Comment Re:Latin isn't dead either (Score 1) 450
I think you miss the issue. It's not about the development, but about the reality of the spoken language, of the actual grammar of Romanian, which I think no one can counterargue, it's best known in Romania, by Romanians.
The fact is that in today Romania both the grammar and the spoken language offer two types of the subordinate clause you were talking about. By subjunctive and infinitive. I'm almost certain that the author(s) you quote, in their Balkanic comparative studies, took the subjunctive as an argument from "balkanism", which they are correct in. But as it's not the subject of their book, they didn't issued, and probably not researched, the clause introduced by infinitive, which represents the Latin heritage.
Maybe in a far future, the infinitive introduced clauses will disappear (it's actually a bit harder to pronounce it, because of the specific infinitive particle "a" which disturbs the coherence of speech, they are seldom used even nowadays), but as we speak it still exists and it's a living proof of the closeness between Latin and Romanian.
Please note that not the author himself is discounted, but the author represented by you and your interpretation and the fallacious calls to authority. You were wrong in several accounts about Romanian language, though you claimed linguistic background and you brought referrences. If your linguistic background or your referrences are responsible in anyway for your arguments, then they are wrong, no matter how respected are they in other places. But as I already said, I hope it's not about them.
The fact is that in today Romania both the grammar and the spoken language offer two types of the subordinate clause you were talking about. By subjunctive and infinitive. I'm almost certain that the author(s) you quote, in their Balkanic comparative studies, took the subjunctive as an argument from "balkanism", which they are correct in. But as it's not the subject of their book, they didn't issued, and probably not researched, the clause introduced by infinitive, which represents the Latin heritage.
Maybe in a far future, the infinitive introduced clauses will disappear (it's actually a bit harder to pronounce it, because of the specific infinitive particle "a" which disturbs the coherence of speech, they are seldom used even nowadays), but as we speak it still exists and it's a living proof of the closeness between Latin and Romanian.
Please note that not the author himself is discounted, but the author represented by you and your interpretation and the fallacious calls to authority. You were wrong in several accounts about Romanian language, though you claimed linguistic background and you brought referrences. If your linguistic background or your referrences are responsible in anyway for your arguments, then they are wrong, no matter how respected are they in other places. But as I already said, I hope it's not about them.
