08-05-2019, 07:25 AM
Indeed, it's "Romance Studies" not "Journal of Romance Studies".
It's as bad as the previous two - in some respects even worse.
It's full of beginner's mistakes:
- mapping f p and q to normal characters.
- reading 'octobre' where it says 'octembre'
- calling 'qu' and 'ta' diphthongs
It has such interesting statements as:
"One scholar even produced a transcription of the manuscript that is entirely incorrect (Reeds 1995)."
and:
"The words read: opat a sa (it is abbot). His is one of very few male faces seen in the manuscript. The word opát survives to mean abbot in Polish, Czech and Slovak, demonstrating that proto-Romance reached as far as Eastern Europe."
No I did not pay to get this, and no, I cannot recommend anyone to spend any money on it.
It's as bad as the previous two - in some respects even worse.
It's full of beginner's mistakes:
- mapping f p and q to normal characters.
- reading 'octobre' where it says 'octembre'
- calling 'qu' and 'ta' diphthongs
It has such interesting statements as:
"One scholar even produced a transcription of the manuscript that is entirely incorrect (Reeds 1995)."
and:
"The words read: opat a sa (it is abbot). His is one of very few male faces seen in the manuscript. The word opát survives to mean abbot in Polish, Czech and Slovak, demonstrating that proto-Romance reached as far as Eastern Europe."
No I did not pay to get this, and no, I cannot recommend anyone to spend any money on it.