[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- Carl Edlund Anderson <cea@hidden.email> wrote:
> that Catalan never had the 2-case system.
>
> I'm not sure how to interpret this. Presumably
> they mean that by the time
> we see a language that is identifiably
> "Catalan", there is no remaining
> sign of a case system (as there was in, say,
> Occitan of the same period)?
That's how I would interpret it - and I think the
same can be said of archaic Spanish as well.
I.e., it never had anything other than one noun
form in either number.
> Speakers who spoke whatever form of
> Romance stood behind Catalan
> were presumably using cases of some kind, and
> not leaping directly from
> Classical Latin declensions to modern caseless
> Catalan? :)
Well, no one anywhere was leaping from CL
declensions to any Romance language, as CL is not
the ancestor of any Romance language.
VL was always poor in nominal inflection, and
that situation rarely got better.
> On this topic, can anyone point to any good
> resources discussing the
> collapse of the Latin case system in Vulgar
> Latin and/or Proto-Romance?
Try Grandgent's "Introduction to Vulgar Latin".
Padraic.
=====
k�su �omklyu tsrasiśśi śï¿½k k�lymentwam!
-- Punyavantaj�taka
--
Ill Bethisad --
<http://www.geocities.com/elemtilas/ill_bethisad>
Come visit The World! --
<http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/>
.