Quantum redactiones paginae "Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium 7" differant

::::::Deserves mention in the history of lingua latina, as I reckon.--[[Usor:Ioscius Rocchius|Ioscius]] <small>^{[[Disputatio Usoris:Ioscius Rocchius|(disp)]]}</small> 01:58, 12 Decembris 2007 (UTC)

:::::::Not to complicate an already complicated discussion which has been ably de-complicated already, but isn't there a strong socio-linguistic aspect to all this? I mean, I think we can say that if Cicero wasn't speaking Latin, nobody was; but Cicero and his cook might be speaking quite different idioms ("sermo classicus" vs. "vulgaris," I guess). Likewise, I presume that your average Gaul in Lyon might speak, from the very get-go, quite a "dialectical" form of Latin. So by the time we get to Ausonius writing beautiful classical Latin (and perhaps speaking it - who knows?) while the rest of the world apart from his class is well on the way to speaking Romance languages, we've got the coexistence of two languages; and who's to say people don't grow up speaking more than one language, one "classical" and the other everyday? We've practically reached this stage in English now, I'd say, in that there's a fairly noticeable difference between literary and scientific English and ordinary speech: we just rarely see the latter in written form, so we call the former "correct." For all I know (which isn't much) the educated classes of, say, the 10th century might still have felt that popular speech and Church Latin were in some sense the same language, even if we don't now regard them as such. Anyway, none of this affects the latest timeline which strikes me as excellent, but just to say we should beware of essentialising language. [[Usor:Jackmitchell|Jackmitchell]] 04:34, 12 Decembris 2007 (UTC)