I could perhaps see late 19th century Romania embracing some derivative of Romance (as opposed to romantic!) nationalism. Stressing their "Latin" heritage would presumably distinguish Romania from neighboring states, the implication being that Bucharest was an embattled outpost of civilization that looked more toward Paris than Moscow.
OTL numerous Romanian intellectuals were Francophile, and some like Ioneso,did their best known work after emigrating to France.
I think youd need a pod in charlemagnes time, eg not conquering the saxons. Then the hre is much more latin,romance, and nostalgia later could look for its recreation. Aa pod this early butterflies away any states immediately recognizable as france or spain, though.o
The difference between a dialect and a language is the dialects share the same linguistical bases between them (basic morphology, basic vocabulary, basic grammar) when languages don't.
Finally the whole "Italian dialects are less intellegible for standard italian than Spanish" is a pure joke. Just because people lost the use of listening dialects doesn't mean it's as different as a language.
Aromanian Nationalism was fairly Pan-Romance (often linked up at a close level with Romanian Nationalism and was propped up by the Italians during the invasion of Greece), but it was also highly unsuccessful.
And for nation, you're confusing nation states and nation.
Ireland during the XIX was a nation, not a nation state.
I think I am missing your point here.
You said "Occitans aren't a nation" as a point about "differences among the romances cultures aren't due only to languages".
But you're confusing "nation" and "nation/state".
A nation is defined as a human group having common common cultural and institutional references. By this definition, occitans can be considered as a nation.
What they are not, is a nation/state, aka the formation of a nation into a distinct institutions from their neighbours.
Another exempl would be Ireland of XIX century that is easily considered as a nation, while not a nation/state.
Still you had a fracture.
Ok, so how do not they share basic morphology, vocabulary and grammar?Sorry. Sicilian and Lombard, for example, do not share basic morphology, vocabulary and grammar, any more than standard Tuscan and Castilian do, or maybe only barely so. There is a quite important linguistic divide between peninsular and "padan" Italy, and the dialects I am familiar with lie across that divide btw.
My knowledge about it is really limited about old Occitan, and (somewhat) limited part of Old French and Old Spanish when it comes to MA.but I also see that your knowledge of medieval Romance dialects is way better than mine.
I think there is a basic difference between us on what a "nation" is, or better said, your emphasis seems to on the objective elements, mine on the subjective ones.
Now, this is a bit OT, but how did Romania/Moldavia come to speak Romance languages? I never quite figured that out. . .
There is an Occitan influence in Sicilian, the Sicilian word for child is Piciottu and Occitan words for child is Petit, Pichon and Pichot.Ok, so how do not they share basic morphology, vocabulary and grammar?
I'm not at all saying there's no difference, but unlike Sardinian, using my own experience, that I'm unable to read (let alone listen), I can read Luumbart or Sicilian (having really issues with that, as Italian isn't my native language).
By using the Occitan exemple, when you have really distinct dialects (maybe more than between French ones, or spanish ones), I'm able to understand them more or less well (some are easy, some are just...) and to say (roughly) when someone talk to me where is coming from.
Admittedly, Italians dialects are really distinct, because of historic context, but once you get rid of the most "institutional changes" (aka use of specific graphy) that helps.
To re-use occitan exemple, I'm unable to read document written in bearnes because they used specific graphy. But once re-written in bearnes using normative graphy (not "translated" in standard language, I precise but using common graphical references) that is already simpler.
Admittedly, North Italian can be considered as its own linguistic group and you have indeed a divide. Maybe this divided is so important that it could be a linguistical one, I'm not expert to judge this.
Still, listening it and reading it as well than Italian is doable, it needs a time of adaptation but it's doable. And Sicilian, again only from my personal experience, is even more.
It's not about knowing more or less romance language, I'm personally unable to read long and complex texts in standard portuguese, let alone its dialect.
My knowledge about it is really limited about old Occitan, and (somewhat) limited part of Old French and Old Spanish when it comes to MA.
So I would be glad to be showed being in the error.
Possible. That said it's not the occitan word for child stritcly speaking that is be dròlle.There is an Occitan influence in Sicilian, the Sicilian word for child is Piciottu and Occitan words for child is Petit, Pichon and Pichot.
Sorry. Sicilian and Lombard, for example, do not share basic morphology, vocabulary and grammar, any more than standard Tuscan and Castilian do, or maybe only barely so. There is a quite important linguistic divide between peninsular and "padan" Italy, and the dialects I am familiar with lie across that divide btw.
I am somewhat basing on experience, but my experience includes extensive travel across Italy, France, and some parts of Iberia, study of French, Spanish, some Catalan and Portuguese, and of course native Italian and some Italian dialects. I gather you are French, and I sense that the French way to see this kind of matters is really alien to me, but I also see that your knowledge of medieval Romance dialects is way better than mine.
So well, maybe I should give up discussing with you about this kind of things after all.
You really think the common people uderstood what was said in mass ? I'm not sure they were well versed in latin, evev, Church Latin. Hell, even some priest had a hard time to read the Bible at certain times.
Padan italy doesnt exist. You will find as much difference among the dialects of peninsular umbria or toscana with the ones of puglia and calabria. Also venetian dialects are extremely different from the rest of the norther regions.