In a peer-reviewed paper published in the journal Romance Studies, Gerard Cheshire, a research associate at the University of Bristol, argues the manuscript is “a compendium of information on herbal remedies, therapeutic bathing and astrological readings” focusing on female physical and mental health, reproduction and parenting. [...]
“Sorry folks, ‘proto-Romance language’ is not a thing,” tweeted Dr Lisa Fagin Davis, executive director of the Medieval Academy of America, of Cheshire’s paper. “This is just more aspirational, circular, self-fulfilling nonsense.” [...]
She was not convinced by Cheshire’s theory. “It takes liberties with how we understand languages to work,” she said. “He is arguing for a language built of words drawn from lots of places and periods, but together they don’t create something that is convincing as a workable language.”
“Sorry folks, ‘proto-Romance language’ is not a thing,” tweeted Dr Lisa Fagin Davis, executive director of the Medieval Academy of America, of Cheshire’s paper. “This is just more aspirational, circular, self-fulfilling nonsense.” [...]
She was not convinced by Cheshire’s theory. “It takes liberties with how we understand languages to work,” she said. “He is arguing for a language built of words drawn from lots of places and periods, but together they don’t create something that is convincing as a workable language.”
No comments:
Post a Comment