billione
i-stem adjective
billionêsimu
o-stem adjective
1015
billiarde
i-stem adjective
billiardêsimu
o-stem adjective
1019
trillione
i-stem adjective
trillionêsimu
o-stem adjective
α Both elements are declinable, e.g. tvehonde, tvahonda;
β Only the last element is declinable, e.g. tvihondêsima, tvihondêsimoro;
γ The first element is indeclinable;
δ All the three elements are declinable, e.g. tvarohondaromillem, tvoshondosmilles;
ε Only the two last elements are declinable, e.g. fimfehondommillevo.
Luthic uses the long scale, unlike English that uses the short scale instead. The long and short scales are two of several naming systems for integer powers of ten which use some of the same terms for different magnitudes. Luthic has a verbal system similar to Italian, German, Dutch and French:
Combinations of a decade and a unit are constructed in a regular way: the decade comes first followed by the unit. No spaces are written between them. Vowel collision triggers an interpunct. For example:
28 vinta·attau (lit “twenty eight”)
73 siuntaþreis (lit “seventy three”)
82 attantatvi (lit “eighty two”)
95 niuntafimfe (lit “ninety five”)
Combinations of a hundred and a lower number are expressed by just placing them together, with the hundred coming first.
111 honduaellefe
164 hondusessantafidvor
225 tvihondivintafimfe
788 siuhondi·attanta·attau
Combinations of a thousand and a lower number are expressed by placing them together, with the thousand coming first. A space is written between them.
When alone, numbers are always in the masculine gender, however numbers always agree in gender and in case (if declinable) with the head noun. For example:
aenu vaere (“one man”)
aena qena (“one woman”)
aenu harge hondevo vaerevo (“an army [composed] of hundred men”)
il meinu hareme hâþ tvashondas qenas (“my harem has two hundred women”)
Compound numbers have both elements declined (if possible):
The four classes of verbs (conjugation’s patterns) are distinguished by the infinitive’s endings form of the verb:
1st conjugation:-are (þagcare “to think”);
2nd conjugation:-ere (credere “to believe”);
3rd conjugation:-ore (holore “to accuse”);
4th conjugation:-ire (dormire “to sleep”).
Additionally, Luthic has a number of verbs that do not follow predictable patterns in all conjugation classes, most markedly the present and the past. Often classified together as irregular verbs, their irregularities occur to different degrees, with forms of vessare “to be”, and somewhat less extremely, havere “to have”, the least predictable. Others, such as ganare “to go”, stare “to stay, to stand”, taugiare “to do, to make”, and numerous others, follow various degrees of regularity within paradigms, largely due to suppletion, historical sound change or analogical developments.
Present
The present is used for:
Events happening in the present;
Habitual actions;
Current states of being and conditions;
Actions planned to occur in the future.
Active Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagco
credo
holo
dormo
im
aggio
gô
stô
taugio
þû
þagcis
credis
holis
dormis
is
hais
gâs
stais
taugis
is
þagcat
credet
holot
dormit
ist
hâþ
gâþ
stâþ
taugit
vi
þagciamos
crediamos
holiamos
dormiamos
siemos
abbiamos
ghiamos
stiamos
taugiamos
gi
þagcates
credetes
holotes
dormites
sietes
havetes
gates
states
taugiates
eis
þagcando
credondo
holondo
dormondo
sondo
hondo
gando
stando
taugiondo
Passive Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcara
credera
holora
dormira
—
aggiara
andara
—
taugiara
þû
þagcasa
credesa
holosa
dormisa
—
haisa
andasa
—
taugiasa
is
þagcaða
credeða
holoða
dormiða
—
haiða
andaða
staða
taugiaða
vi
þagcanða
credenða
holonða
dorminða
—
hanða
andanða
—
taugianða
gi
þagcanða
credenða
holonða
dorminða
—
hanða
andanða
—
taugianða
eis
þagcanða
credenða
holonða
dorminða
—
hanða
andanða
stanða
taugianða
Present subjunctive
Used for subordinate clauses of the present to express opinion, possibility, desire, or doubt. The Subjunctive is almost always preceded by the common relative particle.
Active Subjunctive
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagci
creda
holi
dorma
sia
abbia
vada
stia
taugia
þû
þagcis
credas
holis
dormas
sias
abbias
vadas
stias
taugias
is
þagcit
credat
holit
dormat
siaþ
abbiat
vadat
stiaþ
taugiat
vi
þagciamos
crediamos
holiamos
dormamos
siamos
abbiamos
andiamos
stiamos
taugiaumos
gi
þagciates
crediates
holiates
dormates
siates
abbiates
andiates
stiates
taugiautes
eis
þagcindo
credando
holindo
dormando
siando
abbiando
vadando
stiando
taugiando
Passive Subjunctive
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcirau
credarau
holirau
dormarau
—
abbiarau
vadarau
—
taugiaurau
þû
þagcisau
credasau
holisau
dormasau
—
abbiasa
vadasa
—
taugiausa
is
þagciðau
credaðau
holiðau
dormaðau
—
abbiaðau
vadaðau
stiaðau
taugiauðau
vi
þagcinðau
credianðau
holinðau
dormanðau
—
abbianðau
andianðau
—
taugiaunðau
gi
þagcinðau
credianðau
holinðau
dormanðau
—
abbianðau
andianðau
—
taugiaunðau
eis
þagcinðau
credianðau
holinðau
dormanðau
—
abbianðau
andianðau
stianðau
taugiaunðau
Present conditional
Used for events that are dependent upon another event occurring. The conditional is also used for politely asking for something (as in English: “could I please have a glass of water?”)
Active Conditinal
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcerebbi
crederebbi
holorebbi
dormirebbi
sarebbi
haverebbi
garebbi
starebbi
tavarebbi
þû
þagceresti
crederesti
holoresti
dormiresti
saresti
haveresti
garesti
staresti
tavaresti
is
þagcerebbet
crederebbet
holorebbet
dormirebbet
sarebbet
haverebbet
garebbet
starebbet
taverebbet
vi
þagceremmos
crederemmos
holoremmos
dormiremmos
saremmos
haveremmos
garemmos
staremmos
tavaremmos
gi
þagcerestes
crederestes
holorestes
dormirestes
sarestes
haverestes
garestes
starestes
tavarestes
eis
þagcerebbero
crederebbero
holorebbero
dormirebbero
sarebbero
haverebbero
garebbero
starebbero
tavarebbero
Passive Conditinal
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcerebbira
crederebbira
holorebbira
dormirebbira
—
haverebbira
garebbira
—
tavarebbira
þû
þagceressa
crederessa
holoressa
dormiressa
—
haveressa
garessa
—
tavaressa
is
þagcerebbeða
crederebbeða
holorebbeða
dormirebbeða
—
haverebbeða
garebbeða
starebbeða
taverebbeða
vi
þagceremma
crederemma
holoremma
dormiremma
—
haveremma
garemma
—
tavaremma
gi
þagceremma
crederemma
holoremma
dormiremma
—
haveremma
garemma
—
tavaremma
eis
þagceremma
crederemma
holoremma
dormiremma
—
haveremma
garemma
staremma
tavaremma
vessare lacks a passive voice form;
stare passive voice form is only impersonal.
Present perfect
The present perfect is used for single actions or events (sa maurgna im ganatu a scuola “I went to school this morning”), or change in state (sic ist þvaersotu can atha ia aggio rogiatu “he got angry when I told him that”), contrasting with the imperfect which is used for habits (eggiavo bicichietta a scuola alla maurgna “I used to go to school by bike every morning”), or repeated actions, not happening at a specific time (sic þvaersovat alla vece ei, giuveðar can atha ia rogiavat “he got angry every time someone told him that”).
Past participle
The past participle is used to form the compound pasts (e.g. aggio tavitu “I have done”). Regular verbs follow a predictable pattern, but there are many verbs with an irregular past participle.
1st conjugation:-atu (þagcatu “thought”);
2nd conjugation:-utu (credutu “believed”);
3rd conjugation:-otu (holotu “accused”);
4th conjugation:-itu (dormitu “slept”);
vessare and stare have both statu;
qemare (“to come”) has qemutu;
havere has havutu;
taugiare has tavitu.
-ato, -uto, -oto, -ito declension
Number
Case
o-stem m
a-stem f
o-stem n
Singular
nom.
-atu, -utu, -otu, -itu
-ata, -uta, -ota, -ita
-ato, -uto, -oto, -ito
acc.
-ato, -uto, -oto, -ito
-ata, -uta, -ota, -ita
-ato, -uto, -oto, -ito
dat.
-ata, -uta, -ota, -ita
-ata, -uta, -ota, -ita
-ata, -uta, -ota, -ita
gen.
-ati, -uti, -oti, -iti
-ate, -ute, -ote, -ite
-ati, -uti, -oti, -iti
Plural
nom.
-ati, -uti, -oti, -iti
-ate, -ute, -ote, -ite
-ata, -uta, -ota, -ita
acc.
-atos, -utos, -otos, -itos
-atas, -utas, -otas, -itas
-ata, -uta, -ota, -ita
dat.
-atevo, -utevo, -otevo, -itevo
-atevo, -utevo, -otevo, -itevo
-atevo, -utevo, -otevo, -itevo
gen.
-atoro, -utoro, -otoro, -itoro
-ataro, -utaro, -otaro, -itaro
-atoro, -utoro, -otoro, -itoro
Except with an immediately preceding third person pronominal direct object, the participle always ends in -u.
All transitive verbs and most intransitive verbs form the present perfect by combining the auxiliary verb havere “to have” in the present tense with the past participle of the transitive verb. A small number of intransitive verbs, namely vessare itself and verbs indicating motion (qemare “to come”, ganare “to go”, affargiare “to arrive”, etc.) use the auxiliary verb vessare instead of havere. The past participle in this agrees with gender and number of the subject. Passive forms always use havere.
Ongoing actions in the past and ongoing actions in the past that are eventually interrupted;
States of being and conditions in the past, including weather, time, age.
The difference between imperfective and perfective aspects can be illustrated clearly with the verb vetare “to know”. The Italian imperfect expresses being in possession of knowledge in the past, while the perfective expresses the moment of acquiring the knowledge.
Imperfective: Vetavo la vera. “I knew the truth.” Perfective: Aggio vetatu la vera. “I found out the truth.”
The Imperfect is, in most cases, formed by taking the stem along with the thematic vowel and adding -v- + the ending of the -are verbs in the present tense (with -amos instead of -iamos). There are no irregular conjugations in the Imperfect except for a few forms inherited from Gothic weak verbs, suppletion, and vessare, which uses the stem er- and -v- appears only in 1st and 2nd person plurals.
Active Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcavo
credevo
holovo
dormivo
ero
havevo
eggiavo
stavo
tavevo
þû
þagcavas
credevas
holovas
dormivas
eras
havevas
eggiavas
stavas
tavevas
is
þagcavat
credevat
holovat
dormivat
erat
havevat
eggiavat
stavat
tavevat
vi
þagcavamos
credevamos
holovamos
dormivamos
eravamos
havevamos
eggiavamos
stavamos
tavevamos
gi
þagcavates
credevates
holovates
dormivates
eravates
havevates
eggiavates
stavates
tavevates
eis
þagcavando
credevando
holovando
dormivando
erando
havevando
eggiavando
stavando
tavevando
Passive Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcavara
credevara
holovara
dormivara
—
havevara
eggiavara
—
tavevara
þû
þagcavasa
credevasa
holovasa
dormivasa
—
havevasa
eggiavasa
—
tavevasa
is
þagcavaða
credevaða
holovaða
dormivaða
—
havevaða
eggiavaða
stavaða
tavevaða
vi
þagcavanða
credevanða
holovanða
dormivanða
—
havevanða
eggiavanða
—
tavevanða
gi
þagcavanða
credevanða
holovanða
dormivanða
—
havevanða
eggiavanða
—
tavevanða
eis
þagcavanða
credevanða
holovanða
dormivanða
—
havevanða
eggiavanða
stavanða
tavevanða
Subjunctive imperfect
Used for the subordinate clauses of the imperfect indicative or the conditional. For regular verbs, the subjunctive is formed by taking the infinitive and replacing -re with -ssi, -ssis, -ssit, -ssimos, -ssites, -ssero:
Active Subjunctive
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcassi
credessi
holossi
dormissi
fossi
havessi
eggissi
stessi
tavissi
þû
þagcassis
credessis
holossis
dormissis
fossis
havessis
eggissis
stessis
tavissis
is
þagcassit
credessit
holossit
dormissit
fossit
havessit
eggissit
stessit
tavissit
vi
þagcassimos
credessimos
holossimos
dormissimos
fossimos
havessimos
eggissimos
stessimos
tavissimos
gi
þagcassites
credessites
holossites
dormissites
fossites
havessites
eggissites
stessites
tavissites
eis
þagcassero
credessero
holossero
dormissero
fossero
havessero
eggissero
stessero
tavissero
Passive Subjunctive
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcassirau
credessirau
holossirau
dormissirau
—
havessirau
eggissirau
—
tavissirau
þû
þagcassisau
credessisau
holossisau
dormissisau
—
havessisau
eggissisau
—
tavissisau
is
þagcassiðau
credessiðau
holossiðau
dormissiðau
—
havessiðau
eggissiðau
stessiðau
tavissiðau
vi
þagcassinðau
credessinðau
holossinðau
dormissinðau
—
havessinðau
eggissinðau
—
tavissinðau
gi
þagcassinðau
credessinðau
holossinðau
dormissinðau
—
havessinðau
eggissinðau
—
tavissinðau
eis
þagcassinðau
credessinðau
holossinðau
dormissinðau
—
havessinðau
eggissinðau
stessinðau
tavissinðau
Preterite
The preterite (or perfect) has a function distinct from the present perfect. It is used for events which are distant from the present and no longer directly affect it (e.g. telling a story), whereas the present perfect is used for more recent events which may have a direct impact on the present.
Active Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcai
credeï
holoi
dormei
fui
ebbi
gai
stetti
tavi
þû
þagcasti
credesti
holosti
dormisti
fosti
havesti
gasti
stesti
tavisti
is
þagcaut
credaet
holaut
dormeit
fuiþ
ebbet
gauþ
stettet
tavit
vi
þagcammos
credemmos
holommos
dormimmos
fommos
havemmos
gammos
stemmos
tavimmos
gi
þagcastes
credestes
holostes
dormistes
fostes
havestes
gastes
stestes
tavistes
eis
þagcarondo
crederondo
holorondo
dormirondo
furondo
ebbero
garondo
stettero
tavirondo
Passive Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcaera
credeira
holoira
dormeira
—
ebbira
gaira
—
tavira
þû
þagcasa
credessa
holossa
dormissa
—
havessa
gassa
—
tavessa
is
þagcauða
credaeða
holauða
dormeiða
—
ebbeða
gauða
stetteða
taveða
vi
þagcamma
credemma
holomma
dormimma
—
havemma
gamma
—
tavemma
gi
þagcamma
credemma
holomma
dormimma
—
havemma
gamma
—
tavemma
eis
þagcamma
credemma
holomma
dormimma
—
havemma
gamma
stettemma
tavemma
Subjunctive preterite
Used for subordinate clauses of the imperfect indicative or the conditional. The subjunctive preterite is formed the same as the present perfect, but with the auxiliary verb in the subjunctive present.
Active
abbia þagcatu;
sia qemutu;
sias affargiatu.
Passive
abbiarau þagcatu;
abbiarau qemutu;
abbiasau affargiatu.
Conditional preterite
Used for events that would, could or should have occurred or as a prospective past tense. The conditional preterite is formed the same as the present perfect, but with the auxiliary verb in the conditional.
Active
haverebbi dormitu;
sarebbi venutu.
Passive
haverebbira dormitu;
haverebbira venutu.
Future
The future tense is used for events that will happen in the future. It is formed by adding the forms of havere to the infinitive (with abbiamos and havetes contracted to -êmos and -êtes respectively). Sometimes the infinitive undergoes some changes:
It always loses its final -e;
Verbs in -are end in -er, not in -ar (stare however retains star-);
Most irregular verbs lose the vowel before the last r altogether (e.g. havr- for havere and andr- for ganare, suppletion from *andare). Clusters -mr-, -nr- and -lr- are simplified to -rr- (e.g. qerr- for qemare);
vessare has sar-.
Active Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagceraggio
crederaggio
holoraggio
dormiraggio
saraggio
havraggio
andraggio
staraggio
taugieraggio
þû
þagcerais
crederais
holorais
dormirais
sarais
havrais
andrais
starais
taugierais
is
þagcerât
crederât
holorât
dormirât
sarât
havrât
andrât
starât
taugierât
vi
þagcerêmos
crederêmos
holorêmos
dormirêmos
sarêmos
havrêmos
andrêmos
starêmos
taugierêmos
gi
þagcerêtes
crederêtes
holorêtes
dormirêtes
sarêtes
havrêtes
andrêtes
starêtes
taugierêtes
eis
þagcerondo
crederondo
holorondo
dormirondo
sarondo
havrondo
androndo
starondo
taugierondo
Passive Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagcerêra
crederêra
holorêra
dormirêra
—
havrêra
andrêra
—
taugierêra
þû
þagcerêsa
crederêsa
holorêsa
dormirêsa
—
havrêsa
andrêsa
—
taugierêsa
is
þagcerêða
crederêða
holorêða
dormirêða
—
havrêða
andrêða
starêða
taugierêða
vi
þagcerênða
crederênða
holorênða
dormirênða
—
havrênða
andrênða
—
taugierênða
gi
þagcerênða
crederênða
holorênða
dormirênða
—
havrênða
andrênða
—
taugierênða
eis
þagcerênða
crederênða
holorênða
dormirênða
—
havrênða
andrênða
starênða
taugierênða
Future perfect
Used for events that will have happened when or before something else happens in the future. The future perfect is formed the same as the present perfect, but with the auxiliary verb in the future.
Active
havraggio þagcatu;
sarais holotu.
Passive
havrêra þagcatu;
havrêsa holotu.
Imperative
The imperative is used for giving commands. The imperative is formed by:
Removing the infinitive -re;
Adding -te for the plural;
The word becomes an oxytone in the singular.
Affirmative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
þû
þagcâ
credê
holô
dormei
vessâ
havê
ganâ
stâ
taugiâ
gi
þagcate
credete
holote
dormite
vessate
havete
ganate
state
taugiate
Negative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
þû
non þagcare
non credere
non holore
non dormire
non vessare
non havere
non ganare
non stare
non taugiare
gi
non þagcarete
non crederete
non holorete
non dormirete
non vessarete
non haverete
non ganarete
non starete
non taugiarete
Nominal verb forms
Luthic verbs have three additional forms, known as nominal forms, because they can be used as nouns or adjectives, rather than as verbs.
The past participle has been discussed above;
The present participle is used as an adjective or a noun describing someone who is busy doing something. For example, rogiante means “talking” or “someone who is talking”:
Verbs in -are form the present participle by adding -ante to the stem;
Verbs in -ere and -ire form the present participle by adding -ente to the stem;
Verbs in -ore form the present participle by adding -onte to the stem.
The gerund is the adverbial form of the present participle, and has a very broad use. For example: rogiandu can translate to “talking, while talking, by talking, because of one’s talking, through talking…”:
The gerund is identical to the present participle, but with final -te replaced by -du;
Keep in mind that the gerund is an adverb, not an adjective, and so it does not agree in gender and number. The ending is always -u.
vessare, to be
Tense
Forms
Infinitive
vessare
Auxiliary verb
vessare
Past participle
Number
Case
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
nom.
statu
stata
stato
acc.
stato
stata
stato
dat.
stata
stata
stata
gen.
stati
state
stati
Plural
nom.
stati
state
stata
acc.
statos
statas
stata
dat.
statevo
statevo
statevo
gen.
statoro
stataro
statoro
Present participle
vessante
Gerund
vessandu
Person
Tense
first singular ic
second singular þû
third singular is, ia, atha
first plural vi
second plural gi
third plural eis, ise, ia
Indicative
Present
im
is
ist
siemos
sietes
sondo
Present perfect
im statu
is statu
ist statu
ismos stati
istes stati
sondo stati
Imperfect
ero
eras
erat
eravamos
eravates
erando
Preterite
fui
fosti
fuiþ
fostes
fommos
furondo
Future
saraggio
sarais
sarât
sarêmos
sarêtes
sarondo
Future perfect
saraggio statu
sarais statu
sarât statu
sarêmos stati
sarêtes stati
sarondo stati
Subjunctive
Present
sia
sias
siaþ
siamos
siates
siando
Imperfect
fossi
fossis
fossit
fossimos
fossites
fossero
Preterite
sia statu
sias statu
siaþ statu
siamos stati
siates stati
siando stati
Conditional
Present
sarebbi
saresti
sarebbet
saremmos
sarestes
sarebbero
Preterite
sarebbi statu
saresti statu
sarebbet statu
saremmos stati
sarestes stati
sarebbero stati
Imperative
Positive
vessâ
vessate
Negative
non vessare
non vessarete
havere, to have
Tense
Forms
Infinitive
havere
Auxiliary verb
havere
Past participle
Number
Case
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
nom.
havutu
havuta
havuto
acc.
havuto
havuta
havuto
dat.
havuta
havuta
havuta
gen.
havuti
havute
havuti
Plural
nom.
havuti
havute
havuta
acc.
havutos
havutas
havuta
dat.
havutevo
havutevo
havutevo
gen.
havutoro
havutaro
havutoro
Present participle
havente
Gerund
havendu
Person
Tense
first singular ic
second singular þû
third singular is, ia, atha
first plural vi
second plural gi
third plural eis, ise, ia
Indicative
Present active
aggio
hais
hâþ
abbiamos
havetes
hondo
Present passive
havara
havasa
havaða
havanða
havanða
havanða
Present perfect active
aggio havutu
hais havutu
hâþ havutu
abbiamos havutu
havetes havutu
hondo havutu
Present perfect passive
havara havutu
havasa havutu
havaða havutu
havanða havutu
havanða havutu
havanða havutu
Imperfect active
havevo
havevas
havevat
havevamos
havevates
havevando
Imperfect passive
havevara
havevasa
havevaða
havevanða
havevanða
havevanða
Preterite active
ebbi
havesti
ebbet
havemmos
havestes
ebbero
Preterite passive
ebbira
havessa
ebbeða
havemma
havemma
havemma
Future active
havraggio
havrais
havrât
havrêmos
havrêtes
havrondo
Future passive
havrêra
havrêsa
havrêða
havrênða
havrênða
havrênða
Future perfect active
havraggio havutu
havrais havutu
havrât havutu
havrêmos havutu
havrêtes havutu
havrondo havutu
Future perfect passive
havrêra havutu
havrêsa havutu
havrêða havutu
havrênða havutu
havrênða havutu
havrênða havutu
Subjunctive
Present active
abbia
abbias
abbiat
abbiamos
abbiates
abbiando
Present passive
abbiarau
abbiasau
abbiaðau
abbianðau
abbianðau
abbianðau
Imperfect active
havessi
havessis
havessit
havessimos
havessites
havessero
Imperfect passive
havessirau
havessisau
havessiðau
havessinðau
havessinðau
havessinðau
Preterite active
abbia havutu
abbias havutu
abbiat havutu
abbiamos havutu
abbiates havutu
abbiando havutu
Preterite passive
abbiarau havutu
abbiasau havutu
abbiaðau havutu
abbianðau havutu
abbianðau havutu
abbianðau havutu
Conditional
Present active
havrebbi
havresti
havrebbet
havremmos
havrestes
havrebbero
Present passive
havrebbira
havressa
havrebbeða
havremma
havremma
havremma
Preterite active
havrebbi havutu
havresti havutu
havrebbet havutu
havremmos havutu
havrestes havutu
havrebbero havutu
Preterite passive
havrebbira havutu
havressa havutu
havrebbeða havutu
havremma havutu
havremma havutu
havremma havutu
Imperative
Positive
havê
havete
Negative
non havere
non haverete
Adverbs
An adjective can be made into a modal adverb by adding -mente (from Latin “mente”, ablative of “mens” (mind), feminine noun) to the ending of the feminine singular form of the adjective. E.g. lenta “slow (feminine)” becomes lentamente “slowly”. Adjectives ending in -re or -le lose their e before adding -mente (facile “easy” becomes facilmente “easily”, particolare “particular” becomes particolarmente “particularly”). Other adjectives become adverbs by adding -e. E.g. solu (alone) becomes sole (only).
These adverbs can also be derived from the absolute superlative form of adjectives, e.g. lentissimamente (“very slowly").
There is also a plethora of temporal, local, modal and interrogative adverbs, mostly derived from Latin.
Prepositions
Luthic has a closed class of basic prepositions, to which a number of adverbs can be added that also double as prepositions.
In modern Luthic, all the basic prepositions have to be combined with an article placed next to them. Prepositions normally require the article before the following noun in a similar way as the English language does. However Latin’s (and to extension, Gothic) lack of articles influenced several cases of prepositions used without article in Luthic. The prepositions tra and fra are interchangeable, and often chosen on the basis of euphony.
Mandatory contractions
Luthic
English
Preposition + article
m. sg.
f. sg.
n. sg.
l’
m. pl.
f. pl.
n. pl.
di
of, from
da
da
da
dal’
devo
devo
devo
du
to
gia
gia
gia
gi’
giom
giam
giom
a
to, at
allo
alla
allatha
all’
allos
allas
alla
da
from, by, since
dalla
dalla
dalla
dall’
dallevo
dallevo
dallevo
in
in
nallo
nalla
nallatha
nall’
nallos
nallas
nalla
ana
into, on, onto
agno
agna
agnatha
an’
agnos
agnas
agna
su+ ACC
on, about
sullo
sulla
sullatha
sull’
sullos
sullas
sulla
su+ DAT
on, about
sulla
sulla
sulla
sull’
sullevo
sullevo
sullevo
Optional contractions
Luthic
English
Preposition + article
m. sg.
f. sg.
n. sg.
l’
m. pl.
f. pl.
n. pl.
miþ
with
miþþa
miþþa
miþþa
miþþ’
miþþevo
miþþevo
miþþevo
inu
without
inna
inna
inna
inn’
innevo
innevo
innevo
faur
for, through
faullo
faulla
faullatha
faull’
faullos
faullas
faulla
tra
between, among
tralla
tralla
tralla
trall’
trallevo
trallevo
trallevo
fra
between, among
fralla
fralla
fralla
frall’
frallevo
frallevo
frallevo
Preconsonantal apocopated forms
Luthic
English
Preposition + article
du
to
gi
a
to, at
al
da
from, by, since
dal
in
in
nal
ana
into, on, onto
gna
su + ACC/DAT
on, about
sul
Demonstrative pronouns contractions
Furthermore, prepositions also have optional contractions with the proximal and medial demonstrative pronouns:
Contractions with demonstrative pronouns
Luthic
English
Preposition + article
m. sg. pro.
f. sg. pro.
n. sg. pro.
m. pl. pro.
f. pl. pro.
n. pl. pro.
m. sg. med.
f. sg. med.
n. sg. med.
m. pl. med.
f. pl. med.
n. pl. med.
di
of, from
daþþammo
daþþise
daþþammo
daþþevo
daþþevo
daþþevo
desti
desta
desta
destevo
destevo
destevo
du
to
giaþþammo
giaþþise
giaþþammo
giaþþevo
giaþþevo
giaþþevo
giesti
giesta
giesta
giestevo
giestevo
a
to, at
aþþo
aþþa
aþþatha
aþþos
aþþas
aþþa
—
—
—
—
—
—
da
from, by, since
daþþammo
daþþise
daþþammo
daþþevo
daþþevo
daþþevo
desti
desta
desta
destevo
destevo
destevo
in
in
naþþo
naþþa
naþþatha
naþþos
naþþas
naþþa
neste
nesta
nestatha
nestes
nestas
nesta
su+ ACC
on, about
suþþo
suþþa
suþþatha
suþþos
suþþas
suþþa
—
—
—
—
—
—
su+ DAT
on, about
suþþammo
suþþise
suþþammo
suþþevo
suþþevo
suþþevo
—
—
—
—
—
—
miþ
with
miþþammo
miþþise
miþþammo
miþþevo
miþþevo
miþþevo
miþþesti
miþþesta
miþþesta
miþþestevo
miþþestevo
miþþestevo
faur
for
fauþþo
fauþþa
fauþþatha
fauþþos
fauþþas
fauþþa
—
—
—
—
—
—
tra
between, among
traþþammo
traþþise
traþþammo
traþþevo
traþþevo
traþþevo
—
—
—
—
—
—
fra
between, among
fraþþammo
fraþþise
fraþþammo
fraþþevo
fraþþevo
fraþþevo
—
—
—
—
—
—
Conjunctions
Most of the Luthic monosyllabic conjunctions and prepositions have preconsonantal and prevocalic variations.
e and ed
au and aud
a and ab
a and ad
Intervocalic conjunctions are often reduced, these reductions are however not mandatory:
As a Romance language, Luthic shares the complexities of the copula in Romance languages when to its counterparts in other languages. A copula is a word that links the subject of a sentence with a predicate (a subject complement). Whereas English has one main copula verb (and some languages like Russian mostly express the copula implicitly) some Romance languages have more complex forms.
Vessare generally focuses on the essence of the subject, and specifically on qualities that include:
Nationality
Possession
Physical and personality traits
Material
Origin
Stare generally focuses on the condition of the subject, and specifically on qualities that include:
Physical condition
Feelings, emotions, and states of mind
Appearance
Vessare is the main copula. Stare refers to state rather than essence, but more narrowly than in Spanish. Vessare is used for almost all cases in which English uses “to be”. It therefore makes sense to concentrate on the few uses of stare.
Stare means “to be”, “to be feeling”, or “to appear”.
Stare is used to form continuous forms of tenses.
Stare’s past participle statu has replaced that of vessare, and so statu is used for “been” in all senses.
Stare is occasionally “to be located.” This is very common for both transient and durable location.
Sentence structure
Luthic is an OV (Object-Verb) language. Additionally, Luthic, like all Germanic languages except English, uses V2 word order, though only in independent clauses. In dependent clauses, the finite verb is placed last.
Declarative sentences use V2 (verb in the second position) word order: the finite verb is preceded by one and only one constituent (unlike in English, this doesn’t need to be the subject). The subject is usually omitted when it is a pronoun – distinctive verb conjugations make it redundant. Subject pronouns are considered emphatic when used at all. All examples given below ignore possible clitics, reductions or other more complex grammatical features of Luthic, these are often labeled “book phrases” for Luthic students and have a very pure and simplified grammar.
(Ic) dregco la vadne.
ic dregc-o l-a vadn-e
I.NOM drink-PRS.1SG the-ACC.SG.F water-ACC.SG
“I drink water (lit. I drink the water).”
La vadne dregco (ic).
l-a vadn-a dregc-o ic
the-ACC.SG.F water-ACC.SG drink-PRS.1SG I.NOM
“The water I drink.”
Non-finite verbs as well as separable particles are placed at the end of the sentence:
La meina fregionda ist al festa anaqemandu.
l-a mein-a fregiond-a ist al fest-a ana=qem-andu
the-NOM.SG.F my-NOM.SG.F friend-NOM.SG.F is at=the-DAT.SG.F party-DAT.SG on=come-GER
“My friend is arriving (lit. is on-coming) at the party.”
La meina fregionda qemaut al festa ana.
l-a mein-a fregion-a qem-aut al fest-a ana
the-NOM.SG.F my-NOM.SG.F friend-NOM.SG.F come-PRF.3SG at=the-DAT.SG.F party-DAT.SG on
“My friend arrived (lit. on-came) at the party.”
An inversion is used to emphasise an adverbial phrase, a predicative, an object, or an inner verbal phrase in a sentence. The subject phrase, at the beginning of an indicative unstressed sentence, is moved directly behind the conjugated verb, and the component to be emphasised is moved to the beginning of the sentence. The conjugated verb is always the second sentence element in indicative statements.
Example 1:
Fliugat snele. “(It) flies fast.” – not emphasised;
Snele fliugat. “Fast (it) flies.” – emphasised, i.e. “Fast is how it flies.”
Example 2:
Is liuvaleicu. “(You) are adorable.” – not emphasised;
Liuvaleicu is. “Adorable (you) are.” – emphasised, i.e. “Adorable is what you are.”
Interrogative and command sentences use the V1 (verb-first) word order: the finite verb occupies the first position in the sentence. However, wh question sentences use the V2 word order. The pronoun subject is never omitted in those cases. Questions are formed by a rising intonation at the end of the sentence (in written form, a question mark).
Fliugas þû snele?
fliug-as þû snel-e
fly-PRS.2SG you.SG fast-ADVR
“Do you fly fast?”
Ce taugis þû?
ce taugis þû
what do-PRS.2SG you-SG
“What are you doing?”
Taugiâ þû svasve rogio!
taugi-â þû svasve rogi-o
do-IMP.2SG you.SG as say-PRS.1SG
“Do as I say!”
Relative and subordinate clauses maintain the same word order.
Galauvo ei, sariat beteze si þatha tavissimos gestradage.
galauv-o ei sari-at betez-e si þatha ta-vi-ssimos gestradag-e
think-PRS.1SG that be-CND.PRS.3SG better-ADVR if it.ACC.SG do-IMPF-CND.1PL tomorrow-ADVR
“I think that it would be better if we did it tomorrow.”
Galauvas þû ei, sariat beteze si þatha tavissimos gestradage?
galauv-as þû ei sari-at betez-e si þatha ta-vi-ssimos gestradag-e
think-PRS.2SG you.SG that be-CND.PRS.3SG better-ADVR if it.ACC.SG do-IMPF-CND.1PL tomorrow-ADVR
“Do you think that it would be better if we did it tomorrow?”
Case usage
Luthic case usage is very similar to Gothic, itself who calqued Ancient Greek grammar.
Nominative: (Ic) im lûthicu. “I am Luthic”
Accusative: (Ic) rogio lo lûthico. “I speak Luthic”
Dative: (Ic) laso lo lûthico þus. “I teach Luthic to you”
Genitive: La rasda lûthicoro þiudesca non ist. “The language of the Luths is not Germanic”
Ablato-locatival accusative:
Extent of space: (Is) qaervaut þreis chilometros. “He walked three kilometres”
Duration of time: (Is) non beidaut aeno dago. “He didn’t wait for one day”
Place when: Þo staþo. “In/on this place”
Sometimes prepositional: Naþþo staþo. “id.”
Time when: Giaeno vintru. “In/at/during that winter”
Within which: Leizelas horas (is) scolat sveltare. “Within a few hours he shall die”
Sometimes prepositional (dative is used instead): Dentro di leizelevo horevo (is) scolat sveltare. “Within a few hours he shall die”
Dative:
Purpose: Mannesci non ovela, ac gôðana taugianda. “Humans are not made for evil, but for good”
Action for: Þus scolo helfare los fregiondos þeinos. “I must help your friends for you”
Purpose for action for: Qenevo naseini im. “I am the (cause of) salvation for women”
Action against: La þeina frescapi scolo dauþare þuc. “Against/in opposition to your freedom I shall kill you”
Purpose for action against: Manni dauþevo im. “I am the (cause of) death for men” (affects negatively)
Concerning: Ce þû mis scolas taugiare? “What will you do for me? (expressing the speaker being especially interested in what the other is doing for him or her)”
Instrumento-dative:
Instrument: (Ic) screvo penna. “I write with a pen”
Means: (Ic) saeco augonevo. “I see with the eyes”
Impersonal agent: Is gadauþada coltella velvi. “He was killed by the knife of the robber”
Manner: (Ic) fregio þuc managa fregiaþþa. “I love you with many affection”
Prepositional if with no adjective: (Ic) fregio þuc miþ fregiaþþa. “I love you with affection”
Accompaniment: (Ic) scolo qemare fregiondevo. “I shall come with friends”
Sometimes prepositional: (Ic) scolo qemare miþ fregiondevo. “id.”
Degree of difference: (Is) alþezo aenevo giarevo. “He is older by a few years”
Quality: Aenu vaere summa honesta. “A man of highest honesty”
Ablato-dative:
Separation: (Ic) sculo cofare l’ovelo þus. “I shall keep the evil away from you”
Motion away (prepositional): Giofa Ravenna du America furondo. “They went from Ravenna to America”
Personal agent (prepositional): Roma a levo Gôthicevo qesciada. “Rome is destroyed by the Goths”
Comparison (adjectival): Qenevo scauneza. “More beautiful than women”
Cause: (Ic) greto ira ed agi. “I cry with anger and fear” (marks the reason)
Instrumento-genitive:
Material: La celecna staene. “The tower made of stone”
Author/creator: Þa celecna taveða manum meinara. “This tower was built by my hands”
Behaviour: Molle vadni. “Soft like water”
Often displaced by the relative adverb: Molle svasve vadne. “Soft like water”
Aena pecora ei, stavat inu volla, saecaut somos aecos: aeno eisôro tiravat aeno pesante carro, aeno anþero baeravat aeno mechio carico ed aeno anþero transportavat aeno manno snele. La pecora roðit all’aecos: “Mic pianget atha haertene saecandu ce il mannu trattat l’aecos”. Gl’aechi roðirondo: “Ascoltâ, pecora: faur unse ist penosu saecare ei, il mannu, l’unsar signore, sic taugit aena veste la volla pecore, mentre le pecore ristondo inu volla”. Dopo ascoltauða þatha, la pecora agro fliugat.
aen-a pecor-a ei st-avat inu voll-a saec-aut som-os aec-os aen-o eis-ôro tir-av-at aen-o pesant-e carr-o aen-o anþer-o baer-av-at aen-o mechi-o caric-o ed aen-o anþer-o transport-av-at aen-o mann-o snel-e l-a pecor-a roð-it al-l=aec-os mic piang-et atha haerten-e saec-andu ce il mann-u tratt-at l=aec-os gl=aec-i roð-irondo ascolt-â pecor-a faur uns-e ist penos-u saec-are ei il mann-o l=unsar signor-e sic taug-it aen-a vest-e l-a voll-a pecor-e mentre l-e pecor-e rist-ondo inu voll-a dopo ascolt-au-ða þatha l-a pecor-a agr-o fliug-at
a-NOM.F.SG sheep-NOM.SG that be-IMPF.3SG without wool-DAT.SG see-PRF.3SG some-ACC.M.PL horse-ACC.PL one-ACC.M.SG they-GEN.M.PL pull-IMPF.3SG wagon-ACC.SG one-ACC.M.SG other-ACC.SG bring-IMPF.3SG a-ACC.M.SG big-ACC.M.SG load-ACC.SG and one-ACC.M.SG other-ACC.SG carry-IMPF.3SG a-ACC.M.SG man-ACC.SG fast-ADVR the-NOM.F.SG sheep-NOM.SG say-PRF.3SG to=the-ACC.M.PL horse-ACC.PL I.ACC.SG pain-PRS.3SG the-ACC.N.SG heart-ACC.SG see-GRD how the-NOM.M.SG man-NOM.SG manage-PRS.3SG the-ACC.M.PL=horse-ACC.PL the-NOM.M.PL=horse-NOM.PL say-PRF.3PL hear-IMP.2SG sheep-NOM.SG for us.ACC.PL be-PRS.3SG pitiful see-INF that the-NOM.M.SG man-NOM.SG the-NOM.M.SG=our-NOM.M.SG lord-NOM.SG do-PRS.3R.SG a-ACC.F.SG garnment-ACC.SG the-DAT.F.SG wool-DAT.SG sheep-GEN.SG whereas the-NOM.F.PL sheep-NOM.PL remain-PRS.3PL without wool-DAT.SG after hear-IMPF.PASS.3SG that.ACC.N.SG the-NOM.F.SG sheep-NOM.SG field-ACC.SG flee-PRS.3SG
Dialectology
Geographical distribution.Approximate distribution of native Luthic speakers (roughly 173,500):
Standard Ravennese Luthic (91.93%)
Upper Luthic (1.73%)
Bolognese Standard Luthic (3.46%)
Paulistan Luthic (2.88%)
Luthic has many sociolects, whose differ in phonology and grammar; Standard Ravennese Luthic is the only form who declines noun by cases, other informal sociolects are way closer to other Romance languages in grammar (restrict register). Whereas sociolect refers to a variation in language between different social groups, dialect is a language variation based upon a geographical location, and Luthic has a small geographical area.
Upper Luthic
A major dialect is found nearby Ferrara, who was first mentioned when it was conquered by Germanic tribe the Lombards in 753 CE, and the Byzantine Empire lost its rule over the city. It was gifted to the Holy See by the Franks in either 754 or 756 CE, and was led by the Bishops of Ravenna. Benedictine and Cistercian monasteries started reclaiming Podeltan lands in the 9th century. This contact with West Germanic languages, and the lesser presence of East Germanic influence (unlike Ravenna) modelled some sound changes in discrepancy when compared to Standard Ravennese Luthic. This dialect is often called Ferraresi Luthic (Lûthica Estense) or Upper Luthic (Altalûthica).
It has been estimated that Upper Luthic has approximately 3,000 speakers in Ferrara.
Bilabial and labiodental merging:/ɸ/ and /β/ are merged with /f/ and /v/, a common feature among Luthic dialects.
Loss of untressed final vowels and terminal devoicing: Every unstressed vowel is dropped, except in plurals and monosyllabic words; terminal consonants are devoiced (except if sonorants):
Faðar unsar, þû hemeno,
Veiða latha namno þeino;
La þiuðanagarda þeina qemit;
Lo vegliano þeino taugiat;
Svasve hemeno ed ana aerþa.
Il chiaefu qotidianu unsar gevâ unse oggi,
Ed afietâ las unsaras colpas,
Svasve afietiamos þos ei, colpando unsis;
E non letare unse in tentazione
Ac frieau unse da mala.
Faur þuc ist þiuðanagarda,
E la forza, la volþa,
Faur saechia saechioro. Amen.
Orthographic version in Upper Luthic
Fadar unsar, tû in emen
Veit lat namn tein
La teudanagart tein qemit
Lo velhan tein taugiat;
Sva in emen et an airt.
Il qiaif qotidian unsar gevâ uns ogi
Et afietâ le unsere colpe
Sva afietiamos esti ei, colpan unsis
E non letar unse in tentazion
Ac friau unse di il mal.
Faur tuc ist la teudanagart,
E la forza, la glori
Faur la saiqia di la saiqia. Amen.
Standard Ravennese Luthic narrow transcription
[ˈfa.ðɐr ˈũ.sɐr | ˈθu eˈme.no
ˈvi.ðɐ lɐ.tɐ‿nˈnam.no ˈθi.no
lɐ θjuˌða.nɐˈɡar.dɐ ˈθi.nɐ ˈkᶣe.miθ
lo veʎˈʎa.no ˈθi.no ˈtɔ.d͡ʒɐθ
zvɐ.zve eˈme.no e.ð‿ɐ.nɐ ˈɛr.θɐ
il ˈk̟jɛ.ɸu kʷo.θiˈdja.nu ˈũ.sɐr d͡ʒeˈβa ũ.se ˈɔd.d͡ʒi
e.ð‿ɐ.ɸjeˈta‿llɐs ˈũ.sɐ.rɐs ˈk̠ol.pɐs
zvɐ.zve ɐ.ɸjeˈtja.mo.θ‿θos ˈi | k̠olˈpɐn.do ũ.sis
e non leˈta.re ũ.se in ten.tɐtˈt͡sjo.ne
ɐ.f‿frjeˈɔ ũ.se dɐ‿mˈma.lɐ
fɔr θux ist θjuˌða.nɐˈɡar.dɐ
e lɐ ˈfɔr.t͡sɐ | lɐ ˈvol.θɐ
fɔr ˈsɛ.k̟jɐ ˈsɛ.k̟jo.ru ‖ ˈa.men]
Upper Luthic narrow transcription
[fɐ.dɐɾ ũ.sɐɾ | tu in e.men
vɐjt lɐt nɐmn tɐjn
lɐ ty.dɐ.nɐ.ɡɐɾt tɐjn k̟e.mit
lo ve.ʎɐn tɐjn tɐw.ʒɐt
zvɐ in e.men e.t‿ɐn ɐjɾt
il k̟jɐjf ko.ti.djɐn ũ.sɐɾ ʒe.vɐ ũs ɔ.ʒi
e.t‿ɐ.fje.tɐ le ũ.sɐ.ɾe kol.pe
zvɐ ɐ.fje.tjɐ.mos es.ti i | kol.pɐn ũ.sis
e non le.tɐɾ ũs in ten.tɐ.sjon
ɐk fɾjɔ ũs di il mɐl
fɔɾ tuk ist lɐ ty.dɐ.nɐ.ɡɐɾt
e lɐ fɔrs | lɐ ɡlɔ.ɾi
fɔɾ lɐ sɐj.k̟jɐ di lɐ sɐj.k̟jɐ ‖ ɐ.men]
Although general grammar remains very similar, prepositions become more frequent due to a lack of cases. Some sociolects may also lack the neuter gender, fully merging it with the masculine or the feminine (via the plural form). There are also many ethnolects influenced by regional languages, such as the Lutho-Emilian ethnolect, who has its grammar and vocabulary largely affected and influenced by the Emilian dialects. The orthography may also be affected, since Upper Luthic lacks a regulatory body:
⟨gi⟩ or ⟨j⟩ for /ʒ/: Standard Ravennese Luthic giâ[ˈd͡ʒa], Upper Luthic gia or ja[ʒɐ];
⟨gli⟩ or ⟨lh⟩ for /ʎ/: Standard Ravennese Luthic gli[ʎi], Upper Luthic gli or lhi[ʎi];
⟨gni⟩ or ⟨nh⟩ for /ɲ/: Standard Ravennese Luthic signore[siɲˈɲo.re], Upper Luthic signior or sinhor[si.ɲoɾ];
⟨eu⟩, ⟨y⟩ or ⟨ü⟩ for /y/: Standard Ravennese Luthic niu[nju], Upper Luthic neu, ny or nü [ny];
Disagreement on voiceless terminal consonant spelling: Standard Ravennese Luthic ac[ɐx], Upper Luthic ac or ag[ɐk]; Standard Ravennese Luthic garda[ˈɡar.dɐ], Upper Luthic gart or gard[ɡɐɾt].
Another problem with Upper Luthic lacking a regulatory body is the lack of official statistics:
In general, Upper Luthic has similar, and simpler, nominal declension paradigmata. For u-stems nouns, they are fully merged with o-stems.
Verbal conjugation
Tense
Forms
Infinitive
aver
Auxiliary verb
aver
Past participle
Number
masculine
feminine
neuter
Singular
avut
avuta
avut
Plural
avuti
avute
avuta
Present participle
avent
Gerund
avent
Person
Tense
first singular ic
second singular tû
third singular is, ia, at
first plural vi
second plural gi
third plural eis, ise, ia
Indicative
Present active
o
ais
at
aimos
aites
an
Present passive
avar
avas
avat
avant
avant
avant
Present perfect active
o avut
ais avut
at avut
aimos avut
aites avut
an avut
Present perfect passive
avar avut
avas avut
avat avut
avant avut
avant avut
avant avut
Imperfect active
avait
avaitas
avaitat
avaitamos
avaitates
avaitan
Imperfect passive
avaitar
avaitas
avaitat
avaitant
avaitant
avaitant
Preterite active
ep
avest
ebbet
avemmos
avestes
ebber
Preterite passive
ebbira
aves
ebbet
avem
avem
avem
Future active
avro
avrais
avrat
avremos
avretes
avran
Future passive
avrar
avras
avrat
avrant
avrant
avrant
Future perfect active
avro avut
avrais avut
avrat avut
avremos avut
avrêtes avut
avran avut
Future perfect passive
avrar avut
avras avut
avrat avut
avrant avut
avrant avut
avrant avut
Subjunctive
Present active
abbi
abbias
abbiat
abbiamos
abbiates
abbian
Present passive
abbair
abbais
abbait
abbaint
abbaint
abbaint
Imperfect active
avessi
avessis
avessit
avessimos
avessites
avesser
Imperfect passive
avessir
avessis
avessit
avessint
avessint
avessint
Preterite active
abbi avut
abbias avut
abbiat avut
abbiamos avut
abbiates avut
abbian avut
Preterite passive
abbair avut
abbais avut
abbait avut
abbaint avut
abbaint avut
abbaint avut
Conditional
Present active
averi
averias
averiat
averiamos
averiates
averian
Present passive
averiar
averias
averiat
averiant
averiant
averiant
Preterite active
averi avut
averias avut
averiat avut
averiamos avut
averiates avut
averian avut
Preterite passive
averiar avut
averias avut
averiat avut
averiant avut
averiant avut
averiant avut
Imperative
Positive
ave
avet
Negative
non aver
non averet
Some verbal forms are speculation (by applying and following the common sound changes), as they are not attested.
Standard Bolognese Luthic
"… I say, then, that perhaps those are not wrong who claim that the Bolognese speak a more beautiful language than most, especially since they take many features of their own speech from that of the people who live around them, in Imola, Ferrara and Modena I believe that everybody does this with respect to his own neighbours.... So the above-mentioned citizens of Bologna take a soft, yielding quality from those of Imola, and from the people of Ferrara and Modena, on the other hand, a certain abruptness which is more typical of the Lombards.... If, then, the Bolognese take from all sides, as I have said, it seems reasonable to suggest that their language, tempered by the combination of opposites mentioned above, should achieve a praiseworthy degree of elegance; and this, in my opinion, is beyond doubt true." (Dante Alighieri, De vulgari eloquentia - Liber I, xv, 2-5)
Although very similar to Standard Ravennese Luthic, there is noticeable influence from the regional Bolognese dialects, dialects of Emilian, one of the Gallo-Italic languages of the Romance family. It has been estimated that Stadard Bolognese Luthic has approximately 6,000 speakers in Bologna.
Although Luthic contrasts /e, o/ and /ɛ, ɔ/ vowels in stressed syllables, the distinction is neutralised in unstressed position, where they are realized as [e̞, o̞].
Voiceless continuants /f, s, θ, x/ are always constrictive [f, s, θ, x], but voiced continuants /v, ð, j, ɣ/ are not very constrictive and are often closer to approximants [ʋ, ð˕, j, ɣ˕] than fricatives [v, ð, ʝ, ɣ]. Voiceless fricatives are often fortified to affricates after alveolar consonants, such as /n l r/, or general nasals:
Italian migration to Brazil initiated in 1875, when Brazil began to promote to the country in order to increase its population, creating rural “colonies” for Italians and other Europeans to migrate to, as in between 1880 and 1920, more than one million Italians have immigrated to Brazil. Among all Italians who immigrated to Brazil, 70% went to the State of São Paulo. In consequence, São Paulo has more people with Italian ancestry than any region of Italy itself. Despite the poverty and even semi-slavery conditions faced by many Italians in Brazil, most of the population achieved some personal success and changed their lower-class situation.
Brazil remained neutral at the start of World War II in September 1939, however, German U-boats sank six Brazilian ships in the Atlantic, resulting on Brazil declaring war on Germany and Italy on 22 August 1942. The Brazilians forces fought mainly within Tuscany and Emilia-Romagna regions.
The Brazilian contact with Emilia-Romagna and the Italian immigration to Brazil resulted in a Brazilian dialect of Luthic spoken in São Paulo, known as Paulistan Luthic (endonym: Lútico paulista
[ˈlu.t͡ʃi.ku pawˈlis.tɐ]; Standard Ravennese Luthic: Lûthica Paülista[ˈlu.ti.xɐ pɐwˈlis.tɐ]). Paulistan Luthic is heavily influenced by the Paulistano dialect of Portuguese (Portuguese pronunciation: [paw.lisˈtɐ̃.nu]), as the accent is dominant in Brazilian mass media and is often associated with “standard” Brazilian Portuguese.
Characteristics of Paulistan Luthic
Main phonological differences:
e-prosthesis: In word-initially /sC/ clusters, e-prosthesis is triggered: Standard Ravennese Luthic stare > Paulistan Luthic estare.
thorn stopping and voicing: A similar process that happened with southern German dialects, the High German consonant shift: Standard Ravennese Luthic þû > Paulistan Luthic du
edh stopping:/ð/ is fortified to /d/ in every position: Standard Ravennese Luthic faðar > Paulistan Luthic fadre
r-metathesis: r-stem nouns ending in -ar are always reanalised as -re: Standard Ravennese Luthic broþar > Paulistan Luthic brodre
/t, d/ palatalisation before /i, ĩ, j/: In most of Portuguese varieties spoken in Brazil, the variable palatalisation of alveolar stops turns consonants /t, d/ into affricates [t͡ʃ, d͡ʒ], this highly affected Paulistan Luthic: Standard Ravennese Luthic Lûthica[ˈlu.ti.xɐ], di[di] > Paulistan Luthic Lútica[ˈlu.t͡ʃi.kɐ], di[d͡ʒi]
rhotic: The trill consonant /r/ is fully displaced by a tap consonant /ɾ/, of which may be also described as an approximant /ɹ/ pre-consonantal: Standard Ravennese Luthic rasda[ˈraz.dɐ], barca[ˈbar.kɐ] > Paulistan Luthic rasda[ˈɾaz.dɐ], barca[ˈbaɹ.kɐ]. Due to Paulistano influence, word-initial rhotics are often realised as /ʁ/ ~ /h/, resulting in rasda[ˈʁaz.dɐ] ~ [ˈhaz.dɐ], a great example is Standard Ravennese Luthic rapportu[rɐpˈpɔr.tu] and Paulistan Luthic rapporto[ʁɐˈpɔɹ.tu] ~ [hɐˈpɔɹ.tu]
lack of Gorgia Tuscana: Paulistan Luthic doesn't spirantise atonic plosives: Standard Ravennese Luthic capu[ˈka.fu] > Paulistan Luthic capo[ˈka.pu]
i-epenthesis: Word-terminally plosives are affected by i-epenthesis: Standard Ravennese Luthic ac[ɐx], ist[ist] > Paulistan Luthic ac[ɐ.kĭ], est[es.t͡ʃĭ], this may also be considered a kind of paragoge. This may also happen in consonant clusters if if the second consonant is not /ɾ/ or /l/, resulting in opziune/opˈsju.ne/ > [opiˈsju.ni]
nasalisation: like Paulitano, Paulistan Luthic nasalises every vowel before a nasal in NV.N-: Standard Ravennese Luthic banana[bɐˈna.nɐ] > Paulistan Luthic banana[bɐˈnɐ̃.nɐ]
Main orthographical differences:
Masculine nouns ending in ⟨u⟩ are always spelt as ⟨o⟩
Greco-Roman digraphs such as ⟨th⟩, ⟨ph⟩, ⟨ch⟩ are fully displaced by ⟨t⟩, ⟨f⟩, ⟨c⟩
For velar plosives before front vowels, they are spelt as ⟨qu⟩ and ⟨gu⟩
The velar nasal is no longer spelt as ⟨g⟩ before another velar, but rather as ⟨n⟩
Due to Portuguese influence ⟨j, k, w, x, y⟩ are way commoner instead of the nativisations ⟨gi, c(h), v, c ~ ss, i⟩ present in Standard Ravennese Luthic
The spellings ⟨gni⟩ and ⟨gli⟩ are fully displaced by ⟨nh⟩ and ⟨lh⟩; ⟨gni⟩ is also found as ⟨ñ⟩ in many communities nearby Spanish speakers, mainly outside the capital, such as Bauru, Sorocaba and Jundiaí
Main grammatical differences:
Loss of the neuter gender
Loss of the passive voice
u-stems are merged with o-stems
The verbs vessare and havere are fully displaced by tenere as the common auxiliary verb, mainly due to Portuguese influence
The nominative merges with the accusative, simplifying the general declension paradigmata
Demography and distribution
Map showing the areas of São Paulo where Paulistan Luthic is spoken today
Luthic speakers over 3 years of age in the municipality with most speakers (2022 IBGE census data). Absolute and relative numbers. Percentages given are in comparison to the total population of the corresponding state.
According to Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (Portuguese: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística; IBGE) Luthic is only spoken in São Paulo, and numbers may range anywhere from “perhaps a few dozen, up to almost two thousand people”.
As phonemes, /tʃ/ and /dʒ/ occur only in loanwords, but due to palatalisation, they are also found as allophones of /t/ and /d/ before /i/, /ĩ/ and /j/.
Nasalised /e/ and /o/ are often “diphthongised”, resulting in /ẽ/ > [ẽȷ̃] and, /õ/ > [õw̃].
Paulistan Luthic morphology
Paulistan Luthic has been greatly affected by Paulistano, however, it still has grammatical cases for noun, a feature it has not been lost, however, unlike Standard Ravennese Luthic, Paulistan Luthic does not drop its prepositions before a declined noun, another common feature in Luthic is to decline only the article preceding the noun.
Standard Ravennese Luthic i fregiondi “the friends” > Paulistan Luthic los fregiondo “the friends”
Standard Ravennese Luthic þo staþo “in this place” > Paulistan Luthic in do stado “in this place”
Standard Ravennese Luthic miþ levo piedevo “with the feet” > Paulistan Luthic mid levo piede “with the feet”
Number
Case
o-stem m
a-stem f
i-stem unm
r-stem unm
d-stem unm
Singular
nom. acc.
dago
geva
crafte
brodre
piede
dat.
daga
geva
crafti
brodri
piedi
gen.
dagi
geve
crafti
brodri
piedi
Plural
nom. acc.
dagos
gevas
craftes
brodres
piedes
dat.
dagevo
gevevo
craftevo
brodrevo
piedevo
gen.
dagoro
gevaro
crafte
brodre
piede
Verbs in Paulistan Luthic are way simpler than any other Luthic dialect, as there is no number distinction and basically no person distinction as well. Thence, Verbs are basically only conjugated according to mood and tense, the first person singular, however, is differentiated.
Active Indicative
þagcare
credere
holore
dormire
vessare
havere
ganare
stare
taugiare
ic
þagco
credo
holo
dormo
im
hô
gô
stô
taugio
þû
þagca
crede
holo
dormi
is
hâ
gâ
stâ
taugi
is
þagca
crede
holo
dormi
is
hâ
gâ
stâ
taugi
vi
þagca
crede
holo
dormi
is
hâ
gâ
stâ
taugi
gi
þagca
crede
holo
dormi
is
hâ
gâ
stâ
taugi
eis
þagca
crede
holo
dormi
is
hâ
gâ
stâ
taugi
Vocabulary
It is generally stated that Luthic has around 370,000 words, or 410,000 if obsolete words are counted, however 98% of the Luthic used today consists of only 5,800 words.
A 2016 statistic by Lúcia Yamane is based on 3,172 words chosen on the criteria of frequency, semantic richness and productivity, which also contain words formed on the territory of the Luthic language. This statistic gives the percentages below:
1,200 words inherited from Gothic;
953 words inherited from Latin;
510 words, academic loanwords from Latin;
133 words borrowed from Italian;
125 words borrowed from West Germanic, such as Frankish, Langobardic and Standard High German;
101 words formed in Luthic;
98 words borrowed from French;
52 words borrowed from Greek.
Luthic has approximately 2,000 uncompounded words inherited from Proto-Indo-European. These were inherited via:
45% Germanic;
43% Italic, Romance;
8% Celtic;
2% Hellenic;
2% Uncertain.
A single etymological root appears in Luthic in a native form, inherited from Vulgar Latin, and a learned form, borrowed later from Classical Latin. The following pairs consist of a native noun and a learned adjective:
chilled / frozen: freddu / frigidu from Latin frīgidus.
Insertional code-switching
Code-switching or language alternation occurs when a speaker alternates between two or more languages, or language varieties, in the context of a single conversation or situation. Code-switching is different from plurilingualism in that plurilingualism refers to the ability of an individual to use multiple languages, while code-switching is the act of using multiple languages together.
Insertional code-switching is often referred to as “borrowing” or “tag-switching”, when lexical items from a secondary language are introduced into the primary language. These loan words are partially or fully assimilated into the secondary language, conforming to its phonological and morphological structure. Insertional code-switching serves a “pragmatic purpose, acting as sentence enhancers or indicating the speaker's attitude towards the context of an utterance.”
Standard Luthic: Il nattu stâþ scaunu. Le staerne sceinando e la luna stâþ foglia.
Standard Italian: La notte è bella. Le stelle brillano e la luna è piena.
Insertional code-swicthing: Il nattu ae bellu. Le stelle sceinan(d)o e la luna ae piena.
Note that both è and ae stand for /ɛ/.
The borrowed words can be integrated into the host language either partially or entirely, taking into account their phonological and morphological structure.
Swadesh list
The Swadesh list (/ˈswɑːdɛʃ/) is a compilation of tentatively universal concepts for the purposes of lexicostatistics. Translations of the Swadesh list into a set of languages allow researchers to quantify the interrelatedness of those languages. The Swadesh list is named after linguist Morris Swadesh. It is used in lexicostatistics (the quantitative assessment of the genealogical relatedness of languages) and glottochronology (the dating of language divergence). Because there are several different lists, some authors also refer to "Swadesh lists".
The most used list nowadays is the Swadesh 207-word list, adapted from Swadesh 1952.
Creating word lists depends on the decay of morphemes or changes in vocabulary. For glottochronology to be applicable to a language, the rate of morpheme decay must remain constant. This has led to criticism of the glottochronologic formula, as some linguists contend that the rate of morpheme decay cannot be assumed to be consistent over time. American linguist Robert Lees acquired a value for the “glottochronological constant” (r) of words by analysing the known changes in 13 pairs of languages using the 200-word list by Swadesh. He calculated a value of 0.805 ± 0.0176 with 90% confidence. Swadesh obtained a value of 0.86 for his 100-word list, with the higher value reflecting the exclusion of semantically unstable words. This constant is related to the retention rate of words by the following formula:
L is the rate of replacement, ln represents the natural logarithm and r is the glottochronological constant.
The basic formula of glottochronology in its shortest form is this:
t is a given period of time from one stage of the language to another (measured in millennia), c is the proportion of wordlist items retained at the end of that period and L is the rate of replacement for that word list.
By testing historically verifiable cases in which t is known by nonlinguistic data (such as the approximate distance from Classical Latin to modern Romance languages), Swadesh arrived at the empirical value of approximately 0.14 for L, which means that the rate of replacement constitutes around 14 words from the 100-wordlist per millennium. This is represented in the table below.
Glottochronology Time Scale
Rough Median Dating
Median Cognate Retention in 100-Word List
500 BP
86%
1000 BP
74%
1500 BP
64%
2000 BP
55%
2500 BP
47%
3000 BP
40%
4000 BP
30%
5000 BP
22%
6000 BP
16%
7000 BP
12%
8000 BP
9%
9000 BP
7%
10000 BP
5%
Comparison
Linguistic map of Ravenna and neighbouring regions. Italian:“Lingue parlate accanto al Lutico” English: “Languages spoken alongside Luthic”
Lexical and grammatical similarities among the Romance languages spoken in Ravenna and Emilia-Romagna, and between Latin and each of them, are apparent from the following examples in various Romance lects, all meaning ‘She always closes the window before she dines/before dining’. Additional translations are provided in Gothic, German, Icelandic, due to Luthic Germanic stems, and other related Romance languages.
Hún æ fyrir metur glugganum lókar. (obsolete or altered) Hún lokar alltaf glugganum áður en hún borðar. (standard Modern Icelandic) Hún lokar alltaf glugganum fyrir mat. (also correct)
The cold winter is near, a snowstorm will come. Come in my warm house, my friend. Welcome! Come here, sing and dance, eat and drink. That is my plan. We have water, beer, and milk fresh from the cow. Oh, and warm soup!
De koude winter is nabij, een sneeuwstorm zal komen, Kom in mijn warme huis, mijn vriend. Welkom! Kom hier, zing en dans, eet en drink. Dat is mijn plan. We hebben water, bier, en melk vers van de koe. Oh, en warme soep!
Der kalte Winter ist nahe, ein Schneesturm wird kommen. Komm in mein warmes Haus, mein Freund, Willkommen! Komm her, sing und tanz, iss und trink. Das ist mein Plan. Wir haben Wasser, Bier und Milch frisch von der Kuh. Oh, und warme Suppe!
De kâlde winter is nei, in sniestoarm sil komme. Kom yn myn waarme hûs, myn freon. Wolkom! Kom hjir, sjong en dänsje, yt en drink. Dat is myn plan. Wy ha wtter, bier, en molke farsk fan de ko. Och, en waarme sop!
Den kalde vinteren er nær, en snøstorm vil komme. Kom inn i mitt varme hus, min venn. Velkommen! Kom her, syng og dans, et og drikk. Dette er min plan. Vi har vann, øl og melk fersk fra kua. Åh, og varm suppe!
Kaldi veturinn nálgast, snjóstormur mun koma. Komdu inn í hlýja húsið mitt, vinur minn. Velkominn! Komdu hingað, syngdu og dansaðu, borðaðu og drekktu. Það er planið mitt. Við höfum vatn, bjór, og mjólk ferska úr kúnni. Ó, og volga súpu!
Il caldu vintru ist vicinu, aenu snaevosturmu qerrât. Qemâ gia meina rasna varma, fregiondu meinu. Beneqemutu! Qemâ har, segguâ e danzâ, mangiâ e dregcâ. Su ist il meinu pianu. Vi abbiamos vadne, biure, e meluco fresco da vacca. Ah, e zuppa varma!
O inverno gelado está a chegar, uma tempestade de neve virá. Vem para a minha casa quente, meu amigo. Bem-vindo! Vem cá, canta e dança, come e bebe. É esse o meu plano. Temos água, cerveja e leite fresco da vaca. Ah, e sopa quente!
Il freddo inverno è vicino, arriverà una tormenta di neve. Vieni nella mia calda casa, amico mio. Benvenuto! Vieni qui, canta e danza, mangia e bevi. Questo è il mio piano. Abbiamo acqua, birra e latte fresco di mucca. Ah, e zuppa calda!
El frío invierno está cerca, vendrá una tormenta de nieve. Ven a mi cálida casa, amigo mío. ¡Bienvenido! Ven aquí, canta y baila, come y bebe. Ese es mi plan. Tenemos agua, cerveza y leche fresca de la vaca. ¡Oh, y sopa caliente!
Le froid de l'hiver est proche, une tempête de neige s'annonce. Viens dans ma maison chaude, mon ami. Bienvenue ! Viens ici, chante et danse, mange et bois. C'est mon plan. Nous avons de l'eau, de la bière et du lait frais de la vache. Oh, et de la soupe chaude !
Iarna geroasă este aproape, viscolul o să vină. Vino în casa mea călduroasă, prietene. Bine ai venit! Vino încoace, cântă și dansează, bea și mănâncă. Ăsta e planul meu. Avem apa, bere și lapte proaspăt de la vacă. Aaa, și supă calda!
Este é um magnifico palácio real. Parti, peão ignorante! Somente os elites respeitáveis em política, ciência, cultura e arte são autorizados a entrar. Retornai imediatamente à vossa fazenda miserável, e pagai a taxa, ou os guardas exterminarão a vossa família.
Questo è un magnifico palazzo reale. Partite, pedone ignorante! Solo le élite rispettabili in politica, scienza, cultura e arte sono autorizzate a entrare. Tornate immediatamente alla vostra misera fattoria e pagate la tassa, o le guardie stermineranno la vostra famiglia.
Este es un magnífico palacio real. ¡Partí, peón ignorante! Sólo las élites respetables de la política, la ciencia, la cultura y el arte están autorizadas a entrar. Regresá inmediatamente a vuestra miserable hacienda y pagá la tasa, o los guardias exterminarán a vuestra familia.
C'est un magnifique palais royal. Partez, paysan ignorant ! Seules les élites respectables en politique, science, culture et art sont autorisées à entrer. Retournez immédiatement à votre misérable ferme. Et payez la taxe, ou les gardes extermineront votre famille.
Acesta este un palat regal magnific. Îndepărtaţi-vă, țăranule ignorant! Doar elitele respectabile din politică, știință, cultură și artă sunt autorizate să intre. Întoarceți-vă imediat la ferma voastră mizerabilă. Și plătiţi taxele, altfel gărzile vă vor extermina familia.
Este ist aenu magnificu palazzu reale. Partite, pedone ignorante! Sole le elite rispettavoli in politica, scienzia, coltura e crafte autorizzanða ad entrare. Tornate immediatamente all’isvara misera garda e pagate lo geldo, aud i vardi sterminerando l’isvara famiglia.
This is a magnificent royal palace. Depart, ignorant peasant! Only respectable elites in politics, science, culture and art are authorised to enter. Return immediately to your miserable farm. And pay the tax, or the guards will exterminate your family.
Dit is een prachtig koninklijk paleis. Gaat weg u, onwetende boer! Alleen respectabele elites in de politiek, wetenschap, cultuur en kunst hebben toegang. Keert u onmiddellijk terug naar uw ellendige boerderij. En betaalt u de belasting, of de bewakers zullen uw familie uitroeien.
Dies ist ein prächtiger königlicher Palast. Weggehen Sie unwissender Bauer! Nur respektable Eliten aus Politik, Wissenschaft, Kultur und Kunst haben Zutritt. Kehren Sie sofort auf Ihren armseligen Bauernhof zurück. Und zahlen Sie die Steuern, sonst werden die Wachen Ihre Familie auslöschen.
Dit is in prachtich keninklik paleis. Gean werom, ûnwittende boer! Allinnich respektabele elites yn polityk, wittenskip, kultuer en keunst hawwe tagong. Gean werom fuort nei jo miserabele pleats. En betelje de belesting, of de bewakers sille jo famylje útroege.
Dette er et praktfullt kongelig palass. Forsvinn, uvitende bonde! Bare respektable eliter innen politikk, vitenskap, kultur og kunst har adgang. Dra straks tilbake til din elendige gård. Og betal skatten, ellers vil vaktene utrydde familien din.
Þetta er stórkostleg konungshöll. Farið þér, fáfróður bóndi! Aðeins virðuleg elíta í stjórnmálum, vísindum, menningu og listum hafa aðgang. Farið þér strax aftur á ömurlega bæinn ykkart. Og borgið þér skattinn, annars munu verðir útrýma fjölskyldu ykkarri.
Phrasebook
Luthic phrases that are used in common situations, and may be useful to language learners or travellers.
Mostly of the Luthic idiomatic phrases are similar to mostly European languages idioms, mainly Italian and French. Luthic idioms are often about food or mocking the French people, but mostly because of the French government and its movements against minority people within its territory. Another factor is the Roman inherited culture, as the Roman elite considered the Germanic people savage and stupid (e.g. the word Vandal, that can also stand for a person who needlessly destroys, defaces, or damages things, especially other people’s property; and Gothic that also meant barbarous, rude, unpolished, belonging to the “Dark Ages”, mediaeval as opposed to classical; ultimately of Germanic origin, the name of two East Germanic tribes, but drastically semantic changed to sound pejorative). There were many Germanic raids against the Roman Empire, and a common weapon used back then by the West Germanic people were the javelins, the Common West Germanic word for javelin is *frankō, which is also the name of the Frankish tribe (cf. Latin Francus and Francia). Luthic inherited the word “fragcese” [frɐŋˈke.ze] from Francia + -ensis, ultimately meaning “French (language)”, “Frenchman, Frenchwoman” and "French (people)”, but also meaning “stupid, savage, useless” from a semantic change similar to Vandal and Gothic.
L’amore dominat inu regolevo: somewhat equivalent to all’s fair in love and war; literally, “Love rules without rules”.
Biegguare lo chiudo capo: equivalent to hit the nail on the head, with the same literal translation.
Martellare lo dito: the opposite to the previous idiomatic phrase, when someone is totally wrong; literally, “To hammer the finger”.
Gnosco las meinas patatas: equivalent to I can handle this; literally, “I know my potatoes”.
Stoppau di rogiare fragcese: an expression asking for someone to be straightforward and speak one’s mind; literally, “Stop speaking French”.
Imparasti fragcese, nu rogiâ: equivalent to make one’s bed and lie in it; literally, “You learnt French, now speak it”.
Pasta miþ salsa e caffê aeve neru: equivalent to call a spade a spade; literally, “Pasta with sauce and coffee always black”.
Il þeinu sale stâþ dolce: equivalent to out of one’s mind; literally, “Your salt is sweet”.
Havere managos casos faul·lo dativo: equivalent to wear too many hats; literally, “Have too many usages for the dative”, a joke about the many usages of the dative case in Luthic.
Sputâ la patata da seina monþa faur di rogiare: equivalent to speak up; literally, “Spit the potato out of your mouth before speaking”.
Rogiando da diavola: equivalent to speak of the devil, with the same literal translation.
Il pomudoru non taugit lo capocuocu: equivalent to clothes don’t make the man; literally, “The tomato doesn’t make the chef”.
Aenu pomodoru grossu: equivalent to big shot; literally, “A big tomato”.
Havere aeno cervello di fragcesi: an expression for someone who acts stupidly, has low intelligence or has poor judgement; literally, “To have a French brain”.
Scimmia non dauþat scimmia: equivalent to honour among thieves; literally, “Monkey doesn’t kill monkey”.
Costare aeno augono: equivalent to an arm and a leg; literally, “To cost an eye”.
Þatha ist Italiana mis: equivalent to it’s all Greek to me; literally, “This is Italian to me”.
Drigcare svasve aenu russu: equivalent to drink like a fish; literally, “To drink like a Russian”.
Vivere grande ed al fragcesa: an expression for living in extravagance, to live in luxury; literally, “To live big and French”, mocking the French lifestyle.
Puossere drigcare veleno ana þatha: equivalent to bet one’s bottom dollar; literally, “To can drink poison on that”.
Il volfu danzat har: an expression for a great party; literally, “The wolf dances here”.
Il vendu trabaergna ed atha sauilo giucavando carge erat il fortezu, can aenu pellegrinu qemavat avvoltu hacola varma ana. I tvi diciderondo ei, il fromu a rimuovere lo hacolo pellegrina sariat il fortezu anþera. Il vendu trabaergna dustoggit a soffiare violenza, ac atha maeze is soffiavat, atha maeze il pellegrinu striggevat hacolo; tantu ei, allo angio il vendu desistaet da seina sforza. Atha sauilo allora sceinaut varmamente nallo hemeno, e þan il pellegrinu rimuovaet lo hacolo immediatamente. Þan il vendu trabaergna obbligauða ad andaetare ei, latha sauilo erat atha fortezo tvoro.
Broad transcription
/il ˈβen.du trɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ e.d‿ɐ.tɐ ˈsɔj.lo d͡ʒu.kɐˈβɐn.do kɐr.d͡ʒe ˈɛ.rɐθ il ˈɸɔr.te.d͡zu | kɐn ɛ.nu pel.leˈɡri.nu kʷeˈma.βɐθ ɐβˈβol.tu ɐˈkɔ.lɐ ˈβar.mɐ ɐ.nɐ ‖ i tβi di.t͡ʃi.deˈron.do ˈi | il ˈɸro.mu ɐ ri.mwoˈβe.re lo ɐˈkɔ.lo pel.leˈɡri.nɐ ˈsa.rjɐθ il ˈɸɔr.te.d͡zu ɐ̃ˈθe.rɐ ‖ il ˈβen.du trɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ duˈstɔd.d͡ʒiθ ɐ soɸˈɸja.re βjoˈlɛn.t͡sɐ | ɐ.k‿ɐ.tɐ ˈmɛ.d͡ze is soɸˈɸja.βɐθ | ɐ.tɐ ˈmɛ.d͡ze il pel.leˈɡri.nu striŋˈɡe.βɐθ ɐˈkɔ.lo | ˈtan.tu ˈi | ɐl.lo ˈan.d͡ʒo il ˈβen.du deˈzi.stɛθ dɐ ˈsi.nɐ ˈsɸɔr.t͡sɐ ‖ ɐ.tɐ ˈsɔj.lo ɐlˈlɔ.rɐ ʃiˈnɔθ βɐr.mɐˈmen.te nɐl.lo eˈme.no | e θɐn il pel.leˈɡri.nu riˈmwo.βɛθ lo ɐˈkɔ.lo ĩ.me.djɐ.tɐˈmen.te ‖ θɐn il ˈβen.du trɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ ob.bliˈɡɔ.ðɐ ɐ.d‿ɐn.dɛˈta.re ˈi | lɐ.tɐ ˈsɔj.lo ˈɛ.rɐθ ɐ.tɐ ˈɸɔr.te.d͡zo ˈtβo.ro/
Narrow transcription (differences emphasised)
[il ˈven.du trɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ e.ð‿ɐ.tɐ‿sˈsɔj.lo d͡ʒu.xɐˈβɐn.do kɐr.d͡ʒe ˈɛ.rɐθ il ˈfɔr.ted.d͡zu | kɐn ɛ.nu pel.leˈɡri.nu kᶣeˈma.βɐθ ɐβˈβol.tu ɐˈk̠ɔ.lɐ ˈvar.mɐ ɐ.nɐ ‖ i tvi di.t͡ʃi.ðeˈron.do ˈi | il ˈfro.mu ɐ‿rri.mwoˈβe.re lo ɐˈk̠ɔ.lo pel.leˈɡri.nɐ ˈsa.rjɐθ il ˈfɔr.ted.d͡zu ɐ̃ˈθe.rɐ ‖ il ˈven.du trɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ dusˈtɔd.d͡ʒiθ ɐ‿ssoɸˈɸja.re vjoˈlɛn.t͡sɐ | ɐ.x‿ɐ.tɐ‿mˈmɛd.d͡ze is soɸˈɸja.βɐθ | ɐ.tɐ‿mˈmɛd.d͡ze il pel.leˈɡri.nu striŋ˖ˈɡ̟e.βɐθ ɐˈk̠ɔ.lo | ˈtan.tu ˈi | ɐl.lo ˈan.d͡ʒo il ˈven.du deˈzi.stɛθ dɐ‿sˈsi.nɐ ˈsfɔr.t͡sɐ ‖ ɐ.tɐ‿sˈsɔj.lo ɐlˈlɔ.rɐ ʃiˈnɔθ vɐr.mɐˈmen.te nɐl.lo eˈme.no | e θɐn il pel.leˈɡri.nu riˈmwo.βɛθ lo ɐˈk̠ɔ.lo ĩ.me.djɐ.θɐˈmen.te ‖ θɐn il ˈven.du trɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ ob.bliˈɡ˗ɔ.ðɐ ɐ.ð‿ɐn.dɛˈta.re ˈi | lɐ.tɐ‿sˈsɔj.lo ˈɛ.rɐθ ɐ.tɐ‿fˈfɔr.ted.d͡zo ˈtvo.ro]
Extranarrow transcription
This extranarrow transcription illustrates a Lugo Ravennese, educated, middle-generation speech, in his twenties, and a careful yet colloquial style.
Narrow transcription (differences emphasised, Bolognese Standard Luthic)
[il ˈvin.du tɾɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ e.ð̞‿ɐ.tɐ‿sˈsɔj.lo d͡zu.xɐˈvɐ̃.nu kɐr.d͡ze ˈɛ.rɐθ il ˈfɔɾ.tid.d͡zu | kɐn e.nu pel.liˈɡri.nukᶣeˈma.vɐθ ɐvˈvul.tu ɐˈkɔ.lɐ ˈvar.mɐ ɐ.nɐ ‖ i tvi di.t͡si.ð̞iˈrun.du ˈi | il ˈfru.mu ɐ‿rri.mwoˈve.ɾe lo ɐˈkɔ.lo pel.liˈɡri.nɐ ˈsa.rjɐθ il ˈfɔr.tid.d͡zu ɐ̃ˈt͡θe.rɐ ‖ il ˈvin.du tɾɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ dusˈtɔd.d͡ziθ ɐ‿ssofˈfja.re vjoˈlɛn.t͡sɐ | ɐ.x‿ɐ.tɐ‿mˈmɛd.d͡ze is sofˈfja.vɐθ | ɐ.tɐ‿mˈmɛd.d͡ze il pel.liˈɡri.nu stɾiŋˈɡ̟e.vɐθ ɐˈkɔ.lo | ˈtan.tu ˈi | ɐl.lo ˈan.d͡zo il ˈvin.du deˈzis.tɛθ dɐ‿sˈsi.nɐ ˈsfɔr.t͡sɐ ‖ ɐ.tɐ‿sˈsɔj.lo ɐlˈlɔ.rɐ ʃiˈnɔθ vɐr.mɐˈmen.te nɐl.lo eˈme.no | e θɐn il pel.liˈɡri.nu riˈmwo.vɛθ lo ɐˈkɔ.lo ĩ.me.djɐ.θɐˈmen.te ‖ θɐn il ˈvin.du tɾɐˈbɛr.ɲɐ ob.bliˈɡɔ.ð̞ɐ ɐ.ð̞‿ɐn.dɛˈta.re ˈi | lɐ.tɐ‿sˈsɔj.lo ˈɛ.ɾɐθ ɐ.tɐ‿fˈfɔr.ted.d͡zo ˈtvu.ru]
Orthographic version in Standard Luthic, with reductions and syntactic gemination
Il vendu trabaergna·d atha·ssauilo giucavando carge erat il fortezu, can aenu pellegrinu qemavat avvoltu hacola varma ana. I tvi diciderondo ei, il fromu a·rrimuovere l’hacolo pellegrina sariat il fortezu anþera. Il vendu trabaergna dustoggit a·ssoffiare violenza, ac atha·mmaeze is soffiavat, atha·mmaeze il pellegrinu striggevat hacolo; tantu ei, all’angio il vendu desistaet da·sseina sforza. Atha·ssauilo allora sceinaut varmamente nall’hemeno, e þan il pellegrino rimuovaet l’hacolo immediatamente. Þan il vendu trabaergna obbligauða·d andaetare ei, latha·ssauilo erat atha·ffortezo tvoro.
Orthographic version in English
The North Wind and the Sun were disputing which was the stronger, when a traveller came along wrapped in a warm cloak. They agreed that the one who first succeeded in making the traveller take his cloak off should be considered stronger than the other. Then the North Wind blew as hard as he could, but the more he blew the more closely did the traveller fold his cloak around him; and at last the North Wind gave up the attempt. Then the Sun shined out warmly, and immediately the traveller took off his cloak. And so the North Wind was obliged to confess that the Sun was the stronger of the two.
Faðar unsar, þû hemeno,
Veiða latha namno þeino;
La þiuðanagarda þeina qemit;
Lo vegliano þeino taugiat;
Svasve hemeno ed ana aerþa.
Il chiaefu qotidianu unsar gevâ unse oggi,
Ed afietâ las unsaras colpas,
Svasve afietiamos þos ei, colpando unsis;
E non letare unse in tentazione
Ac frieau unse da mala.
Faur þuc ist þiuðanagarda,
E la forza, la volþa,
Faur saechia saechioro. Amen.
Broad transcription
/ˈɸa.ðɐr ˈũ.sɐr | ˈθu eˈme.no
ˈβi.ðɐ lɐ.tɐ ˈnam.no ˈθi.no
lɐ θjuˌða.nɐˈɡar.dɐ ˈθi.nɐ ˈkʷe.miθ
lo βeʎˈʎa.no ˈθi.no ˈtɔ.d͡ʒɐθ
zβɐ.zβe eˈme.no e.d‿ɐ.nɐ ˈɛr.θɐ
il ˈk̟jɛ.ɸu kʷo.tiˈdja.nu ˈũ.sɐr d͡ʒeˈβa ũ.se ˈɔd.d͡ʒi
e.d‿ɐ.ɸjeˈta lɐs ˈũ.sɐ.rɐs ˈkol.pɐs
zβɐ.zβe ɐ.ɸjeˈtja.mos θos ˈi | kolˈpɐn.do ũ.sis
e non leˈta.re ũ.se in ten.tɐtˈt͡sjo.ne
ɐk ɸrjeˈɔ ũ.se da ˈma.la
ɸɔr θuk ist θjuˌða.nɐˈɡar.da
e la ˈɸɔr.t͡sa | la ˈvol.θa
ɸɔr ˈsɛ.k̟jɐ ˈsɛ.k̟jo.ru ‖ ˈa.men/
Narrow transcription
[ˈfa.ðɐr ˈũ.sɐr | ˈθu eˈme.no
ˈvi.ðɐ lɐ.tɐ‿nˈnam.no ˈθi.no
lɐ θjuˌða.nɐˈɡar.dɐ ˈθi.nɐ ˈkᶣe.miθ
lo veʎˈʎa.no ˈθi.no ˈtɔ.d͡ʒɐθ
zvɐ.zve eˈme.no e.ð‿ɐ.nɐ ˈɛr.θɐ
il ˈk̟jɛ.ɸu kʷo.θiˈdja.nu ˈũ.sɐr d͡ʒeˈβa ũ.se ˈɔd.d͡ʒi
e.ð‿ɐ.ɸjeˈta‿llɐs ˈũ.sɐ.rɐs ˈk̠ol.pɐs
zvɐ.zve ɐ.ɸjeˈtja.mo.θ‿θos ˈi | k̠olˈpɐn.do ũ.sis
e non leˈta.re ũ.se in ten.tɐtˈt͡sjo.ne
ɐ.f‿frjeˈɔ ũ.se dɐ‿mˈma.lɐ
fɔr θux ist θjuˌða.nɐˈɡar.dɐ
e lɐ ˈfɔr.t͡sɐ | lɐ ˈvol.θɐ
fɔr ˈsɛ.k̟jɐ ˈsɛ.k̟jo.ru ‖ ˈa.men]
Orthographic version in English
Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come,
Thy will be done on earth,
as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts,
as we forgive our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil:
For thine is the kingdom,
and the power, and the glory,
forever. Amen.
1984 The Position of Tocharian among the Other Indo-European Languages. Journal of the American Oriental Society 104: 395-402.
1988 Tocharian Historical Phonology and Morphology. (American Oriental Series, 71.) New Haven, American Oriental Society.
2013 A Dictionary of Tocharian B.: Revised and Greatly Enlarged. Amsterdam-New York: Rodopi.
Adams, D.Q. & Mallory, J.P.
1997 Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. London: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers.
2006 The Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alkire, T. & Rosen, C.
2010 Romance Languages: A Historical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Allen, W.S.
1978 Vox Latina: A Guide to the Pronunciation of Classical Latin (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1987 Vox Graeca: The Pronunciation of Classical Greek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alquen, R.J. de
1974 Gothic ai and au: A Possible Solution. In Volume 151 of Janua Linguarum. Series Practica. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Anthony, D.W.
2013 Two IE Phylogenies, Three PIE Migrations, and Four Kinds of Steppe Pastoralism. Journal of Language Relationship 9.
Antonsen, E.
1975. A Concise Grammar of the Older Runic Inscriptions. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Arndt, W.W.
1959 The performance of glottochronology in Germanic. Language, 35, 180–192.
Balg, G.H.
1889 A comparative glossary of the Gothic language with especial reference to English and German. New York: Westermann & Company.
Batllori, M. & Roca, F.
2011 Grammaticalization of ser and estar in romance. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online.
Beech Stave Press
2018 Farnah: Indo-Iranian and Indo-European Studies, in Honor of Sasha Lubotsky. Beech Stave Press.
Beekes, R.S.P.
1969 The development of the Proto-Indo-European laryngeals in Greek. The Hague.
1972 Germanic Verschärfung and no laryngeals. Orbis 21.327–36
1985 The Origins of the Indo-European Nominal Inflection, Innsbruck.
1988a A Grammar of Gatha-Avestan. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
1988b PIE RHC- in Greek and other languages. Indogermanische Forschungen 22-45.
1995 Comparative Indo-European Linguistics, An Introduction, Amsterdam – Philadelphia.
1998 The origin of Lat. aqua and of *teutā ‘people’, Journal of Indo-European Studies 26, 459-466.
2003 Historical Phonology of Classical Armenian. In: F. Kortlandt, Armeniaca: comparative notes. With an appendix on the historical phonology of Classical Armenian by Robert S.P. Beekes, 133-2 11. Ann Arbor.
2010 Etymological Dictionary of Greek. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
2011 Comparative Indo-European Linguistics: An Introduction, 2nd edition, revised and corrected by Michiel de Vaan, Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Bennett, W.H.
1980 An Introduction to the Gothic Language. New York: Modern Language Association of America.
Bergsland, K. & Vogt, H.
1962 On the validity of glottochronology. Current Anthropology, 3, 115–153.
Bomhard, A.
2019 The Origins of Proto-Indo-European: The Caucasian Substrate Hypothesis. Journal of Indo-European Studies, 47.
Boutkan, D.F.H.
1995 The Germanic ‘Auslautgesetze’. Amsterdam.
Boutkan, D.F.H. & Siebinga, S.M.
2005 Old Frisian Etymological Dictionary. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Brotle, C.D.
2011 The role of mnemonic acronyms in clinical emergency medicine: A grounded theory study (EdD thesis).
Bruckner, W.
1895 Die Sprache der Langobarden. Quellen und Forschungen zur Sprach- und Culturgeschichte der germanischen Völker. Vol. LXXV. Strassburg: Trübner.
Buck. C.D.
1904 A grammar of Oscan and Umbrian, Ginn & Co.
1933 Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Burney, C.A.
2004 Historical Dictionary of the Hittites. Scarecrow Press.
Bussche, H. van den
1985 Proto-Romance inflectional morphology. Review of Proto-Romance morphology by Robert Hall. Lingua. 66.
Calabrese, A.
1998 Some remarks on the Latin case system and its development in Romance, in J. Lema & E. Trevino, (eds.), Theoretical Advances on Romance Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
1999 Metaphony Revisited. In Rivista di Linguistica.
2005 On the Feature and the Evolution of the Short High Vowels of Latin into Romance. Connecticut: University of Connecticut
2011 Metaphony in Romance. In C. Ewen; M. & Oostendorp; B. Hume (eds.). The Blackwell Companion to Phonology. Wiley-Blackwell.
Carling, G. & Pinault, GJ.
2023 Dictionary and Thesaurus of Tocharian A. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Carlson, N.
2010 Psychology the Science of Behavior. Pearson Canada, United States of America.
Cercignani, F.
1979 The Development of the Gothic Short/Lax Subsystem. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung. 93 (2): 272–278.
1986 The Development of the Gothic Vocalic System. In Brogyanyi, Bela; Krömmelbein, Thomas (eds.). Germanic Dialects: Linguistic and Philological Investigations. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. pp. 121–151.
Cheung, J.
2007 Etymological Dictionary of the Iranian Verb. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Contini, M.
1987 Etude de géographie phonétique et de phonétique instrumentale du sarde. Alessandria: Edizioni dell'Orso.
Cowgill, W.
1965 EVIDENCE IN GREEK. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 142-180.
Crawford, J.
2012 Old Norse-Icelandic (þú) est and (þú) ert. Los Angeles: University of California.
Crystal, D.
2008 A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Wales: Bangor.
Danilevitch, O.
2019 Logical Semantics Approach for Data Modeling in XBRL Taxonomies. Minsk: Belarusian State Economic University.
Davis, J.C.M.
2017 The Semantic Difference Between Italian vi and ci. CUNY City College of New York.
Delbrück, B.
1909 Zu den germanischen Relativsätzen. Abhandlungen der Königlich-Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften 19. Leipzig: Teubner.
Demiraj, B.
1997 Albanische Etymologien: Untersuchungen zum albanischen Erbwortschatz. Amsterdam-New York: Rodopi.
Derksen, R.
2008 Etymological Dictionary of the Slavic Inherited Lexicon. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
2011 The relative chronology of East Baltic accentual developments. In: Roman Sukač (ed.), Papers on Baltic and Slavic accentology (Potsdamer Linguistic Investigations 7), 17-22. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.
2015 Etymological Dictionary of the Baltic Inherited Lexicon. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Dickhoff, E.
1913 Der Unterschied im Gebrauch von gotisch uns und unsis. Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 54.466–74.
Dobrovolsky, M.; Katamba, F. & O'Grady, W.
1996 Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
Dybo, Y.A.
2002 Balto-Slavic accentology and Winter's law. Studia Linguarum 3/2, 295-515.
Ebbinghaus, E.A.
1976 THE FIRST ENTRY OF THE GOTHIC CALENDAR. The Journal of Theological Studies, 27, 140–145. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ernout, A. & Meillet, A.
1985 Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine: histoire des mots. Paris: Klincksieck.
Feist, S.
1939 Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der gotischen Sprache. Mit Einschluss des Krimgotischen und sonstiger zerstreuter überreste des Gotischen. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Ferguson, T.
1976 A history of the Romance vowel systems through paradigmatic reconstruction. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Fortson, B.W.
2004 Indo-European Language and Culture : An Introduction. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics.
Fritz, M. & Meier-Brügger, M.
2021 Indogermanische Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter.
Fulk, R. D.
2018 A Comparative Grammar of Early Germanic Languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gamillscheg, E.
2017 Die Ostgoten. Die Langobarden. Die altgermanischen Bestandteile des Ostromanischen. Altgermanisches im Alpenromanischen. Romania Germanica. Vol. 2. Berlin: De Gruyter.
1907 An introduction to Vulgar Latin. Boston: D.C. Heath & Co.
1927 From Latin to Italian: An Historical Outline of the Phonology and Morphology of the Italian Language. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Grekyan, Y. H.
2023 By God's Grace: Ancient Anatolian Studies Presented to Aram Kosyan on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday.
Guitel, G.
1975 Histoire comparée des numérations écrites. Paris: Flammarion.
Gumperz, J.J. & Cook-Gumperz, J.
2008 Studying language, culture, and society: Sociolinguistics or linguistic anthropology?. Journal of Sociolinguistics.
Gusmani, R.
1980 Lydisches Wörterbuch. Ergänzungsband, Lieferung 2. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Gvozdanović, J.
1991 Indo-European Numerals. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Hall, R.A. Jr.
1983 Proto-Romance Morphology. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Haller, H.W.
1999 The other Italy: the literary canon in dialect. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Hamp, E.P.
1965a EVIDENCE IN ALBANIAN. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 123-141.
1965b EVIDENCE IN KELTIC. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 1965, pp. 224-235.
Hockett, C.F.
1958 A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: Macmillan.
Hoenigswald, H.M.
1965 INDO-IRANIAN EVIDENCE. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 93-99.
Hoff, E. & Wagner, L.
2009 Language development. Boston, MA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.
Hogg, R.M.
1992. A grammar of Old English, I: phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hogg, R.M. & Fulk, R.D.
2011 A grammar of Old English, II: morphology. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.
Holt, D.E.
2003 The emergence of palatal sonorants and alternating diphthongs in Hispano-Romance. In D.E. Holt (ed.), Optimality Theory and Language Change. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 285–305.
2016 From Latin to Portuguese: Main Phonological Changes. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Irslinger, B.; Schneider, C. & Wodko D.S.
2008 Nomina im Indogermanischen Lexikon. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.
Jasanoff, J.
1978a Stative and middle in Indo-European. Innsbruck.
1978b Observations on the Germanic Verschärfung. MSS 37.77–90
1989 Language and gender in the Tarim Basin: the Tocharian 1 sg. pronoun. Tocharian and Indo-European Studies 3, 125-148.
2003 Hittite and the Indo-European Verb. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2022 The Origin of the Latin Gerund and Gerundive: A New Proposal. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Kapović, M.
2017 Proto-Indo-European Morphology from: The Indo-European Languages Routledge.
Klein, J.; Joseph, B.; Fritz, M. & Wenthe, M.
2017a Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics (Vol. 1). Berlin: De Gruyter.
2017b Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics (Vol. 2). Berlin: De Gruyter.
2018 Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics (Vol. 3). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Kloekhorst, A.
2004 The Preservation of *h₁ in Hieroglyphic Luwian: Two Separate a-Signs, Historische Sprachforschung 117, 26-49.
2006 Initial Laryngeals in Anatolian, Historische Sprachforschung 119, 77-108.
2008 Etymological Dictionary of the Hittite Inherited Lexicon. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
2009 Studies in Lycian and Carian Phonology and Morphology. Kadmos: Zeitschrift für vor- und frühgriechische Epigraphik, 47, 117-146.
2012 The Phonological Interpretation of Plene and Non-Plene Spelled e in Hittite, The Sound of Indo-European. Phonetics, Phonemics, and Morphophonemics (edd. B. Nielsen Whitehead et al.), 243-261.
2018 Anatolian evidence suggests that the Indo-European laryngeals *h₂ and *h₃ were uvular stops. Indo-European Linguistics 6, 69-94.
2019 Kanišite Hittite: The Earliest Attested Record of Indo-European. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
2022 Evidence for a phonemic glottal stop in Hittite: a reassessment. Historische Sprachforschung / Historical Linguistics 133 (2020), 111-143.
2023 New interpretations in Lydian phonology, New approaches on Anatolian linguistics (eds. J.V. García Trabazo, I.-X. Adiego, M., B. Obrador-Cursach, S. Soler) (= Barcino. Monographica Orientalia 22; Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 4), 115-133.
Kloekhorst, A. & Pronk, T.
2019 The Precursors of Proto-Indo-European: The Indo-Anatolian and Indo-Uralic Hypotheses. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Kortlandt, F.
1979 Three problems of Balto-Slavic phonology. Zbornik za Filologiju i Lingvistiku 22/2, 5 7-63.
1980 More evidence for Italo-Celtic. Ériu 32,1-22.
1985 Long vowels in Balto-Slavic, Baltistica 21, 112-124.
1991 Kluge’s Jaw and the rise of Proto-Germanic geminates. Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 34, 1–4.
1994 From Proto-Indo-European to Slavic. Journal of Indo-European Studies 22, 91-112.
1997 Labials, velars and labiovelars in Germanic. North-Western European Language Evolution 30.45–50.
2001 The origin of the Goths. Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 55.21–5.
2003 Indo-Uralic consonant gradation. Etymologie, Entlehnungen und Entwicklungen [Fs. Koivulehto] (Helsinki: Société Néophilologique, 2004), 163-170.
2004 Initial Laryngeals in Anatolian, Orpheus 13-14, Memorial Volume to Georgi Rikov, 9-12.
2006 Germanic *ē₁ and *ē₂ North-Western European Language Evolution 49, 51-54.
2007 Gothic gen. pl. -e. Historische Sprachforschung 120.237–40.
2012 Proto-Indo-European glottalic stops: The evidence revisited. Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 71/1 (2018), 147-153.
2016 More evidence for Proto-Indo-European glottalic stops. Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 71/1 (2018), 153-158.
Koryakov, Y.B.
2001 Atlas of Romance languages. Moscow: Moscow State University.
Krahe, H.
1957 Die althochdeutsche Personalendung -mēs. Indogermanische Forschungen 63. 55-60.
2023 The Indo-European Puzzle Revisited: Integrating Archaeology, Genetics, and Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kroonen, G.
2013 Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Kurzová, H.
1993 From Indo-European to Latin. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Lass, R.
1998 Phonology: An Introduction to Basic Concepts. Cambridge, UK; New York; Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.
Lauttamus, T.
1992 Grimm’s law: a functional-structuralist approach to the first German consonant shift. In Studia linguistica Careliana, ed. J. Niemi, 51–78. Joensuu
Lehmann, R. & Lehmann, W.P.
1975 An Introduction to Old Irish. New York: Modern Language Association of America.
Lehmann, W.P.
1952 Proto-Indo-European phonology. Austin.
1965 GERMANIC EVIDENCE. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 1965, pp. 212-223.
1986 A GOTHIC ETYMOLOGICAL DICTIONARY, Based on the third edition of Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der Gotischen Sprache by Sigmund Feist, with Bibliography Prepared Under the Direction of H.-J.J. Hewitt, BRILL.
Leumann, M.
1977 Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre. München: C.H. Beck.
Lloyd, P.M.
1987 From Latin to Spanish. Volume I: Historical Phonology and Morphology of the Spanish Language. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society.
Lubotsky, A.M.
1988 The System of Nominal Accentuation in Sanskrit and Proto-Indo-European. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Lühr, R.
1978 Die Kontinuante der urindogermanischen Medialflexion im Germanischen. Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 37, 109–20.
Maiden, M.
1995 A linguistic history of Italian. London: Longman.
Mallory, J.P.
2010 Bronze Age Languages of the Tarim Basin. Expedition Magazine. Vol. 52, no. 3. Penn Museum. pp. 44–53.
Martirosyan. H.K.
2009 Etymological dictionary of the Armenian inherited lexicon. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Matasović, R.
2009 Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Celtic. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
2011 Addenda et corrigenda to Ranko Matasović's Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Celtic (Brill, Leiden 2009).
Mayrhofer, M.
1898 Kurzgefasstes etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindischen (A concise etymological Sanskrit Dictionary). Amsterdam.
McGregor, W.B.
2015 Linguistics: An Introduction (2nd ed.). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
McManus, D.
1983 "A chronology of the Latin loan-words in Early Irish", Ériu, 34, Dublin: Royal Irish Academy: 21–71.
1991 "A Guide to Ogam", Maynooth Monographs, no. 4, Maynooth: An Sagart.
Melchert, H.C.
1983 Pudenda Hethitica. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 35, 137-145.
1989 New Luvo-Lycian isoglosses. Historische Sprachforschung 102.23–45.
1993a Lycian Lexicon. Lexica Anatolica Volume 2. Chapel Hill, N.C.
2003a Prehistory, The Luwians (Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section One, Near and Middle East Volume 68) (ed. H.C. Melchert), Leiden—Boston, 8-26.
2003b Language, The Luwians (Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section One, Near and Middle East Volume 68) (ed. H.C. Melchert), Leiden—Boston, 170-210.
2004 A Dictionary of the Lycian Language, Ann Arbor – New York
2008a "Luvian". In Roger D. Woodard (ed.). The Ancient Languages of Asia Minor. Cambridge University Press. pp 31-40.
2008b "Palaic". In Roger D. Woodard (ed.). The Ancient Languages of Asia Minor. Cambridge University Press. pp 40-46.
2008c "Lycian". In Roger D. Woodard (ed.). The Ancient Languages of Asia Minor. Cambridge University Press. pp 46-56.
2008d "Lydian". In Roger D. Woodard (ed.). The Ancient Languages of Asia Minor. Cambridge University Press. pp 56-64.
2008e "Carian". In Roger D. Woodard (ed.). The Ancient Languages of Asia Minor. Cambridge University Press. pp 64-69.
2012 The Indo-European Verb: Proceedings of the Conference of the Society for Indo-European Studies, Los Angeles, 13-15 September 2010. Reichert, Wiesbaden.
Miller, D.G.
2019 The Oxford Gothic Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Müller, S.
2007 Zum Germanischen aus laryngaltheoretischer Sicht: mit einer Einführung in die Grundlagen der Laryngaltheorie. Berlin.
Nair, R.D. & Lincoln, N.B.
2007 Cognitive rehabilitation for memory deficits following stroke. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
Noreen, A.
1894 Abriss der urgermanische Laulehre. Strassburg.
1913 Geschichte der nordischen Sprachen. Trübner: Straßburg. Altisländische und altnorwegische Grammatik (Laut- und Flexionslehre) unter Berücksichtigung des Urnordischen. Halle (Saale): Max Niemeyer.
1970 Altnordische Grammatik, I: Altisländische und altnorwegische Grammatik. 5th, unrev. ed. (rpt. of 4th ed. of 1923). University, Ala.
Olander, T.
2022 The Indo-European Language Family - A Phylogenetic Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Onishi, T.
2022 Pronominal Clitics in Tocharian: A Study in the Morphology-Syntax Interface. Los Angeles: University of California.
Osthoff, H.
1884 Zur Geschichte des Perfects im Indogermanischen. Strassburg.
2000 A concise historical grammar of the Albanian language. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
2003 A Handbook of Germanic Etymology. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Ottenheimer, H.J.
2006 The Anthropology of Language. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Payne, A.
2012 Iron Age Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions. Society of Biblical Literature.
Pellegrino, F. & Coupé, C. & Marsico, E.
2011 Across-language perspective on speech information rate. Paris: French National Centre for Scientific Research.
Peyrot, M.
2008a Variation and Change in Tocharian B. (Leiden Studies in Indo-European, 15.). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
2008b More Sanskrit-Tocharian bilingual Udānavarga fragments. Indogermanische Forschungen, 113: 83-125.
Pinault, G.J.
2002 “Tocharian and Indo-Iranian: Relations between two linguistic areas.” In Indo-Iranian Languages and Peoples, pp. 243-284, ed. Nicholas Sims-William (Proceedings of the British Academy, 116.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2020 New material extracted from revised Tocharian A texts. Leiden University, CIEL, EPHE, PSL.
Piqueron, O.
2015 Yextis Keltikā: Précis de Gaulois Classique. Société Belge d’Études Celtiques.
Pokorny, J.
1959 Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, I. Band, Tübingen – Basel.
Polomé, E.C.
1968 The Indo-European Numeral for ‘five’ and Hittite panku- ‘all’, Pratidānam, Indian, Iranian and Indo-European Studies Presented to Franciscus Bernardus Jacobus Kuiper on his Sixtieth Birthday (edd. J.C. Heesterman e.a.), The Hague – Paris, 98-101.
Prokosch, E.
1939 A Comparative Germanic Grammar. Connecticut: The Linguistic Society of America for Yale University.
Puhvel, J.
1965 EVIDENCE IN ANATOLIAN. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 1965, pp. 79-92.
1984a Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with A, Volume 1, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984b Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with E and I, Volume 2, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984c Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with H, Volume 3, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984d Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with K, Volume 4, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984e Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with L, Volume 5, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984f Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with M, Volume 6, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984g Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with N, Volume 7, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984h Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with PA, Volume 8, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984i Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with PE, PI, PU, Volume 9, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984j Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with SA, Volume 10, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
1984k Hittite Etymological Dictionary: Words beginning with SE, SI, SU, Volume 11, Mouton, Foreign Language Study.
Rasmussen, J.E.
1999 Determining Proto-Phonetics by Circumstantial Evidence: The case of the Indo-European laryngeals. Selected Papers on Indo-European Linguistics. Copenhagen: Museum of Tusculanum Press.
Renzi, L.
1994 Nuova introduzione alla filologia romanza. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Ringe, D.A.
1996 On the Chronology of Sound Changes in Tocharian: From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Tocharian. University of Virginia - American Oriental Society.
2006a From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Linguistic history of English, v. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2006b A sociolinguistically informed solution to an old historical problem: the Gothic genitive plural. Transactions of the Philological Society.
Risch, E.
1984 Gerundivum und Gerundium. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Schaffner, S.
2001 Das Vernersche Gesetz und der innerparadigmatische grammatische Wechsel des Urgermanischen im Nominalbereich. Innsbruck.
Schmidt, G.
1978 Stammbildung und Flexion der indogermanischen Personalpronomina. Wiesbaden.
Schrijver, P.
1991 The Reflexes of the Proto-Indo-European Laryngeals in Latin, in Leiden Studies in Indo-European, Volume: 2.
1997 Studies in British Celtic historical phonology. Amsterdam - Atlanta. Schrijver, P. 1997.
1999 Vowel rounding by primitive Irish labiovelars. Ériu 50, 133-137.
Seebold, E.
1984 Das System der Personalpronomina in den frühgermanischen Sprachen. Göttingen.
Sheila, E.
1992 Historical Linguistics: Mathematical concepts. In W. Bright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Linguistics.
Sihler, A.L.
1995 New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Smith, H.L. Jr.
1941 The Verschärfung in Germanic. Language 17, 93-9.
Snædal, M.
2011 "Gothic <ggw>". Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis. 128: 145–154.
2015a Gothic contact with Greek: Loan translations and a translation problem. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
2015b Gothic contact with Latin: Gotica Parisina and Wulfila's Alphabet. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Staaij, R. van der
1995 A Reconstruction of Proto-Italic. PhD dissertation, Leiden University.
Stearns Jr, M.D.
1978 Crimean Gothic: Analysis and Etymology of the Corpus. Stanford: Anma Libri.
Stewart, W.A.
1968 A Sociolinguistic Typology for Describing National Multilingualism. In Fishman, Joshua A (ed.), Readings in the Sociology of Language. The Hague, Paris: Mouton.
Sturtevant, E.H.
1932 The Ablative in Indo-European and Hittite. Language 8, 1 - 10. Linguistic Society of America.
1944 Hittite verbal nouns in -ātar and the Latin gerund. Language 20. 206-211.
Sütterlin, L.
1894 Etymologisches Allerlei. Indogermanische Forschungen 4, 1. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Swadesh, M.
1950 Salish Internal Relations. International Journal of American Linguistics. 16: 157–167.
Tagliavini, C.
1948 Le origini delle lingue Neolatine: corso introduttivo di filologia romanza. Bologna: Pàtron.
Thurneysen, R.
1883 Urspr. dn tn en im lateinischen. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 26, 301-314.
1946 A Grammar of Old Irish, Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
Torp, A.
1888 Beiträge zur Lehre von den geschlechtlosen Pronomen in den indogermanischen Sprachen. (Christiania Videnskabs-Selskabs Forhandlinger 1888,11. Christiania).
Trask, R.L.
2007 Language and Linguistics: The Key Concepts. Taylor & Francis.
Treffers-Daller, J.
2009 Code-switching and transfer: An exploration of similarities and differences. The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Code-switching. Cambridge: Cambrigde University Press.
Uhlenbeck, C.C.
1906 Aanteekeningen bij Gotische etymologieën. Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde 25. Amsterdam University Press.
Vaan, M.A.C. de
2003 The Avestan Vowels. Amsterdam.
2004 ‘Narten’ roots from the Avestan point of view, Per Aspera Ad Asteriscos, Studia Indogermanica in honorem Jens Elmegård Rasmussen sexagenarii Idibus Martiis anno MMIV (edd. A. Hyllested e.a.), Innsbruck, 591-599.
2008 Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages. Leiden—Boston: Brill.
Vine, B.
2012 “PIE mobile accent in Italic: Further evidence”, in Benedicte Nielsen Whitehead, Thomas Olander, Birgit Anette Olsen, and Jens Elmegård Rasmussen, editors, The Sound of Indo-European: Phonetics, phonemics, and morphophonemics, Museum Tusculanum Press.
Voyles, J.B.
1992 Early Germanic Grammar. San Diego: Academic Press.
Vries, J. de
1977 Altnordisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Wagner, M.L.
1951 La lingua sarda: Storia, spirito e forma. Berne: Francke.
Watkins, C.
1965a EVIDENCE IN BALTO-SLAVIC. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 116-122.
1965b EVIDENCE IN ITALIC. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 181-189.
Weiss, M.L.
2009 Outline of the Historical and Comparative Grammar of Latin. Beech Stave Press.
Wiener, L.
1915 Commentary to the Germanic laws and mediaeval documents. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Winter, W.
1965a ARMENIAN EVIDENCE. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 100-115.
1965b TOCHARIAN EVIDENCE. Evidence for laryngeals, edited by Werner Winter, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 1965, pp. 190-211
Wright, J.
1910 Grammar of the Gothic Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Zoëga, G.T.
1910 A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
The latin library, ancient Latin books and writings (without translations) ordered by author
LacusCurtius, a small collection of Greek and Roman authors along with their books and writings (original texts are in Latin and Greek, translations in English and occasionally in a few other languages are available)
.png){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
