Talk:Judeo-Latin

Judeo-Latin-speaking Jews
Yes, I have to ask this question... was there an ethnic name for Judeo-Latin-speaking Jews?Gringo300 09:15, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Presumably, there was. But we're talking a community that died out 15 centuries ago. (At least, that's my inference, since the article describes them as "later Roman Empire", and the Western Roman Empire fell in 476.) Naturally, there's a lot about them nobody knows. Isaac R 23:09, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Judeo-Italic
Also, wouldn't La'az (Judeo-Latin) be a Judeo-Italic language, rather than a Judeo-Romance language? Latin was an Italic language.Gringo300 09:39, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

ethnonym for Judæo-Latin speakers
In the days when Judæo-Latin was spoken, the communication between Jewish communities had not yet broken down to the extent that the development of regional Jewish communities had had sufficient time to gain distinction as recognizable "ethnicities"&mdash;they were simply "Jewish". Tomer TALK 10:33, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

This raises the question: Are there STILL Jews today who are simply Jewish, as opposed to being members of a specific Jewish ethnic group? Gringo300 14:59, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, as I thought I'd rather clearly told you previously, classifying Jews into this group or that is not exactly a precise science. Calling someone "Ashkenazi" or "Sefardi" is usually fairly safe, although there are a number of people who are both, and as a result, consider themselves to be neither.  There are also a large number of Jews, especially in the US, who regard the distinctions between Ashkenazim and Sefardim (etc.) to be unnecessary or even harmful to klal yisrael, and therefore frown on classifications of any Jewish community...most of whom insist on being called simply "Jews".  Then there is the case of Israel, where much of the population neither knows nor particularly cares into which classification they might happen to fall, who also regard themselves simply as Jews.  Tomer TALK  07:37, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Status of Judæo-Latin as Judæo-Italic rather than Judæo-Romance
Nothing in the article indicates that Judæo-Latin is a Judæo-Romance language. I have modified the Judæo-Romance languages article to address your legitimate concern. That said, the only place that Judæo-Latin remains classified as Judæo-Romance is in Template:Jewish languages, and I think it's OK to leave it classified there as Judæo-Romance rather than in a special class of its own, given its relationship, potential or otherwise, entirely technically accurate or otherwise, to the Judæo-Romance languages. If you still object, the discussion should be taken up on Template talk:Jewish language Tomer TALK  10:39, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 14:28, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Is this supposed to be a scholarly article? There is no such language as "Italkian".
This is a contrived confused garbled fusion of Hebrew and English. Simply say "Judeo-Italian". The Hebrew term "Italkit" is the standard Hebrew word for the Italian language, not for a specific type thereof. "Italkian" is a pure abstraction, jibberish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.68.95.65 (talk) 20:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)