Talk:Catalan language

[Random Flames]

[I am repairing the Talk page by moving mile or so of scattershot invective and ad hominem attacks and blather under a ==section== so that the Talk page has a usable table of contents again. There are actually a couple of salient points in here, but a) the posters didn't bother to follow the guidelines for posting to talk pages; b) I don't have all day to sift them out, c) too of them are unsigned anyway, and d) most date from 2004 or so. It's quite a mess. At least now we can see the ToC and skip that crud if we want to! — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)]

On 00:36 Sep 3, 2002 some anonymous 194.224.86.10 removed these paragraphs with no justification:

• on the name of the language ...(Catal&agrave, Valencià)
• on the areas where it is spoken ... Valencia (País Valencià, Spain), where it is coofficial with Spanish.

Now, if you do not like the facts of reality, would you mind to explain AND justify your version to us?

---

Interestingly, you omitted to mention the fact that there is "some" discussion about the relationship between Català and Valencià. You just make them the same... ...like you also do with Balear and others.

Let's not get into the mess of that discussion, but... shouldn't it at least be "hinted" that the discussion EXIST? (because that's a "fact of reality", isn't it?)

There are people claiming the Moon is made of green cheese as well. May be you think it worth of being hinted here too.

---

I notice that a recent edit by Perique des Palottes takes pretty much all of the content of Valencian (Valencià) and brings it into this article as well. I'm not going to start an edit war, but it seems like this must be a revival of the same fight that apparently occurred in September 2002. Can we please try again to reach a consensus on how to handle this? And can we please try to reach that consensus in the talk page rather than by simply reviving an old fight in the article itself without discussion.

To that I add that I would hope the discussion will consist of more than random jabs between Catalans and Valencianos. I would really like to see each side weigh in with references to what significant linguists hold what stake in the matter.

As I understand it (I'm a presumably neutral party, but this is not a language I even read particularly well, let alone speak), Catalan and Valencian are mutually intelligible dialects, as are the various Balearic dialects. However, in general usage, and for reasons more historical than linguistic (e.g. Barcelona once had a very big navy, which is often the difference between being deemed a langauge and a dialect; that's only partly a joke), the term "Catalan" without qualification usually refers to the language of Barcelona and of Catalonia generally; the other forms are usually deemed to be dialects of Catalan. (I realize that at some level this is an argument like whether Galego is a dialect of Portuguese or vice versa, not ultimately resolvable, but the point is that our arrangement of articles should probably follow the prevailing winds of professional linguists, with commentary explaining how alternate models may have equal objective validity. -- Jmabel 08:56, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

-- A try for NPOV.

Catalan was ported in the 13th century to Balearic Islands and the newly created Valencian Kingdom by the Catalan and Aragonese invaders (notice that the area of Catalan language still extends to part of what is now the region of Aragon). Almost all muslim population of the Balearic Islands were expulsed. But, many muslim peasants stayed in many rural areas of the Valencian Kingdom, as it happened before in the lower Ebre basin (or Catalunya Nova).

During 13th and 14th centuries Barcelona city was the preeminent city and port of the confederation namelly ruled by the King of Aragon (Aragon, Catalonia, Roussillon, Valencia, Balearic Islands, Sicily and later Sardinia and Naples). All prose writers of this era used the name 'Catalan' for their common language (e.g. the Catalan Ramon Muntaner, the Majorcan Ramon Llull, etc) The thing is more complicated with the poets as they wrote in a sort of artificial langue d'Oc in the tradition of the trovadours.

During 15 and 16 centuries the preeminence is taken by Valencia city, due to several factors, demographic changes, the royal court moves there, etc. So, in 15 century the name 'Valencian' starts to be used by Valencian writers to refer to their language.

In 16 century the name 'Llemosí' (that is, the occitan dialect of Limoges) is first documented as refering to Catalan. This attribution has no philological base, but it is explicable by the complex sociolinguistic frame of Catalan poetry of this era (Catalan versus trovadouresques Occitan). Ausias March himself was not sure what language he was writing in (it is clearly his contemporary Catalan or Valencian, and not Occitan anymore).

And then, during 16th century most of the Valencian elites switched languages to Castilian Spanish, as can be seen in the balance of languages of printed books in Valencia city: by the beginning of century Latin and Catalan (or Valencian if you prefer) are main languages of press, by the end of the century Spanish is main language of press. But rural areas and urban working classes continued to speak their vernacular language up to this day.

The issue of a different language or not for Catalan and Valencian has been politically agitated several times by extreme right wing parties in Valencia city area (curiously they have often been Spanish monoglots or not willing to allow any public presence of Valencian language).

Most current (21th century) Valencian speakers and writers use a consensus orthographical normative (Normes de Castelló, 1932) that allows for several diverse idiosincrasies of Valencian, Balearic, Nordoccidental Catalan and Oriental Catalan.

Any serious linguist and all universities teaching romance languages consider those linguistics variants to be part of the same language (sort of Canadian French vs French of France). The differences do exist, the accent of a Valencian is recognisable, there are differences in subjunctive terminations, and diverse Valencian lexical items. But those differences are not any wider than among Nordoccidental Catalan and Oriental Catalan.

In fact, Septentrional Valencian (spoken in Castelló province and Matarranya valley, a strip of Aragon) is more similar to Catalan of the lower Ebre basin (spoken in south half part of the Tarragona province and another strip of Aragon) than to apitxat Valencian (the Horta, Valencia city area).

---

I'm going to try to rewrite the above "try for NPOV" native English (not that it was far off), so we can discuss the POV issue separately from any issue of how correct the English is; I've also made some very small further NPOV changes. PdP, let me know if there is anywhere you think I'm misrepresenting your intent:

Catalan was exported in the 13th century to Balearic Islands and the newly created Valencian Kingdom by the Catalan and Aragonese invaders (note that the area of Catalan language still extends to part of what is now the region of Aragon). During this period, almost all of the Moslem population of the Balearic Islands were expelled, but many Moslem peasants remained in many rural areas of the Valencian Kingdom, as had happened before in the lower Ebre basin (or Catalunya Nova).

During 13th and 14th centuries Barcelona was the preeminent city and port of the confederation nominally ruled by the King of Aragon (Aragon, Catalonia, Roussillon, Valencia, the Balearic Islands, Sicily, and - later - Sardinia and Naples). All prose writers of this era used the name 'Catalan' for their common language (e.g. the Catalan Ramon Muntaner, the Majorcan Ramon Llull, etc.) The matter is more complicated among the poets, as they wrote in a sort of artificial Langue d'Oc in the tradition of the Troubadours.

During the 15th and 16th centuries the city of Valencia gains preeminence in the confederation, due to several factors, including demographic changes and the fact that the royal court moved there. Presumably As a result of this shift in the balance of power within the confederation, in the 15th century the name 'Valencian' starts to be used by writers from Valencia to refer to their language.

In the 16th century the name 'Llemosí' (that is to say, "the Occitan dialect of Limoges") is first documented as being used to refer to this language. This attribution has no philological base, but it is explicable by the complex sociolinguistic frame of Catalan poetry of this era (Catalan versus Troubadouresque Occitan). Ausias March himself was not sure what to call the language he was writing in (it is clearly closer to his contemporary Catalan or Valencian than to the archaic Occitan).

Then, during the 16th century, most of the Valencian elites switched languages to Castilian Spanish, as can be seen in the balance of languages of printed books in Valencia city: at the beginning of century Latin and Catalan (or Valencian if you prefer) are main languages of press, but by the end of the century Spanish is main language of press. Still, rural areas and urban working classes have continued to speak their vernacular language up to this day.

Do we want to add here to that last sentence, "and Catalan and Valencian have undergone a major revival among urban elites in recent generations."?

The issue of whether Catalan and Valencian constitute different languages or merely dialects has been the subject of political agitation several times during what period? Post Franco? or earlier? by extreme right wing parties in the area of the city of Valencia. Curiously, the people claiming Valencian as a separate language have often been Spanish monoglots or people unwilling to allow any public presence of the Valencian language.

Most current (21st century) Valencian speakers and writers use a consensus orthographical normative (Normes de Castelló, 1932) that allows for several diverse idiosyncrasies of Valencian, Balearic, Nordoccidental Catalan, and Oriental Catalan.

All universities teaching Romance languages, and virtually all linguists, consider these all to be linguistic variants of the same language (similarly to Canadian French vs. Metropolitan French). We would do well here to quote a very respectable authority holding this opinion, preferably one from Valencia or abroad, rather than from Catalunya. Differences do exist, the accent of a Valencian is recognisable, there are differences in subjunctive terminations, and there are diverse Valencian lexical items (word differences), but those differences are not any wider than among Nordoccidental Catalan and Oriental Catalan.

In fact, Septentrional Valencian (spoken in the Castelló province and Matarranya valley, a strip of Aragon) is more similar to the Catalan of the lower Ebre basin (spoken in southern half of Tarragona province and another strip of Aragon) than to apitxat Valencian (spoken in the city of Horta, in the province of Valencia).

We would do well here to point to the most respectable authority holding a dissenting opinion.

-- Jmabel 22:12, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

---

Dividing to win -- This is what Spain's doing, even a blind person can see that -- spreding confusion among people that knowns less. The only false POV is the political one, that argues that they are different languages.

[[user:PedroPVZ|Pedro] from Portugal

---

"...sharing edition with its Spanish release..." doesn't make sense. Nosoccomtothom, could you paraphrase this? It's OK if it's easiest for you to paraphrase in Spanish or Catalan, I can presumably translate. -- Jmabel 18:39, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, what i wanted to mean is that El Periódico de Catalunya has two releases either in Spanish and Catalan. Both of them have the same identical news but translated in one or other language. How do you think this idea is best shown? Regards User:Nosoccomtothom (answer transferred from my talk page -- Jmabel 05:05, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC))

---

Hi, I want to know where the translation for the central Catalan come from. Is this very very old Catalan?? I'm Catalan and I understand this text is not correct at all. There's a lot of errors. An actual correct version of the text would be:

Un home només tenia dos fills. El més jove va dir al seu pare: "Ja és hora que sigui el meu propi amo i que tingui cèntims; me n'he d'anar a veure món. Partiu la vostra herència i doneu-me el que em toqui". "Ai, fill meu", va dir el pare, "com vulguis; ets un dolent i Déu et castigarà". I després va obrir una capsa i va partir tot el que tenia en dues parts. Al cap d'uns quants dies, el dolent se'n va anar del poble molt tibat i sense dir adéu a ningú. Va travessar molta terra erma, molts boscos i molts rius, i va arribar a una gran ciutat on es va gastar tots els seus cèntims.

"Cèntims" is ok but "diners" is more commonly used.

Perhaps this translation is an old one when the people didn't have a proper grammar but at least in the sentence "Ja és hora que sigui el meu propi amo i que ..." the "i" conjunction is missing. And, anyway, even if this is archaic Catalan I think it's better to put an actual correct version. I'm also wondering about the translation of the other Catalan dialects!! --Rusian04 04:18, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As the article says, these come from Manuel Milà i Fontanals work in 1861. That is presumably the period of the examples (which come from the Catalan-language version of the article, the only thing added here is my translation of the passage into English for the benefit of English-language readers.) Yes, some of these come off as very archaic. I read Catalan pretty well, but writing it is another matter; no one seems to have seen fit in the Catalan Wikipedia to add modern equivalents; I think that would be worth doing, but I also think it is very vaulable to preserve examples of the older, more extreme, dialects. My own Catalan isn't good enough to be confident in writing that; you are a native speaker. It would be a useful addition, certainly here in the English Wikipedia and probably even in the Catalan Wikipedia.

I would quite disagree with the view behind "didn't have a proper grammar." The fact that the grammar of one time and place differs from another doesn't mean that one of them is wrong. Just like modern Catalan isn't "very bad Latin" (or vice versa), the various 19th-century regional dialects were not unsuccessful attempts to talk like a Barcelones. They were (presumably correct) uses of the dialect of their time and place. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:10, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

---

"Majorquinian" doesn't appear in Google outside Wikipedia. The English adjectives for the islands are "Majorcan" and "Minorcan". --Henrygb 23:23, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Language politics in Valencia

The following was recently and anonymously cut: "...by extreme right wing parties in the area of the city of Valencia. Curiously, the people claiming Valencian as a separate language have often been Spanish monoglots or people unwilling to allow any public presence of Valencian." I believe the cut material to be correct, but probably the sort of thing that should have a citation. I would welcome its restoration, especially with appropriate citation, but I have neither a reference nor first-hand knowledge. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:46, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

The current ruckus is (mostly) between ERC (leftist catalan independentists) and PP (Spanish centralist). Curiously, the Valencian side is mostly advocated by a party which is (to put it mildly) unsympathetic to decentralization and national minorities. I would like to know from someone in Valencia what the position of UV (valencian nationalist) is, because I can´t find that in the Spanish national media. — Miguel 12:32, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)

UV is not a valencian nationalist party - the valencian nationalist party is BLOC, which claims Valencian and Catalan to be the same language.

62.43.177.47

"Passive" vs "Active" Speakers

The article states that Catalan is spoken by 6.5 million people "actively," and 12 million "passively." I have never for another language heard such a distinction made. Can someone please explain? I would think that a person who understands a language "passively" cannot be considered a speaker of a language. If he cannot speak the language, he is not a speaker of the language. Sounds like some inflation of numbers for political purposes if you ask me.

Peter Wye January 16th 2005

The difference it's quite clear: in Catalonia we learn all both Spanish and Catalan in school. We (almost) all can speak both languages without any problem. However, there are people who use in practice (almost) only one of this languages. I am, for example a passive spanish speaker: I can speak it perfectly but I use it only in very rare cases (to speak with a Mexican friend, to travel arround the world, etc).

Xavier. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.139.150.31 (talk • contribs) 1 Dec 2005.

Partisan and unencyclopedic edits

User:68.6.123.6 is making massive, partisan, and unencyclopedic edits to this article. However, I am not sure that the substance of what he/she is saying is entirely incorrect. Therefore, I am not immediately reverting.

Someone more expert than I will probably want to look through these edits and determine if any of them are worth keeping, possibly in somewhat modified form. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:30, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

Backwards, very backwards

Of what possible use is Diccionari Invers de la Llengua Catalana, recently added to external links, based on spelling Catalan words backwards? Seems like basically a joke. I think it should be removed, but thought I'd bring the question here first. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:15, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

I dunno... it could be useful to find rhymes when writing poetry. — Chameleon 23:11, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A retrograde dictionary is used very often in linguistics. It can be used to research suffixes and verb endings. Such a dictionary exists in almost every language (e.g. for English you could search every word ending in -ship). -- Deef1981

Number of speakers

Number of speakers was changed without citation from "6.5 million active, 12 million passive" to "More than 7'5 milion". Aside from the fact that neither "7'5" nor "milion" exists in English... is there a source for this? -- Jmabel | Talk 18:01, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

• The number keeps bouncing all over the place, with absolutely no citations provided. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:01, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Ethnologue gives 6,667,328, based on 1996 data. Would "about 7 million," based on that number, be acceptable? john k 03:42, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

The information in the corresponding section of the article, based on official sources (links are also provided), appears to be more detailed and recent than the one in the Ethnologue. The sentence «More than 7.5 million» in the table should be restored...--Periku 10:07, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Whatever is going on, would someone please get the citations into the article? It's OK if we give a range, and indicate our multiple, conflicting sources, that's normal. But I would point out that people who can merely "understand" a language are not generally counted into the population of those who speak the language. Hence, serious doubts about the 11 million currently claimed in the article.

Is everyone who "can speak" Catalan a first-language speaker of Catalan? john k 05:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

The 11 million figure is indeed wrong: people that merely understand Catalan are, of course, not speakers. Not all the 7.5 million speakers are first-language speakers, but this distinction is really fuzzy, particularly in Spain (Catalonia, for example, is arguably the most perfectly bilingual society in the world): the Ethnologue itself doesn't bother to provide estimates...--Periku 07:52, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

The bilingualism is certainly the case; still, can we try to cite (in the article) the sources of the figures we are using? -- Jmabel | Talk 06:12, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

During Franco

During the Franco regime (1939-1975), the use of Catalan was banned, along with other regional languages in Spain such as Basque and Galician. Following the death of Franco in 1975 and the restoration of democracy, the ban was lifted

Certainly, there was activism and publications in Catalan and Basque (the initial stages of Batua itself) and Galician in the late Franco era. Somebody should clarify what was allowed, when and in which circumstances. --Error 7 July 2005 00:31 (UTC)

There was a ban for the use of any of these languages in any public place, even when two people talked in a restaurant from one table to another. Except for the strictily private area, the use of catalan wasn't allowed at all.--Elgie 23:15, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

If Catalan was banned then maybe Elgie or someone else will cite the law or decree banning it, and maybe Elgie or someone else will produce evidence of anyone ever having been prosecuted or harassed in locations like restaurants. Certainly all the evidence (I'm not talking about reports along the lines of "Hey, my grandad says he was punched in 1942 for speaking Catalan") I have come across is to the contrary. For example, publishing in Catalan in Catalonia recommences in 1940 - I believe the monks up on Montserrat got the ball rolling - and speeds up at the end of WWII, by which stage there is a specialist Catalan bookshop operating publicly in central Barcelona. Amateur and professional theatre is also available in Catalan from at least the late 40s, and I've got school yearbooks from the time that make liberal use of Catalan. Certainly, a decree seems to have been issued by Wenceslao González Oliveros, Barcelona's civil governor after the war, forbidding public servants from using Catalan in- or outside public buildings. However, that's not the same as a blanket ban, and anecdotal evidence (sorry) is that it was not enforced for very long or very widely, partly because local officials up in the hills often weren't very good at Spanish and the public wouldn't necessarily have understood them anyway. Certainly, all talk of a ban having been in place in the 50s and 60s is nonsense. A more truthful statement would be something like "The use of Catalan in institutional contexts was inhibited, particularly during the early stages of the dictatorship." (User:Kalebeul 14 Aug 2005)

Sounds like this calls for some serious research byu someone. As Error remarked above, somebody should clarify what was allowed, when and in which circumstances. Shouldn't be that hard to document, I'm sure there is a book on this, albeit probably not in English. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:20, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

If somebody does this, don't forget to document in Spain under Franco. --Error 11:20, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Cases of fines for the use of Catalan, not only in places like restaurants, but even in telephone calls, is indeed documented but as far as I know they happened only during the Spanish Civil War and the first months of the post-war period. It is well-known the edict of Eliseo Álvarez Arenas, military chief-of-occupation of Barcelona: «Estad seguros, catalanes, de que vuestro lenguaje en el uso privado y familiar no será perseguido.» A completely different thing was the public use of the language, which will be brutally repressed during franquism, particularly during its early period (1939-1944). It is true that the first book legally published in Catalan in post-war Catalonia was already in 1942, but publication had many restrictions for a long time (for example, it is very significant that translations were banned until the 60s). Catalan was never allowed as official second language while Franco was alive: not even the use of catalan christian names was officially permitted (!), let alone the presence of Catalan in the public educational system... Regards.--Periku 01:40, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

AFAIK, Catalan was not an official language earlier (since Philip V of Spain?) I don't know about earlier use in the educational system (it was a competence for the municipalities, I think). --Error 11:20, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Catalan was an official language in Catalonia during the 1932-1939 period, according to the corresponding Statute of Autonomy of 1932, Article 2: «Catalan is, along with Castilian (Spanish), an official language in Catalonia.» Catalan language had already been introduced in the primary schools of Catalonia with the Decreto de Bilingüismo of 29/4/1931; after 1932, it will be introduced even in the University. Public education in Catalonia during the Second Republic was considerably plural: there were schools managed by the central government, the catalan Generalitat, the municipalities... see e.g. this article (in Spanish). Regards.--Periku 17:44, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

For the benefit of those who do not read Spanish, the quotation in the previous not reads, "You may be sure, Catalans, that your private and family usage of your dialect will not be persecuted." The Spanish lenguaje is—at least as I understand it—much closer in meaning to the English dialect than language; the latter would normally be rendered as idioma. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:27, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Jmabel. Although I think that the best rendering of the Spanish «lenguaje» is still language, it is true that «lenguaje» is not as usual and may have some negative connotation that «idioma» or «lengua» don't have, although it is not as explicit as in the word «dialect». Regards.--Periku 08:35, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Periku. I think that you're agreeing - and Solé i Sabaté, who you cite, certainly would - that the phrase used in the article is false and should be changed. Solé i Sabaté's research is interesting and deserves further investigation. I suspect, for example, that many of the cases of closures and destruction cited had less to do with any desire to suppress Catalan language or culture than with the determination within the new regime to put an end to secessionist and left-wing activities. I've documented the great boom in sardana activity during the dictatorship and would be most surprised if this were an isolated occurrence.Kalebeul 16:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I am not quite sure of agreeing with you. Although the sentence in the article could be qualified, there is enough evidence for the desire of the francoism to suppress Catalan language and culture, which was particularly brutal during its early period. Certainly, important members of the illustrated fascism as Dionisio Ridruejo or Serrano Suñer had a different opinion (cf. Solé i Sabaté: [1]), but they were not listened. The example of the sardana is indeed an isolated occurrence, as Solé i Sabaté also indicates (ibid.): «The only manifestation of Catalan identity tolerated was the sardana, it being considered a regional dance and as such an example of the “richness of Spanish folklore”.» Regards.--Periku 10:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Francoism didn't criticise much traditional traits such as the sardana or traditional theater because it wanted Catalan to be seen as a regional, old thing, and a culture which can't achieve any normality at all. Thus, only traditional theater, sardana and medieval poetry were allowed. In fact, some writers tried to sneak their works under censorship by claiming they were medieval or traditional works.

62.43.177.47

Oh, and by the way, something as simple as giving your child a Catalan name was banned during the regime - this should be the definitive proof that Francoism was certainly UNfriendly to the use of Catalan... Sputnikpanicpuppet 20:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Not so easy. I guess there was no problem with Montserrat or Nuria (but there would be with Núria or Jordi). --Error 21:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the word forbidden and banned, as it would seem there is no evidence for this. I have put repressed as it certainly wasn't permitted in many circumstances, if you can think of a better word, change it. But "forbidden" needs a decree or law from the time to source it. user:Boynamedsue

Adéu siau may be singular too

Adéu siau is not always plural (see Gran diccionari de la llengua catalana: Adéu siau, definition in Catalan). It's just a more formal way of saying good bye.

--Outlyer 19:46, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

EU Constitution

--Yodajaus, Im pretty new on editing, but I saw a big mistake in this article, it said Catalan and Valencian versions of the european constitution were identical. This is obviously (if you read them) false, even the first sentence isn't identical. I know some mass media said they were, but please download both versions and read only two pages. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.57.2.146 (talk • contribs) 27 Aug 2005.

• Can someone indicate where to find those? http://europa.eu.int/constitution/index_en.htm does not give either of these. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:49, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

You might want to try http://www.constitucioneuropea.es/index35c3.html?op=doc. There's even a Balear version. :)--Theathenae 18:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

I tried, but my browser crashed on the massive PDF files. If you are accessing these successfully, could you let us know exactly what the respective first sentences are? They'd presumably make a great example for the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:03, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, the constitution's excessive length has been one of the major criticisms articulated by its detractors. :) I've skimmed through the three versions and have so far found no difference whatsoever. They are identical as far as I can tell. As you can see on the website, the document's title is Tractat pel qual s'establix una Constitució per a Europa for all three. This doesn't mean I think Valencian shouldn't be considered a separate language. As with Serbian and Croatian, this is entirely a political question and has little to do with linguistics. If the Valencians want their language to be considered separate, that is their prerogative. And spoken Valencian sounds much closer to Castilian than central Catalan.--Theathenae 06:59, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Here's the opening paragraph of the preamble in Catalan, Balearic and Valencian:

Catalan
INSPIRANT-SE en l’herència cultural, religiosa i humanista d’Europa, a partir de la qual s’han desenvolupat els valors universals dels drets inviolables i inalienables de la persona humana, la democràcia, la igualtat, la llibertat i l’Estat de dret;

Balearic
INSPIRANT-SE en l’herència cultural, religiosa i humanista d’Europa, a partir de la qual s’han desenvolupat els valors universals dels drets inviolables i inalienables de la persona humana, la democràcia, la igualtat, la llibertat i l’Estat de dret;

Valencian
INSPIRANT-SE en l’herència cultural, religiosa i humanista d’Europa, a partir de la qual s’han desenvolupat els valors universals dels drets inviolables i inalienables de la persona humana, la democràcia, la igualtat, la llibertat i l’Estat de dret;

--Theathenae 07:23, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Having read through them in slightly more detail now, it is obvious that they are all identical but shouldn't be. Valencian seua occurs in the Catalan document instead of Catalan seva, as does huit instead of vuit. I remember reading somewhere that the Catalan authorities deliberately submitted a Valencianised version in order to emphasise the unitat de la llengua. This means that the documents could be slightly different if the Catalan version were actually written in pure standard Catalan.--Theathenae 07:58, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

These are the same difference as in British English and American English with words such as "colour" and "color", "authorise" and "authorize", "hood" and "bonnet", "trunk" and "boot", etc... but surely both are the same language, aren't these?. In fact, there are more differences than between valencian and catalan. --Martorell 21:53, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying perfectly well, but the standard forms in an official Catalan document should be seva and vuit, should they not?--Theathenae 03:58, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

No, they shouldn't. All forms are considered correct by IEC.

62.43.177.47

---

Yodajaus

May have been changed after catalanist pressure on government, but initially valencian title was "Tractat pel qual s'instituïx una constitució per a Europa".

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.57.2.19 (talk • contribs) 29 Aug 2005.

That said, it is quite clear that the remark about the official versions varying in the first sentence is apparently not true. If someone can cite to demonstrate that politics was behind the versions being absolutely identical, that would be worth mentioning, but until someone does so, the old text that simply says thear are identical should probably stand. -- Jmabel | Talk 15:47, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

The evidence lies in Valencian forms (seua, huit) being used in the official Catalan version instead of standard Catalan (seva, vuit).--Theathenae 03:55, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Both variants are official according to IEC (Institut d'Estudis Catalans). Both can be used. Of course in Catalonia, seva and vuit are much more used. However, those differences are not as many as differences between British and American English or between European and Brazilian Portuguese (which have two official different spellings without making them separate languages). Best regards, Marco Neves 15:45, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Maps

Why does the article have two rather similar dialect maps? At the very least, can we place them near one another to facilitate comparison? -- Jmabel | Talk 02:21, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

No explanation forthcoming, so I'll remove one. --87.189.80.209

Yes in Catalan

Is yes 'oc' as in Occitan ?--Jondel 07:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Found 'si' in the online dictionaries.--Jondel 07:33, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

It's "sí".

The form 'oc' does also exist, but it was only used in Medieval literature, like that of Ramon Llull.

62.43.177.47

I lived for 53 years in Mallorca (one of the balearic islands) and never heard "oc" for "yes", they allways said "si". Coronellian 18:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Oc as in Occitan (langue d'oc), spoken in the Languedoc region in France and elsewhere, represents the affirmative, as opposed to Oïl, as in the Languedoïl. Both mean yes.
Oc comes from the Latin Hoc. Although hoc was used in proto-catalan, it has not been used since, and modern Catalan and its speakers do not recognise it. Yes is thus only Sí (with an accent, otherwise it means If, the conditional).
--YuriBCN 09:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Hecho diferencial

Removed from the "Classification" section: "It is frequently associated with separatist activity from Catalonia, which wants to split from Spain." At best this was misplaced. But more importantly, for the most part, the Catalans do not speak Catalan as a political statement. They speak it because it is their native language.

This reminds me of a joke, circa 1996: "I think it's perfectly normal that the Catalans speak Catalan. The real hecho diferencial would be for them to speak Gallego." -- Jmabel | Talk 20:45, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I noticed that the article has no numbers on how many Catalan speakers have it as first language or home language. They would be interesting, supposing it has meaning in the many cases of bilingual individuals. --Error 02:30, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

NPOV rewrite

If there is no oposition, I will rewrite the portion regarding the Valencian-Catalan relation in a more NPOV, presenting the two sides of the issue. -- Afaus 15:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

The other issue is marginal, and exclussively politic, there isn't any linguistic matter. The official language academy in the Land of Valencia (Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua) defend the unity of the language, altough it also states that names used for the whole language are two: Catalan, and Valencian. The concept is "one language, two names" isn't unique, it's the same case for two names for Spanish, "castellano" and "español". --Joanot Martorell ✉ 18:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I made considerable further edits, mostly to remove redundancies, be concise, add links, etc., and I reorganized the material. I don't believe I cut anything substantive; if I did, it was by mistake. I did cut the following sentence, because I couldn't see why it's there: "Consider also the web sites of the Valencian universities: Universitat Jaume I de Castelló, Universitat de València or Universitat d'Alacant." This tells the (presumably English-speaking) reader to "consider" three Valencian-language web sites, without indicating what they should note about them; I read Catalan/Valencian moderately well (which probably puts me in with 1-2% of native English speakers), but still I have no idea what I was supposed to notice by "considering" these. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:57, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Carche

I'd like to say that Catalan is not spoken in the Carche area. I have been there and checked it by myself. mabuimo (13 Jan 2006) BTW, this article, among others is 100% political. I won't do further edition on it but I'd like that this comment stays here for the incoming users. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mabuimo (talk • contribs) 16 Jan 2006.

It is not widely spoken anymore, but it IS spoken.

62.43.177.47 16 June 2006

serbo-croatian formula

Hi Reading all these language arguments, very familliar to me, I would just add that the Serbo-croatian formula ( more croatian than serbian ) of fighting about the name of the same language (serbocroatian), and looking for non-existing differences in it, just to fake it "different" eg.( cro vs serb ), is spreading out into western Mediterraneans ( catalons vs valencians ). Maybe it's a natural thing for all mediterraneans, and it will go on until all they realize that having a same language, with variety of dialects is a precious thing, something they need to be proud of and deeply respect it.. Cheers; —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.80.118.62 (talk • contribs) 18 Jan 2006.

More Examples

Could someone add a Catalan version of the Lord's Prayer for comparison, as is done for other languages? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.42.159.11 (talk • contribs) 12 Feb 2006.

Lord's Prayer:

Pare nostre, qui esteu en el cel,

sigui santificat el vostre nom; vingui a nosaltres el vostre regne; faci´s la vostra voluntat, així en la terra com en el cel. El nostre pa de cada día doneu-nos avui; i perdoneunos les nostres culpes, així com nosaltres perdonem els nostres deutors; i no permeteu que nosaltres caiguem en la temptació, ans deslliureunos del mal.

Amén!

Changing view of Catalan

This anonymous edit cut the following:

The concept of a "linguistic Catalan diasystem" was developed at the beginning of the 20th century as part of Catalan nationalist discourse; prior to that, Catalan was generally considered a dialect of Occitan and was included in the "linguistic Romanic-Occitanian diasystem". This newer "linguistic Catalan diasystem" would incorporate Valencian into the Catalan system, instead of both Catalan and Valencian being considered as dialects under the former "Romantic-Occitanian diasystem." This system brings Catalan nationalism the benefit of an increase in the official number of Catalan speakers. The term "Western Catalan" ("catalá occidental") was developed as part of this discourse, based on some lexical and phonetic similarities that the speech of the zone of Lleida (Lérida) had with that of Valencia.

While I don't necessarily like the political spin of the paragraph, I believe that what it said was basically accurate and should be restored (although reworded in a way that is less hostile to Catalan nationalism: it's not as if this was a Catalan nationalist reaction against scientific neutrality: most linguists today would say it was a corrective in terms of an earlier anti-Catalan framing. So I'd end up with something like:

The concept of a "linguistic Catalan diasystem" was developed at the beginning of the 20th century as linguists, doubtless influenced by rising Catalan nationalism, began to distinguish Catalan more firmly from Occitan. Prior to that, Catalan and Valencian were generally considered dialects of Occitan, included in the "linguistic Romanic-Occitanian diasystem". The term "Western Catalan" ("catalá occidental") was developed as part of this discourse, based on some lexical and phonetic similarities that the speech of the zone of Lleida (Lérida) had with that of Valencia.

Unless someone objects in the next few days, I'll restore this modified version of the paragraph to the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:39, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a linguist, but I suggest to supress any political references. So:

The concept of a "linguistic Catalan diasystem" was developed at the beginning of the 20th century as linguists began to distinguish Catalan more firmly from Occitan. Prior to that, Catalan and Valencian were generally considered dialects of Occitan, included in the "linguistic Romanic-Occitanian diasystem". The term "Western Catalan" ("catalá occidental") is based on the lexical and phonetic similarities that the speech of the zone of Lleida (Lérida) had with that of Valencia.

--Joan sense nick 15:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Besides it, I have to say that I talk normally in catalan/valencian to my Valencian and Balearic friends (just little diferences, similar to when I talk spanish with a latinamerican friend). But I've been in Val d'Aran and I can't understand Occitan language. --Joan sense nick 15:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually Gascon has enough personality that some class it apart of the rest of Occitan. --Error 00:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted that text. It is still nnpov--SMP - talk page (en) - talk page (ca) 18:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

English pronunciation

Is it needed to include the English IPA transcription?? It is normal to include the native, not the English.--SMP - talk page (en) - talk page (ca) 17:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it is necessary, as it's something there is considerable confusion about (amongst both native and non-native English speakers) - and something many may visit the article specifically for.

I've just changed it: the general English pronunciation is Cátalan /ˈka.təˌlan/. Some use instead the pronunciation Catalán /ˌka.təˈlan/, which is influenced by the Catalan word. (I've also heard /ˈka.tə.lən/ amongst non-native English speakers.) The OED has ˈkætəlæn (with no [] or // ). kieron 00:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Formentera

If they have dialects at Ibiza, Mallorca, and Menorca, how about Formentera? De mortuis... 20:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Eivissenc dialect is spoken in Eivissa and Formentera.--SMP - talk page (en) - talk page (ca) 14:45, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Comparisons to other regional-national dialects/languages/varieties/you-get-the-point

Off-hand comments comparing the situation of Catalan-Valencian-Occitan with other quite different realities, e.g. those of Serbo-Croatian and of "Canadian" French vs. Metropolitan French, do not help. It is best to view the Catalan-Occitan-Valencian reality as a case study, which in fact is what we linguists working in dialectology or sociolinguistics and language sociology tend to do. It would be great to have (on this talk page) much more discussion about these naming/categorization difficulties. Moreover, it would be informative to clarify terminology concerning dialect/variation/variety/variant. Anyone interested?

For example, I've been working on major re-writes and additions to Quebec French, Canadian French, and Joual. I invite you to read them: the article on Canadian French because the term is a misnomer, and the article on Quebec French due to the utter confusion connected to it. Note that in Quebec French, the section on social perception needs a complete re-write and as it stands, should not be considered reliable. After you read Canadian French, you'll understand why, in this article on Catalan, I changed the false analogy Quebec Fr. vs. Metropolitan Fr. to Acadian French vs. Quebec French. In fact, I suggest eventually avoiding the comparison altogether given the many factors the making most comparisons misleading. CJ Withers 12:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Just a correction. Please, note:

• Catalan-Valencian-Balear (ca)
• Occitan (oc)

They forked centuries ago and ceased to be an important communication interchange. See Treaty of Corbeil. In different historical contexts, they both would be presently an only language.

Because of the lack of an effective or successful standardization and French assimilation or diglossy, Occitan has indeed more dialectal diversity in its languedocien group than the whole Catalan language domain.

Best regards, Toniher 03:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

You mean hyper-correction. I never wrote nor implied they were the same language, or of the same dialect continuum, for that matter. Please read more thoroughly: the key words are "situation" and "reality". Also, the original and English-language term is diglossia. CJ Withers 04:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

---

On 15:44, 12 June 2006, some anonymous under the IP 80.36.189.123 removed comparisons between Valencian/Catalan vs. American English/English English giving the reason "Rv to avoid continous spam against Valencia community". Such comparisons are quite obviously not "spam againsy Valencia community", but just an example to state that Catalan is, like English, a multi-centric language. I have restored and explained better the comparison in hopes that it doesn't get reverted again in the same way, and that this doesn't turn into an edit war. Also, they reverted some other changes I had made: I had removed a comparison between Catalan/Valencian and Spanish/Portuguese because the comparison stated that Portuguese and Spanish are mutually intelligible, which they are not - they are supposed to have been the same language centuries ago, but that relationship would be closer to that of Catalan (and Valencian) with Occitan, although there seems to be no evidence whatsoever other than linguistic characteristics that Catalan and Occitan have ever been the same language. I've restored the changes I made.

- 62.43.177.47

Section about being taught in many universities in North America & Europe

I'm not aware of it being taught in any major university in the US, it certaintely wasn't at the university I attended (at least when I attended in the 1990s). So I'd like examples of universities that teach it in the US. Thanks. Jon 18:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

hi jon. this map shows just those universities around the world where there is a catalan lector sent via the institut ramon llull (an official organisation to promote the catalan language outside catalonia)

http://www.llull.cat/llull/estatic/eng/quisom/lectorats-mapa.shtm

this is by no means all of the universities where catalan is taught (my university, for example, had valencian lectors, which it organised itself without going through any third-party organisation such as the institut ramon llull). i remember a more complete list of universities somewhere, so i'll see if i can find it.

teaching catalan abroad has really taken off in the last few years, so maybe if you were at university in the 90s you would have missed the phenomenon, i dunno. also, at the moment, catalan is usually taught within the spanish department as an optional course, rather than being a major/minor in its own right.

kieron 12:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Dispute / Merge

This is one of the most disputed pages I've run across in months. The issue of whether Catalan and Valencian are the same or are two variants of a "Catalan-Valencian" (cf. Portugese-Galician) is entirely unsettled. Or more accurately I should say unsettled here - no one is citing references on this topic, and this entire Talk page was virtually unusable until I restructured it, because it was filled with pages and pages of ad-hominem and political flamewars, largely relating in one way or another to this issue. I somehow doubt that linguists and the reference works they have published are in anywhere near as much confusion and disagreement on this issue as the posters on this Talk page and editors of this Article are. Hit the books, cite the facts, cite the prevailing theories, and end the dispute.

So, I'm flagging this with a Disputed template, and doing the same over at Valencian. If the dispute is resolved on the side of them being the same language, then the very first thing that should happen is a Merge template should be added to both, and folks who care to edit these articles in depth need to work together on a combined version, and redirect things appropriately. Or something along those lines. Perhaps there should instead be a large article on Catalan-Valencian or Valencian-Catalan, and smaller articles on each of them separately that go into what makes the (alleged) dialects different from each other.

I'm not even going to touch the question whether Catalan is really a dialect of Occitan!! The fact that that possibility has been raised here, with some fervor, is more than sufficient evidence that the facts of this article are truly disputed. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:16, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The part about English English and American English shows pretty much all the facts you need to discern Catalan and Valencian as a single language. Even under the ortography and rules of those who claim Valencian to be different, there's no substantial morphological or syntactic differences between the two - just phonology and some lexic, but, as I said, there's more divergence between American English and English English; the issue is entirely a political one, and as such it shouldn't be considered in an article about linguistics. As for Occitan, morphology IS different; syntax is quite different although it's similar to that of Northern Catalan; phonology is quite different, although you can establish a link to that of Catalan - but both evolved in separate ways, which is evidenced by different diphtongs which don't quite match always; the lexic is quite different as well, although with lots of cognate words. Although it's not quite the same, claiming that Occitan is the same language as Catalan is more or less like claiming that German and Dutch are the same language, or that Scots is English: you could justify it due to history, but any linguist will disagree.

So this is more a "cite sources" situation than a "factual accuracy" one, actually. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12 July 2006 (talk • contribs) .

Oh, as well, linking "Catalan-Valencian" to "Portuguese-Galician" is really unfortunate: while Portuguese-Galician is another case of politics meddling in linguistic fact, there are some non-political reasons you could use to claim Galician as a language evolved from an earlier Portuguese-Galician, although they are not all that important and, thus, many linguists consider both the same. But Valencian is essentially the same as North-Western Catalan, which some differences that, for example, a non-native speaker wouldn't really discern (or even a native speaker - it is not unusual for Valencians to be mistaken as people from Lleida when they travel to Barcelona. Generally, hearing a phrase or two is usually not enough to tell North-Western Catalan apart from Valencian, although obviously differences important enough to class them as separate dialects DO exist.) Really, this issue is quite simply a political one and I think the "factual accuracy" tag should be removed in favour of a "cite sources" one. Plus it has been some months since the last time there was fighting over the contents of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12 July 2006 (talk • contribs) .

I would argue that the Valencian language is not a separate language, but is a valid article topic. This is exactly parallel to Moldovan language vs. Romanian. The common name (in English) of the language is Catalan; the topic here should be the claims that Valencian is a separate language (I think they are wrong, but they are real) and the politics behind the use of the name "Valencian" for that language by the Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua, whose official stance is that there is only one language, but it's proper name is valencià. - Jmabel | Talk 06:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

(I am the anonymous who frequently posts at this page and made the two comments previous to Jmabel's.) I don't think the Valencian article should be deleted since, after all, it's one of the main dialectal blocks of Catalan and merits an article. However, it shouldn't have a page as a "Valencian language"; the theories about Valencian as separate from Catalan aren't supported by linguists: it is true that they should be mentioned, but they already are, which means that there's no fighting AT ALL over the articles. If nobody objects, I'll remove the disputed tag after a few days and replace it with a "cite sources" one. Also, perhaps we should rename this article to "Catalan-Valencian Language" to avoid this kind of fights...

Just to let you know there's still places containing "polaco"

Hello I came here from slashdot. Probably you already know this, but there are still some places throughout the text that contais the word polaco, or somesuch, where I would venture it should be català or catalan... My best regards

Angelo

Mess of a paragraph

The following paragraph is a mess:

Valencian has often been seen as a dialect of Catalan due to their mutual intelligibility, and because it was the Catalan who brought their language there when they conquered the land of Valencia (although some people argue that Valencian didn't evolve from North-Western Catalan at all. For more information on Valencian, its relationship to Catalan according to politicians and linguists and its origins according to the same people, refer to the article on Valencian). However, the issue of language versus dialect is as much a matter of politics as of linguistics. By the criterion of mutual intelligibility, Valencian and other varieties of Catalan are dialects of a single language; but according to this criterion, Norwegian and Danish are dialects of the same language. A language is defined by several factors, political ones among others.

It argues with itself ("although", "however"). It gives a verbose and polemical redirect to another article. I think the problems are mostly in the first half; everything from the "however" on looks OK to me. Could someone who knows this topic better than me please try to disentangle the rival theories and write this in an NPOV manner, attributing theories, rather than an argument of the Wikipedia narrative voice with itself? That is who says that Catalans brought the language to Valencia? Who says Valencian evolved independently? - Jmabel | Talk 06:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

This paragraph is no mess. It points out that Valencian is often seen as a variant of Catalan, mainly by linguists, but that other people... SOME people, mainly politicians, think otherwise. On the other hand, the part after "However" strikes me as quite N-NPOV - it kind of implies that the unity of Catalan is a political matter (when, quite the contrary, it's the supposed independence of Valencian which is.)

So the problem is that the paragraph does not cite sources. But I don't think the redaction is not fine (although I'm biased, because I wrote the although part, in an attempt to avoid pro-Blavero vandalism. It should be noted that, before I edited it, the paragraph was quite clearly N-NPOV in favour of Valencian as a different language, or at least I perceived so.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.43.177.158 (talk • contribs) 21 July 2006.

Edit I'd appreciate having explained

The following edit was made: "Historically, the perceived status of Valencian as a 'dialect of Catalan' has had important political implicationsincluding Catalan nationalism and the idea of the Països catalans or 'Catalan countries.'" The stricken portion strikes me as being on the mark. Am I missing something? - Jmabel | Talk 06:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

It is more or less right, but it is

a) Overtly simplistic. There are lots of other factors in Catalan nationalism and the concept of Catalan Countries, such as unfairness on the Spanish state, history, etc. It should be noted that in the period of history that the "Catalan Countries" concept more or less takes its map from, Valencia had more economic weight than Catalonia, so the phrase is not that good at all, as it kind of has the underlying meaning that the Catalan Countries idea puts Valencia as subordinate to Catalonia; and the same thing linguistically.

b) Misguiding. Valencian as a separate language is a political concept; Valencian as Catalan is a concept supported by linguists. The paragraph kind of makes readers believe that Valencian as a dialect of Catalan is a political concept associated to Catalan Nationalism, which it is not.

I think the Valencian/Catalan sections need a complete rewrite. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.43.177.158 (talk • contribs) 21 July 2006.

Confusing sentence

'There are verbal forms which are not frequently used in either dialect - "aní"/"vaig anar", just like "I advise that he come"/"I advise him to come".' I simply do not understand what is being said here.

Also, am I right in understanding that all the examples in this section are Catalan first, Valencian second? If so, we should say so; if they are not all in the same order, we should change that to something consistent and say so. - Jmabel | Talk 06:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

It is confusing due to poor English, mainly. What it means is that "There are verbal forms unfrequent in one of the dialects - just as American English uses the subjuntive and English English normally does not, some variants of Valencian use the synthetic past (aní) as opposed to the more widespread use of the periphastic one (vaig anar) in Catalan." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.43.177.158 (talk • contribs) 21 July 2006.

Total rewrite of the Valencian section

(I'm the anonymous who frequently posts at this page.) Since there are no disputes about the rest of the page, and the main complaints are that nobody cites their sources and that the Valencian section is polemical and unclear for a number of reasons (mainly clashing views which are not separated and thus result in unclear and half-POV statements), I've removed the disputed tag from the article, but have added a cite sources one and a Complete Rewrite one to the Valencian section, which I think is much needed. I'll try to work on the rewrite one of these days, but, for the time being, I think it's better to leave things this way. If you disagree, please say so! I wouldn't like to be making polemical choices! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sputnikpanicpuppet (talk • contribs) 21 July 2006.

I look forward to seeing a rewrite of this section, laying out the various views in the matter, properly cited. - Jmabel | Talk 06:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Revert

I have reverted the last changes made to the page. Essentially, they introduce wrong info (the dialects are named "Barceloní" and "Tarragoní", and not "Barcelonès" or "Tarragonès", for example); they removed the needed rewrite and cite sources tags without fixing the problems; they remove important information like the relationship between Standard Catalan and other dialects; they restore the comparison with Canadian/Metropolitan French which has been argued against before; the only thing they might be right about is on the Scandinavian language comparison, but I'm not sure (I can't speak any Scandinavian language...) So, for now, I'll revert the changes --Sputnikpanicpuppet 02:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

language as linguistics definition

• "Any serious linguist and all universities teaching romance languages consider those
• "linguistics variants to be part of the same language (sort of Canadian French vs French of France)

and many other possible quotations

The definitions of language vs. dialect, despite the common belief, is not a linguistic one. Linguistics finds in different systems (and, actually, the system used by every person is different) similar features called isoglosses. Linguistic classification is isogloss map, that shows similarity and differences in distinct regions. But there is no rool or claim, that X common isoglosses define a language, while Y define a dialect. These are already defined - historically, politically and sociologically.

In some cases many very different systems are called a language (German, Arabic), and are divided into dialects (Arabic - Syrian, Algerian, Lebanese etc.). In other cases very similar systems defined as different languages (Dutch - Flemish).

So, linguists tell "language is a dialect with flag and navy"

Therefore, it is not a linguistic discussion!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.228.127.127 (talk • contribs) 10 September 2006.

English words of Catalan origin

This section is rather silly. If you follow the links to "barracks", "mayonnaise" and "cul-de-sac", you learn these words are derived from French (well, barracks could have been derived from Italian or Spanish as well). Allioli definitely is a Catalan/Valencian word, but in English "aioli" is commonly used, which is the French version on allioli. Sorry to say, but we didn't influence the Enlish langue in any way that I know of. 69.181.148.6 05:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Most English words come from French. But in a great many cases they come from other sources *via* French. This is certainly the case with 'mayonnaise,' and may well be with the other two examples you cited. It is those articles, rather than this one, which need to be changed. kieron 23:05, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Joan Corominas considers barraca "primitively Catalan, of unknown origin, maybe pre-Roman". Around the war of the Thirty Years French barraque (now baraque) passes to the rest of European languages.

Neither aioli nor allioli are originally French. The word is either Catalan or Occitan.

--Error 18:00, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

According to the OED, none of that is definitive. "Barrack" is "of uncertain origin" but that it "occurs early in [Castillian] and Catalan", while "aïoli" is of French origin - the etymology given is: [Fr. aïoli (Trésor, 1744), f. mod.Pr. aioli, f. ai (F. ail) garlic + oli (F. huile) oil.] Gromitjc 20:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Not even Mayonaise gets credited unequivocally to Catalan in the OED:

 Several etymologies have been suggested. Like numerous dictionaries, N.E.D. (1906) describes it as 
 ‘prob. feminine of mahonnais of Port Mahon, capital of Minorca, taken by the duc de Richelieu in 1756’, 
 but the lateness of the word in French would argue against this, as would perh. also the spelling 
 mayonnaise rather than mahonnaise already in the earliest attestation.
 Bayonnaise (feminine of bayonnais < the name of the French town of Bayonne + -ais -ESE) is attested 
 in the same meaning only two years later, and mayonnaise is freq. explained as a corruption of this 
 word, as in the following early discussion (giving the earliest examples of the form mahonnaise and 
 of bayonnaise in this sense):
 1808 G. DE LA REYNIÈRE Man. des amphitryons II. vi. 211 Les puristes, en cuisine, ne sont pas d'accord sur 
 la dénomination de ces sortes de ragoûts; les uns disent mayonnaise, d'autres mahonnaise, et d'autres 
 bayonnaise. Le premier de ces mots n'est pas français; et le second indique une ville où rien n'est renommé 
 pour la bonne chère; c'est ce qui fait que nous nous sommes décidés pour bayonnaise, dont l'étymologie est 
 dans le nom d'une ville qui renferme beaucoup de Gourmands inventeurs, et qui, de plus, donne naissance 
 chaque année aux meilleurs jambons de l'Europe.
 However, the French chef M. A. Carême (1784-1833) preferred the spelling magnonnaise and an etymology 
 from French manier to handle (see MANNER n.), explained as referring to the method of preparation of the 
 sauce.] "

--Philbarker 16:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Another word that comes from catalan is "paper". Its origin is certainly the latin "papirus", but it went into english through catalan.

Catalan and Spanish

Hello I was interested in someone explaining how inteligable Catalan is to Spanish. There's a lot about Valecian and Catalan, but I want to know how a castillian speaker would go listening in on a conversation in Catalan. Can a Spanish speaker understand Catalan literature? I have heard conflicting statements. A paragraph dealing with Catalan's similarities with other languages would be really interesting. I hope someone can either answer my question and perhaps add a section to the page. 58.169.157.145 14:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Anechdotically, I was told that spoken Portuguese and Catalan are more mutually intelligible than Catalan and Spanish. But there is a difference between Brazilian and European Portuguese. The reason is the similarity of the vowel systems. --Error 18:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

If you consider a castilian speaker with no previous exposure to catalan, not knowing other languages, listening to a speech in catalan, given slowly and clearly, he will understand some random words, but will not get anything of what is being said.

How close is it?

Genetically, so to speak, the closest languages to Spanish are:

• (1) the Ladino language, which could perfectly be considered part of a Spanish diasystem;
• (2) the Asturian language (Eastern varieties being closer than Western ones); Z
• (3) the Galician-Portuguese diasystem (the Galician language being closer than the Portuguese one);
• (4) the Aragonese language (Western varieties being closer than Eastern ones);
• (5) and then, the 5th closest would probably be Catalan, Western varieties (NW Catalan and Valencian) being apparently a little closer, and some Eastern varieties (Majorcan and particularly Algherese, in Sardinia, Italy) being not so close. These last two, particularly the last one, are often hard to understand even for some speakers of the language.Occitan, by the way, is the closest language to Catalan (the 6th closest to Spanish). A speaker of Spanish would probably understand quite a lot of a written text in Catalan, but listening comprehension is a bit more complicated (it all depends too on which Catalan variety is being spoken, the speed and so on). Similar to what will happen to him/her with Portuguese or perhaps a bit more complicated. Sometimes people have referred to Catalan as somewhere between Spanish and French (actually, it is between Occitan and Aragonese, but the average person hasn't ever heard about those minoritarian languages). This ressemblance is due to the fact that many words are similar and also because of a common impression in Spanish speakers that Catalan, just like French, "cuts" final vowels (e.g., Spanish mano 'hand' is mà in Catalan, main in French; Spanish justo is just both in Catalan and French). All this said, intelligibility is always a personal thing. A speaker of Spanish who also knows French or perhaps Italian would understand Catalan much easily, for example. --Info 20:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Catalan is very diferent from castillan, for example, castililan has only 5 vowel sounds, and catalan has 8 sounds, and "j" or "g" has a diferent sound in catalan or castililan, in castilian "g" or "j" are like the english "h", and in catalan are like the english "j". This are some of the differences between the two languages, of course, if you see a dictionary, you will find most of the words are diferent, like for exemple english to german. Coronellian 18:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought "j" in Catalan was pronounced [ʒ], like in Portuguese or in French. That is not the same pronunciation of English "j", which is pronounced [dʒ] instead. 161.24.19.82 17:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Coronellian, saying that spanish to catalan is the same as english to german is quite wrong. An average Castilian speaker with no previous exposure to Catalan can almost understand written Catalan as for spoken Catalan it would take like 2-3 weeks. Catalan (or Valencian) spoken in Valencia is even easier since the accent is softer. There is about 10% of words that are completely different but the rest are very close (you can try some words in this Catalan dictionary http://www.grec.net/home/cel/dicc.htm). I love Catalan but please don't exaggerate and let's keep the facts straight.

Much removed

I would hope that someone who knows more about this topic than I would look closely through the changes of the last few weeks. It seems to me that a lot I would consider correct has simply been removed from the article. Among other things, the following paragraph was removed; insofar as it touches on matters I know about, it seems to me to have been entirely correct (if perhaps not ideally worded), and I don't see any equivalent in the present article.

Standard Catalan, as regulated by the IEC, centres on the speech of the educated classes of Barcelona, and so is closest to Central Catalan; however, not all of the features of Barcelonese speech can be considered standard, as there are lots of traditional dialectal traits and Castillian influence in that area. Aditionally, most important dialectal traits of other dialects are also considered standard. The orthography used to write Standard Catalan (and basically any Catalan text) is closest to Valencian pronunciation, although some instances of grave accented <è> correspond to Central Catalan. There is also a second standard form of the language, Valencian (valencià), regulated by the AVL. The Valencian standard is very close to IEC's but adds features characteristic of Western Catalan.

- Jmabel | Talk 05:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

It's now been restored. - Jmabel | Talk 08:24, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Incoherent "transition"

"…and is often erroneously thought of as a sort of "transitory" language between the Catalan and Gallic languages…" I'm reminded of the Neil Young line "like a cross of himself and a fox". How can it be thought of (erroneously or otherwise) as transitory (presumably "transitional") beteen itself and something else? - Jmabel | Talk 21:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Number of speakers

It states 12 million speakers in the introduction, but when sources are added it goes down to 10.4 and the infobox says more than 7.5, while they are not technically contradicting, I think more coherent data could be given. Anyone? Knights who say ni 23:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

People who understand Catalan in Catalonia (and Andorra) are often counted as potential speakers of the language. While that is not so in the other Catalan-speaking territories (for lack of officiality or strict implementation of it), sometimes potential speakers include all or almost of all the people living in a Catalan-speaking territory. That's why, when figures need being high, potential speakers are used. Other language statistics (including some about English and Spanish) have a tendency to do so. In my opinion, only people who can actually speak the language, in one way or another, should be included. Then, my guess is that Catalan is spoken (as a mother tongue or a second language) by more than 8 million people, perhaps a bit more than 8,5. I'd say 10 millions is really too much, unless we include those who understand it perfectly and would only dare say something in Catalan on certain occasions. I guess the reason they say 12 in the article is because they say spoken or understood, while the table accounts for the number of total speakers and says more than 7,5. Yes, definitely it's more than 7,5 and more than 8 too, but more recent census should be done in order to offer accurate data, specially since immigration in the past 10 years has increased the population in those territories. Info 08:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.8.244.126 (talk • contribs).

Catalan language for featured

I ask your vote for the article Catalan language to featured articles. Please, if someone thought the article is not so excellent try to improve it. Coronellian 13:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

89.129.184.135 20:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Vampire help needed

I'd be grateful if someone familiar with Catalan could check out the article Count Estruc, which asserts the existence of a historical legend about a Catalonian vampire. Given the widespread interest in vampires, the absence of English references seems very odd, and I'm suspicious that this might date back no further than modern fiction by Salvador Sáinz. Could someone glance at the references and advise if they look reliable? See Count Estruc, ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guifred_Estruch and User talk:Estruch. Thanks in advance. Tearlach 17:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Those references only support the existence of Sainz's novel, article needs binning or changing to one describing the novel. Boynamedsue 18:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

This is the discussion page from Catalan wiki

"Molt bon dia Soc Salvador Sáinz, autor de un llibre sobre el comte Estruch. He de fer algunes precisions. En primer lloc el nom Guifred es inventat per mi per donar-li mes identitat a la novel.la. En aquell temps el cognom era Estruc, no Struch. La paraula vol dir fortuna, hi ha un origen de les estriges de la mitologia grega, una paraula que si sembla molt. A Transilvània no existeix el nom de vampir, inventada al segle XVIII, sinó Strigoi per mascles i strigoiaca per les femelles. En meu llibre EL CINE DE DRACULA es parla molt de tot això. La destrucció de Llers per la Legió Condor esta narrada al meu compte LAS HIJAS DE ESTRUC, publicat en Weird Tales (Madrid). La meva obra vareixa la realitat amb la ficció. Només volia aclarir aixó. Atentament.

Un oblit. La data del vampir es dels anys 1174 més o menys. Era la època d'Alfons el Cast que surt a la meva novel.la."

He states, in brief, that his work is a mixture of fact and fiction, but gives no precise information about the factual part. I vote for delete.

Boynamedsue 18:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

right. after exhaustive googling, I can find only reference to the exitence of an oral tradition about the count. All of the reported traditions are suspiciously similarly worded, and all refer to the destruction of all possible evidence in the bombing of Llers. Sainz admits that he invented the first-name Guifred, I wonder if he invented the whole thing? Alternatively, it may be that the legend is a recent campfire story about vampires, based, or not, on folk traditions about a count there. Antway, all very vague.

Spanish not Castillian

I've altered the references to "Castillian" influence on Barcelona Catalan, to say "Spanish". Castillian, in modern English refers properly to the province of Castille. A lot of the influence on BCN Catalan comes from Andaluz dialects (I once heard a girl on the FGC talking Catalan but swapping the S's for aspirated h's "Ehtic en el trehn, em trucah dehpreh?". It sounded gorgeous), or from the catalan dialect of Spanish, which is itself influenced by the Catalan language.Boynamedsue 08:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I personally think you're wrong. A drop of water is not an ocean.

Any reputable source as evidence of the influence of Andalusian in Catalan besides a personal experience? --the Dúnadan 18:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The influence of the Andaluz dialect is very hard on all the Catalan Country, both Catalunya, Valencia, and Balearic Islands. But the word Castillian do not refers to dialect, officialy "Spanish" is said "Castellano" (Castillian) according to the Spanish 1978 Constitution. Coronellian 18:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

New studies - Number of speakers

The new study from Generalitat de Catalunya[2] states that 9,118,882 people speak Catalan.

Categorization

Please see Talk:Romance languages#Confusion in categories. Any input is appreciated. --Amir E. Aharoni 12:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Reasons to delete the "Similarities between Catalan and Spanish" section

It just have been added one section which should be removed for the following reasons (and some more):

• Original research
• Data taken from a non-well acredited source as RAE, IEC or AVL, but from a particular.
• There are mistakes ("adjetiu" is a non existing word in Catalan, "y" should be the translation in Catalan of the Spanish "f" (¿?¿?¿?)...).
• Diacritics are not considered. In catalan there are different words which distinguish just because of a diacritic: (te - té, dona - dóna, pèl - pel, ...). They can not be considered just identical because they aren't.
• It considers just 1938 words over the 60.000 that apear in the DIEC.
• It has no sense to have a whole section comparing Catalan and Spanish. It can be added a comment saying how Catalan differs respect other romanic languages, but not just specialy with Spanish: Occitan and perhaps French is closer to Catalan than Spanish.

--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 00:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the removal of that section. If that section was well referenced and accurate (there is no word in Catalan that is simply an y), and referenced with linguistic sources, I would agree to its inclusion. I wouldn't say that French is closer to Catalan than Spanish, but that is a different story. --the Dúnadan 15:51, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Why user 204.176.13.6 has undid the deletion without arguing?

Note that there is a link that points to an article to be deleted (Catalan Spanish-side-by-side comparison), created by User:Xchip, the same who created the section here also to be deleted.

Note also that the information referenced here from http://aulex.ohui.net/ca-es has been added to s:ca:Comparatiu Spanyol Catala, and also will be deleted if no argument is made for avoiding it. -Aleator 16:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply and misuse, I'm still a newbie :-) so here is my reply:

• It's not OR since it neither introduces a new theory nor defines new terms nor drives conclusions. It just enumerates.
• Please if you have found specific mistakes feel free to correct them, that is the wikipedia spirit. And don't just remove the whole page.
• Sorry about Adjetiu, it should be Adjectiu, please help improve the list by fixing errors as we all do.
• If diacritics are not considered please feel free to add them.
• 60.000 entries is like too much, the Maria Moliner dictionary has 40.000, BTW Shakespeare knew around 60k words, but he was a writer. To pass the GMAT (Graduate Management Admission Test) you need to know around 2500 english words, which is quite good.
• It's weird here that the whole article focuses on how Catalan differs from Spanish bu there is not any section/comment to explain how close they are. Why?

--Xchip 21:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Now we can dicuss here :-)

• It is original research. Where can you cite this data from? It wouldn't be original research if you say "in the book from NAME SURNAME, a reputated linguist, he shows that bla bla bla...". But taking a dictionary from some Internet page and elaborating some data, is original research. Why this dictionary? why not considering dyacritics? why just 1938 words? why this words? are they the most used? are they the easier to learn for a Spanish? why...? You took some assumptions, some hypotesis and you worked with it and you showed the results. This is original research.
• No, I won't correct the mistakes because I think this is not the place. The mistakes were just to show that the original working conditions of your research (the dictionary) was not reliable.
• First it should be taken an assumption in your research about dyacritics: you probably know that Catalan never has "á" and Spanish never has "à". Then should we consider "à" and "á" the same letter? perhaps. Should we consider Spanish "ó" the same letter as Catalan "ò". Sure not. So, one more assumption to take.
• Are we discussing about symilarities of writting languages or symilarities about commons written language? (one more assumption to do in your research). If you are comparing the languages, you have to take the whole dictionary. If you want to compare the most used words, then you have to determine the usage of each word and ponderate.
• Sorry but I don't see in the article any focus of difference with Spanish. The only place I see a comparison with Spanish is in the sentence "phonologically, Catalan is more similar to Portuguese than to Italian, Spanish or French". Well, 5 languages are involved in the sentence. I don't see any any reason to think that "the whole article focuses on how Catalan differs from Spanish" if you don't think also that "the whole article focuses on how Catalan differs from French" or "from Italian". Sincelely, I'm sorry but I don't see the reason of this sentence.

--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 22:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You again removed the whole section, I don't believe this should be black or white thing.

• Translating is not OR, otherwise every sentence you write would be OR since you are a Catalan speaker writting in English...
• Q: Why this dictionary?
  • It had a fair a mount of words, we'll add more don't worry.
• Q: why not considering dyacritics?
  • I'd love to consider them, please help and add them!
• Q: why just 1938 words? why this words? are they the most used?
  • Well, well add more with the time, as for the frequency usage, that is something the article is not covering so it is out of question.
• As for you not wanting to help correct mistakes.. too bad!
• Q: Are we discussing about symilarities of writting languages or symilarities about commons written language?
  • Then again, it's jsut a list of words that change slightly, don't overcomplicate things!
• as for the 'the whole article focuses ... '
  • What I really mean is that apparently there is no interest in showing how related are Spanish and Catalan.

I'm quite disappointed that you removed the whole list instead of working with me to improve it. It looks like we are not going to agree, shall we get into an arbitration process by a third and unbiased person? Do you know what process do we have to follow? --Xchip 23:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

But it will continue being original research (look at Wikipedia:No original research). -Aleator 00:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I insist, you are not just translating. You are choosing a dictionary , you are choosing a method, you are choosing a criterium to avoid dyacritics, you are choosing not ponderating the word depending on its use, you are choosing avoiding phonetics, ... Moreover, it seems you are the author of the dictionary (we'll add more [words]). Then you are creating the dictionary, choosing the words in order to make the comparison. Well, this is 100% original research.

About "interest on showing how related are Spanish and Catalan", this is much different from your first asertion. I have no problem to add this information, only if it is well sourced. For example, in the article about Spanish language, you can see that in the Classification and related languages section there is a symilar paragraph. Well, it is sourced with a prestigious source as the Ethnologue. If you want to add the symilar section with the information you can get here (I even have searched it so that you can not say I want to avoid this information), I don't have absolutely any problem. It's not because of content but because of sources and original research. I hope this can solve the problem. Otherwise, we can make a request for a third part. --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 00:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

This link could be interesting, Xchip, Wikiversity:Portal:Research. I think original research is accepted there, but I am not sure at all. Hope it is useful. -Aleator 01:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's then go to arbitration and we go from there, I don't have much experience with this procedures, Xtv, do you want to start it? Thanks. --Xchip 18:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Why is your original research better than Ethnologue? You haven't answered. I'm not the only one who tells you that your work is original research. This is clearly against policy of Wikipedia. I think there is not much to discuss. Just one user trying to introduce his own research against most of the users... if you want to start an arbitration, I will contribute, but I think the situation don't require it.--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 23:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Similarities between Catalan and Spanish

Since many people ask how different is Catalan from Spanish I went ahead and did some analysis of an open source dictionary, using the Levenshtein distance on every entry shows that:

• 21.98% of the words are the identical (whole list).
• 25.74% only change in one letter
  • bellesa->belleza, bibero->biberon, caramel->caramelo, (whole list).
• 20.33% of the words can be transformed into Spanish with only 2 changes.
  • evolucionat->evolucionado, ferramenta->herramienta, creença->creencia, (whole list).
• 3.3% of the words with 8 or more letters can be transformed into Spanish with only 3 changes.

The metric used is the Levenshtein distance, and a change means an insertion, deletion, or substitution of a single character.

I'd like this to be part of the article, however I can see this being removed by a small group of Catalans that don't like this fact. Any help? Thanks

Xchip 16:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Besides violating WP:OR and WP:NOT, a non-random sample that includes word-derivatives (words formed by suffixes instead of an analysis of morphemes) is nonscientific. The purported similarities of vowel change apply to all Romance languages (in fact, vowel and consonant change from Vulgar Latin was the cause of the formation these languages; compare evolucionat (Cat.) - evolucionat (Occ.) - evolucionado (Sp.) - evolucioné (Fr.) - evolucionado (Pt.) - evolvuto (It.); or creença (Cat.) - cresença (Occ.) - creencia (Sp.) - croyance (Fr.) - crença (Pt.) - credenza (It.)). Last but not least, the "analysis" is based on orthography and not on phonemes; for example: bellesa and belleza imply one difference in spelling, and yet three differences in phonetics ([bəʎeza] vs. [beʝeθa]); a difference in spelling (i.e. China vs. Xina) could be almost phonetically identical (with the exception of the neutralized "a" in Central Catalan); and two identical words/phrases in spelling (i.e. les cartes both in French and Catalan), are pronounced entirely different. --the Dúnadan 16:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why is wrong to have a section that explains how close are Spanish words to Catalan, it is quite a common question, and this is a good answer. As you say, this analysis is based on ortography, that is correct and that is what I was tryign ot proof, I dont see how your argument of phonetics invalidates my point of ortographic closeness. If you don't have stronger arguments please add the section again, I don't see why you removed it without previous discussion.Can any non biased person mediate in this discussion? I will provide the list of words thata are the same, change in one letter and that change in two letters. I don't need to mention protuguese or french to prove my point, I just have my facts straight. BTW the past participle of 'evolucionado' is 'evoluto'.Thanks.--204.176.13.6 19:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

15:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You missed the first part of my comment: that section was eliminated not because of my purported "bias" towards the section but because it clearly violates WP:OR (and consequently, WP:NOT). Even if it didn't, the analysis is still linguistically poor, it only proves (though it never explicitly said so) spelling similarities with a language with which Catalan is not the closest: Catalan spelling similarities (aka "lexical similarities") most resemble that of Occitan of course, then Italian, and then Portuguese and Spanish, according to Ethnologue [3]. Ethnologue report is far more informative, it is based on the language as a whole and not on an arbitrary non-random sample like yours, and most importantly, since it is a reputable linguistic source, its inclusion would comply with WP:CITE and WP:Verifiability (and thus, does not violate WP:OR). Your point must be proven not by your own non-random work, but by a verifiable source. --the Dúnadan 22:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Borrowed words

"Like many modern languages, Catalan contains numerous words originally borrowed from other languages" - I think this is a little misleading as every language throughout history has words borrowed from other languages (at least as far as I know). Perhaps it would be more apporpriate just to say "Catalan contains many words originally borrowed from other languages". Does anyone have any objections? --Lesouris 07:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)