Disputatio:Lingua Francogallica
Do we really need to say "Lingua Francogallica?" Franca or Francica is one word for French in Latin and Gallica is another word, but it makes no sense to combine them. I am thinking we should use "Lingua Franca", as that is a well attested Latin phrase. -Kedemus 28 Martii 2008 18:28 UTC
- Well-attested, certainly, but it would mean 'Frankish', wouldn't it? (Besides Lingua Franca itself, which is another language entirely.) —Mucius Tever 01:31, 29 Martii 2008 (UTC)
- Lingua Franca is "Italian mixed with French, Spanish, Greek, and Arabic . . . spoken in Mediterranean ports" (Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary)—hardly the language of Paris. IacobusAmor 02:37, 29 Martii 2008 (UTC)
- I have to agree with Iacobus on this one. Lingua Franca means the Lingua Franca (disambiguation needed there, in fact), Lingua Francica means Frankish (a medieval Germanic language; disambiguation needed there too), and Lingua Gallica means Gaulish (an ancient Celtic language). In any case, it's not as if Lingua Francogallica is our invention - it's well established in modern Latin. I think we have to stick with it ...
- But thanks, Kedemus, for making it clear that disambig is wanted, and welcome back! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:04, 29 Martii 2008 (UTC)
- The term "Lingua Franca" actually means any language that is a common tongue among a wide variety of people who speak different languages among themselves. The main such language in our time is English, but a century ago it was French and the term literally means "The French Language" in Latin (which itself was the main Western "lingua franca" up to a century prior). Thus "Lingua franca" does mean French, as in the French language in Latin. "Lingua francogallica" makes sense also, especially if we want to distinguish it from "Lingua franca" being used to mean any common language, but "Francogallica" is a bit too long. I would suggest to use a form that was well attested in writings from 1500 to 1850. Note that I am using 1850 as the last year because that was the time around when Latin went from being a "serious" language used for science, official documents, etc. to more of a "hobbyist's" language. If "Francogallica" was well attested in that time period, that's the term we should use, but if it's "Franca", we should use that. -Kedemus 08:15 UTC 8 Iulii 2008
- If you can find any Latin source in which Lingua Franca means "French language", please cite it. Otherwise this is just wasting time. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:54, 8 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- According to the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, lingua franca is an Italian (not Latin) term, it was first used in English in 1619, and it means 'Frankish language'. It does not denote the French language: it's "a common language that consists of Italian mixed with French, Spanish, Greeek, and Arabic and is spoken in Mediterranean ports" (emphasis added, since the point seems to have been missed). IacobusAmor 11:33, 8 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- According to the English Wikipedia, the term comes from this that Arabs referred to all Europeans as Franks. But given that the term was widely used among Europeans it is also likely it was given that name because that language sounded like French. And in that case I do not think it referred to Frankish, as that is a Germanic language and the original Lingua Franca did not consist of Germanic languages. Also the language of the French people they would have most likely been familiar with would have been the most widely spoken language over there at that time, which would have been French- the ancestor of the modern language commonly referred to as French. But given that the term comes from Italian, we can rule out that "Lingua Franca" is Latin for the French language unless we find a reliable source that says it indeed means that. As "Franca" is already taken to mean something, and so are "Francica" and "Gallica", I would suggest calling it "Lingua Franciana". This term is not as long as "Lingua Francogallica" and follows simple Latin standards for forming words. -Kedemus 21:01 UTC 9 Iulii 2008
- I find it hard to believe that nobody in the fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries used a Latin term for the French language, and that we therefore need to coin one. Where did Francogallica come from? Was it coined here? If it isn't an attested form, then what is? Vicipaedia should use well-attested forms when it can. IacobusAmor 23:36, 9 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- Hofmann uses Gallica, describing it as a descendant of Latin with several dialects (including Walloon and, apparently, Poitevin), and quotes the saying about cum mulieribus loquendum esse Gallice. Traupman also gives Gallicus in his dictionary. A bit of googling shows that in at least one place[1] Francicus is equated with Langue d'oïl as Tectosagicus with Langue d'oc. 'Francogallicus' is probably the best when disambiguation is required, though it also seems to be the Vatican solution. —Mucius Tever 02:27, 10 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- Both Francicus and Gallicus make sense for French. Gallicus was frequently used to refer to the French people in more recent times and in English the Gallic language is a term sometimes used to refer to French. Also, Hofmann's Gallicus falls between the 1500 to 1850 range of modern "serious" Latin that I mentioned earlier. The langue Romanes work, which uses Francicus, was written a bit after 1850, but only twenty years later and is still a scholarly work, so that term is also acceptable. Also, throughout the late Medieval period and all periods afterwards, French was much more of a common language than Frankish and Gallic (the Gaelic language) died out many centuries ago. Even if these terms were once used to refer to different languages at one time, it doesn't mean they still need to refer to these languages in our time. Latin that's used in this day and age is not a time warp language that pretends the Caesars are still in power. Rather it is an ancient language as adapted for 21st century use. So in that regard, the ancient Frankish language can be referred to as Lingua Germanofrancica or Lingua Francica Veteris and the original Gallic can be referred to as Lingua Gallica Occidentalis (insert the part of France where it was commonly spoken). -Kedemus 10 Juillet 2008 19:05 UTC
- Re: "in English the Gallic language is a term sometimes used to refer to French."—(1) How many universities these days advertise courses in Gallic instead of French? (2) More dispositively: Gallic is "often used as a rhetorical or (now chiefly) semi-humorous synonym for 'French'; sometimes with allusion to characteristics which the French are supposed to have inherited from their Gaulish ancestors" (Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. Gallic). And (3) the lingua Gallica was the Gaulish language spoken in Gaul, a language that did not develop into French. See en:Gallic language. IacobusAmor 19:40, 10 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- But why change? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:25, 10 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- Both Francicus and Gallicus make sense for French. Gallicus was frequently used to refer to the French people in more recent times and in English the Gallic language is a term sometimes used to refer to French. Also, Hofmann's Gallicus falls between the 1500 to 1850 range of modern "serious" Latin that I mentioned earlier. The langue Romanes work, which uses Francicus, was written a bit after 1850, but only twenty years later and is still a scholarly work, so that term is also acceptable. Also, throughout the late Medieval period and all periods afterwards, French was much more of a common language than Frankish and Gallic (the Gaelic language) died out many centuries ago. Even if these terms were once used to refer to different languages at one time, it doesn't mean they still need to refer to these languages in our time. Latin that's used in this day and age is not a time warp language that pretends the Caesars are still in power. Rather it is an ancient language as adapted for 21st century use. So in that regard, the ancient Frankish language can be referred to as Lingua Germanofrancica or Lingua Francica Veteris and the original Gallic can be referred to as Lingua Gallica Occidentalis (insert the part of France where it was commonly spoken). -Kedemus 10 Juillet 2008 19:05 UTC
- Hofmann uses Gallica, describing it as a descendant of Latin with several dialects (including Walloon and, apparently, Poitevin), and quotes the saying about cum mulieribus loquendum esse Gallice. Traupman also gives Gallicus in his dictionary. A bit of googling shows that in at least one place[1] Francicus is equated with Langue d'oïl as Tectosagicus with Langue d'oc. 'Francogallicus' is probably the best when disambiguation is required, though it also seems to be the Vatican solution. —Mucius Tever 02:27, 10 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- At the time of the oldest known specimen of French, the en:Oaths of Strasbourg or Sacramenta Argentariae, the French language was referred to as "romana lingua" (Romance language) or "rustica romana lingua" (Rural Romance language). Both Gallia and Francia are actually misleading since the first term refers to Celtic tribes an the second to Germanic tribes. Therefore I find the word "Francogallica" ironic and wrong since it should be something like "Roman" or "Latin". Aaker 01:54, 26 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- You're right about "Romana lingua", but the term will not do for us because it is too vague: it referred to any Romance languages. The term "Francogallica" is better than the two obvious alternatives ("Gallica" and "Francica") because they are the names of other historic languages. "Francogallica", though not perfect, is at least unambiguous: there is no other language with this name. In addition it is actually used by some modern writers of Latin: that is a requirement for us. We do not invent terms, we adopt them from existing authorities. By all means suggest something better, but with reference to existing Latin sources. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:05, 26 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- I find it hard to believe that nobody in the fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries used a Latin term for the French language, and that we therefore need to coin one. Where did Francogallica come from? Was it coined here? If it isn't an attested form, then what is? Vicipaedia should use well-attested forms when it can. IacobusAmor 23:36, 9 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- According to the English Wikipedia, the term comes from this that Arabs referred to all Europeans as Franks. But given that the term was widely used among Europeans it is also likely it was given that name because that language sounded like French. And in that case I do not think it referred to Frankish, as that is a Germanic language and the original Lingua Franca did not consist of Germanic languages. Also the language of the French people they would have most likely been familiar with would have been the most widely spoken language over there at that time, which would have been French- the ancestor of the modern language commonly referred to as French. But given that the term comes from Italian, we can rule out that "Lingua Franca" is Latin for the French language unless we find a reliable source that says it indeed means that. As "Franca" is already taken to mean something, and so are "Francica" and "Gallica", I would suggest calling it "Lingua Franciana". This term is not as long as "Lingua Francogallica" and follows simple Latin standards for forming words. -Kedemus 21:01 UTC 9 Iulii 2008
- According to the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, lingua franca is an Italian (not Latin) term, it was first used in English in 1619, and it means 'Frankish language'. It does not denote the French language: it's "a common language that consists of Italian mixed with French, Spanish, Greeek, and Arabic and is spoken in Mediterranean ports" (emphasis added, since the point seems to have been missed). IacobusAmor 11:33, 8 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- If you can find any Latin source in which Lingua Franca means "French language", please cite it. Otherwise this is just wasting time. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:54, 8 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
- The term "Lingua Franca" actually means any language that is a common tongue among a wide variety of people who speak different languages among themselves. The main such language in our time is English, but a century ago it was French and the term literally means "The French Language" in Latin (which itself was the main Western "lingua franca" up to a century prior). Thus "Lingua franca" does mean French, as in the French language in Latin. "Lingua francogallica" makes sense also, especially if we want to distinguish it from "Lingua franca" being used to mean any common language, but "Francogallica" is a bit too long. I would suggest to use a form that was well attested in writings from 1500 to 1850. Note that I am using 1850 as the last year because that was the time around when Latin went from being a "serious" language used for science, official documents, etc. to more of a "hobbyist's" language. If "Francogallica" was well attested in that time period, that's the term we should use, but if it's "Franca", we should use that. -Kedemus 08:15 UTC 8 Iulii 2008
- Lingua Franca is "Italian mixed with French, Spanish, Greek, and Arabic . . . spoken in Mediterranean ports" (Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary)—hardly the language of Paris. IacobusAmor 02:37, 29 Martii 2008 (UTC)
I would reckon (though I'm not absolutely certain), that Francogallica also implies the language of "Frankish Gaul" or of the "Franks in Gaul". Either way it refers to the settlement of the Franks between the 4th and 7th centuries in northern France (Austrasia/Neustria), which is where the Langue d'oïl (the direct precedent of modern French) developped, as opposed to the Romance, southern Gaul, where the Langue d'oc developped (which became Occitan).--Xaverius 10:17, 26 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)