Sheilbh just said that he could more or less converse in Argentine Spanish, but was totally hopeless if a group of Andalucians got together and "started talking rapidly." This was interesting because it contradicted what I thought was my relatively well-informed picture of languages with roots in the Iberian peninsula.
I would have said previously that there were four categories of these languages, which aren't all that closely related. Starting from the east:
Catalan-Including Valencian and the dialect of Mallorca, far closer related to Provencal than even Aragonese and featuring a more conservative Romance phonology and some weird agglutinative tenancies.
Basque-Basque, Iberia's Ralph Wiggum of languages.
"Spanish"-including the dialects/languages of Leon, Aragon, Asturias, Castile and Andalucia. I had thought previously that most Latin American dialects had roots in Castile and Andalucia, with maybe some Asturian.
Galician and Portuguese-Probably the Romance language in the region I know least about.
My dad has been spending months of the year in Brazil, and he's said that it is pretty common for Brazilians to be able to converse with Argentines more easily than with European Portuguese. Would this be because of exposure or because of the formation of a Latin American sprachbund (a "linguistic union")?
I don't speak any Romance language very well, and don't know as much about this as I would like, so would someone mind explaining to me just how many mutually unintelligible are there in the Hispanic world? Do Argentines really sound more like Italians?
Quote from: Queequeg on March 28, 2013, 04:03:21 PM
My dad has been spending months of the year in Brazil, and he's said that it is pretty common for Brazilians to be able to converse with Argentines more easily than with European Portuguese. Would this be because of exposure or because of the formation of a Latin American sprachbund (a "linguistic union")?
I think this is due to television & other media. My wife can understand (but not really speak) Portuguese. The thing that is a little odd is that there doesn't seem to be a lot of intermixing of the languages (loanwords, etc.). They seem to remain pretty distinct. There are a lot of cultural crossovers-- for example there was a recent craze in Argentina of drinking Brazilian caipirinhas, a drink made with the cachaça liquor. And dulce de leche made it over to Brazil a long time ago.
QuoteI don't speak any Romance language very well, and don't know as much about this as I would like, so would someone mind explaining to me just how many mutually unintelligible are there in the Hispanic world?
Hard to say. All I know is there is a lot more regional differentiation in the "Spanish-speaking world" than I originally thought.
QuoteDo Argentines really sound more like Italians?
Yes, but more in terms of speech patterns/rhythm and gesticulations. I was explaining to a co-worker (who had no idea at all what language is spoken in Argentina) that they speak Spanish as if they were trying to imitate Italians. As far as vocabulary is concerned there is a lot of Italian influence, but it was sort of filtered through a pidgin called Lunfardo before it was absorbed into general Argentine usage. So there are a lot of Italianesque words in use but not many that appear purely Italian.
There a buttload of Italian surnames in Buenos Aires, but they're usually pronounced in Spanish rather than Italian, which always throws me off.
Are caipirinhas really that rare? I drink them all the time.
Quote from: garbon on March 28, 2013, 04:47:29 PM
Are caipirinhas really that rare? I drink them all the time.
Outside of your bubble, I'd say yes.
My bubble travels pretty nation-wide. *shrugs*
Quote from: garbon on March 28, 2013, 04:53:29 PM
My bubble travels pretty nation-wide. *shrugs*
Okay, bubbles.
Note to self - der gets panicky when you ask whether one's nations cultural items are uncommon in other nations. Reason for that - unknown.
Quote from: garbon on March 28, 2013, 04:55:56 PM
Note to self - der gets panicky when you ask whether one's nations cultural items are uncommon in other nations. Reason for that - unknown.
:D I think your bar for "common" is pretty low. I'd bet that fewer than 1 or 2% of Americans have ever heard of them.
I had just asked a question. ;)
Besides, I wouldn't consort with much more than 1 to 2% of Americans.
Quote from: derspiess on March 28, 2013, 04:58:25 PM
:D I think your bar for "common" is pretty low. I'd bet that fewer than 1 or 2% of Americans have ever heard of them.
I was going to take that bet, but on reflection I think mojitos are relatively well known but caipirinhas are not.
The problem with European Portuguese is its pronunciation, which is quite complicated. Brazilian Portuguese is much more straight forward.
Quote from: The Larch on March 28, 2013, 05:13:47 PM
The problem with European Portuguese is its pronunciation, which is quite complicated. Brazilian Portuguese is much more straight forward.
I have no idea what brazilians are saying. I understand Spanish much easier.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 28, 2013, 04:03:21 PM
Sheilbh just said that he could more or less converse in Argentine Spanish, but was totally hopeless if a group of Andalucians got together and "started talking rapidly." This was interesting because it contradicted what I thought was my relatively well-informed picture of languages with roots in the Iberian peninsula.
I'd guess it's not about dialects, but about pronunciation. The worst I've seen in that regard was once at a bar in Cordoba, where some friends were trying to order beer. The bartender had a really, really thick accent and spoke so fast we couldn't understand a single word. It was hilarious.
Yeah. I know some Granadans and I understand nothing. I barely even hear words. For me it's the speed, when they speak slowly it's not so bad. Some other Spaniards are far easier too.
I struggle with Mexicans too.
Quote from: Iormlund on March 28, 2013, 05:47:05 PM
I'd guess it's not about dialects, but about pronunciation. The worst I've seen in that regard was once at a bar in Cordoba, where some friends were trying to order beer. The bartender had a really, really thick accent and spoke so fast we couldn't understand a single word. It was hilarious.
:lol: Seems like Cordobenses sort of "sing" each sentence they speak. Some of them are hard even for other Argies to understand.
Quote from: Iormlund on March 28, 2013, 05:47:05 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on March 28, 2013, 04:03:21 PM
Sheilbh just said that he could more or less converse in Argentine Spanish, but was totally hopeless if a group of Andalucians got together and "started talking rapidly." This was interesting because it contradicted what I thought was my relatively well-informed picture of languages with roots in the Iberian peninsula.
I'd guess it's not about dialects, but about pronunciation. The worst I've seen in that regard was once at a bar in Cordoba, where some friends were trying to order beer. The bartender had a really, really thick accent and spoke so fast we couldn't understand a single word. It was hilarious.
Pronunciation is a matter of dialect.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 28, 2013, 04:03:21 PM
"Spanish"-including the dialects/languages of Leon, Aragon, Asturias, Castile and Andalucia. I had thought previously that most Latin American dialects had roots in Castile and Andalucia, with maybe some Asturian.
Galician and Portuguese-Probably the Romance language in the region I know least about.
The "Spanish" you mention is really Castilian. Standard Castilian is supposed to be spoken in Valladolid and Burgos (very conservative regions shall we say).
As for Leon and Asturias, there is also still a separate language, not a dialect, Asturleonese, that is also spoken in Portugal, where it's called Mirandese, but that's another dialect. Asturleonese might be more alive than Aragonese but that's all...
As for Brazilians, there's no unified Brazilian. In Rio and in the South it's somewhat closer to Portuguese and/or less grating on the ears. São Paulo is supposed to be the most common but Brazilians are not known for respecting standards or grammar ;) I guess Portuñol is easier between Argentines and Brazilians (vos & você personal pronouns use are comparable). After a while, Brazilians adapt to European Portuguese. I have no trouble understanding Brazilian except for some slang but I have trouble taking them seriously with their accent sometimes, specially on foreign words such as "boîte".
Bigger problem I think, is some people learning "Brazilian Portuguese" and then discovering it's only spoken there and coupled with their own accent (let's say French) it's hard for other Lusophones, even though these neophytes claim it's easier than standard Portuguese (European Portuguese is wrong since the same norms apply in Africa and wherever in Asia/Oceania it is still spoken).
Same problem with Latin American Spanish, the lack of distinction between s and c/z might be easier in the beginning but complicates things after a while cf. Andalucia where they don't pronounce final letters as well :D
Back to Portuguese, it's not like Lisboete Portuguese is standard anyways, it's an awful dialect and harder to understand for foreigners trying to learn Portuguese. Coimbra Portuguese is supposed to be standard but nothing like Parisian French for French.
Usually, Portuguese people understand better Brazilian than the other way around and wish they would not ;) That's telenovelas, trash talk tv and evangelical sects for you :)
If you ask people in Portugal, they'll say than Angolans or Africans in general speak better Portuguese than Brazilians. Of course, a uni prof is more understandable than a favella boy from Rio fleeing from the BOPE . This Tropa de Elite reference reminds me that I understood what the cops said but not always the criminals.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 28, 2013, 07:04:04 PM
Pronunciation is a matter of dialect.
A dialect is a pronounciation with its own army.
So does all this happen because speakers of Iberian languages couldn't be bothered to actually learn their language? :hmm:
Not really. Most of Europe is de facto extremely fractured linguistically, England and France are exceptions because they have history of continued central government from the 11th Century, and in the French case this is mostly because of three centuries of prejudice against Occitanian and Breton culture.
Also, as I noted, the big linguistic divisions in Iberia are east-west because of the Reconquista. The fractured petty northern Kingdoms all/mostly moved south, taking their dialect with them, where it frequently became vastly different. Castilian Spanish reflects extensive Germanic, Arabic and Basque influence that you don't see at all in Catalan, for instance.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on March 28, 2013, 07:14:27 PM
The "Spanish" you mention is really Castilian. Standard Castilian is supposed to be spoken in Valladolid and Burgos (very conservative regions shall we say).
As for Leon and Asturias, there is also still a separate language, not a dialect, Asturleonese, that is also spoken in Portugal, where it's called Mirandese, but that's another dialect. Asturleonese might be more alive than Aragonese but that's all...
I know they are different languages, but a lot of posters don't, and the fact that a distinct language (Asturleonese, for example) can have multiple names, and I think something like Aragonese is probably pretty close to Castilian, and Galician is very close to Portuguese....I used "dialects" as a shorthand as I think there are so many different socialects, dialects and languages in the Hispanic world that debating which is which could take an entire master's course.
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 28, 2013, 05:55:39 PM
Yeah. I know some Granadans and I understand nothing. I barely even hear words. For me it's the speed, when they speak slowly it's not so bad. Some other Spaniards are far easier too.
I struggle with Mexicans too.
Are the two similar?
I've read that most Latin American dialects are Seville-that is, Andalucian-influenced. Makes sense-it was the big port, and I'd guess that the March would have attracted the sort of types who would later on find colonizing the Americas attractive. I'm not sure how far off that is from Granadan. With that said, I can very quickly tell the difference between Mexican Spanish and most other Spanish, though due to the nature of my exposure I probably understand more Mexican Spanish than anything else.
Quote from: garbon on March 28, 2013, 07:46:54 PM
So does all this happen because speakers of Iberian languages couldn't be bothered to actually learn their language? :hmm:
Iberian languages were born in mountainous regions during the Muslim dominance. Sometimes places as small as a single valley where people were isolated from the other Christian lands. Those surviving now are, from west to east: Galician, Astur-Leonese, Castillian, Aragonese, Aranese and Catalan.
Then there's Basque, completely unrelated to anything else around. That doesn't mean it is a pure language though. There's a lot of Latin/Castillian influence in modern Basque. And there's also a lot of Basque influence in Castillian (which was born in a region where Basque was commonly spoken).
Quote from: Queequeg on March 29, 2013, 12:47:52 AM
Are the two similar?
Not to my ears. Andalusian sounds fine to me, while Latinamerican dialects really annoy me.
Nothing in there really speaks to Portugal though. Also, I suppose there could also be like Psellus said vis-a-vis the inability to stamp out other forms like English and French.
Spain was for much of its history a dynastic union rather than a state. In fact even today several regions still have their own ancient law statutes (fueros).
More's the pity. Seems like it'd be a pain not to understand people in your own country let alone others.
Quote from: garbon on March 29, 2013, 10:25:54 AM
More's the pity. Seems like it'd be a pain not to understand people in your own country let alone others.
Ever been to Eastern Kentucky? :lol:
Quote from: derspiess on March 29, 2013, 10:30:25 AM
Quote from: garbon on March 29, 2013, 10:25:54 AM
More's the pity. Seems like it'd be a pain not to understand people in your own country let alone others.
Ever been to Eastern Kentucky? :lol:
:rolleyes:
Hey I'm not saying there aren't probably parts of the US/Anglosphere - just as a general rule one doesn't have to be particularly concerned that you'll be able to understand the type of English that someone is speaking.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 29, 2013, 12:47:52 AM
Are the two similar?
I don't hear it if they are. This is when they're talking amongst themselves. The issue for me is the speed and clarity.
When I tell my daughter "I love you" she responds with "I amo" :wub:
Quote from: garbon on March 29, 2013, 10:59:28 AM:rolleyes:
Hey I'm not saying there aren't probably parts of the US/Anglosphere - just as a general rule one doesn't have to be particularly concerned that you'll be able to understand the type of English that someone is speaking.
So you'd have no problem following someone speaking with the local cadences if they were from Newfoundland, or a shanty town in Jo'burg, or the slums of Kingston (Jamaica), or the streets of Glasgow; or the English spoken in Bangalore and Mumbai? You readily take to all the dialects of the Anglosphere without difficulty?
That seems a bit far-fetched.
Not really. Jamaica has its own language, even if the high register of Jamaica is closer to international English. Joberg would be another pidgin. I don't think neither Newfie nor Glaswedgian are considered languages, and I can understand the latter in s matter of days of exposure. That's just not the situation in Ineria. Portugese--->Castilian--->Catalan is like English---->German---->Danish.
Thanks, MP. Jake, as far as I can surmise from this thread - the various Iberian languages differ quite a bit. A few pronunciations differences here and there in English don't seem to compare.
Where does Italian fit in? I'be heard before that Spaniards can understand a fair bit of it. Argentines do better I suppose? What of the Iberian regions and other Latin Americans?
Quote from: Queequeg on March 30, 2013, 01:41:47 AM
Not really. Jamaica has its own language, even if the high register of Jamaica is closer to international English. Joberg would be another pidgin. I don't think neither Newfie nor Glaswedgian are considered languages, and I can understand the latter in s matter of days of exposure. That's just not the situation in Ineria. Portugese--->Castilian--->Catalan is like English---->German---->Danish.
Yeah, with Jamaica it's actually what's called a creole. English only has one real dialect (though it can also be classified as a language on it's own), which is Scots.
Dialects don't have to mutually incomprehensible. Most of them are comprehensible. England has a ton of dialects. So does America.
Quote from: Tyr on March 30, 2013, 03:27:43 AM
Where does Italian fit in? I'be heard before that Spaniards can understand a fair bit of it. Argentines do better I suppose? What of the Iberian regions and other Latin Americans?
Italian is pretty close to Spain-a ton of different languages everywhere. Maybe even moreso-the dominance of Castile after Las Novas de Tolosa meant that Castillan spread southward and replaced/synthesized with Mozarabic, and later on was the prestige language throughout most of the peninsula, while nothing similar happened in mainland Italy.
What distinguishes a dialect from a regional accent Squeelus?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 30, 2013, 01:46:23 PM
What distinguishes a dialect from a regional accent Squeelus?
Changes in vocabulary.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 30, 2013, 02:10:47 PM
Changes in vocabulary.
One word does it? Soda/pop, hoagie/grinder/sub?
Quote from: Queequeg on March 29, 2013, 12:47:52 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 28, 2013, 05:55:39 PM
Yeah. I know some Granadans and I understand nothing. I barely even hear words. For me it's the speed, when they speak slowly it's not so bad. Some other Spaniards are far easier too.
I struggle with Mexicans too.
Are the two similar?
I've read that most Latin American dialects are Seville-that is, Andalucian-influenced. Makes sense-it was the big port, and I'd guess that the March would have attracted the sort of types who would later on find colonizing the Americas attractive. I'm not sure how far off that is from Granadan. With that said, I can very quickly tell the difference between Mexican Spanish and most other Spanish, though due to the nature of my exposure I probably understand more Mexican Spanish than anything else.
As Iorm said, not at all. If anything, the Caribbean Spanish accent (Venezuela, Dominican Republic, Cuba) sounds somehow similar to the Canarian accent. Mexican and other Central American dialects are a completely different beast.
Quote from: Tyr on March 30, 2013, 03:27:43 AM
Where does Italian fit in? I'be heard before that Spaniards can understand a fair bit of it. Argentines do better I suppose? What of the Iberian regions and other Latin Americans?
A Spaniard and an Italian willing to understand each other can work things out, even if roughly.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 30, 2013, 01:41:47 AM
Not really. Jamaica has its own language, even if the high register of Jamaica is closer to international English. Joberg would be another pidgin. I don't think neither Newfie nor Glaswedgian are considered languages, and I can understand the latter in s matter of days of exposure. That's just not the situation in Ineria. Portugese--->Castilian--->Catalan is like English---->German---->Danish.
You got the point exactly backwards.
Quote from: Jacob on April 01, 2013, 03:01:40 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on March 30, 2013, 01:41:47 AM
Not really. Jamaica has its own language, even if the high register of Jamaica is closer to international English. Joberg would be another pidgin. I don't think neither Newfie nor Glaswedgian are considered languages, and I can understand the latter in s matter of days of exposure. That's just not the situation in Ineria. Portugese--->Castilian--->Catalan is like English---->German---->Danish.
You got the point exactly backwards.
You'd have a far easier time understanding Swedish than a Portugese man would trying to communicate with someone monolingual in Catalan.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 30, 2013, 02:50:04 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on March 30, 2013, 02:10:47 PM
Changes in vocabulary.
One word does it? Soda/pop, hoagie/grinder/sub?
I'm not an expert, but I think it's a lot of systematic differences. So pop v. soda might not be it, but Appalachian would probably fit pretty easily as a dialect.
Quote from: Queequeg on April 01, 2013, 05:52:06 PMYou'd have a far easier time understanding Swedish than a Portugese man would trying to communicate with someone monolingual in Catalan.
'
Definitely.
My point was simply that the Anglosphere is much wider than the regional accents found within the US. It does include Jamaican patois, Jo'burg pidgin, Delhi-standard English, Glaswegian, inner-city African-American, South Bostonian, and the Newfie brogue. Mutual incomprehension is still distinctly possible; just as it is with Spanish speakers (the comparison I was responding to was the Anglosphere vs Spanish-speakers, not "Iberian languages").
Jamaican isn't a patois. It's a creole. Pidgins aren't dialects either. They are pidgins. Neither of these are dialects.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 01, 2013, 06:24:54 PM
Jamaican isn't a patois. It's a creole. Pidgins aren't dialects either. They are pidgins. Neither of these are dialects.
... well according to Wikipedia, the Jamaicans themselves call it patois (or rather "patwa"), so I'm pretty content with calling it that even if linguists want to call it a creole :)
As for whether they're dialects or pidgins or indeed related but distincts languages (such as Astur-Leonese), that's beside the point I was making - namely that the Anglosphere has a wide range of ways of speaking and they are not always mutually intelligible.
Of course, you could exclude Jamaican patois and various pidgins if you wish, but then if you're complaining mutually unintelligible ways of speaking (and you weren't, but that's what I was talking about), then you'd probably have to exclude distinct languages (such as Astur-Leonese and Portuguese) when talking about linguistic variance within Spanish.
If they are different languages then they really aren't in the Anglosphere are they?
I'd consider Jamaica Anglosphere. The upper and middle class speaks English.
Actually I think you can exclude Jamaican patois as it isn't the same as Jamaican English. I looked up some youtube videos of Jamaican English and I don't think there would be much trouble there.
Also Jacob I think you're misconstruing what I said which that in general, English speakers generally don't have to worry that they'll be understood by other English speakers. Not sure how grabbing out isolated speech patterns here and there counters that. Now perhaps our posters here are overstating the degree of incompatibility between different Spanish dialects / different Portuguese dialects but on the face of what they are saying - sounds different.
English is a bit of an odd bird as languages go. It was standardize fairly early on so separate regional languages died away a long time ago. It doesn't have any close relatives with the exception of Scots and Frisian, two minor languages. The difference between "dialect" and "language" is largely political. Take for example Scandinavia and Italy: Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are considered different languages, though I'm told they are mutually intelligible at least to some degree (Jake would know more, I can't speak any of those languages). On the other hand, German is considered a language with several dialects that aren't mutually intelligible. I suspect this is because of politics. Calling Swedish a different language rather then a dialect helped facilitate a separate Swedish nation identity, while calling German one language instead of several helped facilitate the idea of a unified German nation.
Jake is picking out these pidgins and creoles, but these should be considered their own language and not part of English just as English isn't considered a dialect of French. After all, modern English is a mixture of Old English with French and could be considered a creole of sorts.
Quote from: garbon on April 01, 2013, 07:47:46 PM
Actually I think you can exclude Jamaican patois as it isn't the same as Jamaican English. I looked up some youtube videos of Jamaican English and I don't think there would be much trouble there.
Also Jacob I think you're misconstruing what I said which that in general, English speakers generally don't have to worry that they'll be understood by other English speakers. Not sure how grabbing out isolated speech patterns here and there counters that. Now perhaps our posters here are overstating the degree of incompatibility between different Spanish dialects / different Portuguese dialects but on the face of what they are saying - sounds different.
My point was simply that the if you are comparing mutual intelligibility amongst Spanish speakers to that amongst English speakers, you should exclude roughly the same level of "isolated speech patterns". I don't think your initial comparison did that, Raz and Spellus' tangents about creoles, patois, dialects, and accents notwithstanding. If you exclude Jamaican patois from the English comparison, you should exclude the Spanish/Portuguese equivalents; if you exclude Glaswegian, or South Boston, or urban African-American, or Delhi-standard from the English analysis, you should exclude the Spanish/Portuguese equivalents.
I think you're right that if you're a speaker of something close to TV-American or RP-British you won't have to worry about anyone in the Anglosphere understanding. I'd venture, however, that if you're a speaker of Castilian or Telenovela-Mexican you'd be equally well understood amongst Spanish-speakers worldwide. The issue goes the other way. So to the point of unequal comparisons, comparing how well you personally are understood while travelling in the Anglosphere to how much difficulty Breogan may have in understanding Astur-Leonese isn't really sound data analysis IMO.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 01, 2013, 08:44:04 PM
English is a bit of an odd bird as languages go. It was standardize fairly early on so separate regional languages died away a long time ago. It doesn't have any close relatives with the exception of Scots and Frisian, two minor languages. The difference between "dialect" and "language" is largely political. Take for example Scandinavia and Italy: Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are considered different languages, though I'm told they are mutually intelligible at least to some degree (Jake would know more, I can't speak any of those languages). On the other hand, German is considered a language with several dialects that aren't mutually intelligible. I suspect this is because of politics. Calling Swedish a different language rather then a dialect helped facilitate a separate Swedish nation identity, while calling German one language instead of several helped facilitate the idea of a unified German nation.
Jake is picking out these pidgins and creoles, but these should be considered their own language and not part of English just as English isn't considered a dialect of French. After all, modern English is a mixture of Old English with French and could be considered a creole of sorts.
Raz, not so sure about that, as at it's heart something like 95% of the top 100 most used words are Old English. With then, as you note, a shed load of borrowings from all over the place, principally Latin and French.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 01, 2013, 08:44:04 PM
English is a bit of an odd bird as languages go. It was standardize fairly early on so separate regional languages died away a long time ago. It doesn't have any close relatives with the exception of Scots and Frisian, two minor languages. The difference between "dialect" and "language" is largely political. Take for example Scandinavia and Italy: Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are considered different languages, though I'm told they are mutually intelligible at least to some degree (Jake would know more, I can't speak any of those languages). On the other hand, German is considered a language with several dialects that aren't mutually intelligible. I suspect this is because of politics. Calling Swedish a different language rather then a dialect helped facilitate a separate Swedish nation identity, while calling German one language instead of several helped facilitate the idea of a unified German nation.
The best Scandinavian example of the language/dialect thing is probably modern Norwegian. Norwegian and Danish shared the same written language until Norwegian independence, at which point they started bringing in all kinds of words that would previously have been considered indications of a heavy dialect, as well as "rationalizing" the spelling (which makes sense IMO), and there you have it - a totally different language.
But yeah, Swedish/Norwegian/Danish are mutually intelligible after a few weeks of being immersed. If someone speaks Swedish or Norwegian at me in Vancouver I'll nod politely. But if I'm in Sweden or Norway for a few weeks I'll pick it up; same with the reading, it's close enough that you can pick it up pretty quickly.
QuoteJake is picking out these pidgins and creoles, but these should be considered their own language and not part of English just as English isn't considered a dialect of French. After all, modern English is a mixture of Old English with French and could be considered a creole of sorts.
The pidgins and the creoles were incidental to my point, though I expect that those definitions are as much political as the ones you speak of when it comes to accents, dialects and languages.
Quote from: mongers on April 01, 2013, 09:20:35 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 01, 2013, 08:44:04 PM
English is a bit of an odd bird as languages go. It was standardize fairly early on so separate regional languages died away a long time ago. It doesn't have any close relatives with the exception of Scots and Frisian, two minor languages. The difference between "dialect" and "language" is largely political. Take for example Scandinavia and Italy: Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are considered different languages, though I'm told they are mutually intelligible at least to some degree (Jake would know more, I can't speak any of those languages). On the other hand, German is considered a language with several dialects that aren't mutually intelligible. I suspect this is because of politics. Calling Swedish a different language rather then a dialect helped facilitate a separate Swedish nation identity, while calling German one language instead of several helped facilitate the idea of a unified German nation.
Jake is picking out these pidgins and creoles, but these should be considered their own language and not part of English just as English isn't considered a dialect of French. After all, modern English is a mixture of Old English with French and could be considered a creole of sorts.
Raz, not so sure about that, as at it's heart something like 95% of the top 100 most used words are Old English. With then, as you note, a shed load of borrowings from all over the place, principally Latin and French.
Yes, but Old English shifted dramatically, not just in vocabulary (which was extensive), but also in grammar when it mixed with French. It simply wasn't Old English anymore. It was now a mix of two languages and an entirely new language that wasn't a dialect of either Old English or French.
Quote from: Jacob on April 01, 2013, 09:20:22 PM
So to the point of unequal comparisons, comparing how well you personally are understood while travelling in the Anglosphere to how much difficulty Breogan may have in understanding Astur-Leonese isn't really sound data analysis IMO.
Well good thing I didn't do that? Page 1 we have a discussion on the difficulties of understanding presumably Portugal Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese. None of that seems esoteric to me but examples of rather mainstream speech. Totally could be off but I think Portugal and Brazil have the highest concentrations of Portuguese speakers.
Then we also had some bits about Spanish and difficulties of understanding pronunciations in various parts of the same country. Is that comparable to picking a few places out of anglosphere?
Also, who said anything about excluding South Boston, urban African-American or Delhi-standard - I didn't agree to that and I'm not sure I'd agree either that there would be difficulties to the extent that two speakers would be unable to communicate.
Not sure what to make of this TV-American unless the suggestion is that most Americans all speak that way - as again like I said there really isn't a lot of difficultly understanding English as one travels about America.
The difference between a dialect and a distinct language is that theoretically, dialects of a language are mutually understandable, while distinct languages aren't. But even that breaks down, in part because what's mutually understandable can be an individual thing, but beyond that there are also degrees of understandability. Even professional linguists can't agree on how many living Romance languages there are--some only acknowledge 5 (Portuguese, Spanish, French, Italian, and Romanian), while others would say there are upwards of 20.
Quote from: Jacob on April 01, 2013, 09:20:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 01, 2013, 07:47:46 PM
Actually I think you can exclude Jamaican patois as it isn't the same as Jamaican English. I looked up some youtube videos of Jamaican English and I don't think there would be much trouble there.
Also Jacob I think you're misconstruing what I said which that in general, English speakers generally don't have to worry that they'll be understood by other English speakers. Not sure how grabbing out isolated speech patterns here and there counters that. Now perhaps our posters here are overstating the degree of incompatibility between different Spanish dialects / different Portuguese dialects but on the face of what they are saying - sounds different.
My point was simply that the if you are comparing mutual intelligibility amongst Spanish speakers to that amongst English speakers, you should exclude roughly the same level of "isolated speech patterns". I don't think your initial comparison did that, Raz and Spellus' tangents about creoles, patois, dialects, and accents notwithstanding. If you exclude Jamaican patois from the English comparison, you should exclude the Spanish/Portuguese equivalents; if you exclude Glaswegian, or South Boston, or urban African-American, or Delhi-standard from the English analysis, you should exclude the Spanish/Portuguese equivalents.
I think you're right that if you're a speaker of something close to TV-American or RP-British you won't have to worry about anyone in the Anglosphere understanding. I'd venture, however, that if you're a speaker of Castilian or Telenovela-Mexican you'd be equally well understood amongst Spanish-speakers worldwide. The issue goes the other way. So to the point of unequal comparisons, comparing how well you personally are understood while travelling in the Anglosphere to how much difficulty Breogan may have in understanding Astur-Leonese isn't really sound data analysis IMO.
I don't think anyone is gong to exclude Glaswegian, South Boston or urban African American (I don't know exactly what Delhi standard is). These are all intelligible to an English speaker. It require no long term immersion. While there may be some misunderstanding most people will understand each other.
The point about English derived creole languages is they aren't a comparable to Iberian languages. Castillian and and Catalan developed side by side as separate dialects or languages. Catalan isn't derived from Castillian. An English-Yoruba Creole is derived from English and Yoruba. It's not a dialect of either or both, but neither one.
Garbon, isn't African American vernacular kind of a sociolect? Almost all African American people I know kind of "turn it off", which is what I would suspect would happen if they were in Delhi.
Quote from: Queequeg on April 01, 2013, 10:08:26 PM
Garbon, isn't African American vernacular kind of a sociolect? Almost all African American people I know kind of "turn it off", which is what I would suspect would happen if they were in Delhi.
Some can turn it off a lot more easily than others. A couple gals I've worked with can code-shift in conversation but oddly have trouble doing so in their emails :huh:
Quote from: Queequeg on April 01, 2013, 10:08:26 PM
Garbon, isn't African American vernacular kind of a sociolect? Almost all African American people I know kind of "turn it off", which is what I would suspect would happen if they were in Delhi.
Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you are getting at.
Quote from: derspiess on April 01, 2013, 10:13:01 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on April 01, 2013, 10:08:26 PM
Garbon, isn't African American vernacular kind of a sociolect? Almost all African American people I know kind of "turn it off", which is what I would suspect would happen if they were in Delhi.
Some can turn it off a lot more easily than others. A couple gals I've worked with can code-shift in conversation but oddly have trouble doing so in their emails :huh:
Oh well if that's what he means then sure but of course, different people having varying sizes of vocabularies as well a desire to modulate their behavior. Much the same I'd guess for a lot of slang.
That was my best guess at what he said, but the Delhi thing did kinda throw me off.
Quote from: garbon on April 01, 2013, 10:14:00 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on April 01, 2013, 10:08:26 PM
Garbon, isn't African American vernacular kind of a sociolect? Almost all African American people I know kind of "turn it off", which is what I would suspect would happen if they were in Delhi.
Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you are getting at.
I think a lot of-maybe most-English dialect speakers can "code-shift" depending on circumstance.
Quote from: Queequeg on April 01, 2013, 10:26:13 PMI think a lot of-maybe most-English dialect speakers can "code-shift" depending on circumstance.
I don't think that's a phenomenon that's unique to English speakers. I've observed the same sort of effect with speakers of Japanese, Chinese, and Danish; I expect the same is true for speakers of Spanish and Portuguese.
Quote from: garbon on April 01, 2013, 09:59:26 PMWell good thing I didn't do that? Page 1 we have a discussion on the difficulties of understanding presumably Portugal Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese. None of that seems esoteric to me but examples of rather mainstream speech. Totally could be off but I think Portugal and Brazil have the highest concentrations of Portuguese speakers.
Then we also had some bits about Spanish and difficulties of understanding pronunciations in various parts of the same country. Is that comparable to picking a few places out of anglosphere?
:lol: we are spending a lot of time on something so trivial eh?
Anyhow, I thought you were making that comparison - between the Anglosphere and the Hispanosphere, and that's what I've been talking about. If you weren't then I guess we can take that as proof that even if people have no dialect/accent barrier (since we're typing) there can still be significant communication barriers :)
QuoteAlso, who said anything about excluding South Boston, urban African-American or Delhi-standard - I didn't agree to that and I'm not sure I'd agree either that there would be difficulties to the extent that two speakers would be unable to communicate.
Similarly, I'd wager that a speaker of Brazilian Portuguese and Portuguese from Portugal would be able to communicate.
QuoteNot sure what to make of this TV-American unless the suggestion is that most Americans all speak that way - as again like I said there really isn't a lot of difficultly understanding English as one travels about America.
When you turn on a TV in the US, people on it tend to speak a non-regional "generic American". Same thing as BBC/RP-for the UK, and there are similar dynamics in many other countries. It's the standard towards which you alter your accent if you speak a heavy dialect and want to be understood by others who do not; something which you can do because it's common in education and media. So if your natural accent is close to that standard - and that goes for whatever language you speak - you don't have to worry about being understood if addressing a dialect speaker; they've learned to understand your way of speaking in school and the media.
Quote from: derspiess on March 28, 2013, 04:58:25 PM
Quote from: garbon on March 28, 2013, 04:55:56 PM
Note to self - der gets panicky when you ask whether one's nations cultural items are uncommon in other nations. Reason for that - unknown.
:D I think your bar for "common" is pretty low. I'd bet that fewer than 1 or 2% of Americans have ever heard of them.
I had never ever heard of a capralinhas (sp) before coming here to Brazil.
Jake, where do you get this impression that people in the US have a hard time understanding each other?
Quote from: Barrister on April 02, 2013, 04:35:56 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 28, 2013, 04:58:25 PM
Quote from: garbon on March 28, 2013, 04:55:56 PM
Note to self - der gets panicky when you ask whether one's nations cultural items are uncommon in other nations. Reason for that - unknown.
:D I think your bar for "common" is pretty low. I'd bet that fewer than 1 or 2% of Americans have ever heard of them.
I had never ever heard of a caipirinha before coming here to Brazil.
:contract:
Fixed it for you
Very easy to find in European bars, btw.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 02, 2013, 04:58:12 AM
Jake, where do you get this impression that people in the US have a hard time understanding each other?
My Cousin Vinny. 'What is a yoot?'
Actually Jake, I think you're taking me to me to task about my flippant comment to Iorm about that being a pity and my initially weak salvo about Iberian language speakers being unwilling to learn their own language. -_-
I don't think you've shown that the various English speaking groups you've highlighted are unintelligible to other English speakers - nor beyond mere assertion have you shown that the various Spanish and then also Portuguese groups have an easy time understanding one another. In fact, there's direct testimony against your position by native speakers of English and those Iberian languages respectively.
Also, I should point out - once again that I never said all English speakers can understand one another - clearly that's not true, but that in general one doesn't have to worry at all that one will be unable to understand other speaker's of English. Now that may be the case for the various Spanish and Portuguese groups, but it wasn't the impression I got from this thread.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2013, 07:08:53 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 02, 2013, 04:58:12 AM
Jake, where do you get this impression that people in the US have a hard time understanding each other?
My Cousin Vinny. 'What is a yoot?'
Well, now I want to see that movie again.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 02, 2013, 08:15:13 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2013, 07:08:53 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 02, 2013, 04:58:12 AM
Jake, where do you get this impression that people in the US have a hard time understanding each other?
My Cousin Vinny. 'What is a yoot?'
Well, now I want to see that movie again.
It stands up remarkably well to repeat viewings.
And it is one of the most accurate courtroom portrayals in Hollywood. :unsure:
The one major plot hole in Vinny is that whereas Marissa is supposed to be the automative genius, she's not the one who has the insight about the tire tracks.
The lesser difficulty with the move is: how the hell is a dude that looks like that fucking Marissa Tomei?
Pssst. It's a movie. :secret:
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2013, 08:00:51 AM
Also, I should point out - once again that I never said all English speakers can understand one another - clearly that's not true, but that in general one doesn't have to worry at all that one will be unable to understand other speaker's of English. Now that may be the case for the various Spanish and Portuguese groups, but it wasn't the impression I got from this thread.
Well that's because there are lots of different languages in Iberia. Surely the difference is that all of the variations of English descend from English. They're dialects of English and that's the original mother tongue. Whereas Catalan and Castillian and Portuguese and Galician are languages that come from Latin. They're not dialects of Castillian, but rather separate languages. Given their proximity and so on they're bound to have some bits which are mutually intelligible, but they're dialects of that branch of Latin.
I'm sure there's some Guarani-Spanish language that would really confuse any Spaniards but the differences within Castillian (as opposed to between Iberian languages - which is like Scots Gaelic, Irish Gaelic, Welsh, Breton and Cornish) aren't generally that deep.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 02, 2013, 08:39:55 AM
Pssst. It's a movie. :secret:
That's why it's called a plot hole. :secret:
Quote from: Razgovory on April 02, 2013, 04:58:12 AM
Jake, where do you get this impression that people in the US have a hard time understanding each other?
:lmfao:
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 02, 2013, 08:53:55 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2013, 08:00:51 AM
Also, I should point out - once again that I never said all English speakers can understand one another - clearly that's not true, but that in general one doesn't have to worry at all that one will be unable to understand other speaker's of English. Now that may be the case for the various Spanish and Portuguese groups, but it wasn't the impression I got from this thread.
Well that's because there are lots of different languages in Iberia. Surely the difference is that all of the variations of English descend from English. They're dialects of English and that's the original mother tongue. Whereas Catalan and Castillian and Portuguese and Galician are languages that come from Latin. They're not dialects of Castillian, but rather separate languages. Given their proximity and so on they're bound to have some bits which are mutually intelligible, but they're dialects of that branch of Latin.
e.g Galician and Portuguese are dialects of Galaico-Portuguese. :contract:
Specially for North Portuguese. ;)
As for Catalan, there is still a school linking it to Occitan/South French/Langue d'oc (French is Francilian Langue d'oïl), so it would not be an Iberian language originally.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 02, 2013, 08:38:04 AM
The one major plot hole in Vinny is that whereas Marissa is supposed to be the automative genius, she's not the one who has the insight about the tire tracks.
The lesser difficulty with the move is: how the hell is a dude that looks like that fucking Marissa Tomei?
Cause Joe Pesci is a badass?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 02, 2013, 08:55:31 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 02, 2013, 08:39:55 AM
Pssst. It's a movie. :secret:
That's why it's called a plot hole. :secret:
Hey, us uggos can get cute chicks.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 02, 2013, 08:58:38 AM
e.g Galician and Portuguese are dialects of Galaico-Portuguese. :contract:
Specially for North Portuguese. ;)
Yeah, West Iberian Latin :lol:
Like two Brythonic languages as opposed to two broader Celtic ones.
QuoteAs for Catalan, there is still a school linking it to Occitan/South French/Langue d'oc (French is Francilian Langue d'oïl), so it would not be an Iberian language originally.
That makes some sense. I mean the paisos Catalans included bits of Southern France so they've always been culturally linked. Plus there are weird bits of Catalan that seem very French: 'si us plau' for please, or 'diumenge' for Sunday. From what I've read you're as likely to need a spattering of French and Italian, as you are Castillian, to understand bits and pieces of Catalan.
Diumenge for sunday is quite similar to other romance languages, you have domingo in Spanish, Portuguese and Galician, and domenica in Italian.
True. It's very close to Langue d'Oc too, which is 'dimenge'.
Admittedly all the Catalan I know is from a guidebook for a holiday I never took and a cookbook :lol:
QuoteThat makes some sense. I mean the paisos Catalans included bits of Southern France so they've always been culturally linked. Plus there are weird bits of Catalan that seem very French: 'si us plau' for please, or 'diumenge' for Sunday. From what I've read you're as likely to need a spattering of French and Italian, as you are Castillian, to understand bits and pieces of Catalan.
There's a lot of debate over if Catalan and the Lang d'Oc are separate languages, and if so when it happened. There are models that have them as two registers or dialects of the same language. I don't have enough expertise to comment. The Catalan language, unlike all of the other present Iberian languages, has roots in the eastern Marca Hispanica rather than the mountains of northern Iberia.
QuoteLike two Brythonic languages as opposed to two broader Celtic ones.
It seems plausible that the divide between Brythonic and Goidelic is wider than between Romance languages. It dates to before the foundation of the Empire by a few centuries at least.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 01, 2013, 10:02:50 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 01, 2013, 09:20:22 PM
[
My point was simply that the if you are comparing mutual intelligibility amongst Spanish speakers to that amongst English speakers, you should exclude roughly the same level of "isolated speech patterns". I don't think your initial comparison did that, Raz and Spellus' tangents about creoles, patois, dialects, and accents notwithstanding. If you exclude Jamaican patois from the English comparison, you should exclude the Spanish/Portuguese equivalents; if you exclude Glaswegian, or South Boston, or urban African-American, or Delhi-standard from the English analysis, you should exclude the Spanish/Portuguese equivalents.
I think you're right that if you're a speaker of something close to TV-American or RP-British you won't have to worry about anyone in the Anglosphere understanding. I'd venture, however, that if you're a speaker of Castilian or Telenovela-Mexican you'd be equally well understood amongst Spanish-speakers worldwide. The issue goes the other way. So to the point of unequal comparisons, comparing how well you personally are understood while travelling in the Anglosphere to how much difficulty Breogan may have in understanding Astur-Leonese isn't really sound data analysis IMO.
I don't think anyone is gong to exclude Glaswegian, South Boston or urban African American (I don't know exactly what Delhi standard is). These are all intelligible to an English speaker. It require no long term immersion. While there may be some misunderstanding most people will understand each other.
The point about English derived creole languages is they aren't a comparable to Iberian languages. Castillian and and Catalan developed side by side as separate dialects or languages. Catalan isn't derived from Castillian. An English-Yoruba Creole is derived from English and Yoruba. It's not a dialect of either or both, but neither one.
You need to meet more Glaswegians. Even other northern brits have trouble with them let alone southerners or Americans. It's about as intelligible to a standard English speaker as Dutch would be.
Agreed. The one time I met a Glaswegian I couldn't figure out what language he was speaking.
Once that was resolved, I couldn't figure out what he was trying to say.
The weirdest English I've ever heard in my life was from a guy from Donegal.
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2013, 04:36:48 AM
The weirdest English I've ever heard in my life was from a guy from Donegal.
That would make sense given my experience; the only English accent I've ever had major trouble deciphering was that of a Northern Irish Catholic from just across the border with Donegal.
Actually, it's the only English accent I failed to decipher reliably, despite a year of listening to the man. :(
Quote from: Agelastus on April 05, 2013, 05:21:14 AM
Quote from: The Larch on April 05, 2013, 04:36:48 AM
The weirdest English I've ever heard in my life was from a guy from Donegal.
That would make sense given my experience; the only English accent I've ever had major trouble deciphering was that of a Northern Irish Catholic from just across the border with Donegal.
Actually, it's the only English accent I failed to decipher reliably, despite a year of listening to the man. :(
The guy I speak about lived in Letterkenny. The first time I spoke with him on the phone I chalked it up to bad signal or something, but then I met him in person and it was almost worse...
:hmm:
A map that purports to show of the English dialects of Canada/US.
http://aschmann.net/AmEng/index_collection/AmericanEnglishDialects.gif
http://aschmann.net/AmEng/#LargeMap5Right
The upper south area on that map looks very accurate based on my experience. For example, southern Indiana does in fact have a southern accent.
General American ueber alles :punk:
Quote from: derspiess on April 16, 2013, 02:57:08 PM
General American ueber alles :punk:
A bit odd that it's general American given that apparently almost no one speaks it. :D
Quote from: garbon on April 16, 2013, 01:57:01 PM
:hmm:
A map that purports to show of the English dialects of Canada/US.
http://aschmann.net/AmEng/index_collection/AmericanEnglishDialects.gif
http://aschmann.net/AmEng/#LargeMap5Right
Coming from a language with 14 distinct vowel sounds I'm often baffled that people can't hear differences in the different vowel sounds. For pretty much every vowel example I found on that NA English map Icelandic uses both.
Quote from: garbon on April 16, 2013, 03:02:00 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 16, 2013, 02:57:08 PM
General American ueber alles :punk:
A bit odd that it's general American given that apparently almost no one speaks it. :D
Turn on a TV or radio :contract:
Quote from: derspiess on April 16, 2013, 03:15:01 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 16, 2013, 03:02:00 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 16, 2013, 02:57:08 PM
General American ueber alles :punk:
A bit odd that it's general American given that apparently almost no one speaks it. :D
Turn on a TV or radio :contract:
Yeah but apparently that has little to no effect on our everyday speech patterns. We don't care enough to bother to speak..."properly"? :D
Quote from: garbon on April 16, 2013, 03:20:47 PM
Yeah but apparently that has little to no effect on our everyday speech patterns. We don't care enough to bother to speak..."properly"? :D
But I think it's more widespread than the map suggests-- it's just not what the majority speak in most places. And I'd wager that most Americans are pretty capable of fairly closely mimicking it (and possibly use it in formal settings) even if they don't speak it as their 'natural' dialect.
Btw, I think that's a pretty solid map overall, but it's just one guy's work. Not really a consensus.
Quote from: derspiess on April 16, 2013, 03:29:24 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 16, 2013, 03:20:47 PM
Yeah but apparently that has little to no effect on our everyday speech patterns. We don't care enough to bother to speak..."properly"? :D
But I think it's more widespread than the map suggests-- it's just not what the majority speak in most places. And I'd wager that most Americans are pretty capable of fairly closely mimicking it (and possibly use it in formal settings) even if they don't speak it as their 'natural' dialect.
Well sure but then I'd say a lot of these dialects are a lot more widespread than suggested. For instance that unique insert of what is shown in Bay Area. So many people in the Bay Area (particularly SF) are not from the Bay Area so that map is really a lot more complicated.
Also I'm not sure on the mimicking aspect if only because I'm not sure that many Americans would recognize it as such.
I'm also wondering which of these many dialects I speak given that I'm not really from one places despite my Californian claim. -_-
Quote from: garbon on April 16, 2013, 03:38:52 PM
I'm also wondering which of these many dialects I speak given that I'm not really from one places despite my Californian claim. -_-
I'm sort of in the same boat. I grew up in Appalachia but never fully spoke the local dialect because of my mom's General American influence on me. I did my best to lose any trace of Appalachian (Allegheny Midland/Southern Lowland mix?) when I moved to the "Atlantic Midland" region. I've worked a lot in the upper midwest in the past decade and I think that has had a little influence on me. Cincinnati is supposedly a "linguistic island" but most people I know here speak General American.
People usually have a pretty tough time pinpointing my accent. I'd say I'm closest to General American, but the Appalachian comes out sometimes if I'm really tired or drunk. Or if I'm using a goofy voice to talk to my kids then for whatever reason it's heavily Appalachian.
The cross-hatching showing that cot = caught should go further south in WV IMO. I definately don't distinguish the 2, and I am definately from an area that's not cross-hatched.
Quote from: dps on April 16, 2013, 04:22:28 PM
The cross-hatching showing that cot = caught should go further south in WV IMO. I definately don't distinguish the 2, and I am definately from an area that's not cross-hatched.
Hmm, drawing out "caught" a little more than "cot" and/or pronouncing the former almost like "cowt" does seem like something you'd hear in southern WV. I have absolutely nothing to back that up, though.