European Genetics/IE

[Rick Mc Callister]

	From what I've seen, written forms definitely seem close to the
standard.
	But I'm wondering if the masses initially spoke some pidginzed form
of Latin in the marketplace, which developed into a creole or somelike
close to one.
	I seem to remember reading about some degree of language-mixing (as
opposed to dual texts) in Hispano-Celtic inscriptions

[ Moderator's note:
  The following material is quoted from a posting by JoatSimeon at aol.com dated
  14 Jun 2001 05:05:29 EDT.
  -- rma ]

>> and it seems plausible that (some) early regional forms of Romance may have
>> initially been more like Latinate creoles than daughter languages.

>-- no, because the special conditions which are required for the creation of
>a creole language weren't present.

>Creoles are pidgins which have become 'naturalized' and spoken as a first
>language.

>To have a creole, you first need a pidgin -- and pidgins are the result of
>incomplete language acquisition in situations where multiple languages are
>spoken and a trade jargon is needed, but acquisition of the standard form is
>not possible.

>None of the Romance languages was a pidgin to begin with; they all started
>off as fairly standard versions of Late Latin -- regional dialects of Late
>Latin, to be precise.

Rick Mc Callister
W-1634
Mississippi University for Women
Columbus MS 39701