Italic languages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation
Jump to search

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Italic languages" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR
(January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Italic
Ethnicity Originally the Italic peoples
Geographic
distribution Originally the Italian peninsula and parts of modern day Austria
and Switzerland, today southern Europe, Latin America, France, Romania, Canada, and
the official languages of half the countries of Africa.
Linguistic classification Indo-European

Italo-Celtic ?
Italic

Proto-language Proto-Italic
Subdivisions

Latino-Faliscan (including Romance)

†Osco-Umbrian (Sabellic)
†Venetic?
†Sicel?
†Lusitanian?

ISO 639-5 itc

Glottolog ital1284
Main linguistic groups in Iron-Age Italy and the surrounding areas. Some of those
languages have left very little evidence, and their classification is quite
uncertain. The Punic language brought to Sardinia by the Punics coexisted with the
indigenous and non-Italic Paleo-Sardinian, or Nuragic.

The Italic languages form a branch of the Indo-European language family, whose
earliest known members were spoken on the Italian Peninsula in the first millennium
BC. The most important of the ancient languages was Latin, the official language of
ancient Rome, which conquered the other Italic peoples before the common era. The
other Italic languages became extinct in the first centuries AD as their speakers
were assimilated into the Roman Empire and shifted to some form of Latin. Between
the third and eighth centuries AD, Vulgar Latin (perhaps influenced by language
shift from the other Italic languages) diversified into the Romance languages,
which are the only Italic languages natively spoken today, while Literary Latin
also survived.

Besides Latin, the known ancient Italic languages are Faliscan (the closest to
Latin), Umbrian and Oscan (or Osco-Umbrian), and South Picene. Other Indo-European
languages once spoken in the peninsula, whose inclusion in the Italic branch is
disputed are Venetic and Sicel. These long-extinct languages are known only from
inscriptions in archaeological finds.

In the first millennium BC, several (other) non-Italic languages were spoken in the
peninsula, including members of other branches of Indo-European (such as Celtic and
Greek) as well as at least one non-Indo-European one, Etruscan.
It is generally believed that those 1st millennium Italic languages descend from
Indo-European languages brought by migrants to the peninsula sometime in the 2nd
millennium BC.[1][2][3] However, the source of those migrations and the history of
the languages in the peninsula are still a matter of debate among historians. In
particular, it is debated whether the ancient Italic languages all descended from a
single Proto-Italic language after its arrival in the region, or whether the
migrants brought two or more Indo-European languages that were only distantly
related.

With over 800 million native speakers, the Romance languages make Italic the
second-most-widely spoken branch of the Indo-European family, after Indo-Iranian.
However, in academia the ancient Italic languages form a separate field of study
from the medieval and modern Romance languages. This article focuses on the ancient
languages. For the others, see Romance studies.

All Italic languages (including Romance) are generally written in Old Italic
scripts (or the descendant Latin alphabet and its adaptations), which descend from
the alphabet used to write the non-Italic Etruscan language, and ultimately from
the Greek alphabet.
Contents

1 History of the concept

2 Classification
3 History
3.1 Proto-Italic period
3.2 Languages of Italy in the Iron Age
3.3 Timeline of Latin
4 Origin theories
5 Characteristics
5.1 Phonology
5.2 Grammar
5.3 Lexical comparison
5.4 P-Italic and Q-Italic languages
6 See also
7 References
8 Bibliography
9 Further reading
10 External links

History of the concept

Part of a series on
Indo-European topics
Indo-European migrations.gif
Languages
Philology
Origins
Archaeology
Peoples and societies
Religion and mythology
Indo-European studies

vte

Historical linguists have generally concluded that the ancient Indo-European

languages of the Italian peninsula that were not identifiable as belonging to other
branches of Indo-European, such as Greek, belonged to a single branch of the
family, parallel for example to Celtic and Germanic. The founder of this theory is
Antoine Meillet (1866–1936).[4]
This unitary theory has been criticized by, among others, Alois Walde, Vittore
Pisani and Giacomo Devoto, who proposed that the Latino-Faliscan and Osco-Umbrian
languages constituted two distinct branches of Indo-European. This view gained
acceptance in the second half of the 20th century,[5] though proponents such as Rix
would later reject the idea, and the unitary theory remains dominant in
contemporary scholarship.[6]
Classification

The following classification, proposed by Michiel de Vaan (2008), is generally

agreed on,[7] although some scholars have recently rejected the position of Venetic
within the Italic branch.[8]

Proto-Italic (or Proto-Italo-Venetic)[9][10]

Proto-Venetic[11]
Venetic (550–100 BC)[9]
Proto-Latino-Sabellic[9]
Latino-Faliscan[9]
Early Faliscan (7th–5th c. BC)[12]
Middle Faliscan (5th–3rd c. BC)[12]
Late Faliscan (3rd–2nd c. BC), strongly influenced by
Latin[12][9]
Old Latin (6th–1st c. BC)[13]
Classical Latin (1st c. BC–3rd c. AD)[13]
Late Latin (3rd–6th c. AD)[13]
Vulgar Latin (2nd c. BC–9th c.AD)[14] evolved into Proto-
Romance (the reconstructed Late Vulgar Latin ancestor of Romance languages) between
the 3rd and 8th c. AD[15][16]
Romance languages, non-mutually intelligible with Latin
since at the least the 9th c. AD; the only Italic languages still spoken today[17]
[18]
Gallo-Romance (attested from 842 AD), Italo-Dalmatian
(ca. 960), Occitano-Romance (ca. 1000), Ibero-Romance (ca. 1075), Rhaeto-Romance
(ca. 1100), Sardinian (1102), African Romance (extinct; spoken at least until the
12th c. AD), Eastern Romance (1521)[19]
Sabellic (Osco-Umbrian)[20][21]
Umbrian (7th–1st c. BC), including dialects like Aequian, Marsian,
or Volscian[20][21]
Oscan (5th–1st c. BC), including dialects like Hernican, North
Oscan (Marrucinian, Paelignian, Vestinian), or Sabine (Samnite)[20][21]
Picene languages[21]
Pre-Samnite (6th–5th c. BC)[20]
South Picene (6th–4th c. BC)[20]
(?) Sicel[22][23]
(?) Lusitanian[24][22]

History
Proto-Italic period
Main article: Proto-Italic

Proto-Italic was probably originally spoken by Italic tribes north of the Alps. In
particular, early contacts with Celtic and Germanic speakers are suggested by
linguistic evidence.[2]

Bakkum defines Proto-Italic as a "chronological stage" without an independent

development of its own, but extending over late Proto-Indo-European and the initial
stages of Proto-Latin and Proto-Sabellic. Meiser's dates of 4000 BC to 1800 BC,
well before Mycenaean Greek, are described by him as being "as good a guess as
anyone's".[25] Schrijver argues for a Proto-Italo-Celtic stage, which he suggests
was spoken in "approximately the first half or the middle of the 2nd millennium
BC",[26] from which Celtic split off first, then Venetic, before the remainder,
Italic, split into Latino-Faliscan and Sabellian.[27]

Italic peoples probably moved towards the Italian Peninsula during the second half
of the 2nd millennium BC, gradually reaching the southern regions.[2][3] Although
an equation between archeological and linguistic evidence cannot be established
with certainty, the Proto-Italic language is generally associated with the
Terramare (1700–1150 BC) and Proto-Villanovan culture (1200–900 BC).[2]
Languages of pre-Roman Italy and nearby islands: N1, Rhaetian; N2, Etruscan: N3,
North Picene (Picene of Novilara); N4, Ligurian; N5, Nuragic; N6, Elymian; N7,
Sicanian; C1, Lepontic; C2, Gaulish; I1, South Picene; I2, Umbrian; I3, Sabine; I4,
Faliscan; I5, Latin; I6, Volscian and Hernican; I7, Central Italic (Marsian,
Aequian, Paeligni, Marrucinian, Vestinian); I8, Oscan, Sidicini, Pre-Samnite; I9,
Sicel; IE1, Venetic; IE2, Messapian; G1-G2-G3, Greek dialects (G1: Ionic, G2:
Aeolic, G3: Doric); P1, Punic.
Languages of Italy in the Iron Age

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Italic languages" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR
(April 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

At the start of the Iron Age, around 700 BC, Ionian Greek settlers from Euboea
established colonies along the coast of southern Italy.[28] They brought with them
the alphabet, which they had learned from the Phoenicians; specifically, what we
now call Western Greek alphabet. The invention quickly spread through the whole
peninsula, across language and political barriers. Local adaptations (mainly minor
letter shape changes and the dropping or addition of a few letters) yielded several
Old Italic alphabets.

The inscriptions show that, by 700 BC, many languages were spoken in the region,
including members of several branches of Indo-European and several non-Indo-
European languages. The most important of the latter was Etruscan, attested by
evidence from more than 10,000 inscriptions and some short texts. No relation has
been found between Etruscan and any other known language, and there is still no
clue about its possible origin (except for inscriptions on the island of Lemnos in
the eastern Mediterranean). Other possibly non-Indo-European languages present at
the time were Rhaetian in the Alpine region, Ligurian around present-day Genoa, and
some unidentified language(s) in Sardinia. Those languages have left some
detectable imprint in Latin.

The largest language in southern Italy, except Ionic Greek spoken in the Greek
colonies, was Messapian, known due to some 260 inscriptions dating from the 6th and
5th centuries BC. There is a historical connection of Messapian with the Illyrian
tribes, added to the archaeological connection in ceramics and metals existing
between both peoples, which motivated the hypothesis of linguistic connection. But
the evidence of Illyrian inscriptions is reduced to personal names and places,
which makes it difficult to support such a hypothesis.

It has also been proposed that the Lusitanian language may have belonged to the
Italic family.[24][29]
Timeline of Latin

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding
citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "History of Latin" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR
(January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
In the history of Latin of ancient times, there are several periods:

From the archaic period, several inscriptions of the 6th to the 4th centuries
BC, fragments of the oldest laws, fragments from the sacral anthem of the Salii,
the anthem of the Arval Brethren were preserved.
In the pre-classical period (3rd and 2nd centuries BC), the literary Latin
language (the comedies of Plautus and Terence, the agricultural treatise of Cato
the Elder, fragments of works by a number of other authors) was based on the
dialect of Rome.
The period of classical ("golden") Latin dated until the death of Ovid in AD
17[30] (1st century BC, the development of vocabulary, the development of
terminology, the elimination of old morphological doublets, the flowering of
literature: Cicero, Caesar, Sallust, Virgil, Horace, Ovid) was particularly
distinguished.
During the period of classical ("silver") Latin dated until the death of
emperor Marcus Aurelius in AD 180, seeing works by Juvenal, Tacitus, Suetonius and
the Satyricon of Petronius,[30] during which time the phonetic, morphological and
spelling norms were finally formed.

As the Roman Republic extended its political dominion over the whole of the Italian
peninsula, Latin became dominant over the other Italic languages, which ceased to
be spoken perhaps sometime in the 1st century AD. From Vulgar Latin, the Romance
languages emerged.

The Latin language gradually spread beyond Rome, along with the growth of the power
of this state, displacing, beginning in the 4th and 3rd centuries BC, the languages
of other Italic tribes, as well as Illyrian, Messapian and Venetic, etc. The
Romanisation of the Italian Peninsula was basically complete by the 1st century BC;
except for the south of Italy and Sicily, where the dominance of Greek was
preserved. The attribution of Ligurian is controversial.
Origin theories

This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The
specific problem is: This section duplicates the section 'Proto-Italic period'.
Please help improve this section if you can. (April 2021) (Learn how and when to
remove this template message)

The main debate concerning the origin of the Italic languages mirrors that on the
origins of the Greek ones,[31] except that there is no record of any "early Italic"
to play the role of Mycenaean Greek.

All we know about the linguistic landscape of Italy is from inscriptions made after
the introduction of the alphabet in the peninsula, around 700 BC onwards, and from
Greek and Roman writers several centuries later. The oldest known samples come from
Umbrian and Faliscan inscriptions from the 7th century BC. Their alphabets were
clearly derived from the Etruscan alphabet, which was derived from the Western
Greek alphabet not much earlier than that. There is no reliable information about
the languages spoken before that time. Some conjectures can be made based on
toponyms, but they cannot be verified.

There is no guarantee that the intermediate phases between those old Italic
languages and Indo-European will be found. The question of whether Italic
originated outside Italy or developed by assimilation of Indo-European and other
elements within Italy, approximately on or within its current range there, remains.
[32]

An extreme view of some linguists and historians is that there is no such thing as
"the Italic branch" of Indo-European. Namely, there never was a unique "Proto-
Italic", whose diversification resulted in those languages. Some linguists, like
Silvestri[33] and Rix,[34] further argue that no common Proto-Italic can be
reconstructed such that (1) its phonological system may have developed into those
of Latin and Osco-Umbrian through consistent phonetic changes, and (2) its
phonology and morphology can be consistently derived from those of Proto-Indo-
European. However, Rix later changed his mind and became an outspoken supporter of
Italic as a family.

Those linguists propose instead that the ancestors of the 1st millennium Indo-
European languages of Italy were two or more different languages, that separately
descended from Indo-European in a more remote past, and separately entered Europe,
possibly by different routes and/or in different epochs. That view stems in part
from the difficulty in identifying a common Italic homeland in prehistory,[35] or
reconstructing an ancestral "Common Italic" or "Proto-Italic" language from which
those languages could have descended. Some common features that seem to connect the
languages may be just a sprachbund phenomenon – a linguistic convergence due to
contact over a long period,[36] as in the most widely accepted version of the
Italo-Celtic hypothesis.[undue weight? – discuss]
Characteristics

General and specific characteristics of the pre-Roman Italic languages:

in phonetics: Oscan (in comparison with Latin and Umbrian) preserved all
positions of old diphthongs ai, oi, ei, ou, in the absence of rhotacism, the
absence of sibilants[clarification needed], in the development of kt > ht; a
different interpretation of Indo-European kw and gw (Latin qu and v, Osco-Umbrian p
and b); in the latter the preservation of s in front of nasal sonants and the
reflection of Indo-European *dh and *bh as f; initial stress (in Latin, it was
reconstructed in the historical period), which led to syncopation and the reduction
of vowels of unstressed syllables;
in the syntax: many convergences; In Osco-Umbrian, impersonal constructions,
parataxis, partitive genitive, temporal genitive and genitive relationships are
more often used;

Phonology

The most distinctive feature of the Italic languages is the development of the PIE
voiced aspirated stops.[37] In initial position, *bʰ-, *dʰ- and *gʷʰ- merged to
/f-/, while *gʰ- became /h-/, although Latin also has *gʰ- > /v-/ and /g-/ in
special environments.[38]

In medial position, all voiced aspirated stops have a distinct reflex in Latin,
with different outcome for -*gʰ- and *gʷʰ- if preceded by a nasal. In Osco-Umbrian,
they generally have the same reflexes as in initial position, although Umbrian
shows a special development if preceded by a nasal, just as in Latin. Most
probably, the voiced aspirated stops went through an intermediate stage *-β-, *-ð-,
*-ɣ- and *-ɣʷ- in Proto-Italic.[39]
Italic reflexes of PIE voiced aspirated stops initial position medial position
*bʰ- *dʰ- *gʰ- *gʷʰ- *-(m)bʰ- *-(n)dʰ- *-(n)gʰ- *-(n)gʷʰ-
Latin[38] f- f- h- f- -b-
-mb- -d-[a]
-nd- -h-
-ng- -v-
-ngu-
Faliscan[40] f- f- h- ? -f- -f- -g- ?
Umbrian[41] f- f- h- ? -f-
-mb- -f-
-nd- -h-
-ng- -f-
?
Oscan[42] f- f- h- ? -f- -f- -h- ?

Also -b- in certain environments.

The voiceless and plain voiced stops (*p, *t, *k, *kʷ; *b, *d, *g, *gʷ) remained
unchanged in Latin, except for the minor shift of *gʷ > /v/. In Osco-Umbrian, the
labiovelars *kʷ and *gʷ became the labial stops /p/ and /b/, e.g. Oscan pis 'who?'
(cf. Latin quis) and bivus 'alive (nom.pl.)' (cf. Latin vivus).[43]
Grammar

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Grammar of Romance languages" – news · newspapers · books · scholar
· JSTOR (January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

In grammar there are basically three innovations shared by the Osco-Umbrian and the
Latino-Faliscan languages:

A suffix in the imperfect subjunctive *-sē- (in Oscan the 3rd person singular
of the imperfect subjunctive fusíd and Latin foret, both derivatives of *fusēd).
[44]
A suffix in the imperfect indicative *-fā- (Oscan fufans 'they were', in Latin
this suffix became -bā- as in portabāmus 'we carried').
A suffix to derive gerundive adjectives from verbs *-ndo- (Latin operandam
'which will be built'; in Osco-Umbrian there is the additional reduction -nd- > -
nn-, Oscan úpsannam 'which will be built', Umbrian pihaner 'which will be
purified').[45]

In turn, these shared innovations are one of the main arguments in favour of an
Italic group, questioned by other authors.
Lexical comparison

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Comparative Romance grammar" – news · newspapers · books · scholar ·
JSTOR (January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Among the Indo-European languages, the Italic languages share a higher percentage
of lexicon with the Celtic and the Germanic ones, three of the four traditional
"centum" branches of Indo-European (together with Greek).

The following table shows a lexical comparison of several Italic languages:

Gloss Latino-Faliscan Osco-Umbrian Proto-
Italic Proto-
Celtic Proto-
Germanic
Faliscan Old
Latin Classical
Latin Proto-
Romance Oscan Umbrian
'1' *ounos ūnus *unʊs, acc. *unu *𐌖𐌉𐌍𐌖𐌔
*uinus 𐌖𐌍𐌔
uns *oinos *oinos *ainaz
'2' du *duō duō *dos, f. *duas 𐌃𐌖𐌔
dus -𐌃𐌖𐌚
-duf *duō *dwāu *twai
'3' tris trēs (m.f.)
tria (n.) *tres 𐌕𐌓𐌝𐌔
trís 𐌕𐌓𐌉𐌚 (m.f.)
𐌕𐌓𐌉𐌉𐌀 (n.)
trif (m.f.)
triia (n.) *trēs (m.f.)
*triā (n.) *trīs *þrīz
'4' quattuor *kʷattɔr 𐌐𐌄𐌕𐌖𐌓𐌀
𐌐𐌄𐌕𐌕𐌉𐌖𐌓
petora
pettiur 𐌐𐌄𐌕𐌖𐌓
petur *kʷettwōr *kʷetwares *fedwōr
'5' *quique quinque *kinkʷɛ 𐌐𐌏𐌌𐌐𐌄-
pompe- *𐌐𐌖𐌌𐌐𐌄
*pumpe *kʷenkʷe *kʷenkʷe *fimf
'6' śex *sex sex *sɛks *𐌔𐌄𐌇𐌔
*sehs 𐌔𐌄𐌇𐌔
sehs *seks *swexs *sehs
'7' *śepten septem *sɛpte 𐌔𐌄𐌚𐌕𐌄𐌍
seften *septem *sextam *sebun
'8' oktu octō *ɔkto *𐌖𐌇𐌕𐌏
*uhto *oktō *oxtū *ahtōu
'9' *neven novem *nɔwe *𐌍𐌖𐌖𐌄𐌍
*nuven *𐌍𐌖𐌖𐌉𐌌
*nuvim *nowen *nawan *newun
'10' decem *dɛke 𐌃𐌄𐌊𐌄𐌍
deken *𐌃𐌄𐌔𐌄𐌌
*desem *dekem *dekam *tehun

The asterisk indicates reconstructed forms based on indirect linguistic evidence

and not forms directly attested in any inscription.
Map showing the approximate extent of the centum (blue) and satem (red) areals.

From the point of view of Proto-Indo-European, the Italic languages are fairly
conservative. In phonology, the Italic languages are centum languages by merging
the palatals with the velars (Latin centum has a /k/) but keeping the combined
group separate from the labio-velars. In morphology, the Italic languages preserve
six cases in the noun and the adjective (nominative, accusative, genitive, dative,
ablative, vocative) with traces of a seventh (locative), but the dual of both the
noun and the verb has completely disappeared. From the position of both
morphological innovations and uniquely shared lexical items, Italic shows the
greatest similarities with Celtic and Germanic, with some of the shared lexical
correspondences also being found in Baltic and Slavic.[46]
P-Italic and Q-Italic languages

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding
citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Branches of Italic" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR
(January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Similar to Celtic languages, the Italic languages are also divided into P- and Q-
branches, depending on the reflex of Proto-Indo-European *kʷ. In the languages of
the Osco-Umbrian branch, *kʷ gave p, whereas the languages of the Latino-Faliscan
branch preserved it (Latin qu [kʷ]).
See also

iconlanguages portal

Italo-Celtic
Italic peoples
 List of ancient peoples of Italy
Romance languages
Indo-European languages
Languages of Italy

References

Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 314–319.

Bossong 2017, p. 859.
Fortson 2004, p. 245.
Villar 2000, pp. 474–475.
Villar 2000, pp. 447–482.
Poccetti 2017.
de Vaan 2008, p. 5: "Most scholars assume that Venetic was the first language to
branch off Proto-Italic, which implies that the other Italic languages, which
belong to the Sabellic branch and to the Latino-Faliscan branch, must have
continued for a certain amount of time as a single language."
Bossong 2017, p. 859: "Venetic, spoken in Venetia, was undoubtedly Indo-European.
It is safe to assume that it formed an independent branch by itself, rather than a
subgroup of Italic."
de Vaan 2008, p. 5.
Fortson 2017, p. 836.
Polomé, Edgar C. (1992). Lippi-Green, Rosina (ed.). Recent Developments in Germanic
Linguistics. John Benjamins Publishing. p. 50. ISBN 978-90-272-3593-0.
Poccetti 2017, p. 738.
de Vaan 2008, p. 14.
Bossong 2017, p. 863: "Up to the middle of the 2nd century BCE (conquest of
Carthage and Greece) the language was uniform; no differences between 'higher' and
'lower' styles can be detected." p. 867: "From a strictly linguistic point of view,
the Strasbourg Oaths are just an instantaneous snapshot in the long evolution from
Latin to French, but their fundamental importance lies in the fact that here a
Romance text is explicitly opposed to a surrounding text formulated in Latin.
Romance is clearly presented as something different from Latin."
Posner 1996, p. 98.
Herman 2000, p. 113: "That is, the transformation of the language, from structures
we call Latin into structures we call Romance, lasted from the third or fourth
century until the eighth."
Fortson 2004, p. 258: "The earliest Romance language to be attested is French, a
northern variety of which first appears in writing in the Strasbourg Oaths in or
around the year 842 (...) it had diverged more strongly from Latin than the other
varieties closer to Italy."
Bossong 2017, pp. 863, 867.
Bossong 2017, pp. 861–862, 867.
de Vaan 2008, p. 2.
Baldi 2017, p. 804.
Vine 2017, p. 752.
Brixhe 2017, p. 1854: "The Siculian language is widely believed to be of Indo-
European, Italic origin..."
Villar 2000.
Bakkum 2009, p. 54.
Schrijver 2016, p. 490
Schrijver 2016, p. 499
"history of Europe : Romans". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 28 October 2012.
Francisco Villar, Rosa Pedrero y Blanca María Prósper
Fortson (2010) §13.26.
Leppänen, Ville (1 January 2014). "Geoffrey Horrocks,Greek: A History of the
Language and its Speakers (2nd edn.). Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, 2010. Pp. xx +
505". Journal of Greek Linguistics. 14 (1): 127–135. doi:10.1163/15699846-01401006.
ISSN 1566-5844.
Silvestri 1998, p. 325
Silvestri, 1987
Rix, 1983, p. 104
Silvestri 1998, pp. 322–323.
Domenico Silvestri, 1993
Meiser 2017, p. 744.
Stuart-Smith 2004, p. 53.
Meiser 2017, pp. 744, 750.
Stuart-Smith 2004, p. 63.
Stuart-Smith 2004, p. 115.
Stuart-Smith 2004, p. 99.
Meiser 2017, pp. 749.
Vine 2017, p. 786.
Vine 2017, pp. 795–796.

Mallory & Adams 1997, pp. 316–317.

Bibliography

Baldi, Philip (2017). "The syntax of Italic". In Klein, Jared; Joseph, Brian;
Fritz, Matthias (eds.). Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European
Linguistics. Vol. 2. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-054243-1.
Bakkum, Gabriël C. L. M. (2009). The Latin Dialect of the Ager Faliscus: 150
Years of Scholarship. Amsterdam University Press. ISBN 978-90-5629-562-2.
Bossong, Georg (2017). "The Evolution of Italic". In Klein, Jared; Joseph,
Brian; Fritz, Matthias (eds.). Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European
Linguistics. Vol. 2. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-054243-1.
Brixhe, Claude (2017). "Siculian". In Klein, Jared; Joseph, Brian; Fritz,
Matthias (eds.). Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics.
Vol. 3. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-054243-1.

de Vaan, Michiel (2008). Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic
Languages. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-16797-1.

Fortson, Benjamin W. (2004). Indo-European Language and Culture. Blackwell.

ISBN 978-1-4443-5968-8.
Fortson, Benjamin W. (2017). "The dialectology of Italic". In Klein, Jared;
Joseph, Brian; Fritz, Matthias (eds.). Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-
European Linguistics. Vol. 2. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-054243-1.
Herman, Jozsef (2000). Vulgar Latin. Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN
978-0-271-04177-3.
Mallory, James P.; Adams, Douglas Q. (1997). "Italic Languages". Encyclopedia
of Indo-European Culture. Fitzroy Dearborn. pp. 314–319. ISBN 978-1-884964-98-5.
Meiser, Gerhard (2017). "The phonology of Italic". In Klein, Jared; Joseph,
Brian; Fritz, Matthias (eds.). Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European
Linguistics. Vol. 2. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 743–751. doi:10.1515/9783110523874-002.
ISBN 978-3-11-054243-1.
Poccetti, Paolo (2017). "The documentation of Italic". In Klein, Jared; Joseph,
Brian; Fritz, Matthias (eds.). Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European
Linguistics. Vol. 2. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-054243-1.
Posner, Rebecca (1996). The Romance Languages. Cambridge University Press. ISBN
978-0-521-28139-3.
Schrijver, Peter (2016). "Ancillary Study: Sound Change, the Italo-Celtic
Linguistic Unity, and the Italian Homeland of Celtic". In Koch, John T.; Cunliffe,
Barry (eds.). Celtic from the West 3. Atlantic Europe in the Metal Ages: questions
of shared language. Oxbow Books. pp. 489–502. ISBN 978-1-78570-227-3.
Silvestri, Domenico (1998). "The Italic Languages". In Ramat, A. (ed.). The
Indo-European Languages. pp. 322–344.
Stuart-Smith, Jane (2004). Phonetics and Philology: Sound Change in Italic.
Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-925773-7.
Villar, Francisco (2000). Indoeuropeos y no indoeuropeos en la Hispania
prerromana. Universidad de Salamanca. ISBN 978-84-7800-968-8.
Vine, Brent (2017). "The morphology of Italic". In Klein, Jared; Joseph, Brian;
Fritz, Matthias (eds.). Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European
Linguistics. Vol. 2. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 751–804. doi:10.1515/9783110523874-003.
ISBN 978-3-11-054243-1.

Further reading

Baldi, Philip. 2002. The Foundations of Latin. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Beeler, Madison S. 1966. "The Interrelationships within Italic." In Ancient
Indo-European Dialects: Proceedings of the Conference on Indo-European Linguistics
held at the University of California, Los Angeles, April 25–27, 1963. Edited by
Henrik Birnbaum and Jaan Puhvel, 51–58. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
Coleman, Robert. 1986. "The Central Italic Languages in the Period of Roman
Expansion." Transactions of the Philological Society 84.1: 100–131.
Dickey, Eleanor, and Anna Chahoud, eds. 2010. Colloquial and Literary Latin.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Joseph, Brian D., and Rex J. Wallace. 1991. "Is Faliscan a Local Latin Patois?"
Diachronica 8:159–186.
Pulgram, Ernst. 1968. The Tongues of Italy: Prehistory and History. New York:
Greenwood.
Rix, Helmut. 2002. Handbuch der italischen Dialekte. Vol. 5, Sabellische Texte:
Die Texte des Oskischen, Umbrischen und Südpikenischen. Indogermanische Bibliothek.
Heidelberg, Germany: Winter.
Silvestri, Domenico (1995). "Las lenguas itálicas" [The Italic languages]. Las
lenguas indoeuropeas [The Indo-European languages] (in Spanish). ISBN 978-84-376-
1348-2.
Tikkanen, Karin. 2009. A Comparative Grammar of Latin and the Sabellian
Languages: The System of Case Syntax. PhD diss., Uppsala Univ.
Villar, Francisco (1997). Gli Indoeuropei e le origini dell'Europa [Indo-
Europeans and the origins of Europe] (in Italian). Bologna, Il Mulino. ISBN 978-88-
15-05708-2.
Wallace, Rex E. 2007. The Sabellic Languages of Ancient Italy. Languages of the
World: Materials 371. Munich: LINCOM.
Watkins, Calvert. 1998. "Proto-Indo-European: Comparison and Reconstruction" In
The Indo-European Languages. Edited by Anna Giacalone Ramat and Paolo Ramat, 25–73.
London: Routledge.
Clackson, James, and Horrocks, Geoffrey. 2007. A Blackwell History of the Latin
Language

External links
For a list of words relating to Italic languages, see the Italic languages category
of words in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Library resources about
Italic languages

Online books
Resources in your library
Resources in other libraries

TM Texts Italic A list of all Italic texts in Trismegistos.

Michael de Vaan (2008) Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic
Languages p.826, Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionaries Series, Brill
Academic Publishers, (part available freely online)
"Tree for Italic". Linguist List, Eastern Michigan University. 2010. Retrieved
4 April 2010.
"A Glossary of Indo-European Linguistic Terms". Institut für deutsche Sprache
und Linguistik. 2009. Archived from the original on 4 December 2008. Retrieved 16
September 2009.
"Languages and Cultures of Ancient Italy. Historical Linguistics and Digital
Models", Project fund by the Italian Ministry of University and Research (P.R.I.N.
2017)

vte

Indo-European languages (List)

vte

Italic languages
Authority control Edit this at Wikidata
Categories:

Italic languagesLanguages of EuropeLanguages of ItalyIndo-European languages

Navigation menu

Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in

Article
Talk

Read
Edit
View history

Search

Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate

Contribute

Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file

Tools

What links here

Related changes
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Cite this page
 Wikidata item

Print/export

Download as PDF
Printable version

In other projects

Wikimedia Commons

Languages

‫العربية‬
Cymraeg
Deutsch
Español
Français
Polski
Scots
‫اردو‬
中文

Edit links

This page was last edited on 30 July 2022, at 20:43 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License
3.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use
and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Mobile view
Developers
Statistics
Cookie statement

Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki