Talk:Catalan language

Very badly written article

I made a start but then gave up. Much of this is clearly not written by a speaker of English (perhaps not a writer of any language). Missed articles, "doesn't" "isn't" "like" and just gibberish - it reads very badly. Would anyone care to tidy this up - I would rather it be an experienced linguist rather than me; after all I may "mess up." This really is very badly written —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.11.74 (talk) 16:43, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Dialects of Catalan

I added a section on the dialect in the Empordà region. This was deleted on the grounds that it didn't fit with the other sections on dialects. I understand this, but my contribution was too small to be a page on itself. It would be interesting to have a page or a section highlighting the differences between the dialects, though I only have a small bit of information on one dialect. How can we proceed to include this kind of information, either as a new page or a new section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pete maloney (talk • contribs) 12:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Good, I have seen that you followed the suggestion and added your contributions to Central Catalan, where they belong. I further encourage you to provide your sources (as it stands now that article is unreferenced). Cheers! --Carles Noguera (talk) 07:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The name of the language and the Infobox

There is a contradiction in the Infobox information of the Catalan language: Everywhere in the main article, language appears as catalan, following the linguistic criteria ( The Catalan language entry in the Britannica, another entry: Merriam-Webster, an interview to the main authority of the Valencian "We agree that there is only one language" c., ...]), not the controverted political criteria. But in the Infobox: the name appears for 2 or 3 times as Catalan, Valencian language. You can see, also, that in the Language codes part of the Infobox it appears, only, as Catalan, because the international recognition is for only one language with some variants, one of them named Valencian. As I've said, this is the scientific criteria. All other criteria are opinions derived from political interests (you can opine that the the sun turns over the earth, if you want. But the scientific criteria is that is the earth what turns over the sun, sure!) So, I'm going to revert the mistake in the Infobox, naming the language, only, as Catalan.--Tripallokavipasek (talk) 13:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

What you say, although essentially true, does not imply that we should remove the denomination Valencian. The fact is that it is a pluricentric language with two regulating institutions, IEC and AVL, that use different two different denominations but never deny the unity of the language. Taking into account that we have two separate articles in Wikipedia (Catalan language and Valencian; purportedly to deal extensively with Valencian varieties in a separate article) we should not give the impression that this implies that they correspond to different languages. That's why it is important to keep both official denominations in infoboxes. --Carles Noguera (talk) 08:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

maps

I find the maps on this page hard to read without a larger context. Rick Norwood (talk) 13:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

French recognition

On December 10, 2007 the Conseil Général of Pyrénées-Orientales passed a law "officially recognizing, together with French, the Catalan language as a language of the département" [1] [2]. Can we state then that Catalan is an official language of that territory? --SMP - talk (en) - talk (ca) 10:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I think not. According to the French Constitution the pnly official language in France is French. Catalan has simply been recognised as a language of the departement without any legal implications.--88.11.220.90 (talk) 19:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Typing the middle dot

I am studying Catalan and i want to type it. I can't find the middle dot - punt volat on keyboards. I tried it on Windows and on Fedora. I couldn't find a "Catalan" layout in either of them, they only have "Spain".

Any help? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I think i found it - Shift-3, right? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 14:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Here, copy this: ·

Hold down the Alt key while typing 0183 on the numeric keypad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.162.23.79 (talk) 05:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Relationship to Spanish

At present, the article contains precious little information on the relationship between Catalan and Spanish - surely one of the main areas of inquiry for anyone who has looked up this article. I understand that a "comparison" section was removed as OR, but can't someone who knows something of the subject do something here? This is crucial information which is completely missing. Mr. IP (talk) 00:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

They won't do that. Catalans and spanish have nothing to do. (irony) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.232.73.213 (talk) 23:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Valencian

It's completely wrong to make an exception with valencian. The name of Catalan is the same, wherever you go. Valencian is one of the dialects inside the Catalan. It would be the same to say that in USA they do not speak english, but american. The problem arise when the name of the language is related to the name of an autonomous community (Catalonia), so it seems that Valencian is a minor language. This is also completely false. In catalonia there are other dialects, like the central Catalan. But if you consider that must be noted that in Valencia the language is Valencian, then in the Balearic Island the languages are Mallorquí, Eivissenc and Menorquí. The problem with Valencian is more about a political topic than linguistic. --Jose piratilla (talk) 12:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I am valencian and I don't speak catalan, I speak valencian. You can write false information if you like but almost 100 percent of valencians would agree with me. Catalan people say they are being treated unfairly by Spain, and they say they feel they are being disdained by spanish speakers. Don't you realise you are doing exactly the same thing with valencians? We respect you and so does the vast majority of spanish people, but you are not respecting Valencia and their own identity. You like talking about deserving your identity to be respected, well, start by repecting other people's identity. When I went to school I learnt Valencian, not Catalan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.124.185.39 (talk) 15:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the only one writing false information here is you. As usual, this becomes a political issue rather than a linguistic one. Wanting to deny truth won't make it change, you know. Languages don't originate from nothing. Valencian is a variant of Catalan that became a language after James I of Aragon conquered the land and it was populated by Catalan people. From there, it has evolved to a variant called Valencian but the origin of it is clearly Catalan. What do you people think Valencian comes from, otherwise? This is denying history. Please do tell me where, according to 100% of Valencians, valencian comes from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.147.17.60 (talk) 17:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me, when did I say Valencian didn't come from catalan?? I just read it over again in case I did by mistake. Well I didn't. I have never denied that (there is nothing bad or embarassing about that)! The only thing I said is that They are different, or is the fact that valencian comes from catalan make them the same thing??? Ok take this as an example: Spanish, Italian , etc etc all come from latin... but they are not LATIN!!!! According to you we should!!! Valencian comes from catalan, cool, but they are two DIFFERENT languages and therefore should not be treated as if they were one thing. And valencian speakers should account as catalan speakers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.232.73.213 (talk) 17:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I meant should NOT account as catalan speakers(sorry, my bad) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.232.73.213 (talk) 17:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Could you please explain then, what does Valentian have that makes it as different as to be considered another language? I mean, where is the boundary? Because, according to you Valentian is a new language evolved from Catalan, and when did it achieve the category of language? You know, this has to be done by convention. Spanish and Italian come from Latin, as you say but they are considered different languages than Latin; and I can only agree to that. I would appreciate if you could empirically clarify what makes Valentian a different language from Catalan, as differences are minor. Do you think then that Cuban or Mexican, which have some differences from Castillian Spanish should be considered as different languages? Catalans and Valencians who speak Valencian, who after all nowadays are a minority, do not get the feeling of speaking different languages because there are almost none. Belive me, a Catalan from Barcelona and a Catalan from rural Lleida wouldn't feel less differences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.147.17.60 (talk) 19:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

There are few differences. There are differences in prononciation (not many though) but the main differences are in writting. But the thing is you can't say valencian is the same thing as catalan. After doing some research, i found out that valencian comes from latin according to some people. So not everyone thinks it comes from catalan, to be honest I have my doubts now. Most catalan separatists believe in the "catalan countries" "paisos catalans" and are trying to unify catalonia and valencia, so I think the ones that are using politics are not the valencians. But I am not going into that. I am no expert so I cannot prove anything, my opinion is based on what I read (like the vast majority of people). I was thinking, if they are the same thing, people in catalonia speak valencian don't they? I am just asking for respect, that's all. The truth is I don't live in Valencia, but I can understand and speak valencian. I can write a little as well. But my grandfather who is a "pure" valencian feels very offended when he hears people say valencian is a dialect of catalan, and that it is "less important" because it isn't. Some people in Catalonia think that valencians and catalans share the same cultural identity and heritage which is completely false. That's where I am going. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.232.73.213 (talk) 21:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It is curious to read your message and see that is talking a lot about politics when you just say you are not. This is not a forum about politics. Here we are talking exclusively about linguistics. You have expressed your opinion about something else and maybe there are other places in wikipedia where you could do that, not here. The person who expressed the first opinion about Catalan and Valencian and me are only talking about the language, nothing else. I also think that if one reads your first and last opinion again they seem to contradict each other to some extent. I thought you had learnt Valencian in school but apparently you can only understand and write it a little, besides now Valencian doesn't come from Catalan, either. I think this is also showing us about the honesty of some people writing in this discussion. Wikipedia is trying to be a serious encyclopedia; it cannot talk about what "people" say because people can say they are tall and handsome when in fact they are short and ugly. You can say whatever you want but facts are facts and up to now, a Catalan and a Valencian who speak to each other (in Catalan and Valencian) do not feel as if they were speaking different languages as, e.g. a Spaniard and an Italian would do in spite the fact that they could be able to understand each other to a certain extent. Who is talking here about identity? Who am I or anyone else to talk about people's identity?! The identity of Valencians is something that should be left completely up to them, shouldn't it? Besides we are talking about something very complicated that even belongs to the sphere of privacy. No one is trying to say that Valencians and Catalans have something else than a common language (at least, in this section; again, to talk about other issues, refer to the appropiate section). About your question, well, said like that yes, people in Catalonia speak Valencian because it is the same thing (neither more or less important, nobody said that either), doesn't matter how you call it. Double-check the article and the opinions here: nobody in this section has shown lack of respect for Valencians; if that happens somewhere else, then complain there. This is a section about linguistics, and linguists, up to now, agree on Catalan and Valencian being the same thing (the language, nothing more and nothing else than that). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.147.17.60 (talk) 16:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh come on! I spent about half an hour writing a reply and it wasn't posted! To sum up what I said, I don't live in Valencia at this moment, but I did and I learnt valencian in school. In valencia, valencian is not compulsory and all subjects are taught in spanish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.232.73.213 (talk) 18:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm a little confused here. What is the problem in the article we're trying to address? What's the change being proposed? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's a little funny! I think you should refer to the first post of this section —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baes1234567 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I've read the whole discussion. Still not sure. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 04:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've lived in Barcelona, Lleida, Valencia, Guadalajara, Murcia and Seville during my life. Some things I've noted is that: a) spanish language spoken in Seville is far more different to that in Guadalajara than the difference between the language talked in Barcelona and Valencia and b) Lleida's language is very similar to that in Valencia. From living in Murcia for a long time, I got some words very peculiar and very local that of course no valencian had heard of, but I didn't think spanish from murcia was another language than spanish in valencia. Every place, or even every person has his very particular way of speaking. Those are the small beautiful things that make life lovelier ;) Of course that's personal opinion, but I felt that in Valencia, Lleida and Barcelona people spoke the same language (call it as you want, it's just semantics), but with those obvious peculiarities due to geographical distance. --80.31.125.246 (talk) 23:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It is important to note that the official Valencian Academy of Language has acknowledged that Valencian and Catalan are variants of the same language (link to a newspaper page in Spanish). --jofframes (talk) 14:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm Valencian, and my mother tongue is Valencian. I considere that Valencian and Catalan are the same languages, but there are several dialects. It's like the Spanish in Andalucia, Argentina, Mexico... or the English in Scotland, England, Ireland, California, Australia, South Africa... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlesmari (talk • contribs) 22:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Please keep the discussion on scientific terms, we're talking about a language and it's dialects, not about feelings - points like "according to some people" are far from being scientific. According to 100% of the population on the middle ages the Sun turned around the Earth but it didn't make it any more true. If you can't use scientific truths, then keep your point for yourself. Sirstrahd (talk) 09:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Just an objective opinion. You can prove who developed it first, you can call it whatever you want (it seems pedantic and imperialist trying to call it just catalan), but the fact, and everybody knows, is that is practically the same thing. The actual problem is that this language does not own a proper appelative. It should have get a name like new-occità/provençà or east-mediterranian. I don't understand why politics and linguistics don't see where all conflicts... it's all really easy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.57.58.131 (talk) 15:34, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

This book says Valencian is a dialect of Catlan: Introduccion a la linguistica espanola by Milton M. Azevedo (page 37). I feel like more citations are needed in the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.145.235 (talk) 16:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Word Origin

Aubergine comes from the French word for eggplant, which, itself (if I'm not mistaken) comes from Arabic (think berenjena in Spanish or berinjela in Portuguese). Even if this weren't the case - that it comes from Arabic - we would have to assume that the word in French, Spanish and Portuguese all come from Catalan.

Here is information from www.etymonline.com (an English etymological resource).

aubergine 1794, from Fr., "fruit of the eggplant" (Solanum esculentum), dim. of auberge "a kind of peach," from Sp. alberchigo "apricot." But Klein derives the Fr. from Catalan alberginera, from Arabic al-badinjan "the eggplant," from Pers. badin-gan, from Skt. vatin-ganah. As a color like that of the eggplant fruit, it is attested from 1895.

So, not even Arabic can claim this one as original as it goes through Persian and Sanskrit. So, it's much like saying we get the English word tomato or chocolate from Spanish, when in reality we get it from Nahuatl (the Aztecs), who probably got it from some other Meso-American group.

Tom Douglas Los Angeles, CA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.205.224.64 (talk) 05:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

In nord-western catalan you can find both "alberginia" (eggplant) and "aubergi" (peach, source:http://dcvb.iecat.net/). Both pronounced with [au-] starting, as done in the nord-western dialect. So I would expect two different origins for such different things. The spanish origin for aubergi (alberchigo) could also have an arabic origin. Like a lot of starting al- words. Another thing that points in this direction is the midle-east origin of both goods (peach, Prunus persicae, and eggplant form India).

JC Lleida —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.174.222.55 (talk) 16:01, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Catalan in 88 languages rank

Generalitat de Catalunya (Catalonia Gobern) link and font: http://www20.gencat.cat/portal/site/Llengcat/menuitem.df5fba67cac781e7a129d410b0c0e1a0/?vgnextoid=fe8c949b22741110VgnVCM1000000b0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=fe8c949b22741110VgnVCM1000000b0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=detall&contentid=65502b4d4bc87110VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD —Preceding unsigned comment added by AguaitantPV (talk • contribs) 22:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Aioli etymology

Merriam-Webster's dictionary says that "aioli" is of Occitan origin. Occitan is close to Catalan, but it's separate. If there's no source that defines the etymology of aioli as Catalan, then it should be removed. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 10:07, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

The word/compound exists in all Occitano-Romance languages, and it isn't spelled aioli in any of them, so I wouldn't attribute it to either specifically. It's either older than the split of Occitano-Romance into separate languages or it has spread in a way that blurs its origin. Or maybe allium et oleum goes back to the Romans?--87.162.23.79 (talk) 05:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Alioli is a catalan word (sorry for my bad English). This word comes from: All i oli (oil + garlic)--Asfarer (talk) 13:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

More speakers than Danish

"The number of people who speak it is greater than those who speak Finnish or Danish, and it is equivalent to the number of speakers of Swedish, and Greek in Europe." - What's the relevance of this? Lfh (talk) 11:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

This paragraph was recently added by 194.151.190.23 on August 27 [3]. I think the editor may have been trying to give some comparison, but I almost reverted it right away that day but decided not to be revert happy. It seems like a lot of the comparison is just random languages, and there isn't a source for all the claims. Ethnologue has Greek at 12.3 million native speakers and Catalan at 6.7 million native speakers. Maybe by putting "equivalent to the number of speakers of Swedish, and Greek in Europe", the editor was trying to exclude Swedish and Greek speakers outside of Europe, but that is a very dubious comparison in my opinion. I think the first part about the ranking in the European Union may be appropriate if it's sourced, but I think the rest of it can just be removed. Kman543210 (talk) 11:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Our own table puts Catalan well below 7th in the EU, and that was calculated pre-Enlargement. I hate to get involved in this "league table" style of language assertiveness at all, but the claim as it stands does seem dubious. Lfh (talk) 12:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

If it's not accurate, the entire paragraph should probably be removed. Kman543210 (talk) 13:11, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

new link

there's a new resource for learning catalan online. it is promoted by consorci per la normalitzacio linguistica and the ramon llull insitute it is in Català | English | Castellano | Français | Deutsch, and it has several levels. i think it's quite complete so i'd be a good idea adding it. http://www.parla.cat/ --Josepsbd (talk) 20:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Fix or vandalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalan_language&curid=5282&diff=248054983&oldid=248013582: I have no idea whether this is a fix of vandalism. Would someone with native-speaker knowledge (and maybe some knowledge of Gaudì) please take a look and either confirm here that it is good or that you have reverted? Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 21:19, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for pointing it out! It was indeed a nonsense and I've just removed it. --Carles Noguera (talk) 08:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

relationship with spanish

there should be a section explaining the relationship between spanish and catalan language (how similar or different they are). Loosmark (talk) 22:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

May I ask why? I mean, why noy a section explaining the relationship between French and Catalan? --77.224.26.82 (talk) 00:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Why not have a section explaining the relation of Catalan to both Spanish and French? Grunnen (talk) 16:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

well mainly because it is interesting and many people don't know the difference between the two languages. but of course explaining the relation to French is interesting to. Loosmark (talk) 14:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

the suggestion is very justified. you only need to compare an info pamphlet on barcelona airport written in catalan and spanish(or any other one in catalunya) with open eyes to see that there are great similarities. relatives of mine near barcelona tell me, that people from barcelona and madrid have little problem understanding each other, if they are both willing. this has nothing to do with catalonians learning spanish at school. on the other hand, a frenchman would be hard pressed to understand any catalonian and vice versa. finally, many place catalonian in the language family with aragonese and kastillian as next of kin which, at least, is an indication of a very close relationship and which also justifies the suggestion above. Sundar1 (talk) 15:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

It could be interesting such a comparison, but also including french. Don't forget that, as spanish catalan speakers see simmilarities between catalan and spanish languages, french catalan speakers do the same with catalan and french. In fact, catalan, if we talk about grammar, is more simmilar to french than to spanish (including it in the gaulic-iberian latin group and not in the west-iberian latin group, where spanish belongs), and if we talk about vocabulary, the most simmilar language is italian (in this case because it has kept more latin words than other romance languages influenced by arab or german languages). The only interest in comparing catalan just to spanish is political, as many non-spaniards don't even know in Spain there are many spoken languages apart from spanish (mainly because the spanish government has hidden those other languages in its international relations), so they try to see those new discovered languages in relation to Spanish.

Look, dude! We just want to understand is Catalan like Spanish so that we can understand what the heck it is. I'm not Spanish, I'm American. So I could care less about some gay EU regionality dispute. I just come to the encyclopedia to learn things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.153.42 (talk) 11:26, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I grew up speaking Spanish. Afterwards I became fluent both in Italian and Catalan, and can understand some French. My impression (shared by many speakers who speak some or all of those languages) is that Catalan falls nicely in the middle of the triangle Spanish-French-Italian, very much like it happens geographically. It is indeed closer to French in phonetics (which makes it somehow hard to understand when spoken to Spanish speakers) and closer to Italian in vocabulary--whenever the Catalan word is not similar to the Spanish one, you can almost always work it out through Italian. Hope that helps as a description, if obviously not very quantitative. Fsoto1969 (talk) 10:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

This is not going to be done here, this article is already very messy to add such unnecessary comparison, it could be also compared with Occitan (Catalan's sister language) or with Portuguese, Aragonese or Asturian-Leonese-Mirandese, which are closer languages to Catalan than Castilian (check ca:Lleis fonètiques del català and sources: Catalan and Castilian diverge the most when compared with the other Romance languages). Jɑυмe (xarrades) 20:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

FYI - Lexical similarity: 87% with Italian, 85% with Portuguese and Spanish, 76% with Ladin [lld], 75% with Sardinian [src], 73% with Romanian [ron]. http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=cat Eyesighter (talk) 02:48, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Inverted question mark

Are there any rules for using the Inverted question and exclamation marks in Catalan?

See discussion at Talk:Inverted question and exclamation marks#Used in Catalan?. Thanks in advance for any help. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 21:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

In Catalan they aren't used but, if the sentence is too long or ambiguous(you don't know where the interrogative or exclamative sentence begins) you can use them.--Jarna3 (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Long quote example?

Besides the short phrases, maybe there should be a long quote example of the language, possibly with translations in Spanish and/or other Romance languages, to give a bit more of the "feel." It's just that I don't get a lot out of the short phrases. --True (talk) 03:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Mistake

Hey! I'd like someone to correct one thing. Here in the "Catalan language" article says that català is #93 in the ranking of languages by number of native speakers. But in the Valencian article says that catalan is in the #88 of the same ranking. How is it possible? I'd correct it but I don't know which of them is the good one! :P--Layonard (talk) 09:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Cultural splendour

"During the 15th century, during the Valencian Golden Age, the Catalan language reached its highest cultural splendor, which was not matched again until La Renaixença, 4 centuries later." Could this sentence be improved in some way to make the concept of "cultural splendour" a little more understandable?Jimjamjak (talk) 09:16, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

"Learning Catalan" section

Is this a joke? Per WP:NOTGUIDE, it ought to be removed. Unfortunately, this article seems replete with unencyclopediac content. RobertM525 (talk) 08:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:BOLD, I've gone ahead and removed it. RobertM525 (talk) 08:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you, many sections need to be rebuilt. Jɑυмe (xarrades) 20:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

The Andorran Dialect

There doesn't seem to be any information on this page covering the dialect of Catalan in Andorra. I can't find any page on Wikipedia dealing with it. That should be something to note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.242.125 (talk) 14:55, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Andorran is included in North-Western Catalan :) Jɑυмe (xarrades) 08:22, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

"Decree banning the Catalan language in France"

The so-called "Decree banning the Catalan language in France" does not, in fact, say what the caption says it says. It does *not* ban the Catalan language in France. It only decrees that public acts such as court decisions and such must from henceforth be written in French rather than Catalan. This hardly constitutes "banning" a language.

I therefore suggest to either: 1) change the caption to "Decree from 1700 changing the official language of the newly-acquired Catalan speaking regions to French", or 2) remove the picture as it is not really very interesting (in my opinion).

not logged in, next time sorry. (212.114.247.96 (talk) 22:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC))

You are right, either option is good. First Catalan was diminished to a nonstandard language ("patois") by the Kingdom of France. Then right after the centralised Kingdom of France (1789-1792), the also centralised French Republic banned and started discriminating the nonstandard languages of France. IMO the section 18th century to the present: France should be expanded and mention "La Vergonha" and the French policies against "patois". We should also mention here "The report on the necessity and means to annihilate the patois and to universalize the use of the French language". Jɑυмe (xarrades) 18:41, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

At no point did the French government pass a law making speaking, writing or publishing in Catalan illegal. So it was not "banned", I'm sick of hearing that word regarding Catalan. At no time in its history has Catalan been banned.

Boynamedsue (talk) 22:06, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

English

This article mixes two written variants of English, British (Commonwealth English) and American English. Since Catalan language is entirely spoken in Europe, I suggest to only use British spelling. 31.96.113.39 (talk) 18:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose. The article is written in American English already and does not need to be changed gratuitously. If there were examples of British English, then please point them out, because I could not find any matches for a search on "ise" and "our". It seems to me that the preponderance was written in American English. Elizium23 (talk) 19:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

MOS:RETAIN says, When an article has evolved sufficiently for it to be clear which variety of English it employs, the whole article should continue to conform to that variety, unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic. I do not see how Catalan has any national ties to Commonwealth nations (nor does it have national ties to the United States or American English-speaking countries), so it cannot be argued that national ties are a reason to rewrite the English variety already present.

Number of native speakers

The infobox, citing Ethnologue, erroneously claims that the number of native speakers is 11.5 million. The figure (source) is the population of the regions where Catalan is spoken — which obviously doesn't equal the number of native speakers. ✎ HannesP · talk 02:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Infobox flags

What are they for? --John (talk) 07:16, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Editions by Temax

The last editions by user Temax do not look very neutral. I really don't know what to do about them. Any proposal? Jotamar (talk) 16:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

They're also not very grammatical, so I'm not sure entirely what he's saying, but Temax seems to be summarizing some of the arguments of the Valencian language controversy. I haven't been able to verify the source as it's not online, either. If the source can be verified, then I guess a reduced version of that information can be kept in the article, but it's more appropriate to be under the Valencian languge heading than history. acomas (talk) 21:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I've insulated Temax's editions under the heading Valencian-centric theories. They still don't look neutral, though. Jotamar (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

With no further input in the last weeks (apart of a diatribe in my user talk page), I've decided to alter the section so that it sounds a bit more neutral. Jotamar (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The relevance for the section of the Flos Mundi quotation still remains a complete mystery to me. Jotamar (talk) 17:06, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I've been bold, and I've deleted the wole section. Reasons: It's clearly WP:NPOV. It's poorly sourced. I can't understand many sentences, and many of them sound (IMHO) almost childish. Besides, there's already an article about this: Valencian language controversy. Thanks.--Fauban 13:59, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

When it comes to deleting, everybody is very bold. I've made some new changes, but I won't defend the original text, as it is of no use if the original editor doesn't come around and explains what exactly he meant. But you overlooked 2 very obvious points:

• In no place the original wording spoke about different languages. It just apoke about the origin of those languages. Apparently a lot of people give for granted the tree model.
• If Ubieto is not a scholarly support, then tell me what it is. Jotamar (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Valencian-centric theories

I have been reading the section "Valencian-centric theories". These theories have no scientific support and aren't taught in any university. They are made only for political reasons and have the same value in the academic world as theories proposing the origin of human beings coming from another planet. I propose that someone deletes totally this section. If you need references, you can go to any university library and try to find these theories. I assure you that you won't find them.--Toni PC (talk) 12:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Find the references first, then we'll see what must be deleted or not. By the way, you shouldn't have opened a new section, because this question is what has been discussed in the previous section. Jotamar (talk) 15:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

It's true that it had been discussed in the previous section, but I hadn't realized it because the title of the section didn't give me a clue.

I'd only like to add that this topic seems a bit of nonsense. I have studied Philology at the University of Valencia and know that there is a total academic consensus on the matter. Theories claiming for Valencian (first of all they should clarify what's the scope of Valencian)as a different language are supported by groups outside the universities which no one in the academic world consider, and this originated in the Spanish transition to democracy with political grounds. As I said, if there is an article on evolution and I write a section saying that I know theories which say that human beings descend from another planet, I expect that this section would be deleted, although these theories actually exist, but have no academic recognition. It would be stupid to ask for references that prove the lack of sense of these theories, because any universty student knows it. If we arrive to this nonsense to ask for references for everything that has a total consensus in the academic world, I think this is not the good way for the Wikipedia. Besides this, how can you find a reference that says that one theory is nonsense? --Toni PC (talk) 12:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

After reviewing the article, I consider it totally inadequate that more than half of the Middle Ages section is occupied by this sub-section. I'll give you a reference that I found in a book at home: The book Història de la llengua catalana, by Antoni Ferrando and Miquel Nicolàs, wich was recommended to me by a professor of the Department of Catalan Philology of the University of Valencia, says (pages 422-423) that "it isn't necessary to insist on the philological discredit of secessionist ideas" and that the anticatalanist secessionism arose at the end of the 60s as a form to neutralize the left-wing opposition to the Franco regime. This is due to the fact that the left-wing forces were in favour of a recognition of the Catalan language, so saying that Valencian is not Catalan and inventing a different history of the language would help. This strategy was strengthened during the Spanish transition because the left-wing forces got a majority of votes in the region of Valencia. So this is the origin of these so called Valencian-centric theories. Not very academical nor neutral, of course.--Toni PC (talk) 17:39, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

unneeded classification

I added a reference, deleted by another edtitor, to prove that not all linguists classify Catalan (or any other language) in this or that way. It would be great to have a fine-grained and subtle explanation like that in Finnic languages#Subclassification, but we have no source for it, because linguistics in this part of the world is still dominated by old-fashioned ideas, and we just shouldn't let the reader get the impression that, if there are several different classifications, one must be right and the rest must be wrong. In other words, in an ideal world we wouldn't need my reference, but in the real world of Romance linguistics it is vital to state that languages needn't be classified, and that no classification can be perfect anyway. Opinions? Jotamar (talk) 15:50, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, just because some linguists think dialect continua cannot (or need not, which is even more specious to claim – who decides which scientific endeavours are "needed" and which aren't?) be classified in a tree-like fashion in principle does not make it true, as I tried to indicate with my abbreviated reference to Finnic, which you correctly interpreted. Tiit-Rein Viitso has presented a soundly argued tree-like classification of the Finnic dialects (as opposed to languages, which are not always valid genetic subgroups, perhaps are not even in most cases; Estonian in particular does not form a subgroup) in Abondolo, The Uralic languages, clearly disproving the claim of those Romanists who insist that dialect continua by their particular nature defy such attempts. Just like in biological taxonomy and cladistics, the general assumption is that classifications are not arbitrary, that there are correct and incorrect classifications, and that perfect classifications (or at least classifications that do not include invalid nodes) do exist (though they may not yet have been found, or may only be a theoretical possibility hampered by a lack of data in concrete cases). Secondly, as I have already explained, that point is irrelevant to this specific article anyway. You could add it to any article about a Romance language (if not any language), which would clearly be nonsensical. The remark is only relevant to articles such as Tree model, Dialect continuum, Subgrouping or Language family, not to articles about individual languages. By the way, I get conflicting messages out of your statement – you pretend that you are simply adding other linguists' opinion, but the way you state it (by treating an opinion of individual Romanists as if it were consensus among Romanists, and even as if it were undisputed fact in general, a holy truth, which it is by no means) it appears that this is your own POV that you are trying to push by inserting it (gratuitously, as I have explained) into the article about Catalan (and tellingly no other language). Raises several red flags about conflict of interest. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:02, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

First, I think you could be having a linguistic problem with the difference between need not and must not. I cannot tell for sure because English is not my native language, but neither is it yours. Second, I feel that you should elaborate more on what you mean by conflict of interest before further discussion. Jotamar (talk) 16:46, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for an answer. Jotamar (talk) 13:32, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't have a linguistic problem with that difference, I know very well what I mean with what I have written. Please read it again. To repeat my central point: it would be patent nonsense to include such a remark in any article about a Romance language, let alone language in general, so why Catalan of all languages? This article is not the place to discuss the classification of Romance and individual scholars' opinions on the viability of the endeavour of classifying any particular language family. You seem to care very much for the topic, as a local, which would explain this strange obsession. I would advise you to adopt a different vantage point and get more distance. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:07, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

The reason to include the comment here and not for other languages is because Catalan has been classified in different and seemingly contradictory ways. Now, are you saying that, in your opinion, all language varieties have one and only one correct way to be classified? Because I don't think that is a common belief any more among linguists. Jotamar (talk) 17:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Many languages have been classified in different and seemingly contradictory ways. (Part of the reason is disagreement about the importance or validity of criteria used for classification, but there is widespread agreement that morphological and phonological innovations, if chronologically synchronic, are suitable evidence for subgrouping). What makes Catalan so special?

So you are claiming that the opinion that language classification (or only subgrouping?) is an exercise in futility is prevalent or even (nearly) universal among (historical?) linguists in general? On which evidence is your belief based? I am aware of countless such disputes continuing to be pursued actively in contemporary academia. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I agree with Florian in part. Language classifications are usually a consistent and useful method. If one wants to comment on the validity of language classification theories, that should be done in the Language family or Romance languages articles.

Another thing is the different classification of Catalan according to different linguists. In my view, those views who adscribe it to Ibero-Romance are completelty flawed and based on politics. I mean, apart from geography (and only in part, because there's also Northern Catalonia; and the territories of Catalunya Vella are equally placed on both sides of the Pyrenees), what do they have? The conservative traits of Catalan when compared to Occitan and French cannot be said to be Spanish influence. Conservativism is not an "influence". I can't help thinking in those francoist authorities who called Catalan a "perverted dialect of Spanish" in the 1960s. Are we still using these fascist theories?

On the other hand, there is almost universal consensus that Catalan and Occitan are closely related. Any Catalan, without a linguistics degree, can see it. So the thing should be discussing this in articles such as Occitano-Romance languages, Gallo-Romance languages, or maybe a new article. Ennumerating the different innovations in Catalan and comparing them to other languages would be interesting. In my view, the question should be: Is Catalan Gallo-Romance? Or do Occitan and Catalan form a separate family different from the Oil branch?--Fauban 11:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I had no idea that genetic language classifications were based on influences. Anyway, it seems that the tree model is still very popular among Wikipedia editors. If it were blindly applied to Romance languages, classifying Catalan as Gallo-Romance and not Ibero-Romance would imply that Catalan resembles more French than Spanish or Portuguese, which is not what I feel. The fact that Catalan resembles more Occitan than French or Spanish is obviously the result of the existence of a dialect continuum, not of any classification. What I mean is that the tree model, however applied, is highly dis-informative for the Romance languages, and even so I didn't intend to remove any text from the page, I just wanted to add a caveat for the unfortunate reader, with the Ralph Penny quote (have you read it?). It's sad that Wikipedia has this tendency to reflect established but outdated theories. Jotamar (talk) 14:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I think you should expose your views somewhere else, as what you say applies to all Romance Languages. Please, consider creating a topic at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics. Thanks.--Fauban 19:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

V in Classical Latin

A user has been insisting that we use U instead of V in Classical Latin words on this page, but hasn't made their point consistently as they have left the V in 'levare'. Classical Latin had no letter U, so presumably if the intent is to accurately reflect the original spelling (which the all-caps seems to suggest) then there should not be any U in those words. I therefore have reverted the change but said user has pushed their point through instead, twice. CodeCat (talk) 01:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

It is nonsense to insist on "original spelling" because orthography was not consistent in practice. Spellings are usually normalised anyway in such cases, and that is actually current practice in Romance and Latin linguistics. "Original spelling" orthodoxy would mean that macrons could not be used, either, because they are completely alien to Latin orthographic practice, whether ancient, medieval or modern. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Rewriting the "Grammar" rection

Hi, I think the choices in that section are a bit arbitrary. I mean, why do we include this and not that? Since it's not sourced, I'm going to rewrite it from my Enciclopèdia Catalana article. I'm sure the choices will be more represenative. If somebody is interested in all the grammar aspects, he can check the Catalan Grammar article.

I'm including the original text before my changes:

The first descriptive and normative grammar book of modern Catalan was written by Pompeu Fabra in 1918. In 1995, a new grammar by Antoni Maria Badia i Margarit was published, which also documents the Valencian and Balearic varieties.

The grammar of Catalan follows the general pattern of Western Romance languages. The primary word order is SVO (subject–verb–object).

Substantives and adjectives are not declined by case, as in Classical Latin. There are two grammatical genders—masculine and feminine.

Grammatical articles developed from Latin demonstratives. The form of the article depends on the gender and the number of the subject and the first sounds of the word and can be combined with prepositions that precede them. A unique feature of Catalan is a definite article that may precede personal names in certain contexts. Its basic form is en and it can change according to its environment: en Joan meaning 'John', na Maria meaning 'Mary' (note clitic en has also other lexical meanings). One of the common usages of this article is in the word can, a combination of la casa shortened to ca ('house', as French chez) and en, which here means 'the'. For example la casa d'en Sergi becomes can Sergi meaning 'the house of Sergi', 'Sergi's house'. Note here, other definite articles (el, la, els, les) can also be used with personal names like in Portuguese, as la Maria ('Mary', Portuguese a Maria).

Verbs are conjugated according to tense and mood similarly to other Western Romance languages. Present, imperfect and simple preterite are based on classical Latin present, imperfect and perfect respectively, future and conditional are formed from the infinitive followed by the present and imperfect form of the auxiliary verb haver (written together and not considered periphrastic). Periphrastic tenses are formed from the conjugated auxiliary verbs haver ('to have') and ésser ('to be') followed by the past participle. A unique tense in Catalan is the "periphrastic simple preterite," which is formed of vaig, vas (or vares), va, vam (or vàrem), vau (or vàreu) and van (there is the usual wrong idea these forms are the conjugated forms of anar, which means 'to go'), which is followed by the infinitive of the verb. Thus, jo vaig parlar (or more simply vaig parlar) means 'I spoke'.

Nominative pronouns are often omitted, as the subject can be usually derived from the conjugated verb. The Catalan rules for combination of the object pronoun clitics with verbs, articles and other pronouns are significantly more complex than in most other Romance languages; see Weak pronouns in Catalan.

• The definite articles el, la, els, les derive from Latin demonstratives ille, illa. The older forms lo (m. s.) and los (m. pl.) are still common nowadays in some western dialects and in Algherese. Several varieties of the Catalan language (Balearic Islands, Costa Brava, and Tàrbena) have maintained an article called salat (< Latin ipse, ipsa → es, sa), probably formed before the variants of ille developed. Singular articles are elided before vowel-initial words, in speech and writing: el + home > l'home 'the man', la + hora > l'hora 'the time'.
• Possessive adjectives are formed with the definite article (el meu gos 'my dog') like in Italian (il mio cane), Portuguese (o meu cão) and in many Occitan dialects (Languedocien and Pyrenean Gascon). Weak forms of possessive adjectives (mon, ma, mos, mes, etc.) are fossilized for certain usages, as close familiar relatives or in order to express a high degree of affection (for instance: mon pare 'my dad', ma mare 'my mum'; in Valencian ma casa 'my home', ma vida 'my life'). Also note the postposition of the possessive to express particular nuances, e.g. casa meva ('my home', literally 'a house of mine') as different from la meva casa ('my house').
• Plurals are formed in a number of ways:
  • -a becomes -es (e.g. casa 'house' > cases).
  • Most consonant- and vowel-final words (except -a) add -s: noi 'boy' > nois, detall 'detail' > detalls
  • Words ending in sibilants (-s, -ç, -x, -ig) form plurals with -os: gos 'dog' > gossos, peix 'fish' > peixos. Some plural words with -ig may alternate forming plural by adding -os or a silent -s: raig 'ray' > rajos/raigs.
  • Words ending in sibilant clusters (-sc, -st, -xt) may form plurals by adding -os or -s: bosc 'forest' > boscos/boscs, aquest 'this' > aquestos/aquests.
  • Words ending in a stressed vowel often take -ns: pi 'pine' > pins, cinturó 'belt' > cinturons (but esquí 'ski' > esquís, tabú 'taboo' > tabús). In Western Catalan dialects, some particular words ending in unstressed vowels may also form plural by adding -ns: home 'man' > hòmens (from Latin homo > homines).
• Partitive: While Catalan patterns with Ibero-Romance in the lack of a partitive article (e.g. vull pa 'I want some bread', cf. Spanish quiero pan but French je veux du pain), it does have a partitive pronoun, like in Gallo-Romance languages: jo en tinc tres 'I have three of them' (Spanish tengo tres but French j'en ai trois).
• The construction used to express punctual/perfective aspect in the past tense is one of the most distinctive features of Catalan. It is a periphrasis formed with a special conjugation of anar ('to go'), that comes from the Latin verb vadere, plus the infinitive form of the main verb. For example: jo vaig dir ('I said'). This construction has almost completely replaced the historical simple past form (jo diguí), which corresponds to the Spanish preterit or French passé simple or Italian passato remoto.}}

Thanks--Fauban 12:10, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Overlapping tables?

In the section Vocabulary:Lexical Comparison two table overlap and make understanding difficult. Is anyone in a position to fix this? 41.241.41.23 (talk) 06:58, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm using Firefox and they don't overlap. What are you using?--Fauban 12:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any overlapping either, with MS IE 8. Incidentally, the 2 tables and the whole section look like a clear case of Cherry picking, and they blatantly try to prove how much more similar Catalan is to French and Italian than to Spanish. Jotamar (talk) 17:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

At the beginning of the article, it´s not so clear whether the Autonomous Community of Catalonia is a part of Spain or not.

So I restored Spain instead of "Iberian Peninsula". In the same sentence, France is cited as comprising some catalan-speaking areas; it is really confusing not even name here Spain when it´s actually the nation in which almost all historical catalan-speaking territories are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.39.6.32 (talk) 20:45, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

New "Catalan and Spanish cognates with different meanings" proposal

I propose "cama" ("leg" in Catalan; "bed" in Spanish). I'm not doing it myself because I don't know the Latin word.