Talk:Scandinavians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Disambiguation
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 

Untitled[edit]

you should include the finns in the list

Yes, I found it rather confusing as clicking on "Nordic" results on a page that has Finland listed? mwe85.156.251.13 (talk) 19:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Finns are not Scandinavians. Their language is totally unrelated to Scandinavian. Lindatavlov (talk) 06:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Wrong, they are, since scandinavian is merely a geo expression, not an ethno-linguistic one. The Ogre (talk) 16:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
If you have no knowledge of Scandinavia, I advise you to stay out of this discussion. Scandinavia is not "merely a geo expression", it's a cultural, linguistic and ethnic region. The Scandinavians are an ethnic group in the same way as Germans in Germany, Austria and other ethnically German nations. They have common ancestors, a common language (in Scandinavia it's a dialect continuum in the same way as German), common culture, religion and every other aspect that constitutes an ethnic group. There has been a Scandinavian nationalist movement (if the norsemen could be an ethnic group, how can their descendants some hundred years later not be an ethnic group, even if they still share the same language and culture to a much larger extent than what is the case in many other European nations?). If Scandinavian was "merely a geo expression", there couldn't be an article on Scandinavian languages (the article does not deal with languages in Scandinavia). Lindatavlov (talk) 13:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Finns are definitely not Scandinavians, they are not even Indo-European! In fact, Persian, Kurdish and Hindu are more closely related to the Scandinavian languages than is Finnish. True, Finland has much common history with Scandinavia, but that does not make them Scandinavians! --Oddeivind (talk) 18:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Now you are confusing language with ethnicity. Finnish is not an Indo-European language, that is true, but you make a big mistake if you think there is such a thing as an Indo-European race or an Indo-European ethnicity. You make an additional mistake when you confuse states with people, there is no such thing as "one state, one people". There are Swedes and Norwegians who speak Sápmi, a non-Scandinavian language, just as there are Swedes (and some Norwegians) who speak Finnish (Meänkieli. Likewise, hundreds of thousans of Finns speak Swedish Finland Swedes. Last but not least, please do not confuse the way Scandinavia is used in Swedish and Norwegian with its use in English. In English, it is often taken to include Iceland and Finland.JdeJ (talk) 18:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
"Race" is a rather unclear conception, although the Finnish are probably genetically more closely related to Scandinavians than are for instance the Persians. Ethnicity, as far as I understand the concept, refers to a feeling of common decent. It is also more vague than for instance the concept of "nation", which is itself used to refer to anything from a state (as in the UN) to an ethnic group, although most often when the ethnic group has a political agenda. When it comes to the Samis, they would probably not have been considered belonging to the Scandinavian ethnic group around 1900 (althogh they live in Scandinavia). Today the bordeline between Samis and ethnic Norwegians and Swedes are more unclear. Anyway, ethnicity is one thing, geography quite another. It is often the case that outsiders have a wrong/unclear understanding. In fact, there is a separate term for the NORDIC countries, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland. This term is often confused with the narrower term Scandinavia.
Sorry about all the digressions in the argument over... --Oddeivind (talk) 19:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I am Swedish myself, so I fully understand you. However, it is we in Scandinavia who have a confused view of the English term. In Swedish, and propably in Norwegian, the different between Skandinavien and Norden is quite clear. Not so in English, the most common English usage is to use Scandinavia for what we would call Norden. This usage has become so established that it is by far the most common and we make a mistake if we try to insist on English usage following our usage. I definitely think our usage is more logic :) but we have to admit that it is not normal English usage.JdeJ (talk) 20:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

There is a Scandinavian ethnic group[1] Lindatavlov (talk) 14:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

"all Danes are part of the Scandinavian ethnic group"Hutchinson Country Facts —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lindatavlov (talkcontribs) 14:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

"Once overwhelmingly ethnically Scandinavian, Sweden has experienced significant immigration from many different countries"[2]

Iceland is not part of Scandinavia (as a geographical term), but Icelanders are nevertheless ethno-linguistically Scandinavian. Icelandic could not be a Scandinavian language (as opposed to Finno-Ugric Finnish language) if "Scandinavian" was "merely a geo expression" and not an ethno-linguistic concept. This proves you are wrong, so stop beating the dead horse and please return to Portugal, since you obviously have no knowledge of Scandinavia. Lindatavlov (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Map[edit]

Perhaps a map more akin to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nordiska_spr%C3%A5k.PNG would be more appropriate. The current one (Scandinavia_location_map_definitions.PNG) deals with geography, not ethnicity. There would be no need for different colours for different countries though. I don't know if there are any areas to the north with Sami majorities but they should be discluded. Pollodiablowiki (talk) 04:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Who are the Scandinavians this article is about?[edit]

I think this article is confusing and possibly NPOV, by not having a good definition of what it is about. The article says:

"Scandinavians are a group of Germanic peoples, inhabiting Scandinavia, which includes Danes, Norwegians and Swedes. [...] Scandinavians were known as Norsemen during the Middle Ages. [...] Scandinavians may in a modern context also be used to refer to the inhabitants of the three Scandinavian countries"

This is how the subject is defined. Now, "a group" seems to mean a subset of the population. Then we have to sets of statistics, where seemingly all population of Finland is counted in one of them, and an approximate number of Swedish speakers in the other. For Sweden the numbers are the same in both sets. For USA and Australia we have a sum of people with some of the main ancestors from a Scandinavian country. It seems people with a Swedish mother and a Norwegian father are counted twice (regardless of ethnic background or ethnic identity).

Here obviously different criteria are used for different countries. The problem is that the article hasn't decided whether it is about people in or from a certain area (the definition of which varies between parts of the article without clear notice), people speaking North Germanic languages, people speaking Continental Scandinavian languages or people that are ethnically Scandinavian (by some unmentioned, probably varying, definition).

This is a mess, but without clearing it up I cannot see how the article can provide useful information about "Scandinavians". See also the articles about Scandinavia, the Nordic countries and North Germanic languages, where some of the issues are treated more clearly.

--LPfi (talk) 12:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)