Romanian Language Not as We Know It

Romanian language not as we know it

« on: February 18, 2014, 07:41:56 PM »

For some time I was researching about what are the origins of Romanians and if truly it is a language that derived from latin. For a couple of years some scandals started to unsettle the historical background of Romania, because some discoveries were made that might prove romanian is the mother language of latin. There are people who try to contradict this calling the study of Dacians a pseudoscience. But I will give you some info here that I found in english and maybe you have an opinion about this:

Quote

"In the past few years a new wave of nationalism has hit Romania, with it's own branch of protochronist pseudoscience which we call: dacism / dacology.

As you might know, most historians and linguists agree that the Romanian language resulted from the process of cultural latinization that occurred after the conquest of part of modern Romania by the Roman Empire, ~2000 years ago (at that time, it was populated by Dacians).

Not content with the idea that our language is the result of colonization, the nationalists have come up with a new story: actually, they say, Latin is derived from Romanian, not the other way around.

How is this possible, you ask? Their train of thought goes like this:

Modern Romanian is actually the same language as ancient Dacian. With some changes, obviously, but everything we think is Latin about Romanian is actually Dacian.

Ancient Latin is actually derived from Dacian in the following way: 1) Greece was created by people who originated from around the Black Sea area (Thracians). 2) Rome was created by people who originated from Greece. So "naturally" it follows that Dacians => Thracians => Greek => Romans. So when the Romans conquered Dacia, they were really just "returning home".

Some arguments they come up with to support this theory are:

The fact that the monument dedicated to Emperor Trajan's conquest of Dacia, Trajan's Column seems to depict Romans and Dacians talking, without the need of an interpreter.

The fact that later-period Roman statues seem to feature Dacians in preeminent roles, suggesting a sort of respect one would give to revered ancestors.

A quote attributed to Trajan during his campaign of conquering Dacia, which shows him saying: "I am returning to the home of my ancestors".

https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,34031.msg475091.html#msg475091

Just this year, this theory has received unexpected support from an ex-Vatican collaborator, Micheál Ledwith, who has said the following, during a TV interview:

"I think what is not often remembered is that Romanian, or the ancestry of Romanian, is from where the Latin language came, not vice-versa, in other words Romanian is not a Latin language, rather Latin is a Romanian language, so I want to salute those people from Bucegi mountains and around Brașov, Bucharest. You are the ones that gave the great vehicle of western culture (the Latin language) to the world."

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luWa_vLgc2o#t=55s

Of course, the dacists jumped all over this and gave it the sensationalist title "The secrets of the Vatican are starting to come to light!" - (even though the guy never claimed he got that info from any super-secret Vatican documents).

With serious funding from nationalist circles, they have created a pretty high-budget documentary (high-budget for Romania, that is), called "Dacians, Unsettling Truths" which you can find here, if you are interested in following this story: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PBdNU7xAcM "

source: reddit

And another one:

Quote

"A lot of scientists, linguists, archaeologists, historians etc. are considering that 8,500 years ago, Romania was the heart of the old European civilization. The new archaeological discoveries from Tartaria, (Romania), showed up written plates older than the Sumerian ones. More and more researches and studies converged to the conclusion that the Europeans are originated in a single place, the lower Danube basin. Down there, at Schela and Cladova in Romania have been discovered proves of the first European agricultural activities which appear to be even older than 10,000 years.

Out of 60 scientifically works which are covering this domain, 30 of them localize the primitive origins of the man-kind in Europe, where 24 of them are localizing this origin in the actual Romania, (Carpathian- Danubian area); 10 are indicating western Siberia, 5 Jutland and/or actual Germany room, 4 for Russia, 4 for some Asian territories, 1 for actual France area and all these recognisied despite against the huge pride of those nations.

Jean Carpantier, Guido Manselli, Marco Merlini, Gordon Childe, Marija Gimbutas, Yannick Rialland, M. Riehmschneider, Louis de la Valle Poussin, Olaf Hoekman, John Mandis, William Schiller, Raymond Dart, Lucian Cuesdean, Sbierea, A. Deac, George Denis, Mattie M.E., N. Densuseanu, B.P. Hajdeu, P Bosch, W.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PBdNU7xAcM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luWa_vLgc2o#t=55s

Kocka, Vladimir Gheorghiev, H. Henchen, B.V. Gornung, V Melinger, E. Michelet, A. Mozinski, W. Porzig, A. Sahmanov, Hugo Schmidt, W. Tomaschek, F.N. Tretiacov are among the huge number of specialists which consider Romania the place of otehr Europeans origines and Romanian the oldest language in Europe, older even than Sanskrit.

According to the researchers and scientists, the Latin comes from the old Romanian (or Thracian) and not vice versa. The so called "slave" words are in fact pure Romanian words. The so called vulgar Latin is in fact old Romanian, or Thracian language, according to the same sources...

The arguments sustaining the theories from above are very numerous and I don't want to go into them so deeply as long as the forum is and has to remain one languages dedicated, to.

In the limits of the language, please allow me to present a list of just a few (out of thousands of words), which are very similar/ even identical in Romanian and Sanskrit:

Romanian

numerals : unu, doi, trei, patru, cinci, sase, sapte...100=suta

Sanskrit

numerals: unu, dvi, tri, ciatru, penci, sas, saptan...100 = satan

then Romanian Sanskrit

acasa acasha (at home)

acu acu (now)

lup lup ( wolf)

a iubi (considered slave) iub (love)

frate vrate (brother)

camera camera (room)

limba lamba (tongue)

nepot napat (neffew)

mandru mandra (proud)

lupta lupta (fight)

pandur pandur (infanterist)

nevasta navasti (wife)

prieten prietema (friend)

pranz prans (lunch time)

Ruman Ramana (Romanian)

saptamana saptnahan (week)

struguri strughuri (grapes)

vale vale (valley)

vadana vadana (widow)

a zambi dzambaiami (to smile)

umbra dumbra (shadow)

om om (man-kind)

dusman dusman (enemy)

a invata invati (to study)

a crapa crapaiami (to break something)

naiba naiba (evil)

apa apa (water) and not AQUA like in Latin. It looks like aqua came from apa and not the other way around...

and so on for more than thousand situations...

According to M. Gimbutas, the confusion Roman (Romanian as in original language) = Roman (ancient Rom citizen), is generated by the fact that Romans and Romanians have been the same nation, the same

people. The Dacians/Thracians and Romans have been twins. The illiterate peasants called Romanians, Ruman and not Roman. Why do they call so? Because RU-MANI, RA-MANI, RO-MANI, API, APULI, DACI and MAN-DA , VAL-AH are all synonyms expressing the person from the river banc or from the river valley. APII could be found under the form of mez-APPI in the ancient Italy, under he same name as the APPULI Dacians. APU-GLIA, (or Glia Romanilor in Romanian - Romanian land) can be found with this meaning only in Romanian (Glia= land)

In the Southern side of Italian "booth" exists the first neolitical site of Italy and it is called MOL-feta. The name itself has Romanian names, according to Guido A. Manselli: MOL-tzam (popular Thank you), MUL-tumire (satisfaction), na-MOL (mud); MOL-dova (province and river in Romania, Za-MOL-xis, Dacian divinity. Manselli said that this archaeological sit is 7,000 years old and has a balcanic feature.

I came up with this topic just to hear decent opinions and not banalities like those of a few days ago when while surfing for a language forum, I read all kind of suburban interventions. This topic is for people whith brain only.

As a German myself, I was pure and simple stunned by the childish commentaries regarding German Language given by some individuals, yesterday. I hope, I won't generate anything like that today...if that will happen, I sugest to the moderators to delete it.

What do you think, are you ready to take the challenge and carry on a nice discussion on this topic or I have to look for another place for it?

What do you say about these new (for me - although the theory appears to be known for long time - it has been said that Vatican preserves some secrets about the origins of us all - information obtained in the moment of St Sofia church devastation, in Constantinople, when the churches separation took place). "

source: antimoon.com

There is also another topic that is quite interesting, related to the fact that there is a location in India(punjabi language, unfortunately I wasn't able to find info about the exact location) where over 80 million people speak romanian(apparently there are over 2000 words that might be pure romanian):

Quote

"Lucian Cuesdean: ” Punjabi language, spoken in India, has 2,000 pure Romanian words, and many others sound very much alike. That is because they, the Punjabi people, are the descendants of a Getae tribe, just like Romanians, although there is about 4500 km distance between Romanians and Punjabi people.”

We have learnt in schools that Daco-Getae people would be a branch of Thracians, who used to ,exclusively, live in Dacia, current Romanian territories and that they spoke a language different from Latin.Roman Empire conquered Dacia and Dac0-Getae would, apparently, have given up their own language to learn the conquerors’s. And, this is how Romanian was born.

After 20 years of research, Dr. Cuesdean has come to the conclusion that this theory was completely fake. Cuesdean says that Getae tribes, under a different name, used to live in a very large geographical area, from Central Europe to Asia, close to China and India.

Current Punjabi population from north of India is the descendant of a tribe of Getae located in central Asia, over 2.500 years ago. These descendants of Getae speak a language close to Romanian. But, many of their Punjabi words are also common to Latin. The only problem is that 2.500 years ago, there was no Roman Empire. Which means that Getae did speak a latin language way before Roman expansion.

Getae warriors have descendants in India.

“I began my researches from the informations related to the big tribe of Masagetae, attested in Central Asia by ancient historians and mentioned in Evagrius Scholasticus, written in VIth century after Hr. and translated into Ecclesiastical History by E. Walford in 1846, from which I quote: ” Current JAD population of North of India is the descendant of Messagetae. In Pahalavi language, Messagetae is translated the Big Jats.” I went on the trail of this population, the Big Jats. Chinese people called them Yueci, meaning Getae, talking about their domination in Punjabi. So, the Getae did live once in Punjabi. To remember: Getae-Dacians spoke the same language, as the geographer Strabon ( 60 ante Hr. -26 after Hr. ) says, which means from the Carpathians to the central Asia.”

If the Getae owned territories from Europe to Asia, if Punjabi people are their descendants, and Romanians are, themselves, the descendants of Getae, Dr. Cuesdean was curious to find out if there are any linguistic similarities between Romanians and them, by comparing both languages.

“After 20 years of research, I came to the conclusion that the 80.000.000 of people of Punjabi community speak an archaic Romanian. They use 2.000 identical words, many of them, also, common to Latin. But, if Punjabi is a language once spoken by Getae, it means that the Getae used to speak a latin idioma before birth of Roman Empire. Which leads us to the conclusion that Romanian is older than Latin itself. So, in an immemorial past, there was an unique European language, most probably the archaic Romanian, or Getae-Dacian, which through a series of changes and migrations, gave birth to all of the so-called Indo-European languages, including Latin. And the Dacian-Roman war was a fratricidal one. To this day, they speak Romanian or ARomanian from the North of Adriatic Sea to the Volga. Even more, in Kazakhstan, there are now, officially, 20.000 Romanian speakers.”

Dr. Lucian Cuesdean studied Masagetae history for over 20 years.

Dr. Cuesdean is 70 years old, PhD in Health Sciences. Before 1989 he worked in Libya several years, and

Libya was part of Roman Empire. It is there that he started to look for explainations for the fact that Dacians might have given up their own language in favour of Latin and Libyans did not. In 1990, by studying all the historiography related to Getae, he discovered the informations about Masagetae, and therefore about their descentands , the Punjabi.

Herodotus wrote about the Masagetae of Asia. We can find the first attestations of Masagetae of Asia in Herodotus writings: ” Caucasus sets the barriers (Scythians) from west of Caspian Sea and then west and towards the rising sun comes a vast plain, immense (Central Asia , close to China) lost in the distance; that plain was occupied by Masagetae, agaisnt whom Cyrus wanted to send his army.”

Cyrus , the king of Persians, did fought agaisnt the Masagetae who’s leader was king Tamyris, but Cyrus’s army was defeated and Cyrus, beheaded."

Hope this is of some use for those who are interested in finding more about languages!Ed

« Last Edit: February 18, 2014, 07:49:17 PM by edgitarra »

Logged

“When you battle with your conscience and lose, you win." -Henny Youngman

Laura

Administrator

Posts: 24,028

o

Re: Romanian language not as we know it

« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2014, 09:38:52 PM »

Pretty fascinating and I think there may just be something to it.


https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=17


http://www.laura-knight-jadczyk.com/

Logged

He who learns must sufferAnd even in our sleep pain that cannot forgetFalls drop by drop upon the heart,And in our own despair, against our will,Comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.Agamemnon, Aeschylus

edgitarra

Jedi Master

Posts: 278



Yes, I also think it is very interesting! And with time it is going to be a bigger movement of independent researchers in Romania who will fight all those years that the communists faked a lot of history. Another topic that is not in place for discussion in Rom are the stories about giant people who used to guard a mountain area that has some sort of inner caves, galleries which seem touched by a hand. This is the translation related to the giant guys:

Quote

In February 2012, a team of geologists has been excavated in Rosia Montana, in one of the galleries Agathyrsi discovered, 5500 years ago. They found here a huge piece of stone with a composition of 15% granite powder, 30% tungsten and 55% gold powder. Agathyrsi were mixed Dacian - Scythian which lived in the area that is now Romania. Herodotus was first told about this enigmatic people, that they were very luxurious, which tattooed and wore gold jewelry.




This is an image with a big skeleton found in 1976 at Rosia Montana(I do not really know if the image is real, maybe other forum members can give a look and tell their opinion).

Quote

The slab which is perfectly polished has a length of 12 meters, a width of 6 meters and a height of 3 meters, the approximate weight of 1,700 tons, 100 tons more than the "pregnant woman stone" or slab found at Baalbek, only the gold content in it representing approx. 900 tonnes, nearly three hundred times more than would have been obtained by full recycling for 20 years the waste dumps stored for Rosia Montana gold mines exploatation, and 150 times more than all the gold extracted from the surface and from all galleries by the Agathyrsi for the Dacians and then by the Romans.

This is the cave gallery I was talking about:

Quote

What is more shocking is where this amazing discovery was made. The monument was found in the Hyperborean Gallery, located on the Corna valley below the village of Rosia Montana Corna. This place was investigated 36 years ago and because of the incredible archaeological and anthropological discoveries virtually inconceivable at that time, it was closed and then sealed under the Security command.

Miners who have been called to dig in this gallery have died. Only 4 people left alive. One of them, Ion Mois tells about the night you will not forget." We found a huge bone. I had never seen anything alike. " Maybe I should not say anything, I swore that to the communists, but I'm from Albac(commune), one of the Moti people, so I can not shut up. Here's how it was: in the winter of 76', I was called by the chief engineer and received the disposition to reopen, to enhance and electrify the old gallery 13 which remained closed since the time of the Austro-Hungaria and after the consolidation to have 2 geologists to make a research/inspect. The gallery was old, and it remained so since the time of Agathyrsi, which at the time drew from it and process the Dacian gold and silver; the gallery was out of gold many centuries before the Romans get hold of it. It is true that there are traces of the Romans, but it is clear that they were convinced of the fact very quickly and they have abandoned the place. Consolidation and electrification works have lasted almost until the summer of 77 and I had some problems with the water draining of a part of the gallery which wass flooded . Both the valves from the mine and solenoid valves to pump the water were very helpful .

Also then I found a bone washed away, so big we have never seen before. Not even seen by my comrades. After I showed the bone to the director he handed the bone to the Security chef from Rosia Montana State Mining Enterprise and after a prosecutor questioned(interogatory) us for about four days. Like where was bone when I found it? As in what position? Like who has been with us in the mine? Like who's idea it was? How I got it and how many percent I got out of that day? Well, all kinds of puzzling questions that scare us and make us to be quiet. I shut all obvious and after we asked to sign statements, we were sent back to the gallery. At home I never told a word. I was afraid for my family.

Apparently the findings were sent to Moscow after some geologists and archeologists came and examined them.

Hopefully you will understand the translation.

« Last Edit: February 18, 2014, 10:30:43 PM by edgitarra »

Logged


dantem

Dagobah Resident

Posts: 771

o



Thanks edgitarra! This is very interesting, as no one really tracked down the origins of Latin as yet. It is thought by some that it was a totally fabricated language by the bureaucratic Roman Empire's elite, but

it may be that the weren't such geniuses after all




http://ilsegnodeltempo.wordpress.com/

Is there any book around on this one?

Logged

I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens who, reading newspapers, live and die in the belief that they have known something of what has been passing in the world in their time [...] General facts may indeed be collected from them [...] but no details can be relied on. He who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false. [Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Norvell, 1807]

edgitarra

Jedi Master

Posts: 278



Hello dantem, unfortunately there is no book at the moment. Perhaps there is more research to be made in order to have enough material for a book. The only material you can find is in the youtube link in the beginning post. It is a documentary about the so called real history of Dacians.

Logged


Yozilla

Jedi Council Member





Posts: 614

What is salvation really?


« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2014, 12:01:47 AM »

I also noticed a kind of interesting "similarity" between Greek and Latin - lots of "s" especially ending words while i was reading some stuff about Etruscans. Also lot of words in Latin/Sanskrit are still used in Dalmatia - (islands mainly)... interesting. Croatian linguists clam them to be "Hungarisms"(words adopted from Hungarian in times of Austro Hungarian Empire) or "Latinisms", but now i wonder if those are really "Sanskrtisms". I also wonder if Alexander the Great was Romanian instead Greek (another

hoax from Greek enforcers?). Also this tribe of Getae (Celts" ) in Punjabi, are they remains of "Great Celtic Empire" in which Sanskrit was spoken? So cheating "Greeks put all that in one myth about one great Greek that conquered the world - for propaganda purposes?

« Last Edit: February 19, 2014, 12:03:37 AM by Yozilla »

Logged

Will put something here when I became clever enough!

seek10

The Living Force

Posts: 2,239







Thank you edgitarra for the post. Interesting topic. Other day I was searching india's history , kings , area of kingdoms, their relations to Greeks , Alexander's left over handlers etc to have some fresh perspective. Interestingly no kingdom lasted long , area varied from sri lanka to Iran and there are some marriages between kings of India and Greece. So all over there are lot of cross influences. some lasted a while, some didn't. If British can enforce their English in their colonies so easily ( probably 100 or less years ), you can imagine how many things would have happened.

What C's said is interesting.

941016

Quote

Q: (L) What is the origin of the books of Enoch? A: Sanskritian society in area now referred to as India. Q: (L) What evaluation can we give the books of Enoch as far as level of truth? A: 50% of area was destroyed in nuclear conflagration in between

timing of Enoch books are not clear except it is older than 2nd century BC

941102

Quote

Q: (L) What is the origin of the Sanskrit language? A: Atlantis.

950318

Quote

Q: (L) What is the world's oldest language, at least of those known to today's world? A: Sanskrit. Q: (L) What is the origin of Sanskrit? A: Atlantean roots.


That is more than 12,000 years before. As per C's, At that time Atlantis is like today's NATO. Probably it is like today's English.

There is another hypothesis that people from black sea steppe's migrated to different direction due to catastrophic event probably 3600 years, some migrated towards Greece, some towards India etc. Given how kingdoms change so often and their variation of enforcement of language, it is quite possible all is part of the same cloth.

In case of Punjab, it is more or less on cross roads with the rest of the world. So it is a primary target for any external influence.

Logged

“In the life of warriors it was extremely natural to be sad for no overt reason. Whenever the boundaries of the known are broken, a mere glimpse of the eternity outside is enough to disrupt the coziness of our controlled awareness. The best way to get rid of melancholy is to make fun of it.”(carlos)

Avala

Jedi Council Member

Posts: 572



But, isn't the Sanskrit in the root of the Latin as in majority of European languages? For example half of those words in Sanskrit-Romanian list are the same as in Serbo-Croatian which is slavic language.

Logged

Aeneas

Jedi Master





Posts: 439



Thanks for posting this. Very interesting. In looking on the antimoon site mentioned, I found a youtube video that had the text with pictures and maps. Even if it might have some nationalistic overtones, pictures can sometimes help: _https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Xia-ionsIg

Logged

Those who make peaceful revolution impossibleWill make violent revolution inevitable.John F. Kennedy (1917 - 1963)

Aeneas

Jedi Master

Posts: 439








Interestingly a key ruler who was a contemporary of Ceasar was murdered in the year 44, same year as Ceasar:

Quote

Burebista (Boerebista), a contemporary of Julius Caesar, ruled Geto-Dacian tribes between 82 BC and 44 BC. He thoroughly reorganised the army and attempted to raise the moral standard and obedience of the people by persuading them to cut their vines and give up drinking wine.[40] During his reign, the limits of the Dacian Kingdom were extended to their maximum. The Bastarnae and Boii were conquered, and even the Greek towns of Olbia and Apollonia on the Black Sea (Pontus Euxinus) recognized Burebista's authority. In 53 BC, Caesar stated that the Dacian territory was on the eastern border of the Hercynian Forest.[9]

Burebista suppressed the indigenous minting of coinages by four major tribal groups, adopting imported or copied Roman denarii as a monetary standard[11] During his reign, Burebista transferred Geto-Dacians capital from Argedava to Sarmizegetusa Regia.[41][42] For at least one and a half centuries, Sarmizegetusa was the Dacians' capital and reached its peak under King Decebalus. The Dacians appeared so formidable that Caesar contemplated an expedition against them, which his death in 44 BC prevented. In the same year Burebista was murdered, and the kingdom was divided into four (later five) parts under separate rulers.

From Wikipedia: _https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacia#Burebista

Here is a picture that shows the central position of Romania and the Danube river. A central position.

Logged

http://www.mappery.com/maps/Danube-River-Basin-by-Maps-Illustrated-Map.jpg

Those who make peaceful revolution impossibleWill make violent revolution inevitable.John F. Kennedy (1917 - 1963)

SeekinTruth

Ambassador

Posts: 5,332



Very intriguing. Thanks for sharing, edgitarra. It's not just the lack of any real evidence of where Latin came from, but it seems nobody is really sure of where the very first people on the Italian peninsula, including Rome, came from either. I'm just reading Dionysius of Halicarnassus' Roman Antiquities and he starts with trying to identify the original inhabitants and settlers of Italy, and doesn't seem even as a first century BC historian to know for sure. He mentions conflicting accounts from different historians and writers over the centuries. His preferred claims seem to place the original settlers coming to Italy from Greece dozens of generations before the Trojan War. I think there might be something to the Romanian / Draco-Getae claims, too.

Logged

"All there is is Lessons." "Knowledge Protects, Ignorance Endangers." - Cassiopaeans

I can think of this network-group as a second, adopted family. I can think of Laura and Ark as the "parents" of this rather large family with all our amusing foibles. Occasionally there will be a "falling out;" a certain member may leave the family. But life goes on... and we all continue learning our lessons.

All for One & One for All. Together we stand, divided we fall.

aurora





Jedi Master

Posts: 320




The same as in Turkish (düşman -ş is pronounced as sh). Have we imported this word from Romanian or vice versa. The Turkish site has been hacked so I could not check.

There are Turkish words in Romanian like çorba - soup (chorba).

Logged

edgitarra

Jedi Master

Posts: 278



Quote






I would highly recommend to watch this documentary for those interested in finding more material. I am posting it again because it is easier to be found, rather than the post above.

Logged


SeekinTruth

Ambassador



Quote from: aurora on February 19, 2014, 01:01:54 PM


The same as in Turkish (düşman -ş is pronounced as sh). Have we imported this word from Romanian or vice versa. The Turkish site has been hacked so I could not check.

There are Turkish words in Romanian like çorba - soup (chorba).

Hope this is not going too off topic. Armenians use dusman (yes, it's pronounced dushman) too, because many Armenians use Turkish words. Everyone, including myself, knows that it's not Armenian - we have an Armenian word, tshnami, for enemy - but the Turkish word IS used rather commonly. Same with other Turkish words like chorba for soup (aboor is the Armenian word), lots of Russian words, Arabic, and some Persian. It especially depends on where the Armenian people lived in terms of which foreign words they use habitually.

The point being that over many generations of common usage, the foreign words become part of a language. This seems to have happened most already with Persian/Farsi. Some words that I thought were actually Armenian, I've learned in the last couple of decades are originally Persian/Farsi. And there doesn't seem to be another word for them in Armenian usage anymore. And this does and may happen





in other languages too. Just thought I'd mention all this because it shows that when different peoples come in contact with one another over any considerable time, they tend to pick up/exchange cultural aspects including language.

Logged

"All there is is Lessons." "Knowledge Protects, Ignorance Endangers." - Cassiopaeans

I can think of this network-group as a second, adopted family. I can think of Laura and Ark as the "parents" of this rather large family with all our amusing foibles. Occasionally there will be a "falling out;" a certain member may leave the family. But life goes on... and we all continue learning our lessons.

All for One & One for All. Together we stand, divided we fall.

ytain

Jedi



In regard to Romanian language, I want to offer also a different perspective from a deaf's viewpoint. In Romanian language there are no two or more words that look same when lipread, the phonetic rules are more stricter, that applies to almost all words of Romanian origin. When I lipread in English, it is more difficult to ascertain which words are being spoken because many words look same, like these three words: mall, ball, poll. And English has no strict phonetic rules that applies to all words, forcing me to create additional memory (phonetic representation for every word) for the whole English vocabulary. From what I observe of myself during lipreading in English, I seem to be slower than in Romanian (biased here obviously since Romanian is my mother tongue), and I seem to have less time to ascertain whether the speaker would try to manipulate me or not.I wonder if the English language contains some sort of obfuscation effect on the phonetic aspect of the language making it more difficult whether the speaker manipulates the audience or not?

Ytain

« Last Edit: February 20, 2014, 04:45:53 AM by ytain »

thorbiorn

Jedi Council Member

Posts: 521






Quote from: edgitarra on February 19, 2014, 05:57:12 PM

Quote


I would highly recommend to watch this documentary for those interested in finding more material. I am posting it again because it is easier to be found, rather than the post above.

It is very interesting. There is apparently a second part but I could not find subtitles. Then I found this story which takes one back into prehistoric times:

_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLS1li_tJTw with the Romanian title " Misterul Sfinxului din Carpați - partea I" I began to watch and caught some ideas of an interview between the host Daniel Roxin and his guest, Oana Raluca Ghiocel who then presents, beginning at around 8:50 min into the video, a film/documentary in English about the Carpatian Sphinx and the search of lost goddess worshipping civilizations in the same region. Later there is quite a load of hytpothesis about the Neandertals which is elaborated on in the second part, Misterul Sfinxului din Carpați - partea a II - a _http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOtpPxlkD2w Whereas I watched the entire first part, I only viewed a few sections of the second part which. like the first part, begins with the English about 8-9 minutes in.

Logged

A: ... the universe is merely a school. And, a school is there for all to learn. That is why everything exists. There is no other reason. - Cassiopaean transcripts 950902

About translation.

Laura

Administrator


http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=7911.0




Posts: 24,028

o



Quote from: SeekinTruth on February 19, 2014, 12:44:39 PM

Very intriguing. Thanks for sharing, edgitarra. It's not just the lack of any real evidence of where Latin came from, but it seems nobody is really sure of where the very first people on the Italian peninsula, including Rome, came from either. I'm just reading Dionysius of Halicarnassus' Roman Antiquities and he starts with trying to identify the original inhabitants and settlers of Italy, and doesn't seem even as a first century BC historian to know for sure. He mentions conflicting accounts from different historians and writers over the centuries. His preferred claims seem to place the original settlers coming to Italy from Greece dozens of generations before the Trojan War. I think there might be something to the Romanian / Draco-Getae claims, too.

Indeed! And there is a great "Critical History of Rome" by Gary Forsythe that lays out all the problems with the faked Roman History: http://www.amazon.com/Critical-History-Early-Rome-Prehistory/dp/0520249917

Definitely worth reading. Excellent book.

Logged

He who learns must sufferAnd even in our sleep pain that cannot forgetFalls drop by drop upon the heart,And in our own despair, against our will,

http://www.amazon.com/Critical-History-Early-Rome-Prehistory/dp/0520249917




http://www.laura-knight-jadczyk.com/

Comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.Agamemnon, Aeschylus

l apprenti de forgeron

Dagobah Resident

Posts: 753

Save the human soul from the crucifixion


« Reply #17 on: March 02, 2014, 06:06:01 AM »

There is a book that can be connected to this matter. It called "French does not come from Latin" by Yves Cortez. Apparently he was a journalist by profession and philologist by vocation.Here is the prologue of the book (translated from spanish) and hope it be intelligible:

Quote

Contrary to the generally accepted idea, the French do not come from the Latin nor Italian, Spanish , Romanian or any other Romance language derived from Latin. Here is the summary of the thesis I will demonstrate .

In the early centuries of the history of Rome, two peoples, and therefore two languages coexist in the small territory of Lazio. A people spoke Latin and the other spoke Italian. These two towns were merged into one. The Italian became the language spoken and written language remained Latin .

Thus, from the second century BC, the Romans were bilingual : they used Italian as spoken and written Latin as the language, and it is these two languages which they contributed to all regions they conquered. After the Roman conquest in Italy, France, Spain and Romania, left their respective villages to adopt the Italian language as a spoken language and the Latin is only used for writing, as did the Romans.




It is plausible to think that the Romans call his spoken language the 'Roman'. To avoid confusion with our use of the term today, I will call the language spoken by the "old Italian" Roman. I use this term on purpose since the Romans spoke latin deformed, sometimes called "Vulgar Latin" or "Low Latin", but simply spoke a different language, which has not the latin as origin, and that it was a form Italian .

Bilingualism language spoken - written language has nothing exceptional. Shortly before the beginning of the Christian era, in Jerusalem, the Hebrew language spoken by the Jews until this time, gives way to Aramaic, but keeps its status of religious and literary language. The Jews of Christ's time were bilingual : they spoke Aramaic and Hebrew writing .

Today, in Arab countries, the Arabic dialect is spoken and written in classical Arabic only. In Germanic Switzerland, the spoken language is Swiss German and written language is High German. In Quebec, the spoken language is rich in words from an original vocabulary, but French is still used when writing academic perfectly. In Africa, in America and in Asia, bilingualism language spoken - written language is an everyday reality. Different people continue to use their native languages and writing using the official language, usually the language of the former colonizers : the Spanish , the French, the English...

The strong divergence between Latin and the Romance languages is under discussion for a long time among Latin scholars and linguists. In 1940 the Danish linguist Louis Hjelmslev concluded their research with these words : "the mother tongue we have come to rebuild is not the same Latin that has been handed down to us by the literature." In 1953, French linguist Jean Perrot notes just as the mother tongue has been reconstructed from the various Romance languages "is not for the state to know Latin". Either find a very different Latin mother tongue but are hesitant to move away from dogma and say that instead of "another Latin" is quite simply "other language" .

In 1985 the great Latinist Jozsef Herman recognized at the international congress of linguistics and Roman philology, in front of an audience of coming scholars from around the world : "We Romanists, along with historians of the Latin language, we are almost the only ones to know with respect to the process of transformation from Latin to romance language, we have more hypothesis and controversies that certainties [ ... ] . "

In the late twentieth century, the more advanced the research, unless they disagreed researchers in regard to an explanation about the transformation of Latin in the Romance languages. The difficulties stem from the fact that researchers are prisoners of dogma that the Romance languages come from Latin and manage to find explanations for all the supposed transformation of Latin. Try, therefore, to explain the disappearance of declensions, gender neutral, the deponent verbs, verbal adjectives, and the appearance of the items, the past perfect , conditional...without success.

Antoine Meillet, the famous French linguist of the early twentieth century, provides only partial demonstrations and unfounded conclusions hiding bad his peremptory formulas "common innovations result from the fact that a delicate and complex mechanism was handled by new people from all walks " [1 ] How is it possible that people from different backgrounds could cause the same linguistic

innovations? There is a surprising mystery. For Antoine Meillet, the second major explanation lies in the fact that people prefer simplicity: "The deponent is the kind of useless complication in the language". The people, therefore , would get rid of the deponent. A little further says: "When you leave the neutral, Roman got rid of a linguistic category that meant nothing for a long time."

As for the Greek people, they have remained neutral, like the Germans and the Russians. Antoine Meillet has laws of variable geometry.

One of two things: either remain in the lyricism of Littre exclaiming in the introduction to his dictionary: "To the great surprise of the learned, mutations were made as if a concert had prepared beforehand determined" [2 ] or try to make a rigorous analysis and a little more scientific .

What are the main objections that can do the Latin origin of the Romance languages ?

- How is the disappearance of the same grammatical forms could occur in all the Romance languages ?

- How is the appearance of the same grammatical forms could occur in all the Romance languages ?

- How to explain the disappearance of the same Latin words and the appearance of a negotiation non-Latin words in all the Romance languages ?

- How to explain the disappearance of adjectives, adverbs, the most common Latin verbs in all Roman languages ?

- How is it that such a transformation has been made in less than four centuries, since the demise of the Roman Empire around the year 450 AD and the emergence of the Roman language mentioned at the Council of Tours, in 813, when stability of languages seems to be a general law? Antoine Meillet, however, repeatedly demonstrates this feature of languages in his book about the history of the Latin language: "language of a great empire, Latin remained stable for 800 years" [3 ] . After 8 centuries of stability, the language would have mutated from a stroke at a dizzying to the point of becoming something completely unrecognizable speed.

Antoine Meillet does feel that there 's a single Latin curiosity, and manages to find explanations for the stability of certain languages, as it does with the Turk. "Today Turkish is the Turkish thousand years ago , the rigid language outlining the history preserved". Will there be a law to explain the preservation of languages by the schematic? Antoine Meillet also emphasizes that "the structure of Arabic today is still similar to that of the Semitic languages than three thousand years ago". And who knows ancient Greek and modern Greek can not but be struck before the amazing continuity of Greek vocabulary and grammar over 2500 years. In fact , languages are predominantly stable. So why a Latin transformation - transformationand go - in the course of less than four centuries only?

Why the Latin language is frozen, why all the Romance languages resemble each other and are so

different from latin?

We will review all these questions and I shall endeavor to make accessible to nonspecialists demonstration. It is necessary, however, my dear reader, that you are aware of two major pitfalls:

First, you can not escape the weight of dogma, and it will come to mind constantly the same question: "But how is it possible that every university, in every country, teach the Latin origin of the Romance languages? Perhaps they are wrong for so long and steadily that possible? And why would an amateur who make this discovery, not a university scholar? " .

Just do not think that a minister of the church at the same time I could question the dogma and tradition. See how linguists Perrot and Jean Louis Hjelmslev censor. They stop halfway through the crossing. Do not be timid. Dare to go to the extreme of logic, whatever your previous convictions.

The second obstacle comes from a superficial analysis do believe that Latin and the Romance languages have many common points. Do not want to say that the latter are spawned from the first? The German and English, both Germanic languages are quite close, and yet , the English language does not have the German like mother tongue, the same with Russian and Polish, for example.

The many common points into Latin and the Romance languages come from their common origin, the Indo-European. To this are added the effects of coexistence of nearly 20 centuries between the Romance languages spoken and written language as Latin, to the point that many Romance words are taken as loans from Latin.

Finally, the blind belief in a Latin origin of the Romance languages has led to the French etymologists to invent a Latin origin almost every word. All procedures, from the witty to the most dishonest, are at the service of demonstrating an alleged affiliation without respect for any scientific rule. Will show that the Indo-European origin often appears much more evidence, and it is possible to imagine more rational etymologies. Surely you must have heard thousands of times the word WORK comes from the Latin "tripalium" (instrument of torture), that the word SLAVE comes from the "slavus" (Slavic), or that the word FOREST comes from "Forestis" (exterior). These etymologies are unfounded, but they reinforce the idea of a Latin origin of the Romance languages when they are nothing but the result of our wrong ramblings.

There also I imagine your bewilderment. How - I - tell you that all our etymology is false and what are their titles to afford such questioning? As I said: I am not a man of the temple. Simply, for years I have studied many languages and linguistics, and I discovered that there was another possible way.

Let me quote Buddha, "Do not believe in anything simply hearsay. No attesting only to the traditions because they have been honored after numerous generations. Do not believe in anything simply from the testimony of a sage of antiquity. Do not believe something because the odds in your favor or play because custom push us to take it as true. Do not believe in anything based only on the sole authority of

your teachers or priests".

It is this provision which applied to consider another Copernican worldview.

Get rid of your preconceived ideas, not placed in the hands of specialists, judge for yourselves .

I next two schemes affiliation Roman languages . The "old" scheme, which is taught in all universities, and the new scheme, which will demonstrate in this book.

In the old scheme, the primitive language, the indoeuropean have originated the Latin. Since Roman times, Latin would have evolved into a low Latin, which would have given birth to the Romance languages.

In the new scheme, which will demonstrate in this book, have given rise to the Indo-European Latin, on the one hand, and on the other, the old Italian, long before the Roman era, then, the old Italian had given birth the various Romance languages, while Latin had no children.

[1] Antoine Meillet, Esquisse d’une histoire de la langue latine, 1928. Librairie Klincksieck.[2] Emile Littré, Dictionnaire de la langue française, Librairie Hachette, 1870.[3] Op. cit._http://www.historiaclasica.com/2008/03/el-castellano-no-viene-del-latn.html

Seems that the thesis is interesting enough to buy the book. But in the light of this thread, if the "old Italian" proposed by the author was the Dacian-Romanian (almost identical to Sanskrit if I understood well) would be a key to understanding a lot more.

Logged

"There is no "free lunch" and knowledge is the key. Strait is the gate and narrow the way". Laura


Dagobah Resident

Posts: 753





« Reply #18 on: March 11, 2014, 04:48:44 AM »

Quote from: Yozilla on February 19, 2014, 12:01:47 AM

I also wonder if Alexander the Great was Romanian instead Greek (another hoax from Greek

enforcers?). Also this tribe of Getae (Celts" ) in Punjabi, are they remains of "Great Celtic Empire" in which Sanskrit was spoken? So cheating "Greeks put all that in one myth about one great Greek that conquered the world - for propaganda purposes?

It is very interesting think on it. The Greeks would inherited what could be their natural inheritance of the Dacians and others aryan tribes in the area who spoke Sanskrit, but maybe later the pathologicals, "erased traces" for imperialist issues. And the same with Troy. Seeing where these people lived, perhaps Troy was close of the shores of the black sea? (Thinking it more wildly, if they have been in india, Troy could have been near of the Arabian Sea). I know that do not match with what some writers have said about the Turkish Mediterranean or the British Isles or the Baltics options. Just a thought.

Logged


Kisito

Jedi

Posts: 190


« Reply #19 on: March 11, 2014, 12:19:25 PM »






Certainement que le Sanskrit est la langue la plus ancienne...Mais cela ne veut pas dire qu'il n'y ait pas d'autre source. Selon le magazine scientifique "Pour la science" (janvier-mars 2014) "L'évolution des langues": Le vascon est une langue qui s'est réfugiée durant la dernière glaciation dans le Sud-Ouest de la France, proche des Pyrénées et de l'Espagne. Les Indo-Européens ont très peu progressé en Espagne. A Fribourg en Allemagne, on a trouvé un campement datant de 18 000 ans, établi par des hommes qui réinvestissaient des contrées libérées par les glaces. Les hommes donnèrent alors des noms aux fleuves et aux lieux qu'ils rencontraient. Certains de ces noms ont subsisté. Les Vascons auraient été les premiers à nommer les fleuves, rivières, lieux et montagnes en Europe. Un tel rôle avait été attribué aux Indo-Européens, mais comme nous l'avons souligné, les racines "fossiles" ne ressemble guère aux racines indo-européennes. Par exemple, en Allemagne, près de la moitié des noms anciens de cours d'eau commence par une voyelle. Le (a) commence souvent le mot, et on le trouve aussi souvent en milieu ou en fin de mot. Le (i) et le (u) sont également très fréquents. Cette caractéristique est absente de l'indo-européen, qui utilise plutôt le (e) et (o) rarement en début de mot. Au contraire dans la langue basque (langue franco-espagnol contemporaine), les voyelles (a, i et u) sont très fréquentes. L'Ibérie pays des Ibères, actuelle péninsule Ibérique, comprenant l'Espagne et le Portugal, pourrait bien tenir son nom du fleuve Eber qui coule au Nord de l'Espagne, et dont l'ancienne dénomination était "Iberus". Les Romains nommaient ainsi ce cours d'eau, mais des peuplades basques l'appelaient "Ibai" ou "Ibar", ce qui en basque signifie "fleuve". Plus de 2000 kilomètres à l'Est, au Monténégro et en Serbie, la rivière Ibar se jette dans la Morava occidentale. Les exemples "Ibar" sont nombreux dans toute l'Europe. Dans 200 noms de cours d'eau de la Norvège à l'Italie, d'Espagne à la Russie, de la Grande-Bretagne aux Balkans, on trouve également l

Logged

All our knowledge come of sensations; and the sensation varies according to the individual, therefore the man is the measure of any things, it's by him that they are or are not. Protagoras

Kisito

Jedi

Posts: 190




« Reply #20 on: March 11, 2014, 12:42:06 PM »

Certainly Sanskrit is the oldest language ... But this does not mean that there is no other source.Indo-Europeans arrived while still under Neolithic there 8000 years.According to the science magazine " Scientific American " ( January-March 2014 ) " The evolution of language " : The Vascon is a language that has taken refuge during the last glaciation in the South West of France , near the Pyrenees and Spain. Indo- Europeans have made very little progress in Spain. In Freiburg, Germany , found a camp dating back 18,000 years , established by men who reinvest the countries liberated by ice. The men then gave names to rivers and places they encountered. Some of these names have survived. The Basques were the first to name the rivers, mountains and places in Europe. Such a role was attributed to Indo- Europeans, but as we have noted, " fossil " roots bears little resemblance to the Indo -European roots . For example, in Germany, nearly half of the former names of rivers starts with a vowel . The ( a) often begins the word , and it is also often found in the middle or end of the word . The ( i ) and ( u ) are also very common .This feature is absent from Indo-European , which instead uses the ( e ) and ( o) rarely start of a word . In contrast, in the Basque language (contemporary Franco-Spanish language ) , vowels (a, i and u) are very common. Iberia Iberian countries , current Iberian Peninsula , including Spain and Portugal , might take its name from Eber flowing river in northern Spain , whose former name was " Iberus " . The Romans and named this river , but the Basque tribes called " Ibai " or " Ibar " , which in Basque means " river " . More than 2000 kilometers east , Montenegro and Serbia, the Ibar River flows into Western Morava . 200 names in rivers of Norway to Italy , Spain, Russia , Great Britain in the Balkans, there is also the " iz " variant which means water or watercourse. There are many examples throughout Europe . The word " Land" is also a word Basques . The Vascons had a vigémal system (20) as the Mayans. Vascons come Pyrenees ... In some translations the word "Pyrenees" mean pyramid, sea or space. E. Cayes said that the Atlanteans before their disaster they have migrated Egypts and Pyrenees. The Vascons and the Egyptians did not they be the same people?

Logged

All our knowledge come of sensations; and the sensation varies according to the individual, therefore the man is the measure of any things, it's by him that they are or are not. Protagoras


Dagobah Resident




Posts: 753



« Reply #21 on: March 12, 2014, 01:18:20 AM »

Well, the origin of the Basque language also seems to be "antediluvian", right. And in the forum has been recommended Stephen Oppenheimer's book, "Origins of the British" on possible Basque populations in the islands prior to the Germanic invasions (sorry I have not read that book yet).

Here's an interesting note about that the people of Spain 7,000 years ago had dark skin and blue eyes :_http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/01/140126-blue-eye-spain-fossil-human-discovery-gene/

It is said to be a possible mixture between Aryans and Africans ( this because standard science says that modern man comes from Africa. But the Egyptian question you've hinted, Kisito, may have some validity. I do not know). Another possibility is a mixture between Aryans and " Native Americans" previous arrival to Spain. Also could be adaptations to different environments, without mixture.Spain is so fascinating to anthropological studies : Basques , Germanics ( Suevi and Vandals , besides Alans, etc), Romans, Arabs, Jews, Gypsies.The article ends by saying this:"For fans of the "Paleo Diet" and other get-back-to-nature notions, the study brings some good news, suggesting that people carry around plenty of genes left over from their primeval forebears. The survival of some disease-resistance genes that mattered greatly in antiquity, as shown by their continuity in modern humans, also can help show how evolution worked its magic on us, and is still working today."

« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 01:21:28 AM by l apprenti de forgeron »

Logged


Shijing

SuperModerator



Posts: 4,943


« Reply #22 on: March 12, 2014, 09:28:55 AM »

On the subject of Basque, I've attached a recent paper (and reply to critics) that attempts to connect Basque and Indo-European. I only downloaded it recently and haven't read it in detail, so I can't comment on it, but you can see what you think.

Logged

"Giving birth and nourishing,Bearing yet not possessing,Working yet not taking credit,Leading yet not dominating,This is the Primal Virtue."

- Lao Tsu, Tao Te Ching (10)


Dagobah Resident

Posts: 753







« Reply #23 on: March 14, 2014, 07:07:05 AM »

Thank you very much for sharing, Shijing! I'll read it soon.


Documents

Romanian Language Not as We Know It