If you look at all the other parts of western europe that Rome occupied they all speak romance languages? Why in britain did the native celtic and invading germanic languages survived? Why is it i'm not typing this in some sort of welsh/anglo-saxon influenced romance language?
>>339115
You could argue that Occitain was fairly romantic, Frankish was germanic. The Anglo-Saxons were germanic. Only Italian was really a latin language. (Spanish being copycats and French being keked Franks)
>>339115
english is not germanic, first latin influence and then french influence made the language ~90% romance
>>339115
The best explanation is that the Romans just straight up left Britain and allowed it to fend for itself.
The movements of germanic and other peoples into the rest of the Roman Empire was a pretty gradual process, the barbarians that were settled inside the borders were slowly absorbed into Roman society and then took over, whereas as much as we know about post Roman Britain (which is almost fucking nothing), the invading barbarians just wholesale replaced the existing ruling class, which may or may not have LEFT beforehand anyway.
>>339115
English is a clusterfuck of languages, but essentially it's Germanic, yes. However, there are lots and lots of romance influences, either directly to Latin or later through French.
Not all countries once occupied by Rome speak romance languages (think of the southern Netherlands and Wallonia who speak an even 'purer' Germanic language than English).
Also, England was more some sort of island colony to the Romans, and was never as integrated into the empire as e.g. Gallia.
Source: my ass.
>>339115
English is a creole of Latin and Germanic. German is so infused with the language because of the Saxon invasions which completely dominated the local Celtic-Roman culture.
The Norman invasion and French they brought didn't have as much of an affect as it mostly remained in the nobility and ignored the peasantry whereas for some reason in earlier times all the peasantry decided to speak Saxon.
>>339115
The Latin civilization in Britain collapsed, while in the continent the remanents of Rome make Latin prestigious, that was not the case in Britain.
Brittons took English for their invaders.
>>339146
2/10 made me acknowledge
>>339159
>Also, England was more some sort of island colony to the Romans, and was never as integrated into the empire as e.g. Gallia.
Complete bullshit, at least you were honest with your bibliography.
>>339143
I really dont get what are you tryng to say.
>>339166
If I had that shit organized I could pull up my college texts and prove it to you
>>339173
90% romance is fucking retarded. It's easily possible to talk without using any romance words.
>>339173
Your texts would be wrong, only around half the words in English are derived from Latin or French and many thousands of those are medical and scientific terms not often used. Most of the most commonly used English words have Germanic roots.
>>339115
>Why is it i'm not typing this in some sort of welsh/anglo-saxon influenced romance language?
You kind of are. Old English was a strange Brythonic-twisted old-germanic language that then got romance shit transplanted over it, along with some Norse.
>>339208
>>339182
90% was an exaggeration, but still
there ARE more latin and french derived words in English than Germanic
>>339173
You're wrong though. Anyone who can speak German and English can see it. You don't need a study, we're using it right now.
>>339217
The syntax is much more Germanic however.
English is fucked up and breaks the majority of its language rules.
>>339217
Pretty sure Latin should come under French for the most part.
>>339171
>If you look at all the other parts of western europe that Rome occupied they all speak romance languages?
But you fucking don't?
Maybe
Aquitaine? France as a whole did not all suddenly speak Parisian (French). Many still spoke Occitain, Briton, Frisian, Basque, ect. Until Revolutionary France that is. I believe Spain and Portucale did not speak romantic languages until much later as well. Many languages actually were not "romance" languages, simply Romanized barbarian languages.
Many countries in Europe do not speak Romance languages now, seriously how did you conveniently forget every country except France, Spain and Italy? Where are you from, HUEland?
>forgetting the entirety of Germany and Scandinavia and Eastern Europe
>>339240
He did specifically say western europe and was referring to post roman states, so that doesn't leave many countries.
>>339173
Dear Anonymous, I give you an 8/10 based on the fact that you got me so far as to reply to you.
>>339251
true, however the lowlands are fairly western. So are Wales and Ireland, would you consider Germany/Denmark western countries?
>>339240
You've got it kind of backwards. Francia didn't all suddenly become Frankish speaking either. There is a reason why the new barbarian aristocracy spoke the latin that would offshoot into French, Italian, etc later on
>>339271
The Netherland weren't a part of the Roman Empire, neither was Germany, Ireland or Denmark you massive feg.
He was contrasting Britannia with the rest of the Western Roman provinces, specifically mentioning Wales as part of it.
>>339240
I will just asume that you are not very bright.
>>339160
English is not a creole. Learn what a creole is.
>>339307
This is what happens when we only teach modern history in schools.
>>339256
"Although the Old English vocabulary was almost exclusively Germanic, this is no longer the case. Aprx. 70% of Old English words have been replaced by borrowings from Latin, French and other languages. As far as the lexicon is concerned, Present-Day English is no longer a Germanic language"
Baugh & Cable's History of the English Language, chapts. 3 & 4.
It's still considered a Germanic language because of its grammar and sintax, not because of its vocabulary, so >>339146
was partly right.
>>339216
what about english is brythonic? I can clearly see the original germanic and later french and latin additions but i don't see much if any celtic influence
>>339297
>The Netherland weren't a part of the Roman Empire, neither was Germany, Ireland or Denmark you massive feg.
Nigga you know that roughly 35% of the Netherlands was a part of the Roman empire right?
>>339315
Sure.
>>339115
Primitive Old English didn't get introduced in Britain until the year 449, when the Anglo-Saxons arrived.
>>339343
Ik, Im asking why is it that it replaced a british romance language unlike every other part of the roman empire in the west where the invading germanics adopted the local latin language?
>>339115
England was (relatively) a late conquest and even it's contact with the roman world before being conquered was comparatively young.
It was also always a peripherical frontier region, comparatively isolated, and never belonged to the mediterranean civilization.
>>339366
because few other places were as btfo by the germanic tribes as britain.
>>339115
1. Britain was never fully romanized.
2. The Anglo-Saxon migration to Britain was much, much larger than other Germanic migrations
>it's another "French autists try to convince English speakers that English is a Romance language" thread
A lot of our vocabulary is still English or even Norse in origin. Not to mention the syntax and grammar. see >>339341 for instance. Legal and medical articles are shit examples for obvious reasons.
>>339115
Because Britain was basically the Puerto Rico of the Roman Empire. The Romans had very little interest in integrating it to the point where Latin was the main language.
>>339366
Did the germanics rule together or with the collaboration of the local roman elites? Because that's exactly what they did in Gaul, Hispania and Italy.
>>339320
He means Old English, not modern English.
And to be fair Old English does sound quite Celtic.
>>339377
Why did they migrate to Britain so much anyway?
England isn't that much more appealing that the Netherlands, or Saxony.
>>339405
You don't know anything about Old English or Celtic languages if you think that.
>>339409
they themselves were running from other tribes
>>339412
I maintain that, they sound reasonably similar.
>>339435
In what ways?
>>339409
Yes it is. Compared to the soils and grim weather of northern Germany, England was lush and perfect for settlement.
>>339455
Very superficially.
I just find it to have the same semi-gutteral intonation as Irish.
>>339115
Eh.
When Rome retreated from England you need to realize that they only really controlled only vital parts of the country. Wales and Scotland were pretty much outside of their control, besides a few mines and military forts and shit.
The area in which the Roman Britons lived was the first one to be rekked by the germanics, the celts in Wales, Cornwall and Scotland were capable of resisting much longer and keep their culture, at least to a certain extent.
But yes, there was a romantic britonic language spoken, at least for two or three centuries after Rome left. But then it was kil
>>339115
>poeple calling english romance
>people calling english germanic
Old english was german due to syntax and grammer rules but modern english doesn't have a german syntax infact modern english is almost grammactically and syntaxlly identical to norwegian and danish which although are le northern barbarians don't speak a germanic tongue, scandi languages are their own indo european language branch and if your going by syntax that would make english although vocabularily mostly romantic a scandi language. Its kind of like the debate of which language is closest to latin, romanian has a very close vocabulary with some slavic influence and almost identical syntax, but italian has a much closer vocabulary but a less similar syntax. Either way its pretty autistic to categorize language by only one of the two most important factors which is why you should say english has romance vocab and scandi syntax instead of jerking yourself off to a linguistic oversimplification.
https://aeon.co/essays/why-is-english-so-weirdly-different-from-other-languages
>>339787
Nope. English and the Scandinavian languages are both part of the north Germanic sub family.
>>339787
>scandi languages are their own indo european language branch
Are you in middle school?
>>339217
You do realize that a lot of these from French Latin are Germanic in origin, just re-borrowed?
>>339386
Read a history book
