Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Romance Pannonian language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a proof of the nationalistic pressure that has "erased" the article about the Romance Pannonian language, I want to copy the article erased (and copy even the following final posts on the related talkpage):



Romance Pannonian Language

Spoken in: Pannonia (actual Hungary) Language extinction: probably by the tenth century AD Language family: Indo-European Latin Romance Romance Pannonian Language Language codes ISO 639-1: none ISO 639-2: — ISO 639-3: rpa Note: This page may contain IPA phonetic symbols in Unicode.


The Romance Pannonian language is an extinct language that was spoken in the romanized Pannonia after the fall of the Western Roman empire until the tenth century.

Contents


1 History 2 Geography 3 Language 4 Bibliography 5 External links


History

The romanized population of Pannonia (that the historian Theodore Mommsen calculated in about 200,000 inhabitants around the fourth century) survived the Barbarian invasions (Huns, Goths, Avars, etc…) although reduced to few thousands in the sixth century, mainly in villages fortified like Keszthely and Fenékpuszta. There were other places where it was continued speaking the Latin vulgarized after the fifth century: Pécs, Sopron, Szombathely, Dunaújváros. In these localities have been many Christian relics, with inscriptions in Latin. But it was in the western end of the Pelso lake (now called lake Balaton) where was formed a peculiar society of craftsmen, called the Keszthely culture, of which we have left more than 6,000 artisan tombs and many products (including in gold).


Groups of Romance languages in the Balkans. In blue (around the lake Balaton of Hungary) the extinct Romance Pannonian language

This culture, according to the academic Rumanian Alexander Magdearu (in Românii în opera Notarului Anonim) survived until the tenth century and used the Romance Pannonian language. He also writes that Charlemagne, when conquered the Pannonia in the year 796, found a Romance population that had clerici illiterati (priests without instruction) and that they had survived - thanks to its dominating crafts - the forced assimilation imposed by the Avars. In the area of the Balaton lake have been found 6,000 tombs pertaining to this romanized population, that disappeared with the arrival of the Magyars in the tenth century.


Geography

The Romance Pannonian language was spoken around the Balaton lake in western Hungary, mainly in the fortified villages of Keszthely and Fenékpuszta. Other places, where were found romanizeds tombs of Pannonians in the sixth century, were: Pécs (the Roman Sopianae), Sopron (Scarbantia), Szombathely (Savaria), Tokod and Dunaújváros. The area around the Balaton lake has an almost Mediterranean climate, similar to the one of the subalpine lakes in the north of Italy. According to Alexandru Magdearu this special mild climate is one of the reasons of why the Pannonians remained in Keszthely and they did not flee - during the Barbarian invasions - towards the relatively near coasts of the Adriatic Sea.


Language


The Romance Pannonian language is considered a Indo-European language, pertaining to the Centum group, with celtic roots and related to the old Illyrian. According to the linguist Roxana Curc, the main source of intelligence on this extinct language is the many toponims in the area of the Balaton lake and some antroponims, idronims and etonims that come from the Culture of Keszthely.

In addition to this, the same Keszthely name (pronounced in Hungarian “Kestei”) is similar to the istrian-venecian “castei”, that means “castle”, and is probably an original word of the Romance Pannonian language, according to the Hungarian linguist Julius Pokornyin (in Indogermanisches Etymologisches Worterbuch). This Hungarian linguist also writes that the word “Pannonia” is originated from the illiric word “pen” (marsh) and this demonstrates that the romanized language of the Pannonians was related to the Illyrian, another died Balkan language.

The Romance Pannonian language probably contributed to the creation of the 300 basic words of the “Latin substratum” of the Balkan Romance languages, according to Romanian linguist Alexandru Rossetti (in his Istoria limbii române). Some scholars argue that the Romance Pannonian lacks clear evidences of existence, because no writings of this language has been found until now. But, according to Sós Árthur in his book Cemeteries of the Early Middle Ages (6 th-9 th c.) at Pókaszepetkin, in some of the 6000 tombs of the Keszthely culture there are words in vernacular Latin that seems related to the Romance Pannonian language.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has asked for the classification of the Romance language panona like ISO 639-3, with the pending code “rpa” for an extinct language.


Bibliography

Magdearu, Alexandru. Românii în opera Notarului Anonim. Centrul de Studii Transilvane, Bibliotheca Rerum Transsylvaniae, XXVII. Cluj-Napoca 2001. Mommsen, Theodore. The Provinces of the Roman empire. Barnes & Noble Books. New York 2003 Remondon, Roger. La crise de l’Empire romain. Collection Nouvelle Clio – l’histoire et ses problèmes. Paris 1970 Rosetti, Alexandru. “History of the Romanian language” (Istoria limbii române), 2 vols., Bucharest, 1965-1969. Sós, Árthur/Salamon Á. Cemeteries of the Early Middle Ages (6 th-9 th c.) at Pókaszepetk. Ed by. B. M. Szőke. Budapest 1995. Szemerény, Oswald. Studies in the Kinship Terminology of the Indo-European Languages. Leiden 1977 Tagliavini, Carlo. Le origini delle lingue neolatine. Patron Ed. Bologna 1982

External links

Orbis Latinus, site on Romance languages



and here it is the related talkpage:

CAN ANYONE CITE ONE SINGLE WRITTEN DOCUMENT OF THAT LANGUAGE?

Is there any single word found in a written document or on an archeological fund which proves that Latin language was spoken in Pannonia after the fall of the Roman Empire? Otherwise this whole article is only a theory and this should be explained at the beginning. --Hunadam 05:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


Read again:According to the french historian André Du Nay (in his book The Origins of the Rumanians -- The early history of the Rumanian language) "...in the north (of the Balkan peninsula) a Roman population still lived in the former province of Pannonia at least in the sixth century and the question whether the dialect spoken there belonged to east latin or western latin has been discussed by scholars like Tagliavini (in his Le origini delle lingue neolatine) without a definite conclusion..." In his opinion there was a romance dialect spoken around the Lake Balaton during the times of the Plague of Justinian, in the year 541. Another source is the vatican sponsored website "www.orbilat.com" and articles (about the research done by Schulze-Dörlamm in 1984 on the 6000 tombs in the Keszthely area) appeared on JSTOR. Why to cancel all these evidences? And the article about it? All this smells of Hungarian nationalism to me....Tom R.W.


HUNGARIAN NATIONALISM

I STRONGLY BELIEVE that the Hungarian nationalism has forced the redirect of the article to "Pannonia", as I have written above to Hunadam. Wikipedia should not be influenced in this way....I believe we all have lost useful and interesting information -with precise and serious references from JSTOR- about a language (the Romance Pannonian) that developed in the lake Balaton area and that was "cut and destroyed" in the beginning by the Hungarian barbars. By the way: not one single evidence has been given AGAINST the evidences of the existence of the Romance Pannonian language! Why the decision against the article is based on elementary and not academical opinions? Where is it the proof that the Romance Pannonian language did not exist? In the doubt, the article should have remained (may be with some commentaries against the existence of this romance language by some wikipedians with contrary opinions). There are many other articles that can be erased, if we apply the same logic! Tom R.W.

Actually, what caused it to be redirected were the arguments given at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Romance Pannonian language. And Wikipedia doesn't run on negative proof fallacies. Grandmasterka 05:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
The redirect was done because of arguments not based on academical opinions from Hungarian wikipedians (like Hunadam) and this is absolutely not fair. Their superficial opinions and their lack of evidences against what is written in the article are the real negative proof fallacies! I want to repeat:Where is it the proof that the Romance Pannonian language did not exist? In the doubt, the article should have remained (may be with some commentaries against the existence of this romance language by some wikipedians with contrary opinions). I hope the authors of the article will request a revision of the redirect (WP:DRV) .Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.231.202.139 (talk) 15:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Even if the authors personally don't want it, I believe we can request a WP:DRV because the article has been erased on arguments not based on academical opinions (but only on contrary POV, mainly from Hungarian wikipedians), and there it is a reasonable doubt of "suspicion" of nationalism in the decision. Tom
P.S.: I even want to pinpoint that one of the "delete" requests in the discussion came from User:Sambure, a banned sockpuppet. Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.231.203.101 (talk) 19:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)



I believe Wikipedia has been damaged -even if minimally- by the way this article has been "erased" by some admins. Tom


[edit] Very strange admin behavior and rude answer

The following are excerpts taken from the talkpage of Sandstein, the admin who has "erased" the article of Romance Pannonian language in agreement with admin Bogdangiusca:

HUNGARIAN NATIONALISM

I STRONGLY BELIEVE that the Hungarian nationalism has forced the redirect of the article "Romance Pannonian language" to "Pannonia". Wikipedia should not be influenced in this way....I believe we all have lost useful and interesting information -with precise and serious references from JSTOR- about a language (the Romance Pannonian) that developed in the lake Balaton area and that was "cut and destroyed" in the beginning by the Hungarian barbars. By the way: not one single evidence has been given AGAINST the evidences of the existence of the Romance Pannonian language! Why the decision against the article is based on elementary and not academical opinions? Where is it the proof that the Romance Pannonian language did not exist? In the doubt, the article should have remained (may be with some commentaries against the existence of this romance language by some wikipedians with contrary opinions). There are many other articles that can be erased, if we apply the same logic! Tom R.W. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.231.200.129 (talk) 04:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


I am not a Hungarian and do not care about anyone's nationalism. The article was redirected according to the outcome of the AfD discussion. if you think this redirection was in error, see WP:DRV. Sandstein (talk) 07:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


The redirect was done because of arguments not based on academical opinions from Hungarian wikipedians (like Hunadam) and this is absolutely not fair. Their superficial opinions and their lack of evidences against what is written in the article are real negative proof fallacies! I want to repeat:Where is it the proof that the Romance Pannonian language did not exist? In the doubt, the article should have remained (may be with some commentaries against the existence of this romance language by some wikipedians with contrary opinions). I hope the authors of the article will request a revision of the redirect (WP:DRV) .Tom


I believe we can request a WP:DRV because the article has been erased on arguments not based on academical opinions (but only on contrary POV, mainly from Hungarian wikipedians), and there it is a reasonable doubt of "suspicion" of nationalism in the decision. Furthermore, I even want to pinpoint that one of the "delete" requests in the RfD discussion came from User:Sambure, a banned sockpuppet. Tom R.W. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.231.204.127 (talk) 00:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


I disagree with the deletion of the article "Romance Pannonian Language". I believe Tom is right. There were 3 wikipedians who voted Delete (and one was a banned sockpuppet, as correctly notes Tom), while 2 wikipedians voted Maintain the article. I was going to vote in favor of maintainig the article, but suddenly I saw it deleted. Probably with my vote in this case the article should have not been deleted, but only modified. Anyway, you wrote that <Feel free to change the redirect target or merge the content from the history somewhere>, but how? How can I read again the content and merge something somewhere? The content has disappeared. Now I can read only about "Pannonia".Thanks.--Cherso (talk) 21:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


AfD is not a vote; the closing admin takes the arguments into account. In this case, the problem was that the article Romance Pannonian language (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) was not really about the (supposed) language itself, but about the history of the region, which content probably belongs elsewhere. Is there any proof of banned users participating in the AfD? Also, you can't see the history because Bogdangiusca (talk · contribs) deleted it. Please ask him to restore it if you want to merge the content from the history. Sandstein (talk) 06:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


This deletion of Romance Pannonian language is very strange. Above you ask if "there is any proof of banned users participating in the AfD", after I wrote you that user:Sambure is a banned sockpuppet......of course, as you certainly know looking at [1]! Then Cherso ask for the content that has disappeared and you (an admin) don't know how to retrieve it and so you send the poor Cherso to the boss of the Romanian Wikipedia, Bogdangiusca, for information about. Strange, very strange....May be the smell of nationalism that I have complained in my former edit comes not only from Hungary.....Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.77.23.98 (talk) 22:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


This attitude will not help you get the article undeleted. Go bother someone else. Sandstein (talk) 22:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


WOW. What a rude answer. All this scares away people from participating to Wikipedia: no wonder that the author of the article is no more writing on Wikipedia since the deletion of "Romance Pannonian language".....--Cherso 14:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


I believe we are dealing here with a clear lack of justice! Tom


Sorry, Bogdangiusca, but I disagree with you. I have been an avid reader of your many posts in Wikipedia in the last years and I have always agreed with your points of view. But this time - even if I doubt my 5 points below can be useful to revert your "delete article" decision (but I hope your "high level" of intelligence and personality can do it) - I want to explains the following (in defense of the article that I have partially translated from the Blog at brunodam.blog.kataweb.it/2008/01/24/romance-pannonian-language/):

1) In the article there it is written: "..Some scholars argue that the Romance Pannonian lacks clear evidences of existence, because no writings of this language has been found until now. But, according to Sós Árthur in his book "Cemeteries of the Early Middle Ages (6 th-9 th c.)" at Pókaszepetkin, in some of the 6000 tombs of the Keszthely culture there are words in vernacular Latin that seems related to the Romance Pannonian language..." The scholar Sós Árthur should be read and taken in consideration, don't you agree? 2) The word "Keszthely" is a living proof of this language. In the article there it is written:"...the same Keszthely name (pronounced in Hungarian “Kestei”) is similar to the istrian-venecian “castei”, that means “castle”, and is probably an original word of the Romance Pannonian language, according to the Hungarian linguist Julius Pokornyin (in Indogermanisches Etymologisches Worterbuch)..." Even in this case the scholar Julius Pokornyin should be read and taken in consideration.... 3) In an interesting article about the history of Keszthely [1] we can read that in 456 "...the Ostrogoths occupied Western Transdanubia. The Fenékpuszta fortress (near Keszthely) was set on fire, the majority of the inhabitants died. The Goths returned a couple of months later and they made the rest of the romanised population rebuild the fortress..." So here we have a clear reference that there was a "romanised population": note that it was not a "roman" population speaking Latin and -for Orbis latinus- it was a "romanized" population! This population must have had its own language and that language was starting to evolve (like happened in Italy, France, Spain etc..) from Latin into a neolatin language. Furthermore can be read that "...in 568 in return for an alliance (with the Avars), the Longobards emptied Transdanubia and went down to Italy. It was during the Avar Empire that for the first time in the history of the Carpathian Basin, Keszthely and the surroundings were under the same authority. Keszthely and the surroundings were not occupied so the original inhabitants lived on undisturbed. They paid food and artisan goods for peace...." So, these romanized population were still there in 568 and later: the common sense will indicate to all of us that their language -after nearly two centuries- had evolved in a neolatin language, because "undirsturbed" and without influences from the Avars and Goths. 4) Orbis latinus (as can be read here at [2]) says that "..the question whether the dialect spoken there belonged to East Latin or to the Occidental dialects has been discussed without a definite conclusion..." That means that there are scholars discussing about the dialect and someone of them agrees with the existence! Why they should discuss, dear Bogdangiusca, if there it is no dialect? 5) Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia that gets every "no-nonsense" opinion and data, so why should not include an article about a neolatin language that has scholars discussing about? As wrote Tom "...In the doubt, the article should have remained (may be with some commentaries against the existence of this romance language by some wikipedians with contrary opinions)...."

Sincerely. --Pannonicus (talk) 01:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, there's no reason to write such an article because there's nothing to say about it, only speculation. One possible word of Pannonian Romance origin is not enough.
If you want to write about the Romans in the region, go ahead and edit Pannonia, which is specifically about the Roman province with that name. 13:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] The article in the Spanish Wikipedia

I wonder why the article Romance Pannonian Language has not been "erased" in the Spanish Wikipedia. May be because the nationalistic pressure from the Hungarians has not reached that Wikipedia? Anyway, I invite the readers to go to [[1]] in order to understand that the article is well done and is clearly based on evidences from scholars and well documented. Regards. Tom R.W. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.231.202.175 (talk) 03:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)