/lit/ - Literature

>GREATEST LANGUAGE
>POORTUGUESE

Baseado

Why would I download 8000 books when I can just go on libgen and get the ones I want?

>>17620092
I don't like telegraphed Spanish.

>>17620136
>Libgen shut down

>>17620153
Portuguese is better than Spanish.

The old Spanish kings wrote in Galician-Portuguese.

>>17620113
Which one is it, then?

No seeds :(

>>17620175
>Portuguese is better than Spanish.
No, it's an unpolished and cut version of Spanish, made even worse by Brazilians.

>>17620092
estes gajos não sabem o que perdem primo, caga nestes damos

>>17620175
It's only better as a genre restricted to a certain poetic mode of writing.

>>17620182
Southern US English.

>>17620182
Latin

>>17620153
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pulTcDmlh4

Non quer'eu donzela fea
nen me faça i peior.

Non quer'eu donzela fea
e negra come carvon[e],
que ant'a mia porta pea
nen faça come sison[e].
Non quer'eu donzela fea
que ant'a mia porta pea.

Non quer'eu donzela fea
e velosa come can[e],
que ant'a mia porta pea
nen faça come alermã[e].
Non quer'eu donzela fea
que ant'a mia porta pea.

Non quer'eu donzela fea
que á brancos os cabelos,
que ant'a mia porta pea
nen faça come camelos.
Non quer'eu donzela fea
que ant'a mia porta pea.

Non quer'eu donzela fea,
velha de maa coor[e],
que ant'a mia porta pea
nen me faça i peior[e].
Non quer'eu donzela fea
que ant'a mia porta pea.

>>17620227
Estos gajos entienden todo lo que estas diciendo.

>>17620092
thanks bud, i'm only pracitcing this language so I can get laid in Brazil

>>17620247
Fixe!

>>17620216
>cut

What do you even mean by "cut" and "unpolished"? Idiot.
Also, depending on the region, Brazilians actually speak a Portuguese that is closer to that of Camões. The fact that you ignore this proves that you are uninformed.

>>17620247
Vai po caralho Espanhol de merda, Aljubarrota cabrão. Nem ganhar guerras sabes

>>17620216
>>17620264
Spanish and Portuguese are Judaised versions of Italian.

>>17620247
We understand Spanish better than you understand Portuguese.
That other imbecile poster said that Portuguese is "cut Spanish", but in reality we have more phonemes than you guys, which is precisely why we have an easier time understanding you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BfWGo9xZDA

>>17620276
Italian is a fake language. I agree that it is very good, but it is fake. It was created top-down.
Now the dialects, they are much better. Dante didn't write in what's today considered Italian (though today's artificial language is mostly based on Florentine writers like him).

>>17620092
Baseado.

>b-but Portuguese is cut Spanish!

>>17620092
epub or pdf?

>>17620092
No language is better at describing utter misery than portuguese

>>17620341
Epub

>>17620365
based

>>17620299
Spoken Portuguese is far more telegraphed than the equivalent Spanish sentence, that's incontestable. Spanish is basically Latin boiked down to its essence with the declensional spine removed. Portuguese is far less conservative in these essential regards because it values sonority to such a degree that it has made a confining specialization of it. I can make spoken Spanish sound like Portuguese, but it is impossible for the latter to do the same vis a vis Spanish (its essential specialised structure simply doesn't permit it).

>>17620299
Spoken Portuguese is far more telegraphed than the equivalent Spanish sentence, that's incontestable. Spanish is basically Latin boiled down to its essence with the declensional spine removed. Portuguese is far less conservative in these essential regards because it values sonority to such a degree that it has made a confining specialization of it. I can make spoken Spanish sound like Portuguese, but it is impossible for the latter to do the same vis a vis Spanish (its essential specialised structure simply doesn't permit it).

>>17620491
>telegraphed

What do you even mean?
You can't make Spanish sound like Portuguese because it has less phonemes.

Also, "basically Latin boiked down to its essence"? Are you thinking of what? Lingua sarda?

Pls seed

>>17620365
Specially in Euclides da Cunha and Guimarães Rosa.

>>17620501
>I can make spoken Spanish sound like Portuguese, but it is impossible for the latter to do the same vis a vis Spanish
Except the absolute opposite is true. The only reason you think this is that your tiny phonetic brain can't even comprehend how far away from sounding like any sort of actual portuguese speaker you actually are.

>>17620092
obligatory patriot bump.
Not very fond of portuguese though, maybe that's because I only know 2 languages.
what language should I learn after french bros? (got a french family member so it's freee)

>>17620568
Italian.

>>17620509
Clearly you've never studied Latin grammar so this is all Greek to you.

>>17620597
Portuguese is the thinking man's Latin.

>>17620597
I actually have studied some Latin.

My point was: if you claim Spanish is better because it is (around 10%) closer to Latin, then does it not follow that Sardinian is actually the best Romance language?
And yet almost nobody writes in it. Why?
Because closeness to Latin has nothing to do with how good the language is, only under some outdated Renaissance conceptions of "purity".

>>17620595
do you think it will be useful?
in other words, do you think italy will be a desirable place to go to in one or two decades?

>>17620663
If that's what "useful" means to you then you are on the wrong board.
You can read Dante and Leopardi. What other kind of "use" do you wish for, you ape?

>>17620675
>Dante and Leopardi
More like Don'te and Leotardi

>>17620710
Humour is not your forte...

>>17620092
BASEADO!

>>17620626
Portuguese is so specialized it becomes constricting, such is somewhat also the case with French and Italian, tho to a mercifully lesser degree. The two most conservative (principal) Romance languages are Spanish and Catalan. A simple algorithm is all that's needed to revert Spanish to its ancestral vulgar Latin roots, this confers on Spanish, if no other quality, that universality and classicism that is most proximate to Latin itself. Italian, French, Portuguese, and Occitan, are principally languages conceived in the poetic mode, whilst Spanish has within itself thr capacity to engender all those latter modes and more. And in the case of Catalan, a language essentially little changed since the days of Charlemagne (when an actual common--not simply cognate--Romance could still be perceived from the Channel to the Spanish March) the argument above applies stronger still, for it extends to the relative complexity of the phonemic ambit itself, which the best oral forms of Catalan have retained to this day. Spanish is, to wit, the descendant of the non-specialized Latin of the military barracks and at its best the forum, whilst Portuguese is the descendent of the more tonally complex oral traditions of Latin verse and song.

>>17620773
>aprendendo italiano pra poder ler obras no original
>não li praticamente nada da lista
sou uma fraude

>>17620799
Your claims are incredibly unsubstantiated and some of them sound like sheer nonsense.

>A simple algorithm is all that's needed to revert Spanish to its ancestral vulgar Latin roots, this confers on Spanish, if no other quality, that universality and classicism that is most proximate to Latin itself. Italian, French, Portuguese, and Occitan, are principally languages conceived in the poetic mode, whilst Spanish has within itself thr capacity to engender all those latter modes and more.

???

Based and lusopiled.

>>17620799
I disagree but good post.

>>17620926
Why on Earth is that a good post?

>>17620773
Caraca anon nao acredito que fizeram um livro baseado no filme do Auto da Compadecida

>>17620164
Looks fine to me

>>17620799
good post
t. touro lusitano

>>17620773
Qual desses devo ler primeiro?

>>17621113
você rolou um 13, então o décimo terceiro da lista

O que os anões acham de O Senhor Embaixador do Érico Veríssimo?

>>17620234

>best language
>english


ok then

>>17620799
>>17621105
Seriously, though: why is his post good?
He made a bunch of unsubstantiated and vague claism.

>Portuguese is so specialized it becomes constricting
What does it mean for a language to be specialized? And how does it constrict it? Portuguese is specialized in what?

>A simple algorithm is all that's needed to revert Spanish to its ancestral vulgar Latin roots, this confers on Spanish, if no other quality, that universality and classicism that is most proximate to Latin itself.
You can't do the same for Italian? Seriously?
Linguistic comparisons have shown that Italian and Sardinian are the closest languages to Latin.

>Italian, French, Portuguese, and Occitan, are principally languages conceived in the poetic mode,
Conceived by whom? In what manner?
And "poetic" in what sense? Jakobson's? What does it even mean to "conceive" a language in the "poetic mode?"

>Spanish has the capacity to engender all those latter modes and more
What does it mean to "engender a mode?" is this an expression that is actually used by linguists or did he take it from his own head? and why is it that Italian cannot generate other modes than the poetic one? what are the other modes? prose? novel? You can't write historical prose in Italian? You can't write letters in Italian? You can't write the Decameron?

>And in the case of Catalan (...) the argument above applies stronger still, for it extends to the relative complexity of the phonemic ambit itself
Why? I am not a specialist, but Portuguese seems to have more phonemes than Catalan: https://www.eupedia.com/linguistics/number_of_phonemes_in_european_languages.shtml

>Portuguese is the descendent of the more tonally complex oral traditions of Latin verse and song
What does that mean? That Portuguese comes from song and people in Roman Portugal didn't "speak prose"? What exactly does this mean?

>Spanish is, to wit, the descendant of the non-specialized Latin of the military barracks and at its best the forum
And Italian is not descendant of the common Roman people's vulgar speech? What?

>>17620773
estou tentando ler Macunaíma e não entendo, não conheço nenhum dos termos indígenas.

>>17620675
english allowed me to read so much shit because brazillian portuguese translations are more often than not mediocre, but more importantly than that, it allowed me to go basically anywhere and act smug, like americans do.
i'm learning french partly because it's free, partly because i'm moving to switzerland.
why the fuck would learn a whole language for the sole purpose of reading half a dozen philosophers in the original?
at that point i'm better of learning german so i can fuck some prostitutes and i'll have a bigger arrangment of shit to read. if i don't get bored of this whole philosophy thing in the next few years anyway

>>17621252
como conseguiu se mudar pra lá?

>>17621252
>why the fuck would learn a whole language for the sole purpose of reading half a dozen philosophers in the original?

Why are you even here? Seriously.
Also, Dante and Leopardi are not mainly known for their philosophical work...
My God, you are an idiot.

You can learn to read Italian in one week. German takes a few months...

>>17621197
You distort my meaning by constantly referring to the Italian, which was not the main focus of my comparison. In any case, if you had had a better knowledge of elementary Latin grammar you would have immediately understood that no Romance language is closer to Latin in basic verb morphology and conjugation forms than is the Spanish; nor in *overall* lexical resemblance. Italian is very interesting in this regard because it has evolved more than Spanish in overall lexical morphology, including that of its verb conjugation scheme, whereas in the Spanish one finds a virtual identicality with the Latin in that vital and therefore most essential aspect of the language: that which expresses action. The logic of Latin grammatical action is therefore more fully preserved (beginning at the literal level and, to be sure, extending to the logic of action itself) in Spanish than it is in any other Romance language including both Sardinian and Italian...

>>17621384
I didn't distort anything. I directly quoted you.
And you directly mentioned Italian.

>whereas in the Spanish one finds a virtual identicality with the Latin in that vital and therefore most essential aspect of the language: that which expresses action

Why on earth is that the most essential aspect? This is a completely subjective judgement.

Also, give concrete examples.
And you didn't answer ANY of my questions.

>>17620092
Te saluto, alma Dea, Dea generosa,
O gloria nostra, O Veneta Regina!
In procelloso turbine funesto
Tu regnasti secura; mille membra
Intrepida prostrasti in pugna acerba.
Per te miser non fui, per te non gemo;
Vivo in pace per te. Regna, O beata,
Regna in prospera sorte, in alta pompa,
In augusto splendore, in aurea sede.
Tu serena, tu placida, tu pia,
Tu benigna; tu salva, ama, conserva.

>>17621460
Empty rhetoric. Post something with some *thought* in it, like Leopardi (or Goldoni, if you want Venetian).

>>17621460
I will simply leave off with this poem written in the 18th century by a citizen of the Venetian Republic. It is a linguistic trompe l'oeil of sorts: is it Latin/is it Italian? It is effectively both or either, however as the latter it is quite strained, even unnatural. However, mind you this is poetry, and therein lies precisely my point, it is only by resorting to the poetic mode that Italian is able to contortedly be made to resemble Latin more than routinely does Spanish.

>>17620234
anne frank

>>17621526
Are you running away without answering a single question? Without defining a single term?
You didn't answer any of my relevant questions.
You used terms that have no precise meaning whatever in the science of linguistics.

And that poem is not really poetry. It is one long versified pun. The fact that you can't see the distinction shows a lot. You could write it in prose and create similar effects.

Seriously, show concrete examples of how Spanish resembles Latin more than Italian.

>>17621265
>My god, you're an idiot
well can't argue with that, i am also lazy. i'm content with being the smartest of midwits and reading philosophy to brag to slightly dumber midwits and slightly less capable code monkeys, and to accept my current situation, which to be fair is pretty fucking alright, i get to read, do my own shit to earn money, and smoke pot all day

>>17621264
family connection, they're were all dumped and moved when the ministry of culture was dismantled.
though i don't actually know if they were fired or quit, so they may be full of shit and only said that because they hate Bolsonaro, i'm inclined to believe them though.

>>17621632
kek. i just realized i fit the Brazillian stereotype perfectly, just clever enough to not have to do shit i don't want to, after all, going beyond thay threshold may be a one-way trip, and it could be quite dangerous. i willingly choose blissful ignorance over dreadful wisdom

>>17620113
Portuguese, not Brazilian

>>17621625
I think you're more ignorant than you are unintelligent. A simple comparison of the respective standard Spanish and Italian versions of the Pater Noster should suffice to indicate that Italian is significantly more morphologically evolved than is Spanish. Also, for example, compare the present indicative forms of the Spanish verb "amar" to its Italian equivalent and then to Latin (classical) and you will clearly see that the Spanish forms are closer, nearly identical with the Latin. Repeat for countless other verbs, thereby an indisputably clear pattern emerges: Italian comes second, Sardinian a distant third if that.

>>17621724
https://www.quora.com/Is-Spanish-the-closest-language-to-Latin-in-verb-conjugations

>>17621724
Also, you still didn't answer any of the other questions.
It's amazing how verbose you are, yet how little scientific content there is in your posts. All you do is post very bizarre terms like "poetic mode" and wild claims like "Portuguese came from poetic modes", "Spanish can generate other modes" or whatever.
Crazy. None of that is scientific or philologically accurate.

Not to mention that even if all that were true, your evaluations ("verb is more important", "closeness to Latin makes it more universal" etc.) are bizarrely subjective.

>>17620234
this, but in absolute sincerity

>>17620773
>>17620518
>>17620341
>>17620214
Fix
https://mega.nz/file/mtVGHZ7A#Q3NLwijMBa0HgjRSOnmqy5rE5N6-FIfv4pbIFfSN7WU

Bump

>>17621632

So you have a EU passport as well, otherwise, things will be pretty rough.

>>17621823
This is growing exceedingly tiring, I will leave you with this:

"Podemos decir, con Menéndez Pidal (1905:
178), que “La conjugación fue conservada
por el romance en muy buen estado, con-
trastando con el olvido de la declinación”.
Al contrario de la conjugación, las desinen-
cias de los casos de la declinación “resulta-
ron instrumento inservible en romance”. A
la conservación de las desinencias verbales
pudo haber contribuido el hecho de que es-
tas eran “completamente claras”, no así las
desinencias de los casos de la declinación.
De acuerdo con lo anterior, luego, el espa-
ñol conservó en lo fundamental la morfolo-
gía del verbo latino, especialmente la de la
voz activa. Su gran innovación en este senti-
do pudo estar en la creación de la voz pasiva,
pero bajo formas analíticas o perifrásticas.
En la voz activa, en cambio, su novedad es-
taría en la creación de un modo potencial y
en el pretérito indefinido, con un uso muy
parecido al aoristo indicativo griego.
Muchos de los cambios en la morfología
del verbo que observamos en español con
respecto al latín, no obstante, ya eran obser-
vables en el desarrollo del latín vulgar, y en
algunos casos hasta en el latín literario.
Existen, entonces, dos cosas del latín muy
bien conservadas en español: actualmente
se reconoce que el español conservó en lo
fundamental el léxico latino –muchos estu-
diosos estiman que entre el 80% y el 85%
del vocabulario español deriva del latín–; a
ello debemos añadir la conservación de la forms fundamental del verbo."

>>17620153
Shut up whore.

I just want poetic mode anon to explain why verb structure is the most important comparison to make of a Romance language to Latin. Why not noun declensions? Then I could make big claims about how pure Romanian is. The argument is silly, look at overall lexical similarity and Italian beats Spanish, as if it matters. If it really did you'd be arguing we should still be writing in Latin, not Spanish, because only Latin has the complete grammar and phonology of Latin.

>>17624057
That has proven absolutely nothing and AGAIN you refused to answer A SINGLE question about definitions, choosing to run away from them while focusing on a single (bizarre) point about verb conjugation somehow making Spanish better - a point which you have failed to prove (no, that quote doesn't prove anything, because *it does not make comparisons with other languages*; if you wish to prove that Spanish is closer in its verbs, you need to post a wide comparative study, not just some random quote, and then you will also need to prove that the difference is big enough to actually have any literary relevance, because a difference of 1% or even 5-10% will not be likely to cause any relevant aesthetic change).

But just stop for a moment to consider the stupidity of your claims: you are saying that Spanish is more universal because its verbs are closer to Latin verbs. I suppose you know what "non sequitur" means...

>>17624247
He is completely clueless and throwing around bizarre, non-scientific concepts ("poetic mode", Spanish being uniquely able to "generate other modes", and, as you point out, that idiocy about verb structure being "more vital and more essential") simply because he wants to make it look as though Spanish is the superior, more universal, and better language because it is somehow closer to Latin.
Given that we all know that Sardinian and Italian are closer, he chooses to focus on the single aspect (verb structure) in which (according to him, but totally unproven) Spanish is closer.
I suspect that guy probably comes from this strange "hispanismo" movement that has surfaced around the web recently, and seems to gravitate around the literary critic José Maestro. Their goal is basically to prove that Spanish is superior in pretty much everything, as a way of coping with the fact that they have lost their empire while the Anglos are still as strong as ever.

It is sheer nonsense to call a language more "universal" because of its closeness to Latin. The only language today that comes close to universality is the one we're writing in: English. But a fanatic Spanish nationalist will never praise the Anglos, so he needs to praise Latin instead.

>>17620092
For those who think that Spanish is better than Portuguese, better in what exactly?
Spain had one of the biggest empires in history yet it didn't produce anything significant. There's no reason to learn Spanish other than to read Don Quixote. Their music sucks, their cinema sucks, their literature sucks and it's only spoken in third world shitholes. It also sounds like some retarded arabic.
At least Brazil has decent music, cinema, literature and sounds pleasant.

>>17620175
More like you speak Galician PorTwinkguese boii.

>>17620227
>Speaks Spanish

Why?

>>17620276
>Doesn't have proper plural in your way

>>17620324
>Nasales

Into the gas chamber it goes.

>>17620626
Macaco favelado Latin.

>>17621526
Take it from a professional Latin scholar. Spanish is not that close to Latin. Spanish poetry will never be able to reach the rhetorical richness of Latin poetry since it has abandoned case. Your claims about verb conjugations are laughable. Any native Latin speaker of the past would have seen Spanish as a dirty, vulgar bastardization of their pure language. Don't fool yourself into thinking Spanish is some ultra literary language. It has some good writers but the language itself (at least to a Latinist) sounds childish and unsophisticated.

>>17620092
Baseado, muito obrigado

>>17625534
Under those assumptions Portuguese and French wouldn't even be considered languages by real Latin speakers (Not current reconstructed Latin, real latin from the time)

>>17625581
They would be considered languages, just lesser languages. There are plenty of Latin sources that indicate the vernacular variants if Latin were not well received by the literati. Caesar and Cicero certainly, had they heard it, would not have thought well of French or Spanish (especially their Modern descendants).

Foda-se, bem bom. Preciso de arranjar um ebook reader para isto.

>>17625534
So you're not any sort of Latin scholar then, thanks for playing.

>>17624247
Wrong again, Italian is morphologically more evolved than Spanish in its conjugation of verb forms when compared to Classical Latin. This is empirically clear, that you do not and evidently will not take the couple of minutes necessary to compare the Pater Noster in the three languages, nor, more importantly the verb forms, immediately sorts you out for what you are: a tendentious twat.

>>17620092
>GREATEST LANGUAGE
that's not Italian

>>17625421
Youre such a pleb if you dont recon literature written in spanish is good anon, even me as a brazilian can think of more respectable iberophone writers

>>17624412
You evidently have no clue regarding the early medieval world and how the formation of what would eventually be the various national neo-Latin languages came about. At the time of Charlemagne there was still significant indifferentiation among the neonate Romances, and one could speak of a κοινή or meta-dialect extending from the Channel to the Spanish March to the Asturias in the West, and of course to the Italic wellspring of Latin proper. However this koinal twilight was quickly fading, fragmented in great measure by the Islamic conquests, specially those to which the Iberian peninsula had been made subordinate. If not for this latter earthquake upon the linguistic terrain of Hispania, then today one would have in Spain, quite simply, a second Italic Peninsula, as pertains to linguistic evolution and form. In a world reverting to a quasi wholly illiterate ontology the role of the monks and troubadours would prove key in the subsequent development of the respective neo-Latin national forms. Under one authentic (and not just nominal) Roman state, even if Karolo-barbarian, linguistic fragmentative evolution would have been greatly stemmed and geography rendered less effective a miser of its respective prizes. Instead, the monks and bards who laboured under the hyper-circumscribing patronage of a vast regional plague of petty kings, dukes, counts, margraves, etc., (as opposed to imperial governors and pronconsuls) began to weave the rudiments of new national languages out of the cauldron of their own immediately observable linguistic anthropology; vox populi; the Vulgate; the surviving Latin grammatical tradition and tattered corpus juridicus. By the time of Dante the interplay of vox populi, clerico-grammatical scholasticism, civic sprach (city state speech), troubadourian itinerancy, and regional political reconquest and revived imperial ambition had set the stage not only for the Renaissance to come, but more germanely, as far as the present topic is concerned, the principal poetic and musicological mode of the then already discernible major neo-Latin divisions: langue d'Oi/langue d'Oc; Florentine vs. the Roman or the Venetian; Castilian vs. Catalan-Aragonese; Portuguese vs. Castilian. The point, in sum, and as Vico quite readily understood, is that the poetic mode is never simply secondary to the prosaic in the existence and development of language. That the poesis of a language is inextricable from every point and stage of its evolution is and has been inherent in the pattern of at least all Indo-European tongues: it is the poesis that leads a language, and not that is lead by it. However, this inerrant tendency, this telos has finally been broken down in the present stage of the West, because the illusion of Romance has been grievously injured under what Deleuze has called the "disaster" of Anglophone philosophical re-ontologization, which is precisely the algorithmic techno-dictatorship which Heidegger so much feared.

Uau quantos lusos estão no /lit/
Sempre pensei que estava sozinho

>>17620264
>Brazilians actually speak a Portuguese that is closer to that of Camões
I've heard this many times, but I don't buy it. yes, Portuguese pronunciation is shit, but at least they follow the actual grammar just a little bit when they speak, not this fuleragem we do.
>"eu vi eles"
>"lhe disse que..."
>"tu vai...?"
>"eu te dei seu..."
>etc.

>>17620501
>it has made a confining specialization of [sonority]
>I can make spoken Spanish sound like Portuguese, but it is impossible for the latter to do the same
>(its essential specialised structure simply doesn't permit it).
wtf are you talking about???

>>17620773
>Dom Casmurro > Memórias Póstumas
Cringe
>Um Copo de Cólera > Lavoura Arcaica
Holy Based

>>17620799
sounds like fun bullshit

>>17625421
>There's no reason to learn Spanish other than to read Don Quixote
oh, don't force me to side with the spics, anon......

And please guide me to the "decent Brazilian cinema" (yep, there are a few pretty good movies, but it's far from "decent" overall).

>>17627159
You are either trolling or the worst writer on /lit/, and that's saying a lot...

>the interplay of vox populi, clerico-grammatical scholasticism, civic sprach (city state speech), troubadourian itinerancy, and regional political reconquest and revived imperial ambition had set the stage not only for the Renaissance to come, but more germanely, as far as the present topic is concerned, the principal poetic and musicological mode of the then already discernible major neo-Latin divisions: langue d'Oi/langue d'Oc; Florentine vs. the Roman or the Venetian; Castilian vs. Catalan-Aragonese; Portuguese vs. Castilian.

And you still haven't defined "poetic mode" nor proven why exactly Spanish is dissimilar from the other languages in this particular aspect.
You even contradict yourself, bizarelly:

>The point, in sum, and as Vico quite readily understood, is that the poetic mode is never simply secondary to the prosaic in the existence and development of language.

If it is NEVER simply secondary to the prosaic mode, then it wasn't secondary in Spanish either, and therefore Spanish too came from this strange and undefined "poetic mode".

>However, this inerrant tendency, this telos has finally been broken down in the present stage of the West, because the illusion of Romance has been grievously injured under what Deleuze has called the "disaster" of Anglophone philosophical re-ontologization, which is precisely the algorithmic techno-dictatorship which Heidegger so much feared.

The level of nonsense here, and the revelation of your inferiority complex towards the Anglos, is far from surprising.

An empty head dresses itself in adjectives and adverbs.

>>17627600
Most of the things you point out have to do with the new "second person" that has been made out of "vossa mercê" (você).
"Vi eles" is widespread, but educated Brazilians don't use it very often, as it's considered in bad taste.
But anyway, Camões probably spoke differently from all of us. The point is that some things remained here in Brazil, others in Portugal, but according to some linguists Brazil preserved more; I haven't really checked that claim, but you can see that at least in some cases it's true: for instance, the meter of Camões fits very well with contemporary Brazilian pronunciation, but not with the Portuguese one, which tends to suppress certain vowels. I can read Camões with Brazilian pronunciation and almost no metrical syllable will be lost, if any at all.

>>17620365
French language describes misery better

>>17626319
I am you're just a nationalist blinded by the insufficiency of your language.

>>17628205
Was it just me or did Voyage au bout de la nuit become rather mediocre after page 300 (when he goes back to France)?

There were some moments, such as the relationship between Robinson and the girl, that simply bordered on cheap kitsch, and the best sections were the Dickensian sketches of the psychiatry world - good, yes, but Dickensian. Only towards the very end did it improve again.
I grew very impatient reading the second part of the book, which was quite a disappointment, because the first one had some truly memorable pages.

>>17627943
Look at the Strasbourg Oaths, the Romance translation contained within the original document. What language does that most resemble: Italian, Portuguese, French, Spanish or Catalan (bear in mind the writing was phonetic)? This Romance version documents a lingua franca that covered most of the former territories of the Western Roman Empire. The morphology overall most resembles that of Catalan, while the pronunciation and verb morphology that of Spanish. Apart from the island fossil that is Sardinian, all other Western neo-Latin languages exhibit a far greater level of evolution in terms of phonology and verb morphology. The essence of a language is contained within its formal verbal logic and structure, for there can simply be no action without these. Italian in certain dimensions is closer to Classical and vulgar Latin than are Castilian and Catalan, but in the fundamental dimension of action and, in the case of Spanish, phonology it is simply more evolved, thus less representative of the vulgar Latin-cum-Romance that existed at a time when a universal Romanitas was fading, but not yet gone.

>>17620182
English is the de facto language of humanity

>>17620501
> Spanish is basically Latin boiled down to its essence with the declensional spine removed.
What the fuck?

>>17628359
By the God is it good to be a brit. We have everyone from the burgermutts to the Chinese speaking our tongue.

>>17628198
>but educated Brazilians don't use it very often
to a certain extent... start paying more attention, even academics slip into it often.
people avoid obvious examples like "vi ela", but I just heard my father (who has a doctorate degree and all) saying "eu vou chamar ele" a few minutes ago. I used to speak the correct way when I was a teenager, but now saying "eu vou chamá-lo" sounds needlessly artificial and a bit pedantic in day-to-day speek.

TL;DR the Portuguese speak in a more grammatically correct way in general, therefore, closer to an "older Portuguese" in that aspect.
BUT the Brazilian *pronunciation* (mainly the rhythm and tempo) is more "well preserved", do to all the vowel contractions they do oversees.
Therefore, saying that one is "closer to Camões" then the other is a bit misleading and I have the feeling that it's one of those meaningless pseudo-trivia, like the word "saudades" being untranslatable.

>>17628289
Addendum: https://books.google.es/books?id=eSGxnHt3kFwC&pg=PA292&lpg=PA292&dq=guarnerio+Spanish+provencal&source=bl&ots=vDVeFa0iUl&sig=ACfU3U2SWOR53ycFJyYgTfd886TXxkIHmQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiv44X6moHvAhU8AGMBHbyTDk8Q6AEwAXoECAkQAg#v=onepage&q=guarnerio%20Spanish%20provencal&f=false

>>17628289
Again you answered no question, you didn't define poetic mode, and so on.

You've been hammering and hammering the same point about "verbal structure", which is complete arbitrary nonsense.

>The essence of a language is contained within its formal verbal logic and structure,

No, the essence is contained in the nouns, for there can be no nomination and conceptualization without these. Without the noun, the action has no categories: it has no actor, no time, no place, no object. It is non-existent!
Thus, Italian and Sardinian are closer to Latin in their nouns, and therefore closer to Latin in their essential aspects.

How do you refute that? You can't.
The judgement of what's essential or not in a language is pretty much arbitrary. In reality, every aspect of a language is probably essential.

Not to mention the fact that you haven't proven that Spanish verb structure is closer to Latin than the Portuguese one is. You're just citing hand-picked documents instead of providing a linguistic study proving your point.
For instance, you mentioned the Pater Noster, but the verb *structure* in Spanish is pretty much *the same one* as in Portuguese.

>thus less representative of the vulgar Latin-cum-Romance

Then why not write in Latin instead of Spanish?
Why not throw Cervantes into the trash and read Virgil instead?

>>17620307
Why did you have to abolish monarchy bros?

>>17628793
I looked at the Guarnieri book and what's he's saying is that Italian is closest in general, not in this or that aspect. It's the second place that is disputed between Provençal and Spanish: Spanish comes second at phonetics; Provençal comes second at morphology. But Italian comes first in general.

" 14. Se volessimo classificare i principali tipi
neolatini secondo il grado di maggiore o minore
conservazione rispetto alla lingua originaria, il
primo posto spetterebbe indubbiamente al tipo ita-
liano, intendendo specialmente il complesso idio-
matico dell'Italia centrale, e comprendendovi pure
il tipo sardo logudorese, che serbò meglio d'ogni
altro le sembianze primitive, onde fu detto argu-
tamente essere « italiano antichissimo molto ben
conservato ». *Il secondo posto potrebbe andar con-
teso* [emphasis mine] tra il tipo spagnuolo e quello provenzale ; per
criteri morfologici avrebbe preminenza il provenzale ;
per altri e nell'ordine fonetico in ispecie andrebbe
innanzi lo spagnuolo. "

Here is what you wrote in your post:

>The morphology overall most resembles that of Catalan, while the pronunciation and verb morphology that of Spanish. Apart from the island fossil that is Sardinian, all other Western neo-Latin languages exhibit a far greater level of evolution in terms of phonology and verb morphology

Your own source contradicts your post.

>>17628967
We're much better off without the monarchy to bother us.
D. Pedro II's descendants constitute a dangerous horde of midwits who would use their power to cretinous purposes. They do no honor whatsoever to their family history (assuming that it is good, of which I am not so sure).
Thankfully, they've been reduced to whining about the past.

Pic related is the current heir. Would you wish to be ruled by him or would you rather rule over him?

>>17629097
He specifically says: per
criteri morfologici avrebbe preminenza il provenzale ; per altri e nell'ordine fonetico in ispecie andrebbe
innanzi lo spagnuolo. "

So two points, Guarnieri helpfully allows us to discard that chaff that is French, Portuguese, Romanian, etc. They're no longer in contention. Secondly, the Italian (Florentine) of which he speaks is a highly artificial national standard based on Dantean neo-classicizing poesis. I.e. a quite consciously erudite and inorganic register of high poetry confected by the minds of a few individuals, as opposed to an organic continuum directly descending from vulgar Latin. This, however, is not the case with Catalan, Occitan, and Spanish, hence their far more organic similarity to the Strasbourg Oaths (which were written, mind you, when none of these languages yet existed). The point, and this absolutely does not contradict Guarnieri's point, is that Spanish and Catalan/Occitan have overall, but especially in general morphology and phonology, shown less innovation than the *vulgar Latin*/proto-Romance that served as lingua franca in the interval between the collapse of the Empire in West and the reign of Charlemagne. This is why of all the neo-Latin languages the Spanish and the Catalan are easiest for other neo-Latin language speakers to learn or intuitively understand, because the former have diverged so much less from the Romance lingua franca that developed precisely to serve that purpose after the collapse of Roman authority in the West; and which in turn had as its direct and unalloyed precursor in vulgar Latin itself.

>>17629315
>IL SECONDO POSTO POTREBBE ANDAR CONTESO TRA IL TIPO SPAGNUOLO E QUELLO PROVENZALE

Learn to read.

Spanish and Provençal DISPUTE the second place BETWEEN (TRA) each other:
- by morphological criteria, Provençal has prominence (over Spanish!)
- by phonetic criteria, Spanish has prominence (over Provençal!)

That's between each other!
Italian has already been granted the first place, now Guarnieri is distinguishing BETWEEN Spanish and Provençal to find out which one is closest to Latin.
My God...

>>17629399
Learn to read the rest of what I wrote. I know you're coy not to because I've clenched it.

>>17620214
Sent ;^)

>>17629423
>highly artificial national standard based on Dantean neo-classicizing poesis

Italian is not highly artificial. It is based on real dialects.
Furthermore, there is much dialectal literature in Italy, including works of the highest standards. Therefore, at best you are arguing that we should all write in Italian dialect (something which the Italians themselves don't do anymore).

>The point, and this absolutely does not contradict Guarnieri's point, is that Spanish and Catalan/Occitan have overall, but especially in general morphology and phonology, shown less innovation than the *vulgar Latin*/proto-Romance that served as lingua franca in the interval between the collapse of the Empire in West and the reign of Charlemagne

What then is your standard: Latin or proto-Romance? First you were praising Latin, now that I've shown that Guarnieri considers Italian closer to Latin *INCLUDING* in morphology and phonetics you start praising Proto-Romance. Which is it that you prefer?

However, since you are talking about vulgar Latin (on which literature was also written, mind you, so that your "poetic mode" remains undefined nonsense), then you should probably prove that Spanish is closer to it by posting a study.
All you did was to talk about the Strasbourg oaths and the Pater Noster. Hand-picked examples. The Starbourg oaths is fucking French: of course it's gonna resemble Provençal more!
I could cite this instead: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iscrizione_di_san_Clemente_e_Sisinnio

And all of that trash talk of yours about Spanish being able to engender more modes has also been left unexplained.

Honestly, it's useless to talk to you. You've been completely brainwashed by nationalism to the point that you can't even comprehend a very simple Italian paragraph.

>>17629549
Just answer my one simple question, why is Spanish (with Italian second) the easiest neo-Latin language to learn, including in the case of speakers of other neo-Latin languages? Couldn't it be because it is the one that most closely resembles a lingua franca, perhaps an ancient or convergent (to an ancient) Western Romance lingua franca?

>>17629624
What a non sequitur...
For a Frenchman Italian might be easier.

https://septiemeartetdemi.com/2020/01/08/les-langues-les-plus-faciles-pour-un-francophone/

>Sans conteste, l’italien est la langue la plus facile pour un francophone. Elle nous est très familière et largement intelligible à l’écrit comme à l’oral avec peu d’apprentissage.

So at least some Frenchmen seem to consider it easier "sans conteste".
But I'd argue that it really depends not only on the person but also on cultural exposure. I learned English before learning Spanish due to cultural exposure. It was easier for ME.
For the average Portuguese speaker, Galician would undoubtedly be easier than Spanish. For the average Italian speaker, Sardinian or Neapolitan would perhaps be easier.

Also, you want me to answer one question while failing to having answered any of the many questions I posed criticizing your bizarre and obscure terminology. As I said, it is useless talking to you, because if you were arguing in good faith the first thing you'd do would be to define your terms properly.

Can anyone bother to seed the torrent?

>>17629624
P.S. You have learnt nothing from this conversation, which I too find concluded, bc you don't want to learn anything. You're simply incapable of seeing what is before your eyes or entertaining the possibility that depending on varying but equally legitimate criteria, two very similar languages (Italian and Spanish) might edge out one another in terms of which is operationally closest to a barebones Latin. My thesis is not any sort of fringe theory, but rather one that is based on empirical conditions (Latin/Spanish verb morphology and phonology). And one that is expressed by logically informed students of Romance philology on a routine basis. An example of such can be found here: https://amp.reddit.com/r/latin/comments/6e0x5k/which_language_is_closest_to_latin/

i can't believe any language other than english really exists. i know it to be true but i don't believe it. you all are pretending. this is a joke played at my expense. there are not books out there i am unable to read.

>>17629707
That guy is talking about verbs, but doesn't mention Portuguese.
The other guy on Quora explicitly talked about this. Portuguese is more similar to Latin in certain aspects of its verbs.
Anyway, you still haven't defined any of your obscure terminology. You proposed a lot of very strange theses and in the end ran away from them and started defending only one very small and bizarre claim that Spanish is somehow more universal because its verbs and phonology are closer to Latin (or proto-Romance, or whatever it is that you randomly choose to favor), a claim which also rests on a dubious factual basis.

But that's OK. Nationalists will never be convinced of anything. Good night.

>>17620092
>some gross as form of vulgar latin
>greatest lang
K.

>>17620092
Baseado
Português melhor língua, tô certo

>>17629223
I'm asking to the portuguese since the illustration is from 1922 (and their monarchy was many centuries older than that of Brazil that effectively started in 1808)
I also doubt the dude in the pic would turn out like that of he were raised to be king instead of the equivalent of a c-list celebrity hungry for more fame