The Roman Empire in 337 AD after the conquests of emperor Constantine the Great. Roman territory is dark purple, Constantine's conquests in Dacia are shaded dark purple, and Roman dependencies are light purple.
The Roman occupation led to aThraco-Romansyncretism, and similar to the case of other conquered civilisations (see, for example, howGallo-Roman culture developed inRoman Gaul) led to the Latinization of manyThracian tribes which were on the edge of the sphere of Latin influence, eventually resulting in the possible extinction of theDaco-Thracian language, but traces of it are still preserved in theEastern Romance substratum. From the 2nd century AD, the Latin spoken in the Danubian provinces starts to display its own distinctive features, separate from the rest of theRomance languages, including those of the western Balkans (Dalmatian).[4] TheThraco-Roman period of the language is usually delimited between the 2nd century (or earlier via cultural influence and economic ties) and the 6th or the 7th century.[5] It is divided, in turn, into two periods, with the division falling roughly in the 3rd to 4th century. TheRomanian Academy considers the 5th century as the latest time that the differences between Balkan Latin and western Latin could have appeared,[6] and that between the 5th and 8th centuries, the new language, Romanian, switched from Latin speech, to a vernacular Romance idiom, calledRomână comună.[7][8] The nature of the contact between Latin and the substrate language(s) is considered to be similar to the contact with local languages in other parts incorporated in the Roman Empire and the number oflexical andmorpho-syntactic elements retained from the substrate is relatively small despite some ongoing contact with languages closely related to the original substrate,Albanian for example.[9]
In the ninth century, Proto-Romanian already had a structure very distinct from the other Romance languages, with major differences in grammar, morphology and phonology and already was a member of theBalkan language area. It already contained around a hundred loansfrom Slavic languages, including words such astrup (body, flesh),[10] as well as some Greek language loans viaVulgar Latin, but no Hungarian and Turkish words, as these peoples had yet to arrive in the region.
In the tenth century or some earlier time, Common Romanian split into two geographically separated groups. One was in the northern part of theBalkan peninsula and the other one was in the south of the peninsula where theAromanian branch of Common Romanian presumably was spoken.[11] This is sometimes considered the upper end of the language, leading into the separateEastern Romance languages period. A different view holds that Common Romanian, despite the early split of Aromanian, continued to exist until the thirteenth or fourteenth century when all the southern dialects became distinct from the northern one.[12]
According to the theory, it evolved into the following modern languages and their dialects:[1][13]
a beast of burden had shucked off his load. It happened as his master was marching in front of him. But the ones who were coming from behind and saw the animal dragging his burden after him, had shouted to the master to turn around and straighten the burden. Well, this event was the reason for a great agitation in the army, and started a flight to the rear, because the shout was known to the crowd: the same words were also a signal, and it seemed to mean "run", as if the enemies had appeared nearby more rapidly than could be imagined. There was a great turmoil in the host, and a lot of noise; all were shouting loudly and goading each other to turn back, calling with great unrest in the language of the country "torna, torna", as a battle had suddenly started in the middle of the night.[14]
A beast of burden had thrown off his load, and somebody yelled to his master to reset it, saying in the language of their parents/of the land: "torna, torna, fratre". The master of the animal didn't hear the shout, but the people heard him, and believing that they are attacked by the enemy, started running, shouting loudly: "torna, torna".[15]
The first to identify the excerpts as examples of early Romanian was Johann Thunmann in 1774.[16] Since then, a debate among scholars had been going on to identify whether the language in question is a sample of early Romanian,[17] or just a Byzantine command[18] (of Latin origin, as it appears as such–torna–in Emperors MauriciusStrategikon), and withfratre used as a colloquial form of address between the Byzantine soldiers.[19] The main debate revolved around the expressionsἐπιχώριoς γλῶσσα (epichorios glossa – Theopylactus) andπάτριoς φωνή (pátrios foní – Theophanes), and what they actually meant.
An important contribution to the debate wasNicolae Iorga's first noticing in 1905 of the duality of the termtorna in Theophylactus text: the shouting to get the attention of the master of the animal (in the language of the country), and the misunderstanding of this by the bulk of the army as a military command (due to the resemblance with the Latin military command).[20] Iorga considers the army to have been composed of both auxiliary (τολδον) Romanised Thracians—speakingἐπιχωρίᾳ τε γλώττῃ (the "language of the country"/"language of their parents/of the natives") —and of Byzantines (a mélange of ethnicities using Byzantine words of Latin origin as official command terms, as attested in the Strategikon).[21]
This view was later supported by the Greek historian A. Keramopoulos (1939),[22] as well as byAlexandru Philippide (1925), who considered that the wordtorna should not be understood as a solely military command term, because it was, as supported by chronicles, a word "of the country",[23] as by the year 600, the bulk of the Byzantine army was raised from barbarian mercenaries and the Romanic population of the Balkan Peninsula.[24]
Starting from the second half of the 20th century, many Romanian scholars consider it a sample of early Romanian language, a view with supporters such as Al. Rosetti (1960),[25] Petre Ș. Năsturel (1956)[26] and I. Glodariu (1964).[27]
In regards to the Latin termtorna (an imperative form of the verbtorno), in modern Romanian, the corresponding or descendant termtoarnă now means "pour" (a conjugated form of the verbturna – "to pour"[28]). However, in older or early Romanian, the verb also had the sense of "to return or come back", and this sense is also still preserved in the modernAromanian verbtornu[29][30] and in some derived words in modern Romanian (for example:înturna "return, turn",răsturna "turn over, knock down")[31][32]
The comparative analysis of Romance languages shows that certain changes that occurred from Latin to Common Romanian are particular to it or shared only with a limited number of other Romance languages. Some of these changes are:
reorganization of the Latin vowel system - Common Romanian followed amixed scheme, with the back vowelso, u following the Sardinian scheme but the front vowelse, i following the Western Romance scheme. This produces a six-vowel system (contrast the Sardinian five-vowel system and Western Romance seven-vowel system).
the palatalization of/tjkj/, which appeared as early as the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, resulted in/ttj/ or/tj/ in intervocalic position and as/tj/ in word-initial position or after a consonant, without giving rise to a new phoneme.
the palatalization before a front vowel (/kɡ/ before/ieɛ/), dated around the fifth century in general, did not occur around this time in Common Romanian (and Dalmatian), and took place after the delabialization of/kw//ɡw/ ([*sandʒe] <SANGUEM), the degemination ofnn,ll,rr, and the diphthongization of Proto-Romance/ɛ/ to[jɛ].
the survivingau diphthong was retained and later underwentdiaeresis.
resistance to syncope - Common Romanian kept all the syllables from the Latin word.[34]
absence oflenition - it retained the intervocalic stops intact. It also showed greater conservatism toward/ɡ/ deletion.[35]
analytic future with an auxiliary derived fromLatinvolo (ex:Aromanianva s-cãntu);
enclisis of the definite article (ex.Istro-Romaniancâre – cârele);
nominal declension with two case forms in the singular feminine.
Comparatively, the dialects show a large number of loanwords from Slavic languages, including loanwords from Slavic languages spoken before the 9th century, at the stage before Aromanian, Daco-Romanian, and Megleno-Romanian separated.[38] Of these words a few examples are:[11][39][40]
Substrate words are preserved at different levels in the four dialects. Daco-Romanian has 89, Aromanian 66. Megleno-Romanian 48, and Istro-Romanian 25.[41]
^abSala, Marius (2012).De la Latină la Română] [From Latin to Romanian]. Editura Pro Universitaria. p. 33.ISBN978-606-647-435-1.
^Al. Rosetti: "Istoria limbii române" ("History of the Romanian Language"), Bucharest, 1986
^Dicționarul limbii române (DLR), serie nouă ("Dictionary of the Romanian Language, new series"),Academia Română, responsible editors: Iorgu Iordan, Alexandru Graur, Ion Coteanu, Bucharest, 1983;
^"Istoria limbii române" ("History of the Romanian Language"), II, Academia Română, Bucharest, 1969;
^A. B. Černjak "Vizantijskie svidetel'stva o romanskom (romanizirovannom) naselenii Balkan V–VII vv; "Vizantijskij vremennik", LIII, Moskva, 1992
^Schulte, Kim (2009). "Loanwords in Romanian". In Haspelmath, Martin; Tadmor, Uri (eds.).Loanwords in the World's Languages: A Comparative Handbook. De Gruyter Mouton. p. 234.ISBN978-3-11-021843-5.
^Brâncuș, Grigore (2005).Introducere în istoria limbii române] [Introduction to the History of Romanian Language]. Editura Fundaţiei România de Mâine. p. 62.ISBN973-725-219-5.
^abcVrabie, Emil (2000).An English-Aromanian (Macedo-Romanian) Dictionary. Romance Monographs. p. 21.ISBN1-889441-06-6.
^Theophylacti Simocattae Historiae, II, 15, 6–9, ed. De Boor, Leipzig, 1887; cf. FHDR 1970
^Theophanis Chronographia, I, Anno 6079 (587), 14–19, ed. De Boor, Leipzig, 1883; cf. FHDR 1970: 604.
^Johann Thunmann: "Untersuchungen über die Geschichte der östlichen europäischen Völker" ("Investigations into the histories of eastern European peoples"), 1. Theil, Leipzig, 1774, p. 169–366.: "Gegen das Ende des sechsten Jahrhunderts sprach man schon in Thracien Wlachisch" ("Towards the end of the sixth century, someone already spoke in Tracian Vlachish")
^This view, which suggested that the expression should be taken as such: the language of the country and the language of their fathers/of the natives, thus being a sample of Romanian was supported by historians and philologists such as F. J. Sulzer in "Geschichte des transalpinischen Daciens" ("History of the Transalpine Dacians"), II, Vienna, 1781; G. Șincai in "Hronica românilor și a mai multor neamuri" ("Chronicle of the Romanians and of many more peoples", I, Iași, 1853; C.Tagliavini in "Le origini delle lingue neolatine" ("The origins of the Neo-Latin languages"), Bologna, 1952; W. Tomaschek in "Über Brumalia und Rosalia" ("OfBrumalia andRosalia", Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akademie der Wissenschaften, LX, Viena, 1869; R. Roesler in "Romänische Studien" ("Romanian Studies"), Leipzig, 1871; Al. Rosetti in "Istoria limbii române" ("History of the Romanian Language", Bucharest, 1986; D. Russo in "Elenismul în România" ("Hellenism in Romania"), Bucharest, 1912.; B. P. Hasdeu in "Strat și substrat. Genealogia popoarelor balcanice" ("Stratum and Substratum: Genealogy of the Balkan Peoples"), Analele Academiei Române, Memoriile secțiunii literare, XIV, Bucharest, 1892; A. D. Xenopol in "Une énigme historique. Les Roumains au Moyen Âge" ("An historic enigma: the Romanians of the Middle Ages"), Paris, 1885 and "Istoria românilor" ("History of the Romanians"), I, Iași, 1888; H. Zilliacus in "Zum Kampf der Weltsprachen im oströmischen Reich" ("To the struggle of world languages in the Eastern Roman Empire"), Helsinki, 1935; R. Vulpe in "Histoire ancienne de la Dobroudja" ("Ancient history of Dobrugea"), Bucharest, 1938; C. Popa-Lisseanu in "Limba română în izvoarele istorice medievale" ("The Romanian language in the sources of medieval history"), Analele Academiei Române. Memoriile secțiunii literare, 3rd series, IX, 1940. Lot 1946; G. I. Brătianu in "Une énigme et un miracle historique: le peuple roumain" ("An enigma and an historic miracle: the Romanian people"), Bucharest, 1942; etc.
^This view had proponents such as J. L. Pić in "Über die Abstammung den Rumänen" ("On the descent of the Romanians"), Leipzig, 1880; J. Jung in "Die romanischen Landschaften des römischen Reiches" ("Romanian landscapes of the Roman Empire"), Innsbruck, 1881; A. Budinszky in "Die Ausbreitung der lateinischen Sprache über Italien und Provinzen des Römischen Reiches" ("The propagation of the Latin language in Italy and the provinces of the Roman Empire"), Berlin, 1881; D. Onciul: "Teoria lui Roesler" ("Rosler's Theory") in "Convorbiri literare", XIX, Bucharest, 1885; C. Jireček in "Geschichte der Bulgaren" ("History of the Bulgarians"), Prague, 1876; Ovide Densusianu: "Histoire de la langue roumaine" ("History of the Romanian language"), I, Paris, 1901; P. Mutafčief: "Bulgares et Roumains dans l'histoire des pays danubiens" ("Bulgarians and Romanians in the history of the Danubian lands"), Sofia, 1932; F. Lot: "La langue de commandement dans les armées romaines et le cri de guerre français au Moyen Âge" ("The language of command in the Romanian armies and the French war cry in the Middle Ages") in volume "Mémoires dédiés à la mémoire deFélix Grat" ("Memoirs dedicated to the memory of Félix Grat"), I, Paris, 1946;
^Idea supported byFranz Dölger in "Die „Familie" der Könige im Mittelalter" ("The 'family' of the king in the Middle Ages"), „Historisches Jahrbuch" ("Historical Yearbook"), 1940, p. 397–420; and M. Gyóni in "Az állitólagos legrégibb román nyelvemlék (= "Das angeblich älteste rumänische Sprachdenkmal", "The allegedly oldest spoken evidence of the Romanian language")", „Egyetemes Philologiai Közlöny (Archivum Philologicum)", LXVI, 1942, p. 1–11
^Nicolae Iorga,Istoria românilor ("History of the Romanians"), II, Bucharest, 1936, p. 249.
^"Într-o regiune foarte aproape de Haemus, unde se găsesc nume romanice precum Kalvumuntis (calvos montes), unul dintre soldații retrași din cel mai apropiat ținut primejduit strigă «în limba locului» (ἐπιχωρίᾳ τε γλώττῃ) unui camarad care-și pierduse bagajul «retorna» sau «torna, fratre»; datorită asemănării cu unul din termenii latinești obișnuiți de comandă, strigătul e înțeles greșit și oastea, de teama unui dușman ivit pe neașteptate, se risipește prin văi". ("In a region very close to Haemus, where one finds Romanic names such as Kalvumuntis (calvos montes), one of the soldiers retreated from the nearest endangered land shouts 'in the local language' (ἐπιχωρίᾳ τε γλώττῃ) to a comrade who had lost his baggageretorna ortorna, fratre ("turn back" or "turn, brother"); given the similarity to one of the customary Latin terms of command, the shout is misunderstood and the host, fearing that an enemy had unexpectedly appeared, disperses through the haze." Nicolae Iorga,Istoria românilor ("History of the Romanians"), II, Bucharest, 1936.
^A. Keramopoullos (A. Κεραμóπουλλου): "Τ ε ναι ο Kουτσóβλαχ" ("Who are the Aromanians"), Athens, 1939: "moreover, the termfratre, betraying the familiarity of the comrades, dismissed the possibility of a military term"
^Al. Philippide,Originea românilor ("Origin of the Romanians"), I, Iași, 1925:„Armata, dacă a înțeles rău cuvântul torna, ca și cum ar fi fost vorba că trebuie să se întoarcă cineva să fugă, l-a înțeles ca un cuvânt din limba țării, din limba locului, căci doar Theophylactos spune lămurit că «toți strigau cât îi ținea gura și se îndemnau unul pe altul să se întoarcă, răcnind cu mare tulburare în limba țării: retorna»" ("The army, if it understood badly the wordtorna, which also could have been the word that turned back someone who ran away, understood it as a word of the language of the country, of the language of the place, because only Theophylactos says clearly that 'everyone shouted it from mouth to mouth the gave one another the impetus to turn around, yelling with great concern in the language of the country:turn back'")
^„Dar se pare că Jireček n-a cetit pagina întreagă a descripției din Theophylactos și Theophanes. Acolo se vede lămurit că n-avem a face cu un termin de comandă, căci un soldat s-a adresat unui camarad al său cu vorbele retorna ori torna, torna, fratre, pentru a-l face atent asupra faptului că s-a deranjat sarcina de pe spatele unui animal" ("But it seems that Jireček hadn't read the whole page of description by Theophylactos and Theophanes." There one sees clearly that they it wasn't made as a term of command, because a soldier addressed a comrade of his with the words "turn back" or "turn, turn, brother" to draw his attention to the fact that the burden was disturbed on the back of an animal") [...]"Grosul armatelor bizantine era format din barbari mercenari și din populația romanică a Peninsulei Balcanice" ("The bulk of the Byzantine army was formed of mercenary barbarians and of the Romanic population of the Balkan Peninsula") [...]„armata despre care se vorbește în aceste pasaje [din Theophylactus și Theophanes] opera în părțile de răsărit ale muntelui Haemus pe teritoriu thrac romanizat" ("The army about which they are speaking in these passages [of Theophylactus and Theophanes] was raised in part in the Haemus mountains in the Romanized Thracian territory.")[...]„Ca să ne rezumăm părerea, cuvântul spus catârgiului era un termen viu, din graiul însoțitorilor lui, sunând aproape la fel cu cuvântul torna din terminologia de comandă a armatei bizantine" ("To sum up the opinion, the word spoken to the mule driver was a live term, from the dialect [here and below, we rendergrai as "dialect"; the term falls between "accent" and "dialect" –ed.] of their guide, being almost the same as the wordtorna from the terminology of command of the Byzantine army.")„nimic nu este mai natural decât a conchide, cum au făcut toți înainte de Jireček, că vorbele torna, retorna, fratre sunt cuvinte românești din veacul al șaselea" ("Nothing is more natural than to conclude, as did everyone since Jireček, that the wordstorna, retorna, fratre are Romanian words from the 6th century.") [...]„Preciziunea povestirii lui Teofilact nu a fost până acum luată în seamă așa cum trebuie. Totuși reiese clar din aceste rânduri: 1) că cuvântul întrebuințat de însoțitorii stăpânului catârului nu era chiar același cu cuvântul pe care oștenii și-au închipuit că-l aud și 2) că, pe când în gura tovarășilor lui cuvântul însemna doar «întoarce-te», ε ς τo πίσω τραπέσθαι, așa cum susțin cu bună dreptate mai toți cercetătorii români, în schimb cuvântul așa cum l-au înțeles ostașii însemna «înapoi, la stânga împrejur», precum și-au dat seama tot cu bună dreptate Jireček și alți învățați, fiind, prin urmare, după chiar mărturia Strategikon-ului așa-zis al împăratului Mauriciu, un cuvânt din graiul oștirilor bizantine" ("The precision of Theophylactus' story has still not been given the account it deserves. Everything follows clearly from these lines: 1) that the word employed the guides of the master of the mules was not even the same as the word the soldiers thought they heard and 2) that, although in the mouth of their comrade the word meant merely "turn around, ε ς τo πίσω τραπέσθαι, just as all the Romanian researchers still sustain, instead the word as understood by the soldiers meant "turn back, left about!", according to what Jireček and other scholars have correctly understood, being, through its consequences, after even the witness of the Strategikon so in this manner by the emperorMaurice, a word in the dialect of the Byzantine army.")
^Al. Rosetti, "Despre torna, torna, fratre" ("Abouttorna, torna, fratre"), Bucharest, 1960, p. 467–468.:„Așadar, termenii de mai sus aparțineau limbii populației romanizate, adică limbii române în devenire, după cum au susținut mai demult unii cercetători și, printre ei, A. Philippide, care a dat traducerea românească a pasajelor respective, însoțită de un comentariu convingător. Termenii coincid cu termenii omonimi sau foarte apropiați din limba latină, și de aceea ei au provocat panică în împrejurarea amintită." ("Thus, the terms from above belong to the language of the romanized population, that is, the Romanian language in the process of development, as has long been sustained by some scholars and, among them, A. Philippide, who gave the Romanian translation to the respective passages, guided by a convincing commentary. The terms coincide with homonymic terms or very close from the Latin language, and from that caused panic in those nearby who heard it.")
^Petre Ș. Năsturel,"Quelques mots de plus à propos de «torna, torna» de Théophylacte et de «torna, torna, fratre» de Théophane" ("Those words more appropriate than Theophylactus'torna, torna and Theophanus'torna, torna, fratre"), inByzantinobulgarica, II, Sofia, 1966: Petre Ș. Năsturel "Torna, torna, fratre. O problemă de istorie și de lingvistică" ("Torna, torna, fratre: a problem in the history of linguistics") inStudii de cercetări și istorie veche, VII, Bucharest, 1956:"era un cuvânt viu din graiul populației romanice răsăritene și poate fi socotit ca cea mai veche urmă de limbă străromână; la fel ca și φράτρε ['fratre']. Dar tot atunci se păstra în armata bizantină același cuvânt cu înțelesul de «înapoi», «stânga împrejur», ceea ce a amăgit pe oștenii lui Comentiolus, punându-i pe fugă" ("was a live word in the Eastern Romanic population and could have been reckoned as the oldest utterance of the Old Romanian language; the same also for φράτρε ['fratre']. But still, the Byzantine army retained this word with the sense of "turn back", "left about", as had deluded the soldiers of Comentiolus, putting them to flight") [...]"făceau parte din așa-zisul το⋅λδον, care cuprindea samarele, slugile și vitele de povară. Măcar ei erau băștinași, în sensul larg al cuvântului [...]; ei făceau parte din latinitatea răsăriteană din veacul al VI-lea" ("made up part of the so-called το⋅λδον ['the auxiliary troops'], which includes pack-saddles, servants and draft cattle. Even those were natives, in the broad sense of the word [...]; they formed part of the Eastern Latinity of the 6th century") [...]"Reieșe din aceasta în chip limpede și cu totul neîndoielnic că cel puțin pentru catârgiu și pentru tovarășii lui vorba torna era un cuvânt din graiul lor – la fel cu siguranță și φράτρε – pe când la urechile și în gura oștenilor apărea, cum dovedește Strategikon-ul, ca un cuvânt ostășesc de poruncă. [...]. Cu alte cuvinte, chiar dacă oastea nu a fost alcătuită din băștinași, se aflau împreună cu ea oameni care vorbeau o limbă romanică" ("The result of this clearly and without the least doubt, is that for the muleteer and for his comrades, the wordtorna was a word in their own dialect – as certainly was φράτρε ['fratre'] – which when it appeared in the ears and mouths of the soldiers, as the Strategikon proves, was a soldiers word of command. [...]. In other words, even if the army had not been made up of natives, it would turn out that those men spoke a Romanic language") [...]„torna era un cuvânt din graiul lor" ("torna was a word of their dialect".)
^I. Glodariu:"În legatura cu «torna, torna, fratre»" in „Acta Musei Napocensis", I, Cluj, 1964: „din oameni care transportau bagajele armatei, rechiziționați cu acest scop și, în sens[ul] larg al cuvântului, erau localnici" ("among the men who transported the army's baggage, requisitioned with such a scope and, in the broad sense of the word, they were locals") [...]„torna era un cuvânt din graiul viu al populației băștinașe" ("torna was a word in the live dialect of the local population") [...] "e cert că cei din jur l-au interpretat ca «întoarce-te», dacă nu erau soldați (și termenul folosit de Theophanes ne face să credem că nu erau), sau ca «stânga-mprejur», dacă erau ostași" ("It is certain those nearby interpreted it as "turn around", if they weren't soldiers (and the term used by Theophanes does not make us believe they were), or as "left about!", if they were soldiers")[...]„exista o verigă sigură între lat. frater și rom. frate" ("there is a sure link between Latinfrater and Romanianfrate").
^Andreose, Alvise;Renzi, Lorenzo (2013). "Geography and distribution of the Romance languages in Europe". In Maiden, Martin; Smith, John Charles; Ledgeway, Adam (eds.).The Cambridge History of the Romance Languages, Volume II: Contexts. Cambridge University Press. pp. 283–334.ISBN978-0-521-80073-0.
^Pană Dindelegan, Gabriela,The Grammar of Romanian, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013, ISBN 978-0-19-964492-6, page 4
^Schulte, Kim (2009). "Loanwords in Romanian". In Haspelmath, Martin; Tadmor, Uri (eds.).Loanwords in the World's Languages: A Comparative Handbook. De Gruyter Mouton. p. 235.ISBN978-3-11-021843-5.
^Berciu-Drăghicescu, Adina (coord.), Frățilă, Vasile (2012).Aromâni, Meglenoromâni și Istroromâni: Aspecte identitare și culturale, capitolulDialectul istroromân.Privire generală [Aromanian, Megleno-Romanians, and Istro-Romanians: Aspects of Identity and Culture, chapterIstro-Romanian dialect.General View]. Editura Universității din București. p. 679.ISBN978-606-16-0148-6.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
^Capidan, Theodor (1925).Meglenoromânii, vol. III – Dicționar [Meglenoromanians, vol.III – Dictionary]. Cultura națională.
^Berciu-Drăghicescu, Adina (coord.), Frățilă, Vasile (2012).Aromâni, Meglenoromâni și Istroromâni: Aspecte identitare și culturale, capitolulDialectul istroromân.Privire generală [Aromanian, Megleno-Romanians, and Istro-Romanians: Aspects of Identity and Culture, chapterIstro-Romanian dialect.General View]. Editura Universității din București. p. 678.ISBN978-606-16-0148-6.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Baldwin, Barry (1997). "'Torna, Torna, Phrater' : What Language?".Byzantion.67 (1):264–67.JSTOR44172322. Accessed 25 Mar. 2023.
Barbu, Violeta (2007). "Torna, torna, fratre: la più antica attestazione della lingua romena?". In: Luca, Cristian; Masi, Gianluca (eds).L'Europa Centro-Orientale e la Penisola italiana. Quattro secoli di rapporti e influssi intercorsi tra Stati e civiltà (1300-1700). Braila, 2007. pp. 25–40.
Rusu, Valeriu[in German] (1981). "À propos de: Torna, Torna Fratre". In Schlieben-Lange, Brigitte (ed.).Logos Semantikos (in French). Vol. 5: Geschichte und Architektur der Sprachen. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. pp. 373–374.doi:10.1515/9783110863048.373 (inactive 1 August 2025).ISBN978-3-11-008776-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of August 2025 (link)
Saramandu, Nicolae (2002). ""Torna, torna, fratre" et la romanité orientale au VIe siècle".Revue des études sud-est européennes (in French).40:41–61.
Romania portal
