Why is the Moldovan language similar to Italian? How are Romanians different from Moldovans? Difference between the Moldovan language and Romanian

The question of why the Moldovan language is similar to Italian can be answered succinctly like this. It belongs to the Romance group of languages, more precisely the Balkan-Romance subgroup.

Roman province

During the rule of the ancient Romans, the territory of modern Moldavia and Romania was called Dacia Romana. This happened before our era in 101-106 under the Roman emperor Trojan. The Roman province ceases to exist in 271. For more than three centuries, the Dacian and Roman languages ​​were mixed. Agree that during this period Romanization occurred local population. It is quite natural that the Romanian language eventually grew on this basis. Of course, not without the influence of the Slavic language of the neighbors. However, the Romanian language still developed on the basis of the spoken Latin common at that time.

Moreover, many veterans of the military service of the Roman state remained to live on the lands of Romania (Moldova). Some became close to representatives of the Dacian people. Thus, over time, an imperceptible Latinization of the population occurred.

As you know, the Italian language was also formed on the basis of Ancient Romanesque.

Similar words in Moldovan (Romanian) and Italian

Moldovan and Romanian languages

Modern scientific linguists have come to the conclusion that “Romanian” and “Moldavian” are different names for the same language. The languages ​​of the neighboring countries are virtually identical. It’s just that in “Romanian” there are a little more borrowings of words from Western countries, and in “Moldovan” the main borrowings come from the Russian language. At one time, even in Romania they intensively fought against Slavic borrowings in their vocabulary and tried to replace them with their own. Therefore, in Moldova there are several more “Russianisms”.

This is why the Moldovan language is similar to Italian. This helps Moldovans and Romanians to quickly master spoken Italian. Naturally, they will not be able to understand Italians right away, but immigrants from Romania and Moldova will take significantly less time to master the Italian language.

The question of the name of the language in Moldova is purely political, and therefore frankly, in my opinion, speculative. It just so happened that supporters of the country’s exclusively pro-Western course (who constitute the overwhelming majority in the ranks of the new government of Moldova) advocate the only correct identification of the language as Romanian, supporters of the neutrality of Moldova and supporters of strengthening ties with the East (where the PCRM is usually referred to) advocate identification of the language as Moldavian Neither side allows any concessions.

In expressing my opinion, I prefer to proceed from reasoned theses

I am not a linguist, not a historian. But as a person who speaks the state language to the extent that allows him to read fiction, communicate at the everyday and professional level, I want to say that the literary norm (standard) of the state language of Moldova (Moldavian) and the literary norm of the state language of Romania (Romanian) - which includes spelling, alphabet, syntax (endings and suffixes are identical in all cases) - are identical. This thesis is obvious and undeniable; it is confirmed by the legislative framework of Moldova, the conclusions of the Academy of Sciences, and textbooks approved by the Ministry of Education, from which children learn the language.

At the same time, the spoken form of the language, widespread in Moldova, differs from Romanian due to the peculiarities of pronunciation and intonation (piept-chept, verme-jerme, ce?-ci?, nisip-năsîp, etc.), the presence of a large number of borrowed Slavic regionalisms (interjections, toponymy, professionalism - since many Moldovans studied in Russian).

Let's think objectively, impartially and pragmatically - we have two questions before us. First, are these differences enough to consider Moldovan a separate language? And secondly, is it possible to unambiguously resolve this issue in favor of one of the parties, what conclusions and consequences can this bring?

So, is the separate existence of states that share dialects of the same language real? are there any precedents? Let's look at a group of examples. Most often they remember the German language - which is the official language in seven countries inhabited by different and not very different peoples. Usually they start with the Austro-German case - that's where we'll start. What are Austrians and what language do they speak?

After the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1918 and the formation of a separate Austrian state, the Austrians faced an acute problem of national identity. Until 1918, the German-speaking population of the empire considered themselves Germans and identified themselves with German culture and language. The future of the Austrian Republic was very vague. According to the ethnographer E. Solstein 1994 (http://www.photoglobe.info/ebooks/austria/cstudies_austria_0070.html), the reason for this was various factors, for example, the existence of strong provincial ethno-cultural characteristics - the Tyrolean Germans (Tirol - it is a province on the border of Austria and Italy), for example, identified themselves more with the Tyrol than with the Austrian state. The Austrian historian Friedrich Geer wrote "Who were these Austrians in 1918? Germans living in Austria, German-Austrians, Austro-Germans, Germans in the second German state or an Austrian nation?"

Another major issue was uncertainty about the economic and political viability of the small German-speaking state. As a consequence, throughout the interwar period, a very wide part of the public and political elite of Austria saw the solution to all problems in unification with Germany.

Oddly enough, the birth of the movement for the national identity of the Austrians happened precisely after the Anschluss of 1938 (annexation of Austria by Germany). The underground movement "O5" - a hidden abbreviation of the word Osterreich - Austria (more details here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_resistance) fought against the Nazi regime for the revival of Austria. After the restoration of Austrian independence in 1955, the Austrians abandoned the idea of ​​a single German nation in favor of the idea of ​​two German-speaking nations - German and Austrian, which was based on historical and cultural differences in traditions and language. Although in the political life of Austria there is always a right-wing radical wing that insists on the “Germanness” of Austrians, the ideas of national identity are strengthening among the population - according to statistics, in 1967 only 47% recognized themselves with the Austrian nation, in 1990 there were 67%. Today there are 80% of them. http://derstandard.at/?url=/?id=3261105

However, the language that is the official language of Austria is called German. Although not quite so, I’ll correct myself, it is called Austrian German (Osterreichisches Deutsch, Austrian German). Austrian German has its own literary standard for official texts and teaching in schools, which is regulated by the Austrian National Dictionary and the Austrian Ministry of Education. The specificity lies in some differences in pronunciation, spelling, grammar, as well as vocabulary (mainly in the field of administration and legislation), which have been made standard in Austria. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_German

Switzerland, another state where one of the official languages ​​is also German (65% of the population). A unique situation arose there. Standard Swiss German has official status - Swiss Standard German - which also has its own language standard, it is taught in schools and is the standard written language. However, in everyday speech, on radio and television, the so-called Swiss German - Schweizerdeutsch - is used. It differs significantly from literary German, moreover, it, in turn, is divided into many of its own dialects, characteristic of each canton of Switzerland. For standard German speakers, Schweizerdeutsch is often difficult to understand. Friedrich Dürrenmatt (1921-1990), an outstanding Swiss writer, even said: “I speak the Bernese dialect, but I write in the standard dialect.” German. (...) I am constantly forced to reject in my mind the native language I speak and turn to a language alien to me, which I cannot speak. When I speak German, I pronounce words with a Bernese accent. (...) There are critics who accuse me of having a Bernese dialect in my German. I hope it does. I write in the German that has formed into my native dialect, which has already been formed since childhood." (http://www.swissworld.org). The situation when Swiss Standard German is used in written speech, and in communication Schweizerdeutsch by some linguists even called linguistic diglossia.http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diglossia

The situation with national identity in Switzerland is also special. German-speaking Swiss consider themselves to belong to German culture and the German world, but the unique experience of Switzerland allows us to speak of a formed civil nation, when every Swiss is first of all a Swiss and only then a German, French or Italian. By the way, it is well known that Switzerland did not participate in the World Wars, although after World War II it became known that Hitler had plans to attack Switzerland. Indeed, as an incident, the Third Reich united all the historical German lands under its rule, while Switzerland, with all its credit institutions, intelligence agencies and secret trade through the warring countries, remained untouched. The reason is simple - in the event of aggression, hundreds of thousands of Swiss Germans would be ready to shoot at Wehrmacht soldiers. Undoubtedly, the forces were unequal and the Nazis could have subjugated this mountainous country. But during the battles, it was not so much the Wehrmacht soldiers who would die, but the Nazi ideology. A war between Germans and Germans would destroy the myth of the unity of the Aryan nation and would not leave one stone unturned from the official Nazi ideology. Like this.

Between Austria and Switzerland there is another state where German is the official language - this is dwarf Liechtenstein. Here the population (35,000) considers themselves ethnic Germans, and the language, to be more precise, is Alemannic German (Alemannisch), which also differs in pronunciation, spelling and vocabulary, although it does not have a standard like Austrian or Swiss.

Another example, which everyone obviously knows about, concerns the English language. From country to country it contains a huge number of differences regarding pronunciation, spelling, and vocabulary. Most have their own literary standards - American English (used by 66% of the entire English-speaking population), British English, Standard Scottish English, Australian English, Canadian English, South African English are known. English, the official language among many African countries, has its own unique characteristics. Nevertheless, it is considered English everywhere.

France, Belgium and Quebec have their own versions of the French language. Belgium and Quebec have their own standards, however, the French Academy does not recognize their existence.

And now other examples. Are there cases in which spoken forms of the same language form the basis of a language standard, thus leading to the emergence of new languages ​​with their own names?

Consider the European state of Montenegro. During the time of the independent state of Montenegro (at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries), later, during the period when Montenegro was part of royal Yugoslavia, even later, during the time of socialist Yugoslavia, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Federation of Serbia and Montenegro and later, according to the Constitution of the country, the state language of Montenegro was the Serbian language (more precisely, the Iekavian dialect of the Serbian language). Along with language, accordingly, the concepts of national identity of Montenegrins also cause some controversy. According to a survey conducted in 2003, 32% of the population consider themselves Serbs, but 63.5% of Montenegrin citizens named Serbian as their native language. Some people do not fully understand the difference between the Serbian and Montenegrin nations.

So, a small digression to clarify the confusing tangle of Balkan languages. Historically, a large group of South Slavic peoples living in the territory of the former Yugoslavia spoke the same language - let's call it Serbo-Croatian. Naturally, it cannot be said that the use of this language was identical throughout the entire territory of distribution; of course, over time, certain differences formed due to the influence of neighboring cultures, religions, and the political situation. It is generally accepted, for example, that within the Serbo-Croatian language there are three dialects or dialects known: Chakavian, Kajkavian and Shtokavian (synonym - Jekavian). They are named after the way the pronoun “what” sounds in them - cha, kaј or shto. The Chakavian and Kajkavian dialects were spoken (and are spoken throughout Croatia, which is why today they are considered components of the Croatian language). Further differences lie in the use of the Latin or Cyrillic alphabet - in the territory where Catholicism spread (modern Croatia) the Latin alphabet (gajevica) was used, in turn, in the Orthodox lands (modern Serbia) the Cyrillic alphabet (vukovica) was used. So, throughout the 19th century - at that time the Balkans were divided between the Porte and Austria-Hungary, national liberation movements smoldered and sometimes flared up everywhere, which demanded cohesion and unity - no linguistic contradictions arose, moreover, efforts were made to develop a unified literary norms, the unification of all dialects. In 1850 on the so-called The Vienna Literary Agreement between intellectuals from Croatia (then under Austro-Hungarian rule) and Serbia (controlled by the Turks) decided to create a single Serbo-Croatian language.

Over the next hundred years, many changes took place, powerful empires fell into oblivion, and a single state of Yugoslavia was formed.

The first sign of linguistic discord was the attempt of the Croatian Ustasha to establish a separate Croatian language in 1940-1944. The Ustasha are a nationalist Croatian movement that collaborated with the regimes of Mussolini and Hitler, with the help of which a puppet state was founded in the territory of occupied Yugoslavia. After the formation of Socialist Yugoslavia, the issue seemed to calm down for some time; Josip Broch Tito himself, by the way, was a Croat. However, the centrifugal linguistic situation gradually intensified. At first, under pressure from the Croatian intelligentsia, it was announced that there were two forms of the Serbo-Croatian language - Croatian (in Gajevica) and Serbian (in Vukovica). Then, at the end of the 60s, representatives of the Croatian intelligentsia announced a complete break with Serbo-Croatian, from now on Croatian was declared a separate, equal language, a regional form, taking into account local literary traditions, was given a language standard, and a literary norm of the Croatian language was introduced. These events in the official history of Croatia are called the “Croatian Spring”. Despite the opposition of the authorities, this situation remained in the “status quo” until the collapse of the Yugoslav state: in Croatia the Croatian language was used under the name “Croatian or Serbian”, while in Serbia this language continued to be called “Serbo-Croatian”.

After the collapse of Yugoslavia, the tendency towards linguistic demarcation accelerated. In addition to the Croatian language, the Bosnian language, which was previously a dialect of Bosnian Muslims, has separated from the single Serbo-Croatian language. It contains many borrowings from Arabic, Turkic and Persian. The Bosnian language also had its own language standard. Today in Croatia and Bosnian Muslims only the Latin alphabet is used, in Serbia and Montenegro the Cyrillic and Latin alphabet are equal, but in Serbia the Cyrillic alphabet is used more in everyday life, and in Montenegro, as it “moves” further and further from Serbia, the Latin alphabet is intensively replacing the Cyrillic alphabet .

By the way, since we’re back to Montenegro, just recently, on July 10, 2009, the country’s literary council established a language standard Montenegrin language, which finally cemented the formation (on paper at least) of the fourth language from a single Serbo-Croatian language.

Thus, the Serbo-Croatian language split into a number of very closely related successor languages: this is the situation from the point of view of the significant majority of its speakers, for whom (including in emigration) this issue is quite strongly politicized. Foreign linguists, however, even now often talk about a single Serbo-Croatian language, and appeal to new national variants in cases of fundamental politicization.
It is interesting to note that the difference between the literary norms of Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian languages ​​is much smaller than, for example, between the Kajkavian and Chakavian dialects of the Croatian language. All residents of the former Yugoslavia are able to understand each other without a dictionary, if they do not use specific local vocabulary.

I can prove my words in the most elementary way - by citing a passage of text in all the “derivatives” of Serbo-Croatian.

Serbian-Vukovica:
The Republic of Moldova is a continental land near the source of Europe. Borders with Rumunia in the west and Ukraine at the source. The border with Rumunia is the Prut River and the Danube River. Glavni grad je Chisinau

Serbian-gajevica (Serbo-Croatian):

Croatian:
Republika Moldova je kontinentalna drzava u istocnoj Europi. Granici se sa Rumunijom na zapadu i Ukrajinom na istoku. Njena granica sa Rumunijom je reka Prut i donji tok reke Dunav. Home grad je Kisinjev

Bosnian:
Republika Moldova je kontinentalna drzava u istocnoj Europi. Granici se sa Rumunijom na zapadu i Ukrajinom na istoku. Njena granica sa Rumunijom je reka Prut i donji tok reke Dunav. Main page je Kisnjev

and "fresh" - Montenegrin:
Republika Moldova je kontinentalna drzava u istocnoj Europi. Granici se sa Rumunijom na zapadu i Ukrajinom na istoku. Njena granica sa Rumunijom je reka Prut i donji tok reke Dunav. Home grad je Kisinjev

Well, how many differences did you count? However, it is a fact - Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin - POLITICALLY considered different languages. Although sensible linguists, albeit tactfully with caution, still talk about one Serbo-Croatian with several dialects, even the English section of Wikipedia says so. By the way, the most ardent supporters of the “foreignness” of these languages ​​are the Americans. Well - this is again a separate topic.

Another interesting example is the case of Bulgaria and Macedonia. The history of Macedonia as a state dates back only to 1945 (within Yugoslavia as a federal republic). It should be noted that the territory of the modern state of Macedonia was originally part of the Bulgarian kingdom and was transferred to Yugoslavia as a result of the Balkan wars at the beginning of the 20th century. Until that time, Macedonia had never existed as a state or public entity. The historical region of Macedonia, however, has been known since antiquity; Alexander the Great ruled here (and a little more throughout the world). The ancient Macedonians, however, have virtually no kinship, cultural or political connections with the modern Slavic Macedonian people, just as the ancient Egyptians have nothing in common with the modern Arab population of Egypt. In the middle of the first millennium, these lands were part of the Bulgarian kingdom, later the Byzantine Empire, Ottoman Empire, as a result of the Balkan Wars, they were again ceded to Bulgaria, then Yugoslavia. Macedonia became independent in 1991; the first state in the world to recognize the independence of Macedonia was Bulgaria. It is believed that the Macedonian people as such also emerged only in the 20th century within the framework of Socialist Yugoslavia, at the same time the Macedonian language took shape, whose literary norm was consolidated in the second half of the 20th century after several language reforms. By the way, the official first printed document in the Macedonian language appeared on October 29, 1944. In Macedonia, there have traditionally been two political and linguistic currents. One was based on a Bulgarian identity, the other on a separate Macedonian identity based on many years of Byzantine influence. In Bulgaria - both linguists and public opinion are convinced that the Macedonian language is the same language as Bulgarian, or - at best - a dialect of Bulgarian. It’s easier to assess the degree of difference if you read the same text in Bulgarian and Macedonian.

Bulgarian:
The Republic of Moldova is a country in Iztochna Europe and borders Romania and Ukraine. Capital city Chisinau.
In ancient times, the territory of Moldova was inhabited by Dacians and other tribes.
The Moldovan Parliament has 101 members, and its members are elected through popular vote in four years.
Almost all Moldovans are strictly Orthodox.

Macedonian:
The Republic of Moldova is in Eastern Europe and borders with Romania and Ukraine. Head of the city of Chisinau.
In ancient times, the territory of Moldova was inhabited by Dacians and other tribes.
The Moldovan Parliament has 101 members, and the members of the Moldovan Parliament are elected through a popular vote for all four Godini.
Almost all Moldovans are Orthodox.

How many differences have you counted here? All the same, as you can see, there are enough of them for a separate language. In general, the most interesting thing in the Bulgarian-Macedonian dispute is that our Romanian-Moldovan question is also reflected in it. For example, I was simply shocked when I read in an article in Macedonian on Wikipedia: “Moldavian language is the official language in Moldova. That is the original Roman language. (Translation - Moldovan language is the official language in Moldova. It is a language of the Eastern Latin group. The most similar language to Moldovan is Romanian).

But in the article in Bulgarian it was written like this: “Moldovian ezik is officially named in Romanian ezik, it was used for political reasons by the government of the Republic of Moldova. (Translation - Moldavian language is official name Romanian language, used for political reasons by the government of the Republic of Moldova. The differences between Moldovan and Romanian are controversial and are defended by Moldovan linguists).

So what do you think? You see, each side sees things as they are closer to them. To complete the picture, I will still add that in the Bulgarian section of Wikipedia, in the article about the Macedonian language, it is said that this is not a language at all, but a literary form of Bulgarian...

By the way, there is no movement for the unification of Bulgaria and Macedonia at any official or everyday level.

Another example is the Galician language and the Portuguese language. Galicia is a small autonomous province in North-West Spain on the border with Portugal. The speech of Galicians and Portuguese is distinguished by a number of features in pronunciation and intonation, which formed the basis for the writing of the Galician language. The Galician Academy declared the Galician language to be separate from Portuguese.

And in the finale there are a few more very interesting examples- parallel texts in three languages:

Belorussian:
George W. Bush is in New Haven (Kanektykut), son of J.-G. Bush.
After completing his studies at Phillips Academy and completing his military service at Yale University, he was released from the reserves in 1973. In 1975, he graduated from Harvard Business School, where he began to pursue his strengths in politics and business. In 1977, Argentina launched the Arbusta oil and gas company, which financed the direct transfer of Saudi capital. In response to the energy crisis and financial problems, the campaign was created in 1979 by the Bush Operations company, which, in its own way, was sold to the Spectrum-7 company in 1984.

Russian:
George W. Bush was born in New Haven (Connecticut), the son of J.-G. Bush.
After attending Phillips Academy and graduating from Yale University, he served in the Air Force and was discharged in 1973. In 1975 he graduated from Harvard Business School, after which he began to try his hand at politics and business. In 1977 he organized the Arbusta oil and gas company, in which Saudi capital also took part in the financing. After the energy crisis and financial difficulties, the company was reorganized in 1979 into the Busch Exploitation company, which, in turn, was sold to Spectrum-7 in 1984.

Ukrainian:
George W. Bush was born in New Haven (Connecticut), son of J.-G. Bush.
After starting at the Phillips Academy and graduating from the University of Else, serving in the military forces, in 1973 he was released from the reserve. In 1975, he graduated from Harvard Business School, after which he began to try his hand at politics and business. In 1977, he organized the Arbusta naftagaz company, which also received Saudi capital. Due to the energy crisis and financial difficulties, the company was acquired in 1979 from the Bush Exploitation company, and in 1984 it was sold to the Spectrum-7 company.

Now try to write down some Siberian dialect the way you hear it:

Georges Bush radials in America. After studying at the academy and graduating from Yelskovo University, this guy gave his heart to serving in the army. It is known that in 1977 a cartel was opened near Nivo, which is called “Arbusta”... etc.

Now, for a second, imagine that this way of writing will form the basis of spelling rules and standards, and even add a couple of dozen neologisms... And that’s it, the very next day some Soros will donate millions for the research and development of the original Siberian language, and the State Department will publish Talmuds from his centuries-old history. Funny? If only it weren't sad.

No wonder the sage said: “A language is a dialect with an army and navy” (Language is a dialect with an army and navy).

For complete disclosure, dear readers, I agree that my analogies and hints on the issue of the Ukrainian-Russian language will cause indignation among some of the representatives of our eastern neighbor. Nevertheless, I am a supporter of a unified approach in everything, I cannot take a dual position, and I have a similar opinion on the Russian-Ukrainian and Romanian-Moldovan issues. Ukrainian-Russian contradictions are a topic for a separate discussion.

Regarding our question:
From a linguistic-cultural point of view, Romanian and Moldovan are the same language, and the literary standard is absolutely 100% identical. This is undeniable, period. Any arguments and discussions on this topic are absurd. This is my opinion regarding the first question.

Is it acceptable to have two names for the same language? Absolutely yes - purely on political grounds - there are many examples of this. Should the use of one common language mean that Moldova does not have the opportunity to exist in the form individual country and original culture? - Definitely not - there are many examples of this.

Linguistic relations in Moldova will depend on the constructiveness and prudence of its politicians, because wherever dialects of the same language bear different political names, this is usually due to insurmountable contradictions and ambitions at the level of the elites of these countries. It would be great if the elite of Moldova could implement a language policy using the example of the German world. Is the idea of ​​the existence of two subethnic groups sharing one language and culture acceptable - yes, of course. Moldavian tradition and culture have absorbed a huge heritage of centuries-old contacts with the Slavic, subsequently Russian world; of course, Moldavian culture has specifics that distinguish it from the background of the general Romanian culture. However, Romanian, let’s be honest, is still closer to her.

So, does one part of society have the right to consider the language Romanian? It has full scientific, moral and cultural-ethnic rights, everything stated above is confirmation of this.

Do Moldovanists have the right to consider the language Moldovan? They have, but only from the point of view of the linguonym, and not from the linguistic point of view. There are also reasons for this - the existence of this linguonym for many years before the formation of the national Romanian state, the formation of the modern Romanian language starting from the middle of the 19th century, the rejection of the Cyrillic alphabet and the stage of linguistic anti-Slavic “purism” - when up to 40% of Slavicisms were removed as archaisms - yes, all this happened and all this cannot be denied. However, there is no point in speculating too much on the Moldovan idea - even if the linguonym Romanian appeared relatively recently, even if these changes took place in Romanian - nothing can be done, this is a fait accompli and an objective reality. Why do I think that the idea of ​​linguistic Moldovanism is heading towards collapse - because not a single effort was made by those who declare themselves to be passionate defenders and adherents of this idea. In the previous article I briefly mentioned this - if someone actually set the task of promoting a separate language, then. Following the example of Montenegro, Croatia, Macedonia, etc., it was necessary to introduce our own language standard, legitimize the spelling of all these chept, jerme, jin, nasop, and introduce our own neologisms. Now it will look comical and stupid, the idea will not find any understanding and has exhausted itself.

What options are there for resolving the existing contradictions?
In the current situation, if I were in power, I would generally give the issue of the name of the language the very last place - the leadership must somehow cope with the growing economic problems, and if now some politician focuses attention on the problem of the name of the language, the urgent need to join all sorts of nations, change Constitution and so on and so forth - this only speaks of his excellent acting skills and knowledge of psychology and complete impotence as a manager.

As a last resort, if speculation on this topic becomes inevitable, I have already proposed adopting a law that would equate the terms “Romanian language” and “Moldovan language,” leaving the citizen the right to choose what to call it.

In the future, when the political, economic and social life of the country goes on a normal course, it was possible to consider a concept similar to the Austrian one, calling it Română Moldovenească, equating it with the version of the Romanian language, which has state status in Moldova - a kind of balance would be achieved, which would satisfy many - on the one hand, the identity with Romanian is recognized, on the other, it has a peculiarity, an important status. Further, as for the existence of the Moldovan language with a Krillic alphabet, the situation is confusing, but can be solved with a clear head and the desire to compromise. For some trial period, say ten years, we can indicate the existence of the Moldovan version of the language in two forms - in Latin and Cyrillic - as was done with Serbian. Of course, the aggressive part will take the Cyrillic alphabet with hostility, but firstly this fact does not in any way oblige them to use the Cyrillic alphabet, secondly, mutually exclusive positions are coal to keep the fire of the conflict alive, and a compromise is a step towards and a signal for dialogue.

A small remark regarding the national flag - because due to the short-sightedness and ardor of many, provocations and speculation on this topic may arise. I thought about a solution that could satisfy everyone. Someone proposed introducing the state banner of Stephen the Great (golden bison on a red banner) and the national banner in the form of the Romanian tricolor. However, the proposal is unsuccessful - some are driven into a frenzy by the red color of the banner, while others are haunted by the tricolor, identical to the Romanian one. This is what came to my mind - the banner of Stefan is not entirely acceptable, since Republican Moldavia does not quite correspond to Princely Moldavia, then the best solution would be the flag of the Moldavian Democratic Republic, which represents nothing more than the same tricolor, tilted horizontally with the image of a bison head (or without). So, my arguments - firstly, the tricolor - the pride and national colors of Moldovans - will remain relevant - the ribbons with which they decorate themselves on August 27 and 31, the ornament, ribbons on state awards, badges, etc. will still be relevant. secondly, the arrangement of the stripes distinguishes this flag from the Romanian tricolor, which will relieve tension from the other half of society, besides, the horizontal arrangement is typical for Eastern Orthodox peoples, it is the same as on the flag of the main national minorities - Ukrainians, Russians, Bulgarians. That is, how elementary and simple - all the hysteria, all the bacchanalia around the flag can be solved by turning the flag 90 degrees... Elementary
These are the thoughts, gentlemen.

Category Languages ​​of Eurasia Roman group Balkan-Roman subgroup Writing Latin (Romanian alphabet) - in Moldova,
Cyrillic (Moldavian alphabet) - in the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic,
(historical Romanian Cyrillic) Language codes GOST 7.75–97 pier 460 ISO 639-1 mo (cancelled) ISO 639-2 mol (cancelled) ISO 639-3 mol (cancelled) WALS mol IETF ro-MD Glottolog Wikipedia in this language

Graffiti in Chisinau.
Left: The word “Romanian” has been added under the phrase “Our language.”
Right: the inscription “I am Moldovan! I speak Moldovan!”

The literary Moldavian language began to take shape in the 16th-17th centuries, but was finally formed by the second half of the 19th century. Linguistic differences between the Romanian and Moldavian languages ​​began to arise in the 19th century, when in Romania, which emerged in 1859, a period of correction of the Romanian language began, from which Slavic lexemes were actively removed. In the 19th-20th centuries, a significant number of scientific Latinisms were introduced into the vocabulary of the Romanian language. The linguistic construction of a norm of literary Moldavian language, different from literary Romanian, continued from 1924 to 1932, and from 1938 to 1940 in the USSR. Since the 1950s, there has been a reverse process of convergence between the Moldovan and Romanian language norms, and by the end of the 1980s they became practically indistinguishable.

One of official languages(along with Russian and Ukrainian) of the unrecognized Transnistrian Moldavian Republic is a Moldovan language based on the Cyrillic script.

Story

Early history

Romanesque elements appeared on the territory of Moldavia no earlier than the 12th century. The first Daco-Roman monuments in Cyrillic have been known since the 17th century. The written language in the Principality of Moldova was not a local dialect, but a supra-dialectal Koine, common to the Danube principalities and Transylvania [ ] .

Parent languages:

Becoming

The Moldavian language has ancient literary traditions; literature in the Moldavian language includes the ballad “Mioritsa”, created in the 13th century. The Moldavian vocabulary fund, recorded in charters issued by the office of the Moldavian Principality, amounts to more than 1000 lexical units of the Moldavian vocabulary, recording the existence of the Moldavian written language, which has been certified since 1392.

The first official document in the Moldovan language has been known since 1571. In 1581, the first Moldavian lexicon (dictionary) was compiled - the Katastikh of the Galata Monastery.

In 1628, the book of the German scientist I. Alsted “Treasures of Chronology” (lat. Thesaurus chronologiae) was published, where the Moldavian language is also mentioned in the table of languages ​​\u200b\u200band dialects of 24 parts of the Earth - lingua Moldavorum [ ] .

The Moldavian language was in use in the bilingual Principality of Moldova.

Monuments in the Moldavian language (Cyrillic) have been known in the Moldavian Principality since the 17th century (before that, the language of administration, church and literature in the Moldavian Principality and Wallachia was Church Slavonic, and from the construction of the phrase it is noticeable that it was not native to the scribes. A.I. Yatsimirsky speaks about the Russian basis of the language of Slavic-Moldavian letters). The grammar of this language was significantly different from the modern one. In the middle of the 17th century. Through the efforts of Metropolitan Varlaam, the first printing house in Moldova was founded in Iasi, for which Metropolitan Dosoftey (Dosifei) ordered the necessary supplies from Moscow.

The first studies were written about the Moldavian language in the 17th century: “Despre limba noastre Moldovenasca” Gr. Ureke (1635), “Despre limba moldovenyaske” by Miron Costin (1677), “Despre limba moldovenilor” and “Despre bukile moldovenilor” by D. Cantemir (1716).

Dmitry Cantemir, in his classic “Description of Moldavia” (1714-1716), devoted a separate chapter of the book to the Moldavian language.

He also notes the common language of the inhabitants of the Danube principalities and points out the difference in regional dialects:

Cantemir calls it “Moldavian language” (Latin lingua moldavica) and “Moldavian language” (Latin lingua moldavorum) and directly indicates its connection with Latin:

We, Moldavians, also call ourselves Romans, and our language is not Dacian, not Moldavian, but “Romanian,” and so, if we want to ask a stranger if he knows our language, we do not ask: “Do you know Moldavian?”, but we ask: “Do you know Romanian?”, that is (in Latin): “Do you know Roman?”

In Bessarabia

In 1814 in Chisinau, the “Russian-Moldavian primer” was developed and published, in 1819 - “A short Russian grammar with translation into the Moldavian language”, which was subsequently republished in the Chisinau diocesan printing house. In 1840, “The Outline of the Rules of the Wallachian-Moldavian Grammar” and “Collected Works and Translations in the Wallachian-Moldavian Language” by Y. Ginkulov (Hinku) were published in St. Petersburg. Ginkulov proposed using the terms “Valachian-Moldavian language” or “Romanian language” as generalizing ones for the entire Daco-Romanian language space.

Starting from the 1830-1840s, there was a tendency to oust the Moldavian language from office work and the sphere of education and replace it with Russian. In 1828, the mandatory conduct of office work in the Moldavian language was abolished. In 1842, the seven-year period expired, during which it was possible to submit complaints and petitions in the Moldavian language. In 1866, a ban was imposed on the teaching of the Moldavian language at the Chisinau gymnasium. The formal reason for the ban was that “according to the new gymnasium regulations... there are no special teachers assigned to teach special local dialects in our gymnasiums at all.” Five years after the exclusion of the Moldavian language from the course of the Chisinau gymnasium, a decree was issued banning the teaching of the Moldavian language in district schools of the Bessarabia region. Since the second half of the 19th century, the Moldovan language has been ousted from church services. Under Bishop Pavel (Lebedev), according to various estimates, from 340 to 417 churches were closed due to the fact that it was impossible to organize services in them in Russian. Under him, the Moldovan version of the Chisinau Diocesan Gazette ceased to be printed. Thus, in the last third of the 19th century, the Moldovan language in Bessarabia remained exclusively the spoken language of the peasant population.

The return of the Moldovan language to the public sphere, the education system and Orthodox worship was associated with the events of the revolution of 1905-1907. During this period, the teaching of the Moldavian language and church Moldavian singing began at the Chisinau Theological Seminary and others educational institutions Chisinau diocese, a number of newspapers and magazines are published (See the article Press in Moldova). In liturgical and near-religious literature, the Old Moldavian literary norm and the traditional Cyrillic alphabet were used. There was no literary norm for secular texts. Grammar and vocabulary could vary from the modern Romanian norm to imitations of local dialects. There was also no single alphabet. Most often, either the Russian alphabet or a significantly simplified version of the Moldovan Cyrillic alphabet was used, differing from the Russified version by writing “ъ” instead of “e” and “й” instead of “ь” at the end of words. Writing using the Church-Moldavian alphabet, but in a civil script, was less common practice.

IN Russian Empire the terms “Moldovan” and “Romanian language” were used as synonyms by both Russian and Moldavian authors. The choice of one or another language name was determined in most cases by the context or target audience to which a particular text was addressed.

Wanting to emphasize the differences between the folk language of Bessarabian peasants and Romanian innovations, A. Mateevich, speaking at the First Congress of Teachers of Bessarabia in 1917, stated: “we will teach Moldavian, the church language, and not the language of Bucharest newspapers, from which we understand nothing, as if it were Tatar.”

• Maps of the distribution of the Romanian language at the beginning of the 20th century, made by Gustav Weigand:

Between the First and Second World Wars

Promoters of the Romanian language in Bessarabia recognized that the speech of Bessarabian Moldovans was noticeably different from the Bucharest norm, and were forced to take this into account in their activities - even to the point of publishing some issues of their newspapers in Cyrillic, which was prohibited in Bessarabia from January 1, 1919.

The Moldavian language received official status in 1924 when the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was created on the left bank of the Dniester as part of Ukraine; this was accompanied by fierce discussions between the “originalists” who defended the idea of ​​a literary language based on the dialects of Transnistria, and the “Romanianizers” who focused on literary Romanian norms.

At the initial stage of language construction in the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, for a number of local political figures (for example, Pavel Kior), the creation of a separate Moldavian language was dictated not so much by ethnopolitical as class considerations. It was planned to create a “proletarian” Moldavian language on the basis of popular dialects as an antipode to the “bourgeois” Romanian language. In the future, this “national language” was planned to be used to incite a revolution not only in Bessarabia, but also in Romania. However, the first grammar and dictionary compiled in the MASSR by Gavriil Buciuccanu in 1925 and 1926, with the exception of the Cyrillic alphabet, differed little from most Romanian grammars of that time. In July 1927, the Moldavian Scientific Committee published spelling rules based on the "Moldavian Grammar" ("Grammar of Moldovan"), developed by Leonid Madan. These rules were based on local dialects and represented the most radical attempt to create an independent Moldovan language, completely different from Romanian. In addition to reproducing the folk dialect, it was planned to introduce into the language a huge number of neologisms composed of Moldavian or Russian roots.

An example of the text in Moldovan in the recording at that time:

Eun sektsyya istorichaski, Komitetu shtiintsynik sh'o pus zedaci sy altetuaski history Marxists a narodului moldovinesque. Yntiyu lukru shtiintsynik yn partea "vetseriy norodului moldovinesque a isy'n time di mai aproapi.

Eun sektsyya di "nvetsarya cerii: Din lukru "nsemnat dupe programs pen chi-s strynsy shi tiperiti "n chertsi osegiti kintichi shi zyketoari norodnichi moldovinesti. Eun unili rayoani dyamu-s organizati shi o "ncheput lukru organizatsii shi cercurili di "nv Etzar Tserii.

According to the resolution of the Bureau of the Moldavian Regional Party Committee dated February 2, 1932, it was prescribed to switch to the Latin alphabet by the end of the year. Along with the transition to the Latin alphabet, the norms and rules of the Romanian language were adapted. In May 1938, the romanization campaign was stopped and the Cyrillic script was returned to the Moldovan language. The new norm of the Moldovan language remained quite close to the Romanian one.

In the Moldavian SSR

On August 31, 1989, the new government of the Moldavian SSR (at the request of participants in a demonstration organized by the nationalist Popular Front of Moldavia) abolished the Cyrillic alphabet on its territory and introduced Romanian spelling in the Latin alphabet for the Moldovan language. On the territory of the PMR, the Cyrillic alphabet was preserved and is still used today.

Spelling and alphabet

The main difference between the two Latin spellings (the use of letters â And î to indicate sound s ) was canceled by the publication of the "Spelling Dictionary of the Romanian Language" (developed by the Academy of Sciences of Moldova and recommended for use since November 15, 2000). Previously, in Moldovan Romanian it was recommended to use î wherever sound is made s , while Standard Romanian used both characters according to the etymological principle. However, many publications in Romanian in the Republic of Moldova have previously used â (“Flux”, “Accente”, “Ziarul de Garda”, “Timpul”, etc.), Also in Romania there are publications that use the old spelling, without â (Academia Caţavencu and others). The fact that the official orthography in force in Moldova required exclusive use î , is explained by the fact that at the moment when the Academy of Sciences of Moldova adopted the Latin alphabet (after the Soviet period, when Cyrillic was used), the Romanian Academy had not yet returned the symbol â (the â was completely abolished in 1953).

The Moldovan language in Transnistria is not considered identical to Romanian and continues to use the Cyrillic alphabet.

Numerals

Similarities with the Romance (Latin) group of languages:

Number	Romanian / Moldavian	Spanish	Italian	French	Portuguese
1	unu/ unu	uno	uno	un	um
2	doi/ milk	dos	due	deux	dois
3	trei/ tray	tres	tre	trois	três
4	patru/ patru	cuatro	quattro	quatre	quatro
5	cinci/ chinch	cinco	cinque	cinq	cinco
6	șase / shase	seis	sei	six	seis
7	șapte/ hat	siete	sette	sept	sete
8	opt/ wholesale	ocho	otto	huit	oito
9	nouă / noue	nueve	nove	neuf	nove
10	zece / zeche	diez	dieci	dix	dez

Slavicisms

A characteristic feature of the Moldavian language is the presence of a significant Slavic layer in its composition. Of the 710 words related to agriculture, terms of Latin origin - 5.4%; words that originated among the Moldovan population - 53.3%; words of Slavic origin - 30.3%. Words of Slavic origin include: “plow” (Russian plow), “borane” (Russian harrow), “koase” (Russian scythe), “brazde” (Russian furrow), “sheaf” (Russian sheaf) , “stog” (Russian stack, stack), “kepitse” (Russian haystack), etc. In the terminology associated with the production of fabrics, about 200 terms are used in the dialects of the Moldovan language. Of these: words of Latin origin - 12.5%, East Slavic - 39% and South Slavic - 23%.

Linguistic ties between the Moldovans and the Eastern Slavs through everyday communication were established during the period of the Moldovans’ settlement in Bukovina and Moldova, and then in Bessarabia, probably from the 14th-15th centuries. There is a pronounced East Slavic influence in the Moldavian language: over 2,000 East Slavic borrowings in the main stock of the modern Moldavian language. Before 1812, many Russianisms from the Moldavian language entered the Wallachian language.

Current situation

Some Moldovan officials at the rank of ministers have repeatedly stated that “Moldovan and Romanian are the same language.” According to official data from the 2004 population census, in Moldova, 78.4% of Moldovans called Moldovan their native language, and 18.8% called Romanian their native language (in cities - 30.9%, in villages - 13.0%), but In answer to the question about nationality, they classified themselves as Moldovans; in these data M. N. Guboglo sees an indication of “the beginning of an internal split in Moldavian ethnopsychological life.” Discussion of the issue of naming the state language of Moldova “Moldavian” or “Romanian” currently always has a political connotation.

In schools and universities of modern Moldova there is no subject “Moldavian language”. The subject “Romanian language” is studied. This is also the name of the main language of instruction in educational institutions in Moldova. The subject “Moldavian language” (in Cyrillic) is taught only in universities and secondary educational institutions of Transnistria as an elective, starting from the first grade, along with the Ukrainian language.

The collective work "Moldavians", published in 2010 by Moldovan and Russian scholars in the series "Peoples and Cultures", includes Chapter 3 "The Moldovan Language", written mainly by Vasile Stati, who in 2003 published his own Moldovan-Romanian dictionary (English) Russian. In 2011, the expanded second edition of the dictionary was printed at the printing house of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Moldova. To justify the difference between Moldavian and Romanian, Stati cites the following arguments: the presence in Moldavian of significant Slavic borrowings, some of which are absent in Romanian; the presence of a number of gypsy borrowings in Romanian; specificity of the Moldovan dialects of the Left Bank of the Dniester; earlier fixation of the glottonym “Moldavian” compared to the glottonym “Romanian”. “Moldovan-Romanian Dictionary” by Vasile Stati caused both critical and positive reviews among Moldovan and Romanian linguists.

Although the Moldovan language was originally assigned ISO 639 codes: "mo" and "mol", these were abolished in the 2000s and the Moldovan language now does not have a separate ISO code. Also, the well-known reference book on the languages ​​of the world - “Ethnologue: Languages ​​of the World", which contains information on more than 7,000 living languages ​​of the world - does not mention Moldavian as a separate language, but as an alternative name for Romanian.

The country's population uses both names. While the majority of rural residents indicated Moldovan as their native language during the last census, the majority of Chisinau residents and, according to surveys, people with higher education tend to call their language Romanian. The highest propensity to use the name “Romanian language” is observed among young people, people with higher education, urban residents and people with high incomes. The name “Moldavian language” is most often used by those residents of Moldova for whom this language is not their native language.

On the territory of Moldova there is a movement of Moldovenists, who believe that the name “Moldavian language” should be used for the state language of Moldova, in particular because it is more ancient than the linguonym “Romanian language”. According to a survey conducted in 2012, 65% of citizens support this opinion.

Romania is putting pressure on Moldova to change the state language: in 2012, it was reported that Romania would block Moldova’s accession to the European Union “if Chisinau does not abandon the historical name of its language - the Moldovan language - and does not recognize it as “Romanian””.

see also

Notes

1. unrecognized state
2. Article 12 of the Constitution of the PMR
3. “Popov: No bilingualism in Kyiv”, Kyiv Post September 19, 2012
4. Lukht L. I., Narumov B. P. Romanian language // Languages ​​of the world. Romance languages. - M., Academia, Institute of Linguistics RAS, 2001 - P. 575
5. eNews: “The Moldavian language is older than Romanian” - Interview with historian, author of the first Moldavian-Romanian dictionary Vasile Stati Archived copy dated July 21, 2015 on the Wayback Machine, December 5, 2013
6. "Romanian language" in the Encyclopedia Britannica; Lukht L. I., Narumov B. P. Romanian language // Romance languages. M., 2001. P. 577.
7. Problems of language in the global world. Monograph // Ed. Ganina E.V., Chumakova A.N. - 2015
8. Toporov V. Research on etymology and semantics. Volume 2. Indo-European languages ​​and Indo-European studies. Book 1 - 2006
9. Chervinsky P., Nadel-Chervinskaya M. Explanatory and etymological dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language - Ternopil: Krok, 2012 - pp. 478-479
10. Neroznak V. P. Balkan Studies // Great Russian Encyclopedia
11. Corleteanu N. G. Moldavian language // TSB. - 1969-1978
12. , With. 241.
13. King, Charles. Forging a Soviet Moldovan Nation// The Moldovans: Romania, Russia, and the Politics of Culture. - Hoover Press, 2000. - P. 107-108. - 303 p. - ISBN 9780817997922.
14. Art. 13 of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova
15. Law No. 3465 of 01.09.1989 on the functioning of languages ​​on the territory of the Moldavian SSR: “The consolidation by the Constitution (Basic Law) of the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic of the status of the Moldavian language as the state language is intended to contribute to the achievement of the full sovereignty of the republic and the creation of the necessary guarantees for its full and comprehensive implementation in all spheres of political, economic, social and cultural life. The Moldavian SSR supports the acquisition of education and satisfaction of their cultural needs in their native language by Moldovans living outside the republic, and taking into account reality of Moldovan-Romanian linguistic identity- and Romanians living on the territory of the USSR.”
16. Lukht, Narumov, p. 575.
17. The Constitutional Court of Moldova decided that the state language of the Republic of Moldova is Romanian, News Agency “Novosti-Moldova” (December 5, 2013). Archived from the original on December 7, 2013. Retrieved December 19, 2013.
18. Romanian was recognized as the state language of Moldova, Lenta.ru (December 5, 2013). Retrieved December 19, 2013.
19. Dissenting opinion of Judge Aurel Baiesu, stated on the basis of Article 27 para. (5) of the Law on the Constitutional Court and Article 67 of the Code of Constitutional Jurisdiction (undefined) .
20. Russian Foreign Ministry: “According to the current Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, the state language is Moldovan”
21. , With. 152.
22. Repina T. A. Historical chronicles XVII - early. XVIII century// History of the Romanian language: textbook. - St. Petersburg. : St. Petersburg University Publishing House, 2002. - P. 64. - ISBN 5-288-02915-6.
23. Tagliavini C. Una nuova lingua literaria. Il moldavo?//Communicazione letta al VIII Congresso di studii romanzi. Firenze, 3 - 8 April 1956//Foreign authors about the Moldavian language. - Chisinau, 1970.
24. Stati V. Moldovans. eno-linguistic features. - Odessa. 2016. - p. 33
25. Stati V. Moldovans. eno-linguistic features. - Odessa. 2016. - p. 41
26. Johann Heinrich Alsted Thesaurus chronologiae
27. Paskar Evgeniy. History of the names of the Moldovan language.
28. Shornikov P. Linguistic dualism in the Moldavian principality of the XIV-XVII centuries. // Rusin, 2010, No. 2 (20) - Chisinau, 2010 - ISSN 1857-2685 - P. 68, 71, 72
29. , With. 243.
30. Slavic-Moldavian chronicles of the XV-XVI centuries. Comp. F. A. Grekul; Rep. ed. V. A. Buganov. - M.: Nauka, 1976.
31. History of the Moldavian SSR. In two volumes T. I. Ed. 2nd. Rep. ed. L. V. Cherepnin. P. 272.
32. Stati V. Moldovans are not Romanians, - 2013. P. 215

Is there a fundamental difference between Romanian and Moldovan languages? This question seems very difficult for the average person interested.

It is interesting that the language that officially functions today on the territory of the Republic of Moldova bears the name limba moldovenească, although it is almost identical to the literary Romanian language, which is used in neighboring Romania. At the same time, in the territory of neighboring Transnistria they use the same language, but write it in Cyrillic and, accordingly, the local language is called “Transnistrian Moldavian” - Limba Moldovenaske. Romanian philologists insist that the Moldovan language is not at all independent language, and a dialect of the Romanian language, like Olten or Transylvanian. In their favor, they argue that this dialect is also spoken in the Romanian historical region of Moldova, centered in Suceava, Bacau and Iasi.

The question of what to call the linguistic continuum - a language or a dialect - is still more political than philological. However, the very fact that some very high-ranking officials in the Moldovan government allow themselves to say that Moldovan is Romanian in its purest form speaks volumes.

The Moldovan language “begins to develop” after Moldova entered the family of socialist nations on the basis of distancing the language spoken on the territory of Moldova from the Romanian models proper. This situation is painfully reminiscent of the Balkan version, when Yugoslav leader Josip Broz Tito blessed the Macedonian language with the stroke of his pen.

Today, no one questions the viability of this Balkan language. Perhaps only the Greeks allow themselves to make impartial statements. And even then, not so much about the language, but about the state of Macedonia as a whole. Let us recall that the Greeks are confident in the illegality of using this name by anyone other than the Greeks themselves and refuse to accept such a name for this ex-Yugoslav people, state and language.

Communist leaders, in pursuit of a new social community, seem to have given rise to another linguistic conflict in Europe, of which there are already enough.

In practice, let’s allow the Moldovans to decide for themselves about the existence of a language or dialect, and until then, each of us will remain with our own opinion. And the most interesting thing is that everyone will be right! However, this question may become another antinomy - in logic, this is a situation when opposing judgments have equal logical justification, such an antinomy of the Moldavian language.

Denis Kralikauskas(Lgroup)

inFrance Forums - France in Russian > Life in France > French— questions of learning and teaching > Which language is most related to French?

PDA version

View full version: What language is most related to French?

They say Italian is very similar, but maybe Algerian has already become 🙂?

I was pleasantly surprised that Turkish has the ending “sion” (operasyon - operation, rehabilitasyon - rehabilitation, rezervasyon - reservation, etc.)

I thought the word pardon was purely French, but it turned out to be the same in Turkish with the same meaning, I wonder which one came from which one :)

Turkish kartuj (cartridge) reads closer to French cartouche than Russian cartridge

plus in Turkish all the stress is mainly on the last syllable.

"Russian cartridge is cool!" - said my son, looking over my shoulder at the monitor. :biggrin:

Tyk is not a Turkish ending, after all, but simply a borrowed European word.

07.07.2003, 13:28

A couple of years ago we were on holiday in Romania. Thus, the locals claimed that Romanian is very similar to French, and that supposedly they can understand the French without a translator :) And they also claimed that Romanian is closest to classical Latin. To my unenlightened ears, it looks like it :)

They also say that Moldovan is very similar and many people in Moldova speak French

07.07.2003, 14:04

There is no “Moldovan” language :) Both in Moldova and Romania they speak Romanian!

And Stephen the Great is great for both peoples :) More precisely, they are one and the same people.

Sanatata si bukoria frate si sore, hi sabem!
In my opinion, Romanian sounds very far from French. However, I’m not a linguist, I don’t understand. :)))))
PS I can’t vouch for the correct spelling of the phrase, I learned it by ear

Romanian is so similar that you can easily read newspapers in Romanian even if you know French...

It’s a little more difficult to hear, but there are a lot of words with Latin roots, so it’s easy to remember, although they say that the structure is more complicated (cases and so on).

It’s funny that some swear words in Romanian are taken from Russian... 😉

She lived in Moldova for five years and studied Moldavian and French. The languages ​​are very similar. All of Moldova used to learn French and Spanish, but now they have switched to English, and Moldavian began to use the Latin alphabet instead of the Cyrillic alphabet. And the Moldovan and Romanian languages ​​are different, although they are very similar.

My niece, who knew Moldovan well since childhood, studied Romanian for a year in Bucharest at the preparatory university. But these languages ​​are all of the Romance group. Will linguists confirm?

Moldavian was created after the annexation of Moldova to the Soviet Union... I don’t know myself, but the Romanians said that they differ approximately in the same way as English differs between American and British...

Of those very similar to French, there is also Catalan... if you don’t look at the endings of words and Spanish articles, it looks almost like French...

07.07.2003, 16:24

yes, I can only confirm Maxou's words. Our group consisted of 90% Moldovans and they communicated absolutely freely with Romanians. They are not considered foreigners there either. Half of the 90% have Romanian passports.

The roots in Moldavian and Romanian are mostly Latin, but the article is stuck at the end of the word, out of habit this gets in the way.
And in Catalan, the articles are not Spanish at all :) Even the names of cities in this regard may differ: La Escala in Spanish, L’Escala in Catalan. And it is also much more difficult to hear than to write. There is also a similar language called occitan, I don’t know how to say it in Russian :)

Today in Moldova there is an opinion among the people that they should unite with another country - Romania. About a third of the Moldovan population adheres to this idea.

In many Moldovan villages (there are approximately 140 of them), supporters of this opinion decided to raise the issue at the state level: a referendum was held in which the residents of Moldova voted for the idea of ​​joining Romania. This decision will be a good economic shift. For example, in Romania the pension is 6 times higher than in Moldova. Romanian citizens have the right to enter European countries.

In addition to economic issues, there is another very powerful argument: folk culture. The people of both countries speak almost the same language. The history of Moldova and Romania constantly intersects. This idea is actively supported and sponsored by the European Union. For example, if a Moldovan wants to get a Romanian passport, he can get it without much worries. Third-party countries claim that the peoples of Moldova and Romania have almost the same languages, culture and even destiny. And yet, the main question remains unanswered: are Romanians and Moldovans a single people or different, but with similarities? Perhaps the answer can be found if you turn to ancient history. Having understood it, you can come to some conclusion.

Formation of the Romanian and Moldavian states

Romania is a state that belongs to a group of relatively young countries. It emerged as an independent sovereign state only in the second half of the 19th century. Until this time, on the territory of future Romania and Moldova, there existed an ancient people - the Vlachs. They are the ancestors of the Moldovans and Romanians, and themselves descended from the Roman Empire. In the medieval years, the Vlachs experienced strong pressure from the Bulgarian state. The Wallachian people borrowed Orthodox traditions, culture and the Cyrillic alphabet from the Bulgarians. However, Bulgaria loosened its grip around the middle of the 14th century, and at this very time two sovereign independent principalities were formed: Wallachia and Moldavia. Initially, the second state was much stronger than the first.

However, the situation changed at the beginning of the 15th century: a third party, the Turkish yoke, began to increase in power. They win over the people of Wallachia to their side, and they start a war with Moldavia, forgetting about kinship. For several centuries there were constant bloody wars in this territory. The Turkish yoke had a strong influence during this period of time. It existed for about 400 years and all this time poisoned the lives of the Moldavian and Romanian peoples.

Wallachia and Moldavia tried to fight him. Sometimes the attempts were successful. For example, in 1600, ruler Michael the Brave liberated Wallachia from the oppression of the Turks and created a union of three Wallachian states (one of them was Transylvania). However, it quickly fell apart. After a certain period of time, other parties enter the game - Russia and Austria. The Austrian Empire influences the Vlachs and Transylvanians, and the Russian Empire influences Moldavia. Ultimately, by 1861, Wallachia and Transylvania united into a single state - Romania.

Distance from related countries

Romania and Moldova have moved significantly away from each other. Each country followed its own path and developed its folk culture and linguistic characteristics. The Romanians continued to speak the Vlach language, while the Moldovans became noticeably closer to Ukraine and Russia, as a result of which their speech underwent significant changes. Linguistic misunderstandings have further intensified since Romania decided in 1918 to gather the remaining parts of the Wallachian people after the destruction of the Austrian and Russian empires. This historical fact brought the cultures of Romania and the Vlachs even closer together.

In the 20th century, language differences became so strong that Moldovans asked Romanian authorities to translate their books from Romanian to Moldovan or Russian. In Moldova they did not understand and did not want to learn the Romanian language. Here is one of the striking examples of the appeal of the Moldovan people to the Romanian authorities: “What does the word “volumul” mean? We guess it’s some kind of brochure (book). If you guessed right, then please don’t bother sending it again, because there is no one to read it.

We tell you again, if the book is useful for us, write it in Moldavian or Russian (don’t shy away from the Russian language like the devil from incense), and not in Romanian, because we have a weak understanding of the Romanian language, not that and understand it."

Things weren't going smoothly in Romania either. There were large linguistic differences between high society and the peasantry. The intelligentsia honored Romanian traditions and language, while ordinary peasants underwent strong cultural changes. Various peoples were mixed in the provinces: Bulgarians, Germans, Serbs, Jews and Vlachs. The country's authorities wanted to unite all nations into a single people, since people who are united by common thoughts and worldviews are easier to manage. However, this idea was not completed due to the outbreak of the Second World War.

At this very time, the northern part of Bessarabia became part of the Soviet Union. Before the outbreak of World War II, the people who inhabited these places formed a clear border between the Romanian people and the “Soviet Moldovans.” As we know from history, in 1940 the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed, according to which the USSR appropriated Bessarabia and northern Bukovina. Here the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic is formed. As soon as the Second World War ends, the Moldovan people split into two parts: one was a supporter of Russian rule, and the second wanted to unite with the Romanian state.

When the USSR collapsed, Moldova became an independent state. Democratic romantics immediately began to express ideas about unification with Romania. However, the country faced much more important issues - poverty and privatization. A serious conflict also arose with Transnistria. In the 90s and 00s, the country rushed between supporters of European integration and communists. Today we can see that the choice fell on a pro-European force.

They strongly developed the idea of ​​unity between Moldova and Romania. Moldovan deputies began to deny the Moldovan people as a separate entity. Politicians have ensured that there are many more supporters of the idea of ​​unifying the two countries. Their number was 35% of the population, and initially only 2%. In modern times, a huge civilized schism forms the border between the two states. Moldova has still not decided who to join - Russia or Europe.

For Romania, such a choice did not exist at all. That is why the question of the unity of the Moldovan and Romanian peoples is at present and in the future. This problem originated in past centuries, but it affects these countries at the present time. It must be said that the unification of peoples will have an impact not only for Romania and Moldova. First of all, this concerns European countries. The reunification of the Moldovan and Romanian nations will greatly affect economic relations with European countries.

In any case, if Moldova and Romania decide to unite, this will lead to many changes, both within and outside the states.

Advokat-Romania offers you assistance in obtaining Romanian citizenship as soon as possible. We also provide assistance in taking the oath(oaths of allegiance) to Romania, obtaining a birth and marriage certificate, marking a divorce or death (as appropriate), obtaining a Romanian ID card, passport, obtaining child benefits, as well as obtaining a Romanian driving license. You can contact us by phone