Jump to content

Talk:Arbëresh language

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exonym of the language

[edit]

It appears that the endonym of the language in Arbërisht, a name also used as an endonym for Arvanitika, and that Arberësh or Arbëreshë is the name of its speakers. What is the name most used in English, and what is the exonym used in Italy? Based on this information, a move to a name such as Arbërisht (Italy) should be considered.  Andreas  (T) 15:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Arbëresh language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:14, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dialect vs Language

[edit]

Someone is repeatedly editing this article to refer to arbresh as a dialect even though the title is Arberesh language. Linguistics of the 21st century do not impose the label of dialect on an endangered minority language. Is this vandalism and how can it be stopped? 2A00:23C8:728C:5C01:FD7C:896C:33D5:7732 (talk) 00:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, and it seems the original change from language to dialect was made in 2021. It also seems that good-faith editors started reverting and re-reverting, and that is where the confusion comes from. The article is back to the original stable form now after your last edit. Netherzone (talk) 01:24, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ENDONYMS

[edit]

It seems there is some confusion about the meaning of ENDONYM and NATIVE NAME, as some editors are typing "Albanian of Italy" in the native name field and "Albanians of Greece" or "Arvanitic Albanian" in endonym field, neither of which are correct. The correct native name for Arberisht is Arbërisht, and the correct endonym for Arvanites is Arvanites, and the language is Arvanitika. ARBERESHTV (talk) 15:14, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

“Italian Language”

[edit]

Why is this article part of the series about the Italian Language ? Flight714 (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious information pushed in the lede

[edit]

As I already explained, I removed the claim "The ethnic Albanian (Arbëresh) dialects of Italy bear little resemblance to the standard language or dialects of Albania, as they have been cut off from the main language for around 500 years.", which is a very vague description and misleading because there are more affinities between modern Arbëresh and modern Tosk than betwen modern Gheg and modern Tosk. Also the intelligibility depends on the proficiency of the speakers, because speeches highly affected by Italian are not intelligible with Tosk, but more conservative speeches are. I'll add academic sources specializing about it. – Βατο (talk) 23:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Arbëresh language" and recent additions in lede

[edit]

Arbëresh did not develop from a common language or dialect. Arbëresh varieties developed from the different varieties of Old Tosk spoken by Albanian immigrants that came from different areas of the southwestern Balkans. The already different Albanian varieties settled different areas of Italy that have remained isolated from each other and that have had contacts with different local Italo-Romance dialects. Furthermore, Arbëresh varieties have not yet experienced a linguistic unification process. For these reasons, Arbëresh can not be defined as a "language", but as Albanian linguistic varieties. Here is an academic source that gives a clear definition of Arbëresh:

Matranga, Vito; Milano, Emma (2019). "Strategies for conservation of a minority language – Between convergence and hybridization". In Francesc Feliu; Olga Fullana (eds.). The Intricacy of Languages. IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literatur. Vol. 20. John Benjamins Publishing Company. pp. 227-.

  • 1. Arbëresh is the name used to indicate the linguistic varieties spoken by descendants of groups of Albanian immigrants in southern Italy from the middle of the fifteenth century. The Albanian varieties are divided into Gheghe varieties, spoken (by the Shqiptarë) in the northern part of the albanophone territory, in Kosovo and in Macedonia, and Tosche varieties, spoken in the southern part of Albania (by the Shqiptarë), in some areas of Greece (by the Arvaniti) and in Southern Italy (by the Arbëreshë). The standard language (Shqipja) is derived from the Tosco variety. The Arbëresh language mostly derives from the Tosche varieties. Arbëresh is a variety that is orally learned and transmitted, even if there is no lack of important recorded examples in Albanian literary and linguistic history. The standard Albanian language, known mainly by academics, today no longer functions as a 'roof language' for the Arbëresh variety, in that it is not in a condition to influence its grammatical and lexical evolution.

The main description in the lead section should clarify it, and the article title should be changed to Arbëresh, which now is a redirect to this article. – Βατο (talk) 13:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the problem of establishing an Arbëresh ausbausprache as the linguistic minority language, scholar Francesco Altimari has pointed out that (quotes from Matranga, Vito (2018). "Arbëreshë". In Thomas Krefeld; Roland Bauer (eds.). Lo spazio comunicativo dell’Italia e delle varietà italiane. Korpus im Text. Vol. 7. ISBN 978-3-95896-019-0.):

  • «l’uso nel provvedimento normativo dell’espressione “lingua di minoranza” non può autorizzare un’interpretazione “restrittiva” di essa da intendere come lingua locale o “localistica”, circoscrivendo la lingua su cui operare al solo codice orale sopravvissuto nei secoli di “resistenza” all’ombra dei rispettivi campanili […] Le differenze linguistiche anche marcate, che pure si registrano all’interno dell’arbëresh tra le sue varianti locali, da una parte, e tra loro e l’albanese standard, dall’altra, non appaiono di per sé determinanti, né sufficienti per spingere a ipotizzare la trasformazione della variante dialettale arbëreshe ad Ausbausprache […] In tale contesto l’arbëresh parlato […] ha bisogno come lingua scritta della “lingua-tetto” dell’albanese comune […] una sorta di albanese standard allargato, comprendente alcune specificità comuni del sistema morfosintattico e lessicale dell’albanese più arcaico, oggi rintracciabili sia in area tosca (dialetti arbëreshë e dialetti ciami e labi), sia in area ghega» (Altimari 2007: 75-77).

translation:

  • "the use of the expression “minority language” in the legislative provision cannot authorize a “restrictive” interpretation of it to be understood as a local or “localistic” language, limiting the language on which to operate to the only oral code that survived over the centuries of “resistance” in the shadow of the respective bell towers […] The linguistic differences, even marked ones, which are also recorded within Arbëresh between its local variants, on the one hand, and between them and standard Albanian, on the other, do not appear in themselves to be determining, nor sufficient to push one to hypothesize the transformation of the Arbëresh dialectal variant into Ausbausprache […] In this context, spoken Arbëresh […] needs as a written language the “roof language” of common Albanian […] a sort of extended standard Albanian, including some common specificities of the morphosyntactic and lexical system of the most archaic Albanian, today traceable both in the Tosk area (dialects Arbëreshë and Ciami and Labi dialects), both in the Gheg area" (Altimari 2007: 75-77).

as well as that:

  • «L’ipotesi di trasformazione dell’arbëresh a Ausbauprache, distaccato dal macrosistema dell’albanese, è linguisticamente insostenibile e politicamente irrealizzabile. […] In ogni caso, la distanza esistente tra l’abanese d’Italia e l’albanese standard, entrambi a base tosca, non risulta essere affatto strutturale, non coinvolgendo sostanzialmente né la fonetica né la grammatica di base, ma il solo lessico. Non c’è dubbio però che ci si debba confrontare con tale distanza, che non rappresenta certamente una questione di linguistica o di politica linguistica, come è stato più volte ingenuamente e erroneamente riproposto, ma un problema didattico da porre e da risolvere all’interno di una strategia pedagogica attenta alle ragioni del plurilinguismo e del pluriculturalismo, che porti il discente nella scuola di base delle aree minoritarie arbëreshe a sviluppare gradualmente, attraverso appropriate metodologie, la sua competenza comunicativa, tenendo conto delle sue conoscenze linguistiche già acquisite e di tutte le lingue in uso nella comunità (arbëresh, dialetto romanzo, italiano). In altre parole, occorre proporre all’alunno arbëresh che ha sempre vissuto in una situazione di bilinguismo composito (o bilinguismo “zoppo”, come espressamente è stato definito), un’educazione linguistica che punti a garantirgli un’effettiva condizione di bilinguismo paritario. Per raggiungere tale obiettivo occorre innanzitutto consolidare la sua competenza verbale di partenza, sia ricettiva che produttiva, che non può prescindere dall’arbëresh parlato all’interno della famiglia della comunità di appartenenza. Nel passaggio dall’oralità alla scrittura, si terrà conto, nella prima fase, dell’albanese conosciuto dall’alunno, valorizzando la sua competenza linguistica già acquisita sia a livello orale, attraverso la varietà dialettale arbëreshe della comunità e, possibilmente le altre varietà dialettali arbëreshe presenti nell’area, sia a livello scritto, utilizzando i documenti linguistici e letterari. Si passerà quindi, nella seconda fase, a illustrargli le differenze esistenti tra le varietà dialettali albanesi – sia quelle arbëreshe che quelle balcaniche – perché partendo dalle varianti linguistiche e dall’eteroglossia dialettale possa prendere coscienza dell’unitarietà di fondo che caratterizza il sistema linguistico dell’albanese comune. Con questi presupposti, si potrà, quindi, adottare nella terza fase, quale lingua-tetto delle cinquanta varietà dialettali arbëreshe parlate in Italia, l’albanese comune, che sarà sostanzialmente incentrato sul modello ortografico, fonologico e morfologico dell’albanese standard, ma con una certa flessibilità normativa» (Altimari 2007: 78).

translation:

  • «The hypothesis of transforming Arbëresh into Ausbauprache, detached from the macrosystem of Albanian, is linguistically unsustainable and politically unrealizable. […] In any case, the distance existing between the Albanian of Italy and standard Albanian, both of Tosk origin, does not appear to be structural at all, not substantially involving either phonetics or basic grammar, but only the lexicon. There is no doubt, however, that we must deal with this distance, which certainly does not represent a question of linguistics or linguistic policy, as has been naively and erroneously proposed several times, but a didactic problem to be posed and resolved within a pedagogical strategy that is attentive to the reasons for plurilingualism and pluriculturalism, which leads the student in the primary school of the Arbëreshe minority areas to gradually develop, through appropriate methodologies, his communicative competence, taking into account his linguistic knowledge already acquired and all the languages ​​in use in the community (Arbëresh, Romance dialect, Italian). In other words, it is necessary to propose to the Arbëresh student who has always lived in a situation of composite bilingualism (or “lame” bilingualism, as it has been expressly defined), a linguistic education that aims to guarantee him an effective condition of equal bilingualism. To achieve this goal, it is first necessary to consolidate the student's starting verbal competence, both receptive and productive, which cannot ignore the Arbëresh spoken within the family of the community to which he belongs. In the transition from oral to written communication, the Albanian known by the student will be taken into account in the first phase, enhancing his linguistic competence already acquired both at an oral level, through the Arbëreshe dialect variety of the community and, possibly the other Arbëreshe dialect varieties present in the area, and at a written level, using linguistic and literary documents. In the second phase, the differences existing between the Albanian dialect varieties will be illustrated - both the Arbëreshe and the Balkan ones - so that, starting from the linguistic variants and dialectal heteroglossia, he can become aware of the basic unity that characterizes the linguistic system of common Albanian. With these assumptions, it will therefore be possible to adopt, in the third phase, common Albanian as the roof language of the fifty Arbëreshe dialectal varieties spoken in Italy, which will be substantially centred on the orthographic, phonological and morphological model of standard Albanian, but with a certain normative flexibility» (Altimari 2007: 78).

The issue is a difficult task which is involving specialist scholars. These recent additions in lede are oversimplifications of the subject by selecting and adding full quotes also from non specialized sources. As per WP:LEAD: The lead should identify the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight. – Βατο (talk) 13:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This source The role of grassroots' media and community leaders for the small endangered languages: the case of Arbëresh of Piana degli Albanesi by Eda Derhemi, an academic that has written extensively about Arbëresh and has conducted field studies in Piana, already used in this article as a reliable source, clearly identifies Arbëresh as a language, albeit endangered. Seems to me that you are trying to push your point of view, disregarding the opinions of experts in the field that don’t agree with you. Some academics consider Arbëresh a language, others not; they consider it a variety of Albanian, but these two opinions should be reflected in the article, not just the one you seem to agree with. - DonCalo (talk) 23:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another proof of your pushing of your point of view is that you deleted this: "A study about ‘new’ Albanian immigrants arriving since 1990 in the ‘old’ Albanian diaspora Arbëresh Sicilian town, Piana degli Albanesi, makes clear that there are significant differences between standard Albanian and Arbëresh:

The Albanians who stay for some years in Piana, increasingly lose the native accent of their language from Albania. The children, even those who now are between 12 and 15 and can still understand Albanian, can no longer speak it. The younger ones cannot even understand it. The adult, forced by the needs of everyday life to speak Arbëresh, unconsciously continue speaking to each other in a changed Albanian. It is surprising that the influence is not just in the vocabulary or in frequent idiomatic expressions of interpersonal communication, but in the phonetic features of the language and even in some structural grammatical characteristics. (Derhemi, E. (2003). 'New Albanian immigrants in the old Albanian diaspora: Piana degli Albanesi'. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 29(6), 1015–1032. doi:10.1080/1369183032000171348)

And replaced it with a quote from the article in a reference that only represents your point of view. That is rather childish and abusing the sources in violation with WP:NPOV - DonCalo (talk) 23:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources you quote are also more nuanced. Matranga also clearly talks of an "Arbëresh language" that mostly derives from the Tosche varieties. Seems to me that there are two distinct strategies to try to maintain Arbëresh: one is to morph it into somekind of standard or common Albanian, if that even exists (the sources you quote even seem to doubt that); the other is to strengthen the Arbëresh language through standardized writing, the use of the language in schools, support local grassroot initiatives that want to preserve the language and the need for institutional and academic intervention for the linguistic maintenance in the 21st century, as advocated by Derhemi. This dilemma should be better reflected in the article, which is currently not the case, because you keep denying that Arbëresh is a language, or at least a dinstinct linguistic entity worth preserving. - DonCalo (talk) 00:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Derhemi writes: "Arbëresh is a variety of Albanian, but it is more distant from the main Albanian homeland dialects which have been in constant contact and have undergone the unifying process of standardisation. As expected, the recent influences of Italian are much weaker in Albanian than in Arbëresh" But as I clearly explained above, also with quotes, Arbëresh cannot be considered a language, not even a single variety of Albanian, but different Albanian linguistic varieties. Concerning the standardization, Altimari clarified that The hypothesis of transforming Arbëresh into Ausbauprache, detached from the macrosystem of Albanian, is linguistically unsustainable and politically unrealizable. Concering the quote you added in the lede, it is obviously WP:UNDUE.
Your opinion that Arbëresh is a language distinct from Albanian and related to Albanian is original research and completely inappropriate because you are erroneously considering Albanian = standard Albanian. Arbëresh are Albanian varieties that in the centuries evolved through contacts with different neighboring Italo-Romance dialects. Arbëresh was called "Albanian" ("Albanese") until recently. Arbëresh is just the old Albanian self endonym that has been widely adopted today by other languages to designate the centuries-old varieties of Albanian spoken in Italy. That's not a WP:POV, but a historical fact. Next time I read a WP:personal attacks (the most recent one "childish") I'll report you to the administrators. – Βατο (talk) 01:00, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As suggested by user Daniel Case on the "Edit warring" page, I'm replicating here my reply with a suggestion of outcome:
May I step in? I believe the dispute originates from the type of source used: from the linguistics side, from the sociolinguistics side, and from the political side (I mean it in a neutral way). To me, one could assess which source provides the most accurate information, and which side of the subject matter the article should focus on. Then, one moves to select the source that aligns with the direction of the article. KHR FolkMyth (talk) 02:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I dont have much time to get involved in the discussion right now, but Arbereshe is not its own language, it literally originates from Tosk Albanian, which itself is a dialect of Albanian. Personal insults are not needed. Alltan (talk) 10:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Alltan: a clarification to your already correct statement: Arbëresh did not originate from a single Tosk Albanian dialect, Arbëresh varieties originated from different varieties of Old Tosk Albanian, through several migratory waves from different areas of the Balkans that occurred since the 13th century. Those Old Tosk Albanian varieties were borught in different and isolated areas of Italy, constituting isolects that remained separated from each other and in contact with different neighboring Italo-Romance varieties depending on the settled area. Furthermore those varieties have not yet experienced a linguistic unification. So, from a scientific perspective, Arbëresh cannot be defined as "a language", not even as "a dialect of Albanian" or "a variety of Albanian", but only as "Albanian linguistic varieties". This has been widely clarified by the academic sources.
Concerning the problem of intelligibility between the Albanian varieties of the Balkans and those of Italy, it is only a recent phenomenon, due to the language attrition, bilingualism and language shifts from native Arbëresh speakers to the Italian language. In the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, the Albanian varieties of Italy were very similar to Cham and Lab varieties of Albania and the Albanian varieties of Greece. So adding entire quotes inline in the lede about 21st century phenomena of certain Albanian immigrants in some Arbëresh communities is WP:UNDUE. Also, Standard Albanian was formed only in the 20th century, before that there were only Albanian varieties, mainly spoken, rarely written with very different and localized script systems. – Βατο (talk) 11:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Problems of intelligibility have also been reported between speakers of various mainland dialect speakers as well. Within Gheg, An Upper Rekan speaking in his native dialect will not find it easy to understand or be understood by a speaker of Arbanasi. This does not mean it's a different language. Alltan (talk) 12:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I think that the intro should solely focus on the linguistic aspect of the article. As such, Arbëresh should be described as the collective name of the Tosk Albanian varieties which developed in Italy in the last 500 years. I agree with Bato about the need to use the plural form varieties to describe Arbëresh.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:54, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arbëresh_language&oldid=1248907170"