Re: Old French
| From: | Jeff Jones <jeffsjones@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Friday, July 12, 2002, 17:08 |
|---|
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002 18:42:23 +0200, Christophe Grandsire
<christophe.grandsire@...> wrote:
>En réponse à Jeff Jones <jeffsjones@...>:
>
>> > Please get your facts right! You're talking about the "serments de
>> > Strasbourg" which were written in Roman and Tudesque (indeed a
>> > Romance and a Germanic language).
>> > Old French didn't exist by then, and nobody ever said so.
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> Please get _your_ facts straight, Christophe. I have seen in published
>> scholarly books any number of times statements referring to the language
>> of that period of Old French. Even if it's not the best analysis,
>> _somebody_ still said so.
>
>Titles please.
I wish I remembered. The books were probably from the FIU library, which I
no longer have easy access to. I could try the public library to see what
they have in the catalogue.
>I've never seen such books. Even my book of French I had when I was 12
>didn't claim so, and yet was full of other simplifications. Also, the
>answers of Ray and Julien seemed to agree with it. Next time I'll add
>an "AFAIK" to be sure.
Always a good idea when using words like "nobody". No matter how stupid the
opinion is, there's usually at least one author who's said it.
>> > Roman is an ancestor of Old French that's true, but nothing else, and
>> > its grammar and syntax were too different to be called French.
>>
>> Still, it's closer to French than to eny other modern language, except
>> probably Langue d'Oc. I've also seen what you call Old French referred
>> to as Middle French, as well as "Roman" called Old French.
>
>And how did they call 16th century French then? Because the only name I've
>ever seen it called was Middle French, and it was too different from both
>Modern French and the dialects referred to as Old French to be called like
>any of those two.
I think he included it in Early Modern French (that is, the author that
didn't use the term Middle French -- he used Early and Late Old French, and
Early and Late Modern French, or something like that). Bear in mind that
these books were some decades old (or reprints) and their Late Modern
French probably referred to the literary French of that time, not
colloquial French ca. 2000 (personally, I'd say _these_ are too different
to use the same name).
Jeff
Reply