Search

Petru Maior (1760-1821) is one of the great personalities of Romanian culture. The Romanians' national consciousness based on the recovery of the Romanian people's historical memory and the idea of the Romanian language's Latin origin owe a lot to the great scholar. The itinerary of his education in Transylvania's Catholic colleges, and his studies in Rome and Vienna allowed him to become acquainted with 18th century culture, the spirit of the time, integrating his work in the great cultural movement of the Enlightenment, inaugurating the Romanian cultural dialogue with Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diplomatic relations between Romania and Italy began at the end of the Romanian War of Independence in 1878, Italy recognizing Romania's sovereignty a year later. In this context, diplomatic relations were established at the level of the Legation and at the end of 1879 Italy would accredit Count Giuseppe Tornielli-Brusati di Vergan in Bucharest as Extraordinary Envoy and Minister Plenipotentiary. As for the cultural-diplomatic relations of Romania in Italy in the interwar period, they started to emerge with the creation of the Romanian School in Rome. Focused on the Latinity vacation that the Romanian society fully assumed after the establishment of Greater Romania. After long negotiations with the Italian state, on 1st November 1922, the Romanian School in Rome opened its gates in the Eternal City. The first Romanian academic establishment that aimed to affirm the national cultural identity and the formation of new intellectual elites that would contribute to the development of Romanian universities. Another channel for communicating Romanian cultural values relevant to cultural diplomacy in Italy was the establishment of the Department of Romanian Language and Literature at the Università degli Studi di Roma. This was followed by the creation of the "House of the Romanian" in Venice and the purchase of a Pavilion in the Giardini della Biennale. In romanian cultural landscape, the creation of romanian institutes in Italy played a significant role in shaping diplomatic-cultural relations. The ambitious projects of the historians Vasile Pârvan and Nicolae Iorga represented the beginning of the road that would aim at the reform of the Romanian humanities, culture but also reinforcing of the relations between the two states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Leopoldine Diploma from 1691 stipulated that Transilvania passed under the authority of the Habsburgs, which have as immediate goal the consolidation of the borders as well as that of Catholicism. Some of the Orthodox Romanians have accepted, while preserving their rite, the affiliation to the Church of Rome, in exchange of some political advantages (among which the bishop's ennoblement) and some cultural ones (the acces to education in great European universities). In this context, the mentalities of the new Romanian elites have changed, and they started to show interest for written Romanian language. The book printed in Sibiu in 1781 is an example of the evolution of writing in Romanian language, being in fact an encomium brought by the believers to Maria Theresia after her death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union gathers more than 500 million people, from 27 member states, with 23 official languages and 3 types of alphabets. In addition, 60 other languages are part of the EU heritage and are spoken in djfferent regions or by certain groups. The Romanian language, the continuance of the Latin language spoken in the eastern parts of the former Roman Empire, comes with its four dialects: Daco-Romanian, Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian and Istro-Romanian to complete the European linguistic palette. The Romanian linguists have always shown a permanent concern for both the identity and the status of the Romanian language and its dialects, thus supporting the existence of the ethnic, linguistic and cultural particularities of the minorities and rejecting, firmly, any attempt to assimilate them by force. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The disclosure of numerous words which belong to the military (Dacian-)Roman environment -- 52 semantic specific changes and inherited military Latin words with their classic sense -- grounds the thesis that the Romanian language is the continuation of the military Latin spoken in the north-eastern frontier region of the Roman Empire. These military vestiges particularise the Romanian language in the neolatin area. Thus, the Romanian language becomes scientifically very interesting, from a linguistic and his- torical point of view, because the other frontier regions of the Roman Empire in Europe, Asia and Africa are not today Romances. Also, the conservation in Romanian language of these numerous vestiges of Latin military slang (sermo castrensis) and their absence in Aromanian (Balkan Romanian dialect) proves the continuity of the latinophones in the northern Danubian region by terrible and heroic battles, in order to safeguard their lands and culture, against the attacks of the barbarian tribes. This linguistic fact represents an irrefutable argument against the Roeslerian theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Română de Conservare şi Restaurare a Cărţii is the property of Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

As the Romanian control data fails to accommodate the standard NULL-case-checking theory, which seems rather tailored on the specificity of English non-finiteness, the syntactic conditions that generate obligatory or nonobligatory control readings in Romanian are identified and interpreted from a new perspective: specific conditions that may support the reevaluation of PRO as a phonologically unselected DP rather than a specific syntactic primitive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]