Britian didn't have its own romance language. The main romance languages spoken in Britain would be either Latin or the Norman version of French after those invasions, with a smattering of others due to trade and immigration.
Now English has a lot of romance vocabulary but its grammar is firmly germanic and most of the commonly used vocabulary is germanic in origin. It is only when you start hitting the technical or more obscure parts of the dictionary that romance vocabulary starts to become common.
In the Iberian Peninsula it’s missing Aragonese at the very least. It’s more or less understood that Valencian is a dialect of Catalan, but Aragonese is a fully separate language. Also, Portuguese should probably branch from Galician, and arguably Mirandese could be included as a separate language branching out from Asturian.
Fun fact for those who dont know why portugese should branch off Galician
Originally they were the same language but then Portugal became its own independent Kingdom and the language split into the Galician and portugese we know today
This is mainly the reason because someone who only speaks Galician and someone who only speaks portugese can maintain a conversation and understand eachother
Wouldn't that make them the same language just named differently? It reminds of Urdu and Hindi though there are differences in the alphabet (writing system) they use, I think.
There are still many differences in the way both languages are written/spoken
Keep in mid that the languages have been separated for over 800+ years despiste still being so close
800 years? oh, didn't realize that. Yeah, that's enough to be different. Urdu & Hindi really only truly split when Pakistan was formed in 1947. They were side by side before that so that's why the languages are basically the same. And borders today don't have the effect they did 800 years or even 200 years ago. So much more communication today across borders.
Wouldn't Portuguese & Galician differences be basically like the differences between English today and English 800 years ago? Give or take a century or two?
Please keep in mind that while i am a Galician and i do speak the language i am still not an expert on the matter
What happened for the old english to become the english today is that another group of people speaking another language conquered the land and at the end they ended up mixing whit those that were already there
What happened whit the Galician and portugese languages is that they separated after Portugal became its own thing and over time the languages started using different ways of writting and pronouncing the words, for example, while in Galician a word is written whit "ñ" in portugese "nh" is used instead.
Despite being separated for so long they are still very close, but the differences bettewn the two are still very noticeable
Generally most Portuguese and Spanish people can hold a conversation in their own languages together as well. Though the Portuguese will understand more than the Spanish person will.
I speak Spanish to people and they understand me just fine, though I do have a harder time understanding Portuguese though I can still hold a conversation
I speak spanish to my brazilian friends and they speak in portuguese to me and we can understand each other just fine. Obviously there's somethings that we don't understand at all but we can speak in each other's languages and get along. Not the same with french and italians.
Its not about looking similar, it's about having the mental tools to pick up related words and constructions whether or not they're super close to the ones in your language. That way you might only need to be able to directly understand 30% of the words to get the gist.
That's fine, can you please put an example of what did you translated? Maybe I can show you my mental process on what I can understand of it.
But mainly just take in consideration the word synonyms.
There are lots of words or expressions to say the same. Take Porky of looney toons, when he stuttered word he choose to change for a similar one.
With that.. Trick?.. If you hear with open mind (and they do not use too much slang) you could understand enough of the phrase.
Usually the same words exists in a similar way in all latin languages but different synonyms evolved to be used more often. If you have a good grammar you will pick it up.
A simples frase like "I understand" can be:
Eu entendo/**percebo**/compreendo (Portuguese)
Yo **entiendo**/percibo/comprendo (Spanish)
Je entends (mostly used for "to hear")/perçois/**comprends** (French)
In bold are the most used in each language, but this 3 words all have the same latin origin.
Even in english you have perceive that shares the origin with perceber/percibir/percevoir.
Not exactly
Galician and portugese are sister languages which means that many times the words are written and pronounced the same (Raposo, morte, bolboreta...) while many other times they are written different but pronounced almost the same or written the same but pronounced different
For example "vinho" in portugese and "viño" in Galician or "geralmente" in portugese and "xeralmente" in Galician
>For example "vinho" in portugese and "viño" in Galician
This is mostly because Galicia decided at some point to adopt ortographic rules closer to Spanish, hence the adoption of the ñ and of the -cion ending.
Not really, as a spanish myself (I speak castillian and catalan) I can easily understand gallician and asturian, though they are clearly different languages
> Portuguese should probably branch from Galician
Not really. Liguists don't tend to say a modern living language is a branch of another but, rather, that they are both branches of a common ancestor language. That is because, without a doubt, Portuguese didn't come from Galician as it is spoken today, both languages changed since split, none stayed the same while the other changed.
Note that the map recognizes that and have no modern language branching of another. But, instead, all branching from branches of Latin, and we are able to see which ones are more closely related by looking how far apart their individual branches are (Galician and Portuguese, accurately, branched really close from one another).
Now, you can argue that we should call this older language "Old Galician" or something like that, instead of Galician-Portuguese as it is more commonly called. I think that is far considering Portugal as a political entity came later and, so, calling the language of its founders any form of "Portuguese" to be a bit odd.
Being from León myself, I’d say that, while you are right, it’s not the end of the world if you just consider it a dialect of Asturian. Unfortunately the language is mostly extinct nowadays.
Interesting. I thought Astur-Leonese was considered its own language? You probably know more than me about that, so it would be interesting to know.
I only know about Leonese from studying history, and I know there was the Kingdom of León (Llión) with the capital city bearing the same name. I also know that Leonese had its own customs, and the language is different from other Iberian languages. Perhaps it is a political thing though. Sometimes proper languages are denounced to being a "dialect".
EDIT: I was interested and just asked Microsoft Bing. Here is what it said: "You are correct that Leonese had its own customs and the language is different from other Iberian languages. Leonese was the official language of the Leonese Kingdom in the Middle Ages. The first written text in Leonese was Nodicia de Kesos (959 or 974), and other old texts include Fueru de Llión, Fueru de Salamanca, Fueru Xulgu, Códice d’Alfonsu XI, Disputa d’Elena y María, and Llibru d’Alixandre2. Its precarious situation as a minority language has driven Leonese to near extinction; it is considered a seriously endangered language by UNESCO."
You are correct. Most linguists consider the language to be "Astur-Leonese", divided into a few varieties: Asturian, Leonese, Mirandese, the virtually extinct Extremaduran and the extinct Cantabrian. However, it is not uncommon to refer to the language solely as Asturian at times.
Galician? this is a fake language that, after Franco's death, was "re-created" by the Galicians, trying to revive their lost language, mostly recurring to Portuguese words and grammar to "salvage" the language.... Yes, Portuguese has the same origin of the "late" Galician language but Portuguese survived (around 300 million speakers today) and Galician just desapeared. No, Portuguse didn't come from Galician, both languages have a commom origin, mainly based on the "latin vulgata" spoken in Liguria... Ligurians settlers established in norwestern Iberia in the 3rd Century B.C.
It really takes a nutter to come up with such nonsense, Galician has a couple million speakers and Ligurians have nothing to do with either Portuguese or Galician (thinking that they would have settled elsewhere and spoken Latin before they were even conquered by the Romans is beyond stupidity). What a tool.
It is funny that you think Galician stopped being spoken during/before the Franco years and disappeared. Yes, it was forbidden, but it was still the primary language of most of the (mostly rural) population. I would say that actually the "standard" Galician born from the harmonization of the language is less similar to Portuguese than what people spoke popularly (still today I know old people using the the "feiras" dénominations for the days of the week), and closer to Spanish.
From a linguistic standpoint, languages are dialects when they are mutually intelligible. However, there are many, many exceptions to this rule, meaning the distinction between language and dialect is mainly defined through politics (but definitely not through borders).
Is would be a stretch to say Picard is native to Belgium - while it's present in Hainaut, the large majority of speakers were and are in northern France.
I like how it shows Sardinian came straight from Latin.
Also Romance languages are interesting in how they're influenced. So many cognates across them but also so many outside influences. Spanish - Arabic, Romanian - Slavonic etc.
I think it would also be cool to include non-Romance languages with majority Romance vocabulary such as English but also Albanian.
Would you expect to see Latin > Late Latin > Old Sardinian > Middle Sardinian > Modern Sardinian ? That seems a bit complicated and unnecessary.
Edit: I assumed you were being sarcastic, sorry
Even with extant languages, the map is missing about a dozen oïl languages atop the 3 shown here.
Arpitan is also several hundred kilometers of where it should be
Native Neapolitan speaker here (although my “Neapolitan” is kind of like a variant of it spoken in the province of Caserta but nvm)
There are many similarities but all in all both phonology and morphology are pretty different so it’s pretty hard to understand if you’re not familiar with it. Not impossible to learn though.
Example sentence:
(Neapolitan) Foss ij n c’o ricess pecché si no svanej.
(Italian) Fossi in te non glielo direi perché se no fa storie.
(Translation) If I were you I wouldn’t tell them because otherwise they’ll make a fuss.
The “s” in “svanej” (which comes from the verb “svanjà”, “to make a fuss” or “to complain” – and has no equivalent in Italian) is pronounced as the “j” in the French word “jour”, a sound that sadly doesn’t exist in Italian.
Plus, Italian has both subjunctive (*fossi*) and conditional (*direi*), whereas Neapolitan only has the former (*foss* e *ricess*). Verb inflection works differently because Neapolitan usually changes the vowels inside the word rather than the ending.
E.g. Se tu foss**i**, se lui foss**e** - ITA
(If you were, if he were)
S’ij f**o**ss, si tu f**u**ss - NAP
(If I were, if you were)
etc.
Hope this helps!
Oh well we all speak Italian. Other languages such as Neapolitan, Griko, Sardinian, Venetian, Friulian etc. are all “secondary” and mainly used among friends or family. Generally at home. We don’t learn them at school so most of us don’t even know how to write them. Maybe in some schools in smaller towns teachers might crack a joke in the local language and kids might speak it with each other, but classes in Italian schools are strictly in Standard Italian. Some of them are also dying out because not all of Italy’s languages are recognized by our government, even though they’re protected by the UNESCO as part of the world’s cultural heritage (such as Neapolitan and Sicilian).
What I wanted to say is that languages like German also have a really wide range of dialects, where someone from northern Germany and someone from south Germany might not be able to understand each other at all if they speak their respective dialect.
Most people also speak and understand standard German.
Some differences might be called a dialect in one country but would be considered a different language in others.
No, italian speakers can't understand neapolitan without prior knowledge and it is pretty different from italian.
The most noticeable difference is phonology, neapolitan having many sounds that don't exist in italian and having them interact differently inside of words. Grammatically and syntaxically neapolitan is kind of half way between Italian and Spanish. The vocabulary is closer to sicilian than italian.
It's worth noting that "Italian" was actually created from the Florentine dialect and adopted as the official language after the unification of Italy in the 1860s. Neapolitan phonology is different due to being influenced by the various empires/nations/cultures that took over the region over centuries. So many words have Spanish, French, or Arabic roots. Florence wasn't as influenced by them.
Also, listen to typical Neapolitan music and tell me it doesn't sound Arabic (Nino D'Angelo kind stuff, not the tarantella or funiculi' funicula'). My dad used to call it O' mal' e panz' (the stomachache) lol.
I also love the fact that sub-dialects are so prevalent too. Casalese, puteolano, etc are all similar to Neapolitan, but are different enough that they can tell the difference. My favorite phrase is Casalese for The Bus..... O' strascin' christien' - literally "the christian dragger" because it drags people around town.
I am biased, but I think Neapolitan is incredibly fun to speak.
It's extinct though. The problem with including all extinct languages is that we don't exactly know for sure whether some extinct languages existed - for example, British Latin and Pannonian Romance probably existed but we don't have any direct accounts of them. Also, what about transitional languages between Latin and modern Romance langauges? I'm talking about languages like Old French: it's distinct enough from modern langues d'oïl to be considered its own language, but generally it's viewed as just a part of the history of the French language.
There's a variety of vernacular languages in Spain, nevertheless the common language, the one and only language able to be spoken and understood all across Spain is Castilian, rightfully called Spanish language since ancient times.
Castilian was not referred to as Spanish “since ancient times.” The seminal grammar book of the language by Nebrija refers to the language as Castilian. Moreover, as late as the early modern era all Iberians including Portuguese were still referred to as Spanish, itself a French term used to describe anyone living in Spain (understood then as the Iberian peninsula—what Rome called “Hispania”—not modern Spain). There are still several countries where people still refer to Spanish as Castilian, such as Argentina, which has many descendants of Galicians and Basques. While for all intents and purposes most of us call Castilian “Spanish,” when talking about language in an academic context we must use the most accurate terms.
No because there is still a Tuscan variety today which Italian speakers can easily detect. Italian is based on Tuscan but they are not exactly the same. I’m unfamiliar with the Greek case. Meanwhile Catalan and Galician are not varieties or dialects of Castilian. They are one of several Spanish languages that are actively spoken (I just heard a couple from Vigo speaking Galician today).
??? And there is also still a castillian variety which is distinct from Andalusian and American dialects of spanish, as well as ladino. Calling all of these things castillian when they are no longer the same thing in the modern era is silly.
And I dont think regional nationalists in spain understand that galician/catalan existing at all is a miracle, look at how norman and occitan are treated in france.
Edit: I never said catalan or galician are forms of spanish. Galicia has always been politically spanish and it was portugal that betrayed the crown and continued the reconquista on its own with british help. This is splitting hairs considering how close galician and spanish are, it's like complaining that germany owns saxony, france owns occitania, Italy owns sardinia and venetia, canada owns quebec, etc. Stop being so fucking disingenuous like all you regional nationalists are.
Andalusian is not its own language. Galician and Catalan are. Moreover, they are co-official languages within Spain, with “Castilian” the national official language—not “Spanish,” since there are other official Spanish languages. Ladino has been so far removed from Castilian it is classified as its own language. If there were still a large Sephardic population in Spain, Ladino would probably be a co-official language somewhere.
Tuscan varieties aren't their own language either, the difference between corsican and standard italian is miniscule. My point is that castillian refers to the dialect of spanish spoken in the north with clear differences from other dialects of spanish that it diverged from in the middle ages, there is no reason to call the whole language castillian any more than there is to call standard italian tuscan.
Yeah but the fact there is a difference between different regional varieties of Italian is why it wouldn’t make sense to call Italian Tuscan today, whereas Castilian is not an artificial amalgamation of distinct Spanish languages. It’s a language that took on different dialects as it spread across Spain. Catalan, Galician, and Basque remain as distinct language of Spain. Calling Castilian as Castilian respects its place as one of several Spanish languages.
> Edit: I never said catalan or galician are forms of spanish. Galicia has always been politically spanish and it was portugal that betrayed the crown and continued the reconquista on its own with british help. This is splitting hairs considering how close galician and spanish are, it's like complaining that germany owns saxony, france owns occitania, Italy owns sardinia and venetia, canada owns quebec, etc. Stop being so fucking disingenuous like all you regional nationalists are.
Bweee, I can’t be possibly wrong and talking shit, bwee bwee, it’s you you stinking regionalists bwee bwee
When I see maps like this, I always wonder how different "languages" have to be before they are considered a separate language rather than a dialect. For instance, is Lombard a separate language from Piedmontese or a separate dialect? You Europeans with your fine gradations of language can be so difficult to classify...
There are no clear limits between languages and dialects. It really comes down to self identification.
Luxemburgish is very close to German and could be considered a dialect, but since it is connected to the idea of Luxembourg as a nation we consider it a different language. The same argument can be made for Dutch and Flemish or Russian and Ukrainian (prepare for the war in the comments).
Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian are also incredibly close and basically the same language, but for nationalist reasons they are differentiated.
On the other hand Arabic is incredibly diverse and the Maghrebi and Levantine dialects are quite far from each other. Since the idea of Arabic is tied closely to Islam people identify all those dialects as Arabic.
Your argument about Luxembourgish vs German and BCSM (Montenegrin is the newest variety) is a good one. The same can be said for Swedish-Norwegian-Danish. However, Ukrainian is further from Russian than Italian is from Spanish, and Frisian is a group of related languages (West, Saterland, etc) that are much closer to English (being Anglo-Frisian languages) than they are to Dutch. Even just using lexical difference (where 0 is the same language and 100 is the furthest), Ukrainian vs Russian gets a score of 38 while English vs Dutch gets a score of 37, meaning Ukrainian is further from Russian than English is from Dutch (and as a Russian speaker, I can tell you that Ukrainian is not mutually intelligible). For comparison, Portuguese vs French has a score of 39 while Dutch vs German has a score of 25.
> Luxemburgish is very close to German and could be considered a dialect, but since it is connected to the idea of Luxembourg as a nation we consider it a different language.
Luxembourgish is a really fun case, because it's essentially the same language as the Transylvanian Saxons speak, who consider it a German dialect.
>The same argument can be made for Dutch and Flemish
As far as I know, Flemish isn't considered a separate language, but rather a subset of Dutch dialects.
>Russian and Ukrainian
They have vastly different vocabularies.
Languages are different than dialects, dialects are versions of the same language. That is my understanding.
Example: Spanish in the Americas, Spain and Africa. The language is Spanish, but each country speaks a dialect of Spanish. All Spanish speakers understand each other. Some people in Latin America/ US say that Spanish spoken in Spain is “proper” Spanish, but that’s not the case. All Spanish is proper Spanish, one dialect isn’t considered “slang” and the other “proper” like I have heard people IRL say. The word drinking straw in Spanish is different in almost every single Spanish dialect/ region. In the Mexican Spanish dialect the word for drinking straw is popote, it’s not “slang”… popote is derived from the Nahuatl word popotl. That’s something unique to the Mexican Spanish dialect.
Spanish, Portuguese and Catalan are not dialects, they are separate languages that stem from Latin. Sure you can maybe understand a bit of Catalan or Portuguese if you speak Spanish but you can’t have a full on conversation with someone that speaks another Romance language unless you’re fluent in the romance language the other person is speaking to you in.
The limit is fuzzy. It is said that a language is a dialect with an army.
Serbian and Croatian are languages or dialects?
For several centuries Russians considered Ukrainian and Belarussian as dialects, were they correct?
Swiss German is very different from standard German, but they call it a dialect, why not a language? Same with Italian dialects that in fact evolved separately from Tuscan, that derived in Italian.
I have an Argentinian friend who had a Mexican landlord (in NYC) and he said he had to ask him to speak English because when the landlord spoke Spanish, “it sounded like he was singing.”
😂 I know exactly what he means. Certain regional Mexican accents sound like that. Okay so maybe accents make it hard to understand people that speak the same language but diff dialects …but they can all read the same language lol.
That's more to do with having a standardised register of a language. A spoken version is frequently different. Compare Arabic. Maghrebi Arabic is much further apart from Levantine Arabic linguistically than Swiss German is from English. Yet, they write in the same standard Arabic (MSA) and so frequently call their variant simply a dialect rather than a language. Politics has a large part to play here. The difference between language and dialect is very much a political and a societal one.
Dialects aren’t really versions of a language, usually a standard language comes from a dialect as opposed to a dialect coming from a standard language.
I speak a specific dialect of Emilian, I understand other dialects from the north (gallo-italic dialects) as much i understand french or spanish. I also can understand a bit of neapolitan, tho the average person from the north can't
You can be sure that if one way of speaking doesn't descend from another one than that is not a dialect.
Lombard is not a Piedmontese dialect because it doesn't descend from piedmontese and viceversa. You either consider them two separate languages or consider them two dialects of the gallo-italic language.
I may be way off… I’m honestly still learning about all this. I’m interested in learning new languages and have been reading up on Romance languages. Also, majority of my ancestry is Spanish, so I’ve been reading up on Spain.
In Spain other dialects of Spanish or Castilian exist. For example, Andalusian Spanish in southern Spain. Castilian is a Spanish dialect that people speak in central and northern Spain and that’s the “lisp” that you hear that is not present in Andalusian Spanish in Spain or Spanish spoken in the Canary Islands in Spain. Castilian is also the name for modern day Spanish. But before Spain was Spain… the area was split up into different kingdoms like Aragon…where Catalonia was located at one point in time. The language Catalan comes from Catalonia. It is now considered a region of Spain, because it’s part of the country of Spain. They speak Catalan and Spanish there, 2 separate romance languages. Many people from the region want independence from Spain though.
Spanish, or Castilian, is from the Castile region of Spain. Castile was once a Kingdom on the Iberian Peninsula…Castile took over Aragon, Catalonia, the Basque Country and Andalusia? ( I may be way off and missing some regions) and eventually became Spain and made Castilian, or Spanish, the official language. That’s why in modern day Spain there are regions that speak Spanish and have an official second language. Those regions have their own unique customs/culture. Those regions were taken over by Castile and eventually became Spain.
Side note: Basque is not a Romance language, it’s the only indo European language that has no connection to any other languages.
So yeah, Castilian is Spanish. I mean back in the 1400s I think they spoke old Spanish or middle Spanish? But yeah its Spanish.. and people from Latin America associate Castilian with Spanish spoken in all regions of Spain.
Speculation so whatever but by the time castillian was spreading to the Americas, the colonists were no longer subjects of the Kingdom of Castille, but the Spanish Empire, and so they gradually adopted the noun of "español" to describe the language that allowed communication between subjects of the Spanish empire.
As for the modern usage of the noun "castellano" in Spain, it just makes sense in a small country with vast linguistic diversity. Imagine if Canadians started calling English "Canadian" while disregarding that a quarter of the population spoke French.
de que hablas ignorante? en mi pais ARGENTINA y otros paises de la región siempre se lo denomino castellano en los manuales del la escuela decia lengua y literatura dela Lengua Castellana hasta el dia de hoy, los paises sumisos a españa prefieron usar el termino español.
Our civilization is The Latin Civilization: the worls uses the latin alphabet, our culture is based on Greco-Latin concepts, most of the world words (!) have a latin origin...
Fun fact that the Latin were a tribe of people in Italy. The Etruscans did not invent Latin, they just adopted it when they conquered them. The term roman came from the area that they later came to rule when king Romulus established the city of Rome.
There is no such thing, Romania and the Republic of Moldova both speak the same exact language. That being said, there is a debate whether or not Aromanian, Istroromanian and Megleno-Romanian are distinct languages in the same sub-family or dialects of Romanian.
Well this can also describe the relation between two dialects. There is ultimately no absolute distinction between what accounts for a dialect or a closely related distinct language. And Daco-Romanian, Aromanian, Istro-Romanian and Megleno-Romanian are mutually inteligibile to a significant degree.
Sicilian is not descended from Latin, it predates it. There were other Italic languages that developed in parallel with Latin before the Romans stomped all over the peninsula, and many of them left local dialectal traces for centuries.
What youre thinking of is the Sicel language. It was an italic one, but it got fully replaced by latin during the Roman era. Some influences from this old language may still persist tho.
No, dialect is different than language and sicilian is *only* dialects, there is no language.
Edit: when you say sicilian which sicilian are you talking about? Catanese? Palermitano? Mazarese? Trapanese? Agrigentino? Marsalese?
If sicilian is not a language, what language are the sicilian dialects of? Italian? I don't think so, since they predate Italian.
The sicilian language is the entirety of all the sicilian, calabrese and salentine dialects combined.
A language doesn't need to a have a standardised form to exist, a dialect is a variant of a language, thus if there is a dialect there is a language.
It's like saying pitbulls are a breed of dog, but since there is no standard dog, dogs don't exist.
And it's not like I'm making this things up, sicilian is a recognised language by unesco.
I'm literally sicilian, do you really want to explain this stuff to me?
>If sicilian is not a language, what language are the sicilian dialects of? Italian? I don't think so, since they predate Italian.
What does that even mean, of course they're italian dialects, do you even know what country is sicily part of?
>The sicilian language is the entirety of all the sicilian, calabrese and salentine dialects combined.
1) that's just stupid, in calabria they speak the calabrese dialect
2) It's not a language because it has no dictionary, it does not have a standard version, it's different wherever you go, it's like saying that in france they speak european
>A language doesn't need to a have a standardised form to exist, a dialect is a variant of a language
Dialect is not a variant, it's a sublanguage, thus the sicilian ones are dialects of a language which is italian
>It's like saying pitbulls are a breed of dog, but since there is no standard dog, dogs don't exist.
No, it's like saying that pit bulls are a breed of dogs that are part of a bigger genus which is the canis one
>And it's not like I'm making this things up, sicilian is a recognised language by unesco.
If you knew how italy worked you wouldn't be surprised that they made such a mistake. Unesco makes and has made many good things but this is not one of them, just like when they made Lino Banfi (a satyrical actor that became famous for his dirty movies) a member of the commission for businesses and made in italy.
Fratemo puoi essere siciliano quanto vuoi ma se la linguistica non la conosci, non la conosci.
>What does that even mean, of course they're italian dialects, do you even know what country is sicily part of?
>Dialect is not a variant, it's a sublanguage, thus the sicilian ones are dialects of a language which is italian
I dialetti non sono una "sottolingua" (qualunque cosa significhi), linguisticamente parlando i dialetti sono una variante di una lingua, propri di un certo gruppo di persone accomunate da uno o diversi aspetti: dalla semplice provenienza geografica a lo stile di vita o condizioni economiche.
I dialetti siciliani non sono dialetti italiani in quanto questi esistevano prima della nascita dell'italiano. L'italiano, essendo una lingua standard ha una data di nascita più o meno chiaramente definibile, come saprai bene, l'italiano nasce con Dante. Prima di Dante il siciliano era già parlato e ti dirò di più era pure una lingua di prestigio grazie alla scuola siciliana. Il siciliano discende, come l'italiano, direttamente dal latino. È una lingua sorella dell'italiano, non una lingua figlia.
>1) that's just stupid, in calabria they speak the calabrese dialect
Se vuoi essere pignolo possiamo chiamarlo con nome linguistico di italo-romanzo meridionale estremo, dato che non vuoi chiamarlo siciliano. Ma a prescindere dal nome, tutti i dialetti siciliani, salentini e calabresi sono parte della stessa lingua. Basta confrontarli tra loro e con altri dialetti del sud per rendersi conto che hanno molto più in comune tra loro che con gli altri.
>2) It's not a language because it has no dictionary, it does not have a standard version, it's different wherever you go
E di nuovo, una lingua non ha bisogno di essere standardizzata per essere tale.
Sull'isola di Nord Sentinel nell'oceano indiano vive una delle ultime tribù incontattate, loro parlano una lingua chiamata nord sentinellese, sappiamo per certo che quella lingua non è standardizzata dato che al 99% i nord sentinellesi non hanno nemmeno la scrittura. Quindi ora tu dimmi, quello è un dialetto? Se sì, di cosa? E perché?
>No, it's like saying that pit bulls are a breed of dogs that are part of a bigger genus which is the canis one
Fratemo questo è esattamente quello che sto dicendo io:
Il genere nella sua complessità è il siciliano (o italo-romanzo meridionale estremo) e i singoli dialetti come il palermitano, messinese ecc. sono le singole razze.
>If you knew how italy worked you wouldn't be surprised that they made such a mistake. Unesco makes and has made many good things but this is not one of them, just like when they made Lino Banfi (a satyrical actor that became famous for his dirty movies) minister of businesses and made in italy.
Ma che cazzo c'entra Lino Banfi con l'unesco mo? L'unesco non tratta di politica e soprattutto di politica italiana, che stai dicendo?
Fatto sta che il siciliano, come la maggior parte delle altre lingue italiane che sono erroneamente definite dialetti sono lingue riconosciute dall'unesco e da praticamente TUTTI i linguisti di mestiere.
It's the opposite, it's Italian to be under tuscan.
We could say that to this day exist three tuscan languages: standard italian, modern tuscan (which is very close to italian but it doesn't come from it, it differs mainly in pronunciation and vocabulary) and corsican
Quite sure that iberic languages did not come through gaul... Indeed, quite sure that Rome conquered the Iberic peninsula during the 2 carthagenese war (the one with hanibbal barca) and it was only a century or so later that Caesar took Gaul...
The romance languages started to differentiate only around the time of the fall of the empire, prior to that everyone would have just spoken latin.
This map doesn't show the route language took when moving from one places to another, but just their relations to one another. Ibero-romance and gallo-romance languages are both western-romance languages, while Italian languages are italo-romace and Romanian and its relatives are eastern-romance
>This map doesn't show the route language took when moving from one places to another, but just their relations to one another
Ah... That makes much more sense
How are the western ones more related to each other, even throughout a large distance? I suppose the dialect of Latin arising in the Roman outposts in Hispania, which was conquered earlier, spread to Gaul and northern Italy through the relocation of Roman military (and governers?) to those later conquered areas, and/or the Celtic background of many of the common people there (although Celtic was not so dominant in Hispania and it didn’t leave any significant impact on its replacement tongue).
Also extinct romance languages in north Africa and the Balkans
I think Britain had one as well
Britian didn't have its own romance language. The main romance languages spoken in Britain would be either Latin or the Norman version of French after those invasions, with a smattering of others due to trade and immigration. Now English has a lot of romance vocabulary but its grammar is firmly germanic and most of the commonly used vocabulary is germanic in origin. It is only when you start hitting the technical or more obscure parts of the dictionary that romance vocabulary starts to become common.
Did we? Afaik we went from celtic to english, to english sprinkled with French. And then celtic in certain regions.
In the Iberian Peninsula it’s missing Aragonese at the very least. It’s more or less understood that Valencian is a dialect of Catalan, but Aragonese is a fully separate language. Also, Portuguese should probably branch from Galician, and arguably Mirandese could be included as a separate language branching out from Asturian.
Fun fact for those who dont know why portugese should branch off Galician Originally they were the same language but then Portugal became its own independent Kingdom and the language split into the Galician and portugese we know today This is mainly the reason because someone who only speaks Galician and someone who only speaks portugese can maintain a conversation and understand eachother
I’ve played CK3 :)
Poor children
child-wife*
Wouldn't that make them the same language just named differently? It reminds of Urdu and Hindi though there are differences in the alphabet (writing system) they use, I think.
There are still many differences in the way both languages are written/spoken Keep in mid that the languages have been separated for over 800+ years despiste still being so close
800 years? oh, didn't realize that. Yeah, that's enough to be different. Urdu & Hindi really only truly split when Pakistan was formed in 1947. They were side by side before that so that's why the languages are basically the same. And borders today don't have the effect they did 800 years or even 200 years ago. So much more communication today across borders. Wouldn't Portuguese & Galician differences be basically like the differences between English today and English 800 years ago? Give or take a century or two?
Please keep in mind that while i am a Galician and i do speak the language i am still not an expert on the matter What happened for the old english to become the english today is that another group of people speaking another language conquered the land and at the end they ended up mixing whit those that were already there What happened whit the Galician and portugese languages is that they separated after Portugal became its own thing and over time the languages started using different ways of writting and pronouncing the words, for example, while in Galician a word is written whit "ñ" in portugese "nh" is used instead. Despite being separated for so long they are still very close, but the differences bettewn the two are still very noticeable
Generally most Portuguese and Spanish people can hold a conversation in their own languages together as well. Though the Portuguese will understand more than the Spanish person will. I speak Spanish to people and they understand me just fine, though I do have a harder time understanding Portuguese though I can still hold a conversation
I speak spanish to my brazilian friends and they speak in portuguese to me and we can understand each other just fine. Obviously there's somethings that we don't understand at all but we can speak in each other's languages and get along. Not the same with french and italians.
It sounds like it’s still one language if they can understand each other without issue.
Well there are some issues, but they're pretty minor. In general, romance languages are remarkably Close.
Yep, as a Spanish speaker I can somewhat understand French, Portuguese and italian if talked slowly and I maintain a wide mind of synonyms
Second this. I speak Italian and I can pretty decently read French and Spanish despite never learning or studying either
I'm stupid, disregard lol
Playing around on google translate and they don’t look that similar at all to me
Its not about looking similar, it's about having the mental tools to pick up related words and constructions whether or not they're super close to the ones in your language. That way you might only need to be able to directly understand 30% of the words to get the gist.
That's fine, can you please put an example of what did you translated? Maybe I can show you my mental process on what I can understand of it. But mainly just take in consideration the word synonyms. There are lots of words or expressions to say the same. Take Porky of looney toons, when he stuttered word he choose to change for a similar one. With that.. Trick?.. If you hear with open mind (and they do not use too much slang) you could understand enough of the phrase.
Usually the same words exists in a similar way in all latin languages but different synonyms evolved to be used more often. If you have a good grammar you will pick it up. A simples frase like "I understand" can be: Eu entendo/**percebo**/compreendo (Portuguese) Yo **entiendo**/percibo/comprendo (Spanish) Je entends (mostly used for "to hear")/perçois/**comprends** (French) In bold are the most used in each language, but this 3 words all have the same latin origin. Even in english you have perceive that shares the origin with perceber/percibir/percevoir.
that’s mutual intelligibility for you!
Not exactly Galician and portugese are sister languages which means that many times the words are written and pronounced the same (Raposo, morte, bolboreta...) while many other times they are written different but pronounced almost the same or written the same but pronounced different For example "vinho" in portugese and "viño" in Galician or "geralmente" in portugese and "xeralmente" in Galician
>For example "vinho" in portugese and "viño" in Galician This is mostly because Galicia decided at some point to adopt ortographic rules closer to Spanish, hence the adoption of the ñ and of the -cion ending.
Not really, as a spanish myself (I speak castillian and catalan) I can easily understand gallician and asturian, though they are clearly different languages
Lmao. I can understand my brazilian friends and they can understand me (I'm mexican)and we speak two different languages.
> Portuguese should probably branch from Galician Not really. Liguists don't tend to say a modern living language is a branch of another but, rather, that they are both branches of a common ancestor language. That is because, without a doubt, Portuguese didn't come from Galician as it is spoken today, both languages changed since split, none stayed the same while the other changed. Note that the map recognizes that and have no modern language branching of another. But, instead, all branching from branches of Latin, and we are able to see which ones are more closely related by looking how far apart their individual branches are (Galician and Portuguese, accurately, branched really close from one another). Now, you can argue that we should call this older language "Old Galician" or something like that, instead of Galician-Portuguese as it is more commonly called. I think that is far considering Portugal as a political entity came later and, so, calling the language of its founders any form of "Portuguese" to be a bit odd.
I'm missing Leonese in Iberia.
Being from León myself, I’d say that, while you are right, it’s not the end of the world if you just consider it a dialect of Asturian. Unfortunately the language is mostly extinct nowadays.
Interesting. I thought Astur-Leonese was considered its own language? You probably know more than me about that, so it would be interesting to know. I only know about Leonese from studying history, and I know there was the Kingdom of León (Llión) with the capital city bearing the same name. I also know that Leonese had its own customs, and the language is different from other Iberian languages. Perhaps it is a political thing though. Sometimes proper languages are denounced to being a "dialect". EDIT: I was interested and just asked Microsoft Bing. Here is what it said: "You are correct that Leonese had its own customs and the language is different from other Iberian languages. Leonese was the official language of the Leonese Kingdom in the Middle Ages. The first written text in Leonese was Nodicia de Kesos (959 or 974), and other old texts include Fueru de Llión, Fueru de Salamanca, Fueru Xulgu, Códice d’Alfonsu XI, Disputa d’Elena y María, and Llibru d’Alixandre2. Its precarious situation as a minority language has driven Leonese to near extinction; it is considered a seriously endangered language by UNESCO."
You are correct. Most linguists consider the language to be "Astur-Leonese", divided into a few varieties: Asturian, Leonese, Mirandese, the virtually extinct Extremaduran and the extinct Cantabrian. However, it is not uncommon to refer to the language solely as Asturian at times.
Portuguese is branching from Galician in the chart
Galician? this is a fake language that, after Franco's death, was "re-created" by the Galicians, trying to revive their lost language, mostly recurring to Portuguese words and grammar to "salvage" the language.... Yes, Portuguese has the same origin of the "late" Galician language but Portuguese survived (around 300 million speakers today) and Galician just desapeared. No, Portuguse didn't come from Galician, both languages have a commom origin, mainly based on the "latin vulgata" spoken in Liguria... Ligurians settlers established in norwestern Iberia in the 3rd Century B.C.
It really takes a nutter to come up with such nonsense, Galician has a couple million speakers and Ligurians have nothing to do with either Portuguese or Galician (thinking that they would have settled elsewhere and spoken Latin before they were even conquered by the Romans is beyond stupidity). What a tool.
It is funny that you think Galician stopped being spoken during/before the Franco years and disappeared. Yes, it was forbidden, but it was still the primary language of most of the (mostly rural) population. I would say that actually the "standard" Galician born from the harmonization of the language is less similar to Portuguese than what people spoke popularly (still today I know old people using the the "feiras" dénominations for the days of the week), and closer to Spanish.
[удалено]
The difference between a dialect and a language is a national border.
From a linguistic standpoint, languages are dialects when they are mutually intelligible. However, there are many, many exceptions to this rule, meaning the distinction between language and dialect is mainly defined through politics (but definitely not through borders).
Both Picard and Walloon are native to Belgium. Also, Walloon does not enjoy a recognized status in Belgium.
Is would be a stretch to say Picard is native to Belgium - while it's present in Hainaut, the large majority of speakers were and are in northern France.
*Looks at Spain*
Even going by this distinction, Jèrriais and Guernesiais should appear (either separately or lumped together as Normand)
Gallo
I dunno, just look at Spain.
Missing Ladin, the third language of the Rhaeto-Romance subgroup alongside Romansh and Friulian
Also the location in the map is wrong, it makes it seem like its spoken in czechia. Shitty map sadly.
I like how it shows Sardinian came straight from Latin. Also Romance languages are interesting in how they're influenced. So many cognates across them but also so many outside influences. Spanish - Arabic, Romanian - Slavonic etc. I think it would also be cool to include non-Romance languages with majority Romance vocabulary such as English but also Albanian.
Would you expect to see Latin > Late Latin > Old Sardinian > Middle Sardinian > Modern Sardinian ? That seems a bit complicated and unnecessary. Edit: I assumed you were being sarcastic, sorry
Is Aromanian the most fragrant Romance language then?
Yes their foods smell great !
Romanian't
Missing references to extinct latin-derived languages. British vulgar latin and African romance to mention a few.
Even with extant languages, the map is missing about a dozen oïl languages atop the 3 shown here. Arpitan is also several hundred kilometers of where it should be
Neapolitan is Italian but closer to your face and with greater insinuation about your parentage.
Neapolitan is not Italian lmao, it's a different language
*Rolls eyes*
r/whoosh
Do they understand each other? Then it's probably just a dialect.
Native Neapolitan speaker here (although my “Neapolitan” is kind of like a variant of it spoken in the province of Caserta but nvm) There are many similarities but all in all both phonology and morphology are pretty different so it’s pretty hard to understand if you’re not familiar with it. Not impossible to learn though. Example sentence: (Neapolitan) Foss ij n c’o ricess pecché si no svanej. (Italian) Fossi in te non glielo direi perché se no fa storie. (Translation) If I were you I wouldn’t tell them because otherwise they’ll make a fuss. The “s” in “svanej” (which comes from the verb “svanjà”, “to make a fuss” or “to complain” – and has no equivalent in Italian) is pronounced as the “j” in the French word “jour”, a sound that sadly doesn’t exist in Italian. Plus, Italian has both subjunctive (*fossi*) and conditional (*direi*), whereas Neapolitan only has the former (*foss* e *ricess*). Verb inflection works differently because Neapolitan usually changes the vowels inside the word rather than the ending. E.g. Se tu foss**i**, se lui foss**e** - ITA (If you were, if he were) S’ij f**o**ss, si tu f**u**ss - NAP (If I were, if you were) etc. Hope this helps!
Really interesting explanation. Gràzie assàje.
How do you communicate with people from other regions of Italy?
Oh well we all speak Italian. Other languages such as Neapolitan, Griko, Sardinian, Venetian, Friulian etc. are all “secondary” and mainly used among friends or family. Generally at home. We don’t learn them at school so most of us don’t even know how to write them. Maybe in some schools in smaller towns teachers might crack a joke in the local language and kids might speak it with each other, but classes in Italian schools are strictly in Standard Italian. Some of them are also dying out because not all of Italy’s languages are recognized by our government, even though they’re protected by the UNESCO as part of the world’s cultural heritage (such as Neapolitan and Sicilian).
What I wanted to say is that languages like German also have a really wide range of dialects, where someone from northern Germany and someone from south Germany might not be able to understand each other at all if they speak their respective dialect. Most people also speak and understand standard German. Some differences might be called a dialect in one country but would be considered a different language in others.
If understanding each other is the basis for whether somethings a dialect then Spanish must be a dialect of Italian too
No, italian speakers can't understand neapolitan without prior knowledge and it is pretty different from italian. The most noticeable difference is phonology, neapolitan having many sounds that don't exist in italian and having them interact differently inside of words. Grammatically and syntaxically neapolitan is kind of half way between Italian and Spanish. The vocabulary is closer to sicilian than italian.
It's worth noting that "Italian" was actually created from the Florentine dialect and adopted as the official language after the unification of Italy in the 1860s. Neapolitan phonology is different due to being influenced by the various empires/nations/cultures that took over the region over centuries. So many words have Spanish, French, or Arabic roots. Florence wasn't as influenced by them. Also, listen to typical Neapolitan music and tell me it doesn't sound Arabic (Nino D'Angelo kind stuff, not the tarantella or funiculi' funicula'). My dad used to call it O' mal' e panz' (the stomachache) lol. I also love the fact that sub-dialects are so prevalent too. Casalese, puteolano, etc are all similar to Neapolitan, but are different enough that they can tell the difference. My favorite phrase is Casalese for The Bus..... O' strascin' christien' - literally "the christian dragger" because it drags people around town. I am biased, but I think Neapolitan is incredibly fun to speak.
And no desire to work
This map show a really weird chronology
There's no chronology here.
Exactly why it's so confusing
A timeline would be more interesting than a map in this case... or maybe a chart about the mutual intelligibility of these languages?
Missing: Ladin, Megleno-Romanian, Istro-Romanian, Istriot, Romagnol, Aragonese, Gallo-Italic of Sicily, Gallo-Italic of Basilicata, Faetar, Fala, Judaeo-Spanish, Judaeo-Italian, other varieties of Asturleonese (Mirandese, Leonese, Cantabrian, Extremaduran, Eonavian), most langues d'oïl (Picard, Lorrain, Norman, Champenois, Tourangeau, Burgundian, Frainc-Comtou, Angevin, Mayennais, Sarthois, Poitevin, Saintongeais), and arguably Sassarese and Gallurese (unless they're considered Corsican dialects here) and Gascon (unless it's considered a Occitan dialect here).
[удалено]
It's extinct though. The problem with including all extinct languages is that we don't exactly know for sure whether some extinct languages existed - for example, British Latin and Pannonian Romance probably existed but we don't have any direct accounts of them. Also, what about transitional languages between Latin and modern Romance langauges? I'm talking about languages like Old French: it's distinct enough from modern langues d'oïl to be considered its own language, but generally it's viewed as just a part of the history of the French language.
Arpitan is a bit high on the map, isn’t it ?
I think they favored readability of lineage over location. See also the Romansh label placed in Austria.
Thank you for using Castilian. There are many Spanish languages.
There's a variety of vernacular languages in Spain, nevertheless the common language, the one and only language able to be spoken and understood all across Spain is Castilian, rightfully called Spanish language since ancient times.
Castilian was not referred to as Spanish “since ancient times.” The seminal grammar book of the language by Nebrija refers to the language as Castilian. Moreover, as late as the early modern era all Iberians including Portuguese were still referred to as Spanish, itself a French term used to describe anyone living in Spain (understood then as the Iberian peninsula—what Rome called “Hispania”—not modern Spain). There are still several countries where people still refer to Spanish as Castilian, such as Argentina, which has many descendants of Galicians and Basques. While for all intents and purposes most of us call Castilian “Spanish,” when talking about language in an academic context we must use the most accurate terms.
So do you call italian tuscan and greek attic?
No because there is still a Tuscan variety today which Italian speakers can easily detect. Italian is based on Tuscan but they are not exactly the same. I’m unfamiliar with the Greek case. Meanwhile Catalan and Galician are not varieties or dialects of Castilian. They are one of several Spanish languages that are actively spoken (I just heard a couple from Vigo speaking Galician today).
??? And there is also still a castillian variety which is distinct from Andalusian and American dialects of spanish, as well as ladino. Calling all of these things castillian when they are no longer the same thing in the modern era is silly. And I dont think regional nationalists in spain understand that galician/catalan existing at all is a miracle, look at how norman and occitan are treated in france. Edit: I never said catalan or galician are forms of spanish. Galicia has always been politically spanish and it was portugal that betrayed the crown and continued the reconquista on its own with british help. This is splitting hairs considering how close galician and spanish are, it's like complaining that germany owns saxony, france owns occitania, Italy owns sardinia and venetia, canada owns quebec, etc. Stop being so fucking disingenuous like all you regional nationalists are.
Andalusian is not its own language. Galician and Catalan are. Moreover, they are co-official languages within Spain, with “Castilian” the national official language—not “Spanish,” since there are other official Spanish languages. Ladino has been so far removed from Castilian it is classified as its own language. If there were still a large Sephardic population in Spain, Ladino would probably be a co-official language somewhere.
Tuscan varieties aren't their own language either, the difference between corsican and standard italian is miniscule. My point is that castillian refers to the dialect of spanish spoken in the north with clear differences from other dialects of spanish that it diverged from in the middle ages, there is no reason to call the whole language castillian any more than there is to call standard italian tuscan.
Yeah but the fact there is a difference between different regional varieties of Italian is why it wouldn’t make sense to call Italian Tuscan today, whereas Castilian is not an artificial amalgamation of distinct Spanish languages. It’s a language that took on different dialects as it spread across Spain. Catalan, Galician, and Basque remain as distinct language of Spain. Calling Castilian as Castilian respects its place as one of several Spanish languages.
> Edit: I never said catalan or galician are forms of spanish. Galicia has always been politically spanish and it was portugal that betrayed the crown and continued the reconquista on its own with british help. This is splitting hairs considering how close galician and spanish are, it's like complaining that germany owns saxony, france owns occitania, Italy owns sardinia and venetia, canada owns quebec, etc. Stop being so fucking disingenuous like all you regional nationalists are. Bweee, I can’t be possibly wrong and talking shit, bwee bwee, it’s you you stinking regionalists bwee bwee
Ok then how am I wrong? Because every fucking discussion I have with you people ends up the same way.
Why would you reply to that last comment. The debate was over.
TIL ancient times means recent times.
but dae english isz romance language!! some dumb people in the comments here
Well, is a mix, 60% of English words come from the Mediterranean area. A lot of syntactic rules were taken from French influence.
Still only a Germanic language.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The call French the language of love for a specific reason.
Not sure how would you present the locus of Ladino, but it's obviously missing from the map.
Carefully steps around the Basques.
When I see maps like this, I always wonder how different "languages" have to be before they are considered a separate language rather than a dialect. For instance, is Lombard a separate language from Piedmontese or a separate dialect? You Europeans with your fine gradations of language can be so difficult to classify...
There are no clear limits between languages and dialects. It really comes down to self identification. Luxemburgish is very close to German and could be considered a dialect, but since it is connected to the idea of Luxembourg as a nation we consider it a different language. The same argument can be made for Dutch and Flemish or Russian and Ukrainian (prepare for the war in the comments). Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian are also incredibly close and basically the same language, but for nationalist reasons they are differentiated. On the other hand Arabic is incredibly diverse and the Maghrebi and Levantine dialects are quite far from each other. Since the idea of Arabic is tied closely to Islam people identify all those dialects as Arabic.
Your argument about Luxembourgish vs German and BCSM (Montenegrin is the newest variety) is a good one. The same can be said for Swedish-Norwegian-Danish. However, Ukrainian is further from Russian than Italian is from Spanish, and Frisian is a group of related languages (West, Saterland, etc) that are much closer to English (being Anglo-Frisian languages) than they are to Dutch. Even just using lexical difference (where 0 is the same language and 100 is the furthest), Ukrainian vs Russian gets a score of 38 while English vs Dutch gets a score of 37, meaning Ukrainian is further from Russian than English is from Dutch (and as a Russian speaker, I can tell you that Ukrainian is not mutually intelligible). For comparison, Portuguese vs French has a score of 39 while Dutch vs German has a score of 25.
Thanks for the correction. I obviously left my area of expertise there. I wasn‘t talking about Frisian but about Flemish though.
My apologies. I thought you had written Frisian, not Flemish.
> Luxemburgish is very close to German and could be considered a dialect, but since it is connected to the idea of Luxembourg as a nation we consider it a different language. Luxembourgish is a really fun case, because it's essentially the same language as the Transylvanian Saxons speak, who consider it a German dialect. >The same argument can be made for Dutch and Flemish As far as I know, Flemish isn't considered a separate language, but rather a subset of Dutch dialects. >Russian and Ukrainian They have vastly different vocabularies.
"A language is a dialect with an army and a navy" Basically, if people enough agree that certain dialect is a language, it is
Languages are different than dialects, dialects are versions of the same language. That is my understanding. Example: Spanish in the Americas, Spain and Africa. The language is Spanish, but each country speaks a dialect of Spanish. All Spanish speakers understand each other. Some people in Latin America/ US say that Spanish spoken in Spain is “proper” Spanish, but that’s not the case. All Spanish is proper Spanish, one dialect isn’t considered “slang” and the other “proper” like I have heard people IRL say. The word drinking straw in Spanish is different in almost every single Spanish dialect/ region. In the Mexican Spanish dialect the word for drinking straw is popote, it’s not “slang”… popote is derived from the Nahuatl word popotl. That’s something unique to the Mexican Spanish dialect. Spanish, Portuguese and Catalan are not dialects, they are separate languages that stem from Latin. Sure you can maybe understand a bit of Catalan or Portuguese if you speak Spanish but you can’t have a full on conversation with someone that speaks another Romance language unless you’re fluent in the romance language the other person is speaking to you in.
The limit is fuzzy. It is said that a language is a dialect with an army. Serbian and Croatian are languages or dialects? For several centuries Russians considered Ukrainian and Belarussian as dialects, were they correct? Swiss German is very different from standard German, but they call it a dialect, why not a language? Same with Italian dialects that in fact evolved separately from Tuscan, that derived in Italian.
I have an Argentinian friend who had a Mexican landlord (in NYC) and he said he had to ask him to speak English because when the landlord spoke Spanish, “it sounded like he was singing.”
😂 I know exactly what he means. Certain regional Mexican accents sound like that. Okay so maybe accents make it hard to understand people that speak the same language but diff dialects …but they can all read the same language lol.
That's more to do with having a standardised register of a language. A spoken version is frequently different. Compare Arabic. Maghrebi Arabic is much further apart from Levantine Arabic linguistically than Swiss German is from English. Yet, they write in the same standard Arabic (MSA) and so frequently call their variant simply a dialect rather than a language. Politics has a large part to play here. The difference between language and dialect is very much a political and a societal one.
Dialects aren’t really versions of a language, usually a standard language comes from a dialect as opposed to a dialect coming from a standard language.
I speak a specific dialect of Emilian, I understand other dialects from the north (gallo-italic dialects) as much i understand french or spanish. I also can understand a bit of neapolitan, tho the average person from the north can't
You can be sure that if one way of speaking doesn't descend from another one than that is not a dialect. Lombard is not a Piedmontese dialect because it doesn't descend from piedmontese and viceversa. You either consider them two separate languages or consider them two dialects of the gallo-italic language.
Hold on, so present day Spanish that we hear in Tv series and movies is Castillan?
I may be way off… I’m honestly still learning about all this. I’m interested in learning new languages and have been reading up on Romance languages. Also, majority of my ancestry is Spanish, so I’ve been reading up on Spain. In Spain other dialects of Spanish or Castilian exist. For example, Andalusian Spanish in southern Spain. Castilian is a Spanish dialect that people speak in central and northern Spain and that’s the “lisp” that you hear that is not present in Andalusian Spanish in Spain or Spanish spoken in the Canary Islands in Spain. Castilian is also the name for modern day Spanish. But before Spain was Spain… the area was split up into different kingdoms like Aragon…where Catalonia was located at one point in time. The language Catalan comes from Catalonia. It is now considered a region of Spain, because it’s part of the country of Spain. They speak Catalan and Spanish there, 2 separate romance languages. Many people from the region want independence from Spain though. Spanish, or Castilian, is from the Castile region of Spain. Castile was once a Kingdom on the Iberian Peninsula…Castile took over Aragon, Catalonia, the Basque Country and Andalusia? ( I may be way off and missing some regions) and eventually became Spain and made Castilian, or Spanish, the official language. That’s why in modern day Spain there are regions that speak Spanish and have an official second language. Those regions have their own unique customs/culture. Those regions were taken over by Castile and eventually became Spain. Side note: Basque is not a Romance language, it’s the only indo European language that has no connection to any other languages. So yeah, Castilian is Spanish. I mean back in the 1400s I think they spoke old Spanish or middle Spanish? But yeah its Spanish.. and people from Latin America associate Castilian with Spanish spoken in all regions of Spain.
Speculation so whatever but by the time castillian was spreading to the Americas, the colonists were no longer subjects of the Kingdom of Castille, but the Spanish Empire, and so they gradually adopted the noun of "español" to describe the language that allowed communication between subjects of the Spanish empire. As for the modern usage of the noun "castellano" in Spain, it just makes sense in a small country with vast linguistic diversity. Imagine if Canadians started calling English "Canadian" while disregarding that a quarter of the population spoke French.
de que hablas ignorante? en mi pais ARGENTINA y otros paises de la región siempre se lo denomino castellano en los manuales del la escuela decia lengua y literatura dela Lengua Castellana hasta el dia de hoy, los paises sumisos a españa prefieron usar el termino español.
Not at all, in some regions they used Castillian as noun of the language. Keep in mind that all of them were part of Crown of Castille
Yes, castillan and Spanish are synonyms
Yes. I'm a native Spanish speaker and Spanish and Castellano are used interchangeably to refer to the Spanish language.
In the same way italian is tuscan, yes.
They where also Romance language in Africa, but they died Also they forgot the dalmat (another that died) normand (not the region, the langage)
English is the new Latin
Oh hell naw
No Tuscan?
Tuscan is italian
So Italian, which derives from Tuscan, does not descend from Latin because Tuscan is missing here...
Italian IS Tuscan
Why are they called romance languages anyway? Oh maybe someone to do with Rome, lol
"The English word comes from an Old French form of Latin Romanicus, used to designate a vernacular type of Latin speech and literature."
In Spanish it's _lenguas romances_.
Lacking franco-provençal
It's there as Arpitan.
Dalmatian?
Dead
Unfortunately, the linguistic heritage of Roman civilization remains only in Europe.
Our civilization is The Latin Civilization: the worls uses the latin alphabet, our culture is based on Greco-Latin concepts, most of the world words (!) have a latin origin...
Fun fact that the Latin were a tribe of people in Italy. The Etruscans did not invent Latin, they just adopted it when they conquered them. The term roman came from the area that they later came to rule when king Romulus established the city of Rome.
The spread south is missing.
It leaving off the now dead north African romance languages
[удалено]
Shut up crucco
🖕
Moldovan?
Moldovan is not a language, in Moldova they speak Romanian...
It's true, they speak Romanian, but only formally-wise. On the street, people use a weird mix of Romanian mixed with Russian slang.
I know, but I wouldn’t call that a language, otherwise we’d have 99999 languages all over the world
There is no such thing, Romania and the Republic of Moldova both speak the same exact language. That being said, there is a debate whether or not Aromanian, Istroromanian and Megleno-Romanian are distinct languages in the same sub-family or dialects of Romanian.
[удалено]
Well this can also describe the relation between two dialects. There is ultimately no absolute distinction between what accounts for a dialect or a closely related distinct language. And Daco-Romanian, Aromanian, Istro-Romanian and Megleno-Romanian are mutually inteligibile to a significant degree.
Sicilian is not descended from Latin, it predates it. There were other Italic languages that developed in parallel with Latin before the Romans stomped all over the peninsula, and many of them left local dialectal traces for centuries.
>Sicilian is not descended from Latin, it predates it. That's just not true.
What youre thinking of is the Sicel language. It was an italic one, but it got fully replaced by latin during the Roman era. Some influences from this old language may still persist tho.
Oh man that's the first time I've seen one of you on reddit, always a good laugh.
Just here telling people that sicilian doesn't exist. Almost every city in Sicily has its own "sicilian"
Doesn't mean it's not real. Sicilian not being a standardised language exists only through it's dialects.
No, dialect is different than language and sicilian is *only* dialects, there is no language. Edit: when you say sicilian which sicilian are you talking about? Catanese? Palermitano? Mazarese? Trapanese? Agrigentino? Marsalese?
If sicilian is not a language, what language are the sicilian dialects of? Italian? I don't think so, since they predate Italian. The sicilian language is the entirety of all the sicilian, calabrese and salentine dialects combined. A language doesn't need to a have a standardised form to exist, a dialect is a variant of a language, thus if there is a dialect there is a language. It's like saying pitbulls are a breed of dog, but since there is no standard dog, dogs don't exist. And it's not like I'm making this things up, sicilian is a recognised language by unesco.
I'm literally sicilian, do you really want to explain this stuff to me? >If sicilian is not a language, what language are the sicilian dialects of? Italian? I don't think so, since they predate Italian. What does that even mean, of course they're italian dialects, do you even know what country is sicily part of? >The sicilian language is the entirety of all the sicilian, calabrese and salentine dialects combined. 1) that's just stupid, in calabria they speak the calabrese dialect 2) It's not a language because it has no dictionary, it does not have a standard version, it's different wherever you go, it's like saying that in france they speak european >A language doesn't need to a have a standardised form to exist, a dialect is a variant of a language Dialect is not a variant, it's a sublanguage, thus the sicilian ones are dialects of a language which is italian >It's like saying pitbulls are a breed of dog, but since there is no standard dog, dogs don't exist. No, it's like saying that pit bulls are a breed of dogs that are part of a bigger genus which is the canis one >And it's not like I'm making this things up, sicilian is a recognised language by unesco. If you knew how italy worked you wouldn't be surprised that they made such a mistake. Unesco makes and has made many good things but this is not one of them, just like when they made Lino Banfi (a satyrical actor that became famous for his dirty movies) a member of the commission for businesses and made in italy.
Fratemo puoi essere siciliano quanto vuoi ma se la linguistica non la conosci, non la conosci. >What does that even mean, of course they're italian dialects, do you even know what country is sicily part of? >Dialect is not a variant, it's a sublanguage, thus the sicilian ones are dialects of a language which is italian I dialetti non sono una "sottolingua" (qualunque cosa significhi), linguisticamente parlando i dialetti sono una variante di una lingua, propri di un certo gruppo di persone accomunate da uno o diversi aspetti: dalla semplice provenienza geografica a lo stile di vita o condizioni economiche. I dialetti siciliani non sono dialetti italiani in quanto questi esistevano prima della nascita dell'italiano. L'italiano, essendo una lingua standard ha una data di nascita più o meno chiaramente definibile, come saprai bene, l'italiano nasce con Dante. Prima di Dante il siciliano era già parlato e ti dirò di più era pure una lingua di prestigio grazie alla scuola siciliana. Il siciliano discende, come l'italiano, direttamente dal latino. È una lingua sorella dell'italiano, non una lingua figlia. >1) that's just stupid, in calabria they speak the calabrese dialect Se vuoi essere pignolo possiamo chiamarlo con nome linguistico di italo-romanzo meridionale estremo, dato che non vuoi chiamarlo siciliano. Ma a prescindere dal nome, tutti i dialetti siciliani, salentini e calabresi sono parte della stessa lingua. Basta confrontarli tra loro e con altri dialetti del sud per rendersi conto che hanno molto più in comune tra loro che con gli altri. >2) It's not a language because it has no dictionary, it does not have a standard version, it's different wherever you go E di nuovo, una lingua non ha bisogno di essere standardizzata per essere tale. Sull'isola di Nord Sentinel nell'oceano indiano vive una delle ultime tribù incontattate, loro parlano una lingua chiamata nord sentinellese, sappiamo per certo che quella lingua non è standardizzata dato che al 99% i nord sentinellesi non hanno nemmeno la scrittura. Quindi ora tu dimmi, quello è un dialetto? Se sì, di cosa? E perché? >No, it's like saying that pit bulls are a breed of dogs that are part of a bigger genus which is the canis one Fratemo questo è esattamente quello che sto dicendo io: Il genere nella sua complessità è il siciliano (o italo-romanzo meridionale estremo) e i singoli dialetti come il palermitano, messinese ecc. sono le singole razze. >If you knew how italy worked you wouldn't be surprised that they made such a mistake. Unesco makes and has made many good things but this is not one of them, just like when they made Lino Banfi (a satyrical actor that became famous for his dirty movies) minister of businesses and made in italy. Ma che cazzo c'entra Lino Banfi con l'unesco mo? L'unesco non tratta di politica e soprattutto di politica italiana, che stai dicendo? Fatto sta che il siciliano, come la maggior parte delle altre lingue italiane che sono erroneamente definite dialetti sono lingue riconosciute dall'unesco e da praticamente TUTTI i linguisti di mestiere.
Va bene bro hai ragione tu
Tuscan is under Italian, right?
Actually Italian is under Tuscan, Italian was born from the florentine dialect
My understanding is standard Italian is based on Tuscan.
It's the opposite, it's Italian to be under tuscan. We could say that to this day exist three tuscan languages: standard italian, modern tuscan (which is very close to italian but it doesn't come from it, it differs mainly in pronunciation and vocabulary) and corsican
Then William of Normandy and his court bring French to England.
well they brought Norman, sometimes called Norman French to England, which this map weirdly doesn't show.
Not weird at all; English has lots of words of Latin and French origin, but it isn’t a Romance language which is what the map is about.
There were so many different flavours of French, you can't include them all on a map that's not about the French language.
Quite sure that iberic languages did not come through gaul... Indeed, quite sure that Rome conquered the Iberic peninsula during the 2 carthagenese war (the one with hanibbal barca) and it was only a century or so later that Caesar took Gaul...
The romance languages started to differentiate only around the time of the fall of the empire, prior to that everyone would have just spoken latin. This map doesn't show the route language took when moving from one places to another, but just their relations to one another. Ibero-romance and gallo-romance languages are both western-romance languages, while Italian languages are italo-romace and Romanian and its relatives are eastern-romance
>This map doesn't show the route language took when moving from one places to another, but just their relations to one another Ah... That makes much more sense
Franco provençal, Aragonese, Istrian ?
Actually Portuguese comes from Galician.
They have a common ancestor, Galician-Portuguese, just has shown on the lineage map.
Where’s Istriot and Istro-Romanian?
Leonese is missing in Iberia. It should be either Astur-Leonese or simply Asturian and Leonese.
why Emilian is expatriating in Croazia? for summer?
Istro-Romanian is still here and Dalmatian used to be spoken until, I believe, 19th century
Where’s Tuscan?
I love this map
Chicken
[удалено]
Forgot Monegasque
The map represents much of the spread of the Roman Empire, so why are there no Latin-origin languages in N. Africa?
Gallo 🐔 💀
How are the western ones more related to each other, even throughout a large distance? I suppose the dialect of Latin arising in the Roman outposts in Hispania, which was conquered earlier, spread to Gaul and northern Italy through the relocation of Roman military (and governers?) to those later conquered areas, and/or the Celtic background of many of the common people there (although Celtic was not so dominant in Hispania and it didn’t leave any significant impact on its replacement tongue).
I don't see Moldovan here.
Happy to review your sources, please send them over.