How can a country suddenly change language and lose their old

>>2736286
that's not how it happened. this is how it happened:
>celts migrate to gaul
>speak celtic
>over time and isolation, becomes gaulish
>romans invade and conquer gaul
>impose latin as a language
>people never truly learn latin well
>vulgar latin (aka the "latin" the people spoke) becomes a different variety compared to formal latin
>by the time of the end of the western roman empire, differences are significant to the point of vulgar latin and formal latin are not mutually comprehensible
>franks invade gaul, wre collapses
>merovigians unite and in a brief period of prosperity talk with the priests to convert the people
>priests acknowledge vulgar latin and formal latin are different and they need to celebrate masses in the vulgar form
>vulgar latin aka language of the people becomes the standard to be taught and spoken everywhere
>still tons of varieties present all over the place
>one standard emerges around paris (aka where the king lives)
>centuries go by and the parisian standard is imposed on all people
>that standard is now modern french
it's actually much more progressive than what you described. also franconian was never a primary language in france

>>2736286
I'm Lithuanian, so I can speak a bit about how Polish spread here. When the Union happened, the aristocarcy would learn Polish in order to communicate with the Polish side, since Poland was seen as a more 'western' country all matters would be discussed in Polish. Over time they Lithuanian became unnecesary since they they could just speak in polish not only with the Poles but also among themselves. Eventually, seeing that Lithuanain was only spoken among the peasantry, it became associated with being a 'peasant' rather than a citizen. The peasantry would then try to emulate their lord (who often didn't even know any Lithuanian) and would also adopt Polish.

Another way to look at this is the influene of English today. Non-anglo people will start using english slang among themselves even when they speak the same language. At first it's for convenience and then it becomes a status thing.

>Xnjor
Wtf

>>2736556
That's a transliteral transciption of the Armenian script

>>2736286
All of that is so wrong it's really hard to begin. First most these changes take place over a long period of time. Only the educated elites would rapidly change languages. Most the gauls were not speaking Latin in there daily lives around 100 AD. Furthermore your example of the Frank's is just completely wrong. The people of France still speak a Latin descendant language today.

>>2736286
>Suddenly
French used to have more languages and more widespread but they were suppressed during and after the French Revolution when all were made to speak Parisian French. The process continued up to the 1950s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Gr%C3%A9goire#Annihilating_the_dialects_of_France
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_France
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergonha

File: Capture.jpg (63KB, 614x509px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 614x509px

>>2736403
Polish was never widely spoken among peasantry it wasn't that common among lower status nobility.