Talk:Catalan language/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

[Random Flames]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A try for NPOV.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Use:Perique des Palottes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[[user:PedroPVZ|Pedro] from Portugal

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

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

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

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

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

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

As the article says, these come from Manuel Milà i Fontanals work in 1861. That is presumably the period of the examples (which come from the Catalan-language version of the article, the only thing added here is my translation of the passage into English for the benefit of English-language readers.) Yes, some of these come off as very archaic. I read Catalan pretty well, but writing it is another matter; no one seems to have seen fit in the Catalan Wikipedia to add modern equivalents; I think that would be worth doing, but I also think it is very vaulable to preserve examples of the older, more extreme, dialects. My own Catalan isn't good enough to be confident in writing that; you are a native speaker. It would be a useful addition, certainly here in the English Wikipedia and probably even in the Catalan Wikipedia.
I would quite disagree with the view behind "didn't have a proper grammar." The fact that the grammar of one time and place differs from another doesn't mean that one of them is wrong. Just like modern Catalan isn't "very bad Latin" (or vice versa), the various 19th-century regional dialects were not unsuccessful attempts to talk like a Barcelones. They were (presumably correct) uses of the dialect of their time and place. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:10, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

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

Language politics in Valencia

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

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

UV is not a valencian nationalist party - the valencian nationalist party is BLOC, which claims Valencian and Catalan to be the same language. 62.43.177.47

"Passive" vs "Active" Speakers

The article states that Catalan is spoken by 6.5 million people "actively," and 12 million "passively." I have never for another language heard such a distinction made. Can someone please explain? I would think that a person who understands a language "passively" cannot be considered a speaker of a language. If he cannot speak the language, he is not a speaker of the language. Sounds like some inflation of numbers for political purposes if you ask me. Peter Wye January 16th 2005

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

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

Partisan and unencyclopedic edits

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

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

Backwards, very backwards

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

I dunno... it could be useful to find rhymes when writing poetry. — Chameleon 23:11, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
A retrograde dictionary is used very often in linguistics. It can be used to research suffixes and verb endings. Such a dictionary exists in almost every language (e.g. for English you could search every word ending in -ship). -- Deef1981

Number of speakers

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

  • The number keeps bouncing all over the place, with absolutely no citations provided. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:01, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
Ethnologue gives 6,667,328, based on 1996 data. Would "about 7 million," based on that number, be acceptable? john k 03:42, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
The information in the corresponding section of the article, based on official sources (links are also provided), appears to be more detailed and recent than the one in the Ethnologue. The sentence «More than 7.5 million» in the table should be restored...--Periku 10:07, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

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

Is everyone who "can speak" Catalan a first-language speaker of Catalan? john k 05:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
The 11 million figure is indeed wrong: people that merely understand Catalan are, of course, not speakers. Not all the 7.5 million speakers are first-language speakers, but this distinction is really fuzzy, particularly in Spain (Catalonia, for example, is arguably the most perfectly bilingual society in the world): the Ethnologue itself doesn't bother to provide estimates...--Periku 07:52, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
The bilingualism is certainly the case; still, can we try to cite (in the article) the sources of the figures we are using? -- Jmabel | Talk 06:12, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

During Franco

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

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

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

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

Sounds like this calls for some serious research byu someone. As Error remarked above, somebody should clarify what was allowed, when and in which circumstances. Shouldn't be that hard to document, I'm sure there is a book on this, albeit probably not in English. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:20, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
If somebody does this, don't forget to document in Spain under Franco. --Error 11:20, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
Cases of fines for the use of Catalan, not only in places like restaurants, but even in telephone calls, is indeed documented but as far as I know they happened only during the Spanish Civil War and the first months of the post-war period. It is well-known the edict of Eliseo Álvarez Arenas, military chief-of-occupation of Barcelona: «Estad seguros, catalanes, de que vuestro lenguaje en el uso privado y familiar no será perseguido.» A completely different thing was the public use of the language, which will be brutally repressed during franquism, particularly during its early period (1939-1944). It is true that the first book legally published in Catalan in post-war Catalonia was already in 1942, but publication had many restrictions for a long time (for example, it is very significant that translations were banned until the 60s). Catalan was never allowed as official second language while Franco was alive: not even the use of catalan christian names was officially permitted (!), let alone the presence of Catalan in the public educational system... Regards.--Periku 01:40, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
AFAIK, Catalan was not an official language earlier (since Philip V of Spain?) I don't know about earlier use in the educational system (it was a competence for the municipalities, I think). --Error 11:20, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
Catalan was an official language in Catalonia during the 1932-1939 period, according to the corresponding Statute of Autonomy of 1932, Article 2: «Catalan is, along with Castilian (Spanish), an official language in Catalonia.» Catalan language had already been introduced in the primary schools of Catalonia with the Decreto de Bilingüismo of 29/4/1931; after 1932, it will be introduced even in the University. Public education in Catalonia during the Second Republic was considerably plural: there were schools managed by the central government, the catalan Generalitat, the municipalities... see e.g. this article (in Spanish). Regards.--Periku 17:44, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
For the benefit of those who do not read Spanish, the quotation in the previous not reads, "You may be sure, Catalans, that your private and family usage of your dialect will not be persecuted." The Spanish lenguaje is—at least as I understand it—much closer in meaning to the English dialect than language; the latter would normally be rendered as idioma. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:27, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks Jmabel. Although I think that the best rendering of the Spanish «lenguaje» is still language, it is true that «lenguaje» is not as usual and may have some negative connotation that «idioma» or «lengua» don't have, although it is not as explicit as in the word «dialect». Regards.--Periku 08:35, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
Thanks Periku. I think that you're agreeing - and Solé i Sabaté, who you cite, certainly would - that the phrase used in the article is false and should be changed. Solé i Sabaté's research is interesting and deserves further investigation. I suspect, for example, that many of the cases of closures and destruction cited had less to do with any desire to suppress Catalan language or culture than with the determination within the new regime to put an end to secessionist and left-wing activities. I've documented the great boom in sardana activity during the dictatorship and would be most surprised if this were an isolated occurrence.Kalebeul 16:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
I am not quite sure of agreeing with you. Although the sentence in the article could be qualified, there is enough evidence for the desire of the francoism to suppress Catalan language and culture, which was particularly brutal during its early period. Certainly, important members of the illustrated fascism as Dionisio Ridruejo or Serrano Suñer had a different opinion (cf. Solé i Sabaté: [1]), but they were not listened. The example of the sardana is indeed an isolated occurrence, as Solé i Sabaté also indicates (ibid.): «The only manifestation of Catalan identity tolerated was the sardana, it being considered a regional dance and as such an example of the “richness of Spanish folklore”.» Regards.--Periku 10:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Francoism didn't criticise much traditional traits such as the sardana or traditional theater because it wanted Catalan to be seen as a regional, old thing, and a culture which can't achieve any normality at all. Thus, only traditional theater, sardana and medieval poetry were allowed. In fact, some writers tried to sneak their works under censorship by claiming they were medieval or traditional works.
62.43.177.47
Oh, and by the way, something as simple as giving your child a Catalan name was banned during the regime - this should be the definitive proof that Francoism was certainly UNfriendly to the use of Catalan... Sputnikpanicpuppet 20:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Not so easy. I guess there was no problem with Montserrat or Nuria (but there would be with Núria or Jordi). --Error 21:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

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

Adéu siau may be singular too

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

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

EU Constitution

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

You might want to try http://www.constitucioneuropea.es/index35c3.html?op=doc. There's even a Balear version. :)--Theathenae 18:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
I tried, but my browser crashed on the massive PDF files. If you are accessing these successfully, could you let us know exactly what the respective first sentences are? They'd presumably make a great example for the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:03, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
Yes, the constitution's excessive length has been one of the major criticisms articulated by its detractors. :) I've skimmed through the three versions and have so far found no difference whatsoever. They are identical as far as I can tell. As you can see on the website, the document's title is Tractat pel qual s'establix una Constitució per a Europa for all three. This doesn't mean I think Valencian shouldn't be considered a separate language. As with Serbian and Croatian, this is entirely a political question and has little to do with linguistics. If the Valencians want their language to be considered separate, that is their prerogative. And spoken Valencian sounds much closer to Castilian than central Catalan.--Theathenae 06:59, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Here's the opening paragraph of the preamble in Catalan, Balearic and Valencian: Catalan
INSPIRANT-SE en l’herència cultural, religiosa i humanista d’Europa, a partir de la qual s’han desenvolupat els valors universals dels drets inviolables i inalienables de la persona humana, la democràcia, la igualtat, la llibertat i l’Estat de dret;

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

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

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

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

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

I understand what you are saying perfectly well, but the standard forms in an official Catalan document should be seva and vuit, should they not?--Theathenae 03:58, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
No, they shouldn't. All forms are considered correct by IEC.
62.43.177.47

Yodajaus

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

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

That said, it is quite clear that the remark about the official versions varying in the first sentence is apparently not true. If someone can cite to demonstrate that politics was behind the versions being absolutely identical, that would be worth mentioning, but until someone does so, the old text that simply says thear are identical should probably stand. -- Jmabel | Talk 15:47, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
The evidence lies in Valencian forms (seua, huit) being used in the official Catalan version instead of standard Catalan (seva, vuit).--Theathenae 03:55, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Both variants are official according to IEC (Institut d'Estudis Catalans). Both can be used. Of course in Catalonia, seva and vuit are much more used. However, those differences are not as many as differences between British and American English or between European and Brazilian Portuguese (which have two official different spellings without making them separate languages). Best regards, Marco Neves 15:45, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Maps

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

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

Yes in Catalan

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

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

The form 'oc' does also exist, but it was only used in Medieval literature, like that of Ramon Llull. 62.43.177.47

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

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

Hecho diferencial

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

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

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

NPOV rewrite

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

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

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