Jump to content

Talk:Italo-Dalmatian languages

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

Inadequate sourcing

[edit]

Seven sparse footnotes for this entire article is not what is considered well-sourced. The tag {{refimprove}} is entirely appropriate. As JamesBWatson pointed out in his message on his talk page, asking folks to track down sources on the wikilinked pages is not appropriate.

On a separate issue, Wictionary hardly counts in any way as a WP:Reliable Source. The Dissident Aggressor 18:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Can you tell me what is wrong with the article? Have you consulted any of the references provided? Have you got any sources of your own? Why are you editing articles on languages when you have already said "I don't know crap about languages."?. Why do you never answer my questions? Why are you being a dissident aggressor? Do you want me to take further action against you? --Mrjulesd (talk) 18:45, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  1. If you don't understand how to cite articles using reliable sources there is plenty of help. JamesBWatson and I have both explained some of the problems with your lack of sources. Citing wictionary is one such issue.
  2. What's remarkable is that I answered your first question above even before you asked it.
  3. I've refrained from adding or deleting content after your initial objection, but I will not refrain from article maintenance.
  4. The problem is you're ignoring the editing practices regarding reliable sources. I'm merely pointing that out at this point.
  5. Thank you, but I'll edit any article that tickles my fancy.
  6. Go ahead and take whatever action "against me" you feel appropriate. I'm not afraid of bullies or folks that want to own articles like you have claimed this one.
The Dissident Aggressor 17:15, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RV?

[edit]

User:JorisvS: Why have you deleted a large portion of Italo-Dalmatian_languages as rv? https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Italo-Dalmatian_languages&oldid=627252316 My edits are not vandalism. Saying vague things like blah blah doesn't help. I shall explain the meaning behind the various sections to you, from https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Italo-Dalmatian_languages&oldid=627241133

Please note Italo-Dalmatian = Italian Romance plus Dalmatian, in case you didn't realise!

The original deleted sections

Italian Dialects or Languages

Also see Regional Italian.

The Italian Dialects are the different linguistic varieties of Italian spoken in Italy. They correspond to the languages classified as being Italian Romance (or Italo-Romance), and hence Italo-Dalmatian. Although they are labelled as dialects (It. dialetti), they can also be considered as individual languages, as they can differ widely from Standard Italian.[1] They do not include the Sardinian language.

The meaning of the “Italian Dialects” is not that of merely cataloguing the different linguistic varieties spoken in Italy, but instead of cataloguing the linguistic varieties spoken in Italy that are considered to be Italian in nature. But there is no absolute judge of which varieties are Italian in nature, as there is no means of creating a clear consensus. But some varieties are not considered to be Italian varieties, but are instead considered as being non-Italian varieties which are traditionally spoken in Italy. This is often the case when languages originate from outside of Italy.

The Gallo-Italic languages, and the Venetian language, are considered to be Northern Italian Dialects.[2] But they are also considered to be Western Romance languages. So it is possible to classify them as being both Western Romance and Italian Romance.

Regional Italian has a different meaning: it is the varieties of Standard Italian, which is based on the Florentine dialect of Tuscan, spoken in different Italian regions, which have had influences from the traditional local Italian dialects. So they are similar to Standard Italian except for some local influences.

There are two major groups of Italian Dialects spoken in Italy: the Northern (Settentrionale) dialects; and the Central-Southern (Centro-Meridionale) dialects. They are divided by the La Spezia–Rimini Line, which is an isogloss, a geographical line that divides the Italian dialects in terms of linguistics. It roughly follows the divide between the Italian regions of Tuscany and Emilia-Romagna. The line can also be thought as dividing the Western Romance from the Central (Italo-Dalmation) Romance, Sardinian Romance and Eastern Romance, the main four groups of Romance languages.

Northern Italian Dialects or Languages

The Gallo-Italic languages and the Venetian language are considered to be Northern dialects of the Italian language, hences Italian Romance, hence Italo-Dalmatian.[2] But they are also considered to be Western Romance languages.[2]

Some other Romance languages are spoken in North Italy, but are not included in the Northern Italian Dialects, being seen as Gallic languages.[2] Also, some Non-Romance languages are also spoken. See the languages of Italy.

You can copy-paste your text on this talk page and bold some things, but my answer remains as simple as I've given twice before in the edit summaries: It is off-topic. I'll explain how it is off-topic, though: That article is about a branch of Romance languages, specifically the Italo-Dalmatian languages. Information about Gallo-Italic should not be in there, unless Italo-Dalmatian languages are compared to each other and to languages belonging to other branches. Dialetti italiani is Italian POV for the Romance languages spoken in Italy, which are vastly more different than anything rightfully called "dialects", at least in its English meaning, and so this has, again, no bearing on this article. --JorisvS (talk) 09:37, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: You're wrong, and I'll explain why.
(i) Firstly you've only addressed the Gallo-Italic languages. There is a whole host of other matters, that i have highlighted in bold. Why don't you discuss all these? Pleae go through all the points I've raised.
(ii) The Italian Dialects are not the same as the Romance languages spoken in Italy. Dialetti italiani is not Italian POV for the Romance languages spoken in Italy.I've researched this thoroughly. For example, in Northern Italy, Rhaeto-Romance languages Ladin and Frulian, Arpitan and the French language are all Romance languages, and are all spoken in Northern Italy. But only the Gallo-Italic languages and Venetian are included in the Northern Dialcts of the Italian Language. I can give you sources if you want. Look at the sources I've given, or if not available please look at http://www.evolpub.com/Italiandialects/ITALdial.html . It makes it quite clear that the Northern Dialects are regarded as dialects of the Italian language, while Rhaeto-Romance languages Ladin and Friulian, Arpitan and the French language are not. In addition, sardinian is a Romance language spoken in Italy, but is not included in the Italian dialects or Italian Romance. Also, Corsican is not spoken in Italy (Corsica is a French Island) but is considered an Italian dialect. The confusion arises becuase they are North of the La Spezia–Rimini Line, so are also thought as being Western Romance. But you will note that according to modern classification, a superfamily of Italo-Western puts Italo-Dalmatian and Western together, basically considering them as the same thing. This is now accepted on most sites I've visited. Read about this if you really belive there is a strong divide between the Northern Dialcts and the Central-Southern Dialects. They are certainly not accepted by the Italians. Also languages like Venetian are quite close to Tuscan and Istriot. Also look at Venetian language "Venetian is a Romance language and therefore descends from Vulgar Latin. Specifically, it belongs to the Italo-Romance group, most closely related to Istriot on the one hand and Tuscan–Italian on the other.[4] Also look at Gallo-Italic_languages " Most commonly, they are grouped with the Gallo-Romance languages,[5] but some Italian linguists prefer to group them with the Italo-Romance languages.[6] ".

Please read the following, i assume you can read Italian. Carlo Tagliavini, Le origni delle lingue neolatine, Bologna, Pàtron, 19726, p. 396. «Col nome di dialetti settentrionali o alto-italiani intendiamo i dialetti gallo-italici, il Veneto e l'Istriano [lege: Istriot language].» Also read Lorenzo Renzi, Nuova introduzione alla filologia romanza, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1994, p. 176 «I dialetti settentrionali formano un blocco abbastanza compatto con molti tratti comuni che li accostano, oltre che tra loro, qualche volta anche alla parlate cosiddette ladine e alle lingue galloromanze [...] Alcuni fenomeni morfologici innovativi sono pure abbastanza largamente comuni, come la doppia serie pronominale soggetto (non sempre in tutte le persone)[...] Ma più spesso il veneto si distacca dal gruppo, lasciando così da una parte tutti gli altri dialetti, detti gallo-italici.»
(iii) Please explain the additional points raised, there are a lot of additional highlights in the above section I would like to discuss. Please check all the references if you want to understand things. --Mrjulesd (talk) 10:56, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Could you try to make your point with less text, please? That focuses the discussion.
(ii) Okay, dialetti italiani is especially used to refer to those languages that do not have political recognition (as the result from previous lengthy discussions and arguments at Italian dialects). Quoting the English Wikipedia does not help, because it has self-corrected to use the linguistic definition of what are languages. No matter anyway, because it is all wholly irrelevant to an article about a specific branch of Romance languages.
(i) "Firstly you've only addressed the Gallo-Italic languages.". Just an example. Any other branch will do.
(iii) Make your points succinctly and I will. --JorisvS (talk) 11:18, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Please answer my questions!
(ii) You're wrong about political recognition. Sardinian is recognised politically, but is not an Italian dialect. Look at any text book. Also, look at the huge number of examples and references that I've given. I ddn't just quote english wikipedia, I just pointed out that not even wikipedia articles supported your position. Look at all the references I have supplied!
(i) Thats not good enough. I asked you specific questions and your refuse to answer.
(iii)Succinctly, I have explained to you following:
The Italian Dialects are the different linguistic varieties of Italian spoken in Italy. They correspond to the languages classified as being Italian Romance (or Italo-Romance), and hence Italo-Dalmatian.
Why there is sometimes disagreements over which languages consist of Italo-Romance.
Why the Gallo-Italic languages can be thought of being both Italian Romance and Western Romance.
The difference between Italian dialects (same as Italian Romance) and Regional Italian.
Italo-Dalmatian = Italian Romance plus Dalmatian. Italian Romance = Dialetti italiani.
Why many Romance languages spoken in Italy are not considered to be Italian dialects.
That italo-Western is now supported by most linguists.
Please look at my examples for why these are true. --Mrjulesd (talk) 11:51, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(ii). So I said "especially those with no political recognition". Still, itSardinian is still sometimes called a dialetto. The Wikipedia articles are actually in favor of my position. Please try not to misread what I say.
(iii). a) "Italian Dialects are the different linguistic varieties of Italian spoken in Italy", yet you subsumed regional Romance languages under this, which is linguistically not appropriate: These are not Italian linguistically, i.e. not dialectal forms of the Italian language.
b) Then the actual disagreement should be documented, which would be nothing of the sort you've done.
c) What are you getting at? If you're going for them having characteristics of both Gallo-Romance and Italo-Romance: that's because there is a dialect continuum and the Gallo-Italic languages are in between.
d) The only valid definitions linguistically give Italian dialects = Regional Italian. Sociolinguistically, this need not be the case. But this article is about a strictly linguistic subject.
e) Italian Romance ≠ dialetti italiani, not in any linguistically sensible way. Sociolinguistically, such an equalization could be pushed. That does not matter, because this article is about a linguistic clade and hence this article should no go into the messy details of linguo-politics. If there is a reliable source that says exactly so, it can be mentioned that Italian Romance is sometimes equated with the dialetti italiani, but also that this is not always the case.
f) Politics. Political recognition has no bearing on an article about a clade in a language family.
g) So? Even if true, this has little bearing on this article, aside from the infobox. --JorisvS (talk) 17:58, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I support the deletions that JorisvS has made. This whole article is a mess. Kudos to JorisvS for attempting to improve it. The Dissident Aggressor 17:02, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can be dismissive, you can make personal attacks but you can't undo consensus. The Dissident Aggressor 12:34, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Glottolog2.3 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ a b c d e Carlo Tagliavini, Le origni delle lingue neolatine, Bologna, Pàtron, 19726, p. 396.
  3. ^ a b Lorenzo Renzi, Nuova introduzione alla filologia romanza, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1994, p. 176
  4. ^ Carlo Tagliavini, Le Origini delle Lingue Neolatine".
  5. ^ Ethnologue, report for Gallo-Italian
  6. ^ For example, Giovan Battista Pellegrini, Tullio De Mauro, Maurizio Dardano, Tullio Telmon (see Enrico Allasino et al. Le lingue del Piemonte, IRES – Istituto di Ricerche Economico Sociali del Piemonte, Torino, 2007, p. 9) and Vincenzo Orioles (see Classificazione dei dialetti parlati in Italia).

Response to your queries

[edit]

1) "Okay, dialetti italiani is especially used to refer to those languages that do not have political recognition (as the result from previous lengthy discussions and arguments at Italian dialects).". Untrue, all Italian Romance languages are considered dialetti. If true, then Standard Italian would not be a dialect of Italian!

2) "So I said "especially those with no political recognition". Still, Sardinian is still sometimes called a dialetto. The Wikipedia articles are actually in favor of my position. Please try not to misread what I say.". Sardinian is not considered as an Italian dialect among any reliable sources I have consulted. It just shows that people can get confused. Some people think the earth is flat!

3) ""Italian Dialects are the different linguistic varieties of Italian spoken in Italy", yet you subsumed regional Romance languages under this, which is linguistically not appropriate: These are not Italian linguistically, i.e. not dialectal forms of the Italian language.". "(b) “Why there is sometimes disagreements over which languages consist of Italo-Romance.” Then the actual disagreement should be documented, which would be nothing of the sort you've done." Wrong. I explained that the Gallo-Italic & Venetian languages are sometimes put in Western Romance, and sometimes in Italian Romance, depending on the linguist. Look at my sources, or the relevant WP articles.

4) "“Why the Gallo-Italic languages can be thought of being both Italian Romance and Western Romance.” What are you getting at? If you're going for them having characteristics of both Gallo-Romance and Italo-Romance: that's because there is a dialect continuum and the Gallo-Italic languages are in between.". This needs to be explained, otherwise it can cause considerable confusion, as shown by this conversation.

5) "“The difference between Italian dialects (same as Italian Romance) and Regional Italian.” The only valid definitions linguistically give Italian dialects = Regional Italian. Sociolinguistically, this need not be the case. But this article is about a strictly linguistic subject." Wrong. Please read the wikipedia articles to understand the difference between Italian dialects and Regional Italian, or I will explain if you so wish.

6) "“Italo-Dalmatian = Italian Romance plus Dalmatian. Italian Romance = Dialetti italiani.” Italian Romance ≠ dialetti italiani, not in any linguistically sensible way. Sociolinguistically, such an equalization could be pushed. That does not matter, because this article is about a linguistic clade and hence this article should no go into the messy details of linguo-politics. If there is a reliable source that says exactly so, it can be mentioned that Italian Romance is sometimes equated with the dialetti italiani, but also that this is not always the case." Well all the Italian Dialects I have come across, have also been described as Italian Romance in sources. What languages do you think this doesn't apply to? As I have explained earlier, the main debate is the Gallo-Italic & Venetian languages, which have been described as both Italian dialects and Italian Romance. I can quote sources if you wish.

7) "“Why many Romance languages spoken in Italy are not considered to be Italian dialects.” Politics. Political recognition has no bearing on an article about a clade in a language family." I disagree. For example the Rhaeto-romance languages spoken in Italy have a strong Gallic nature, it would difficult to describe them as Italian dialects. Considerable analysis has occurred from linguists, for example it is the reason why Sardinian is not considered Italian Romance by any reliable source.

8) "“That italo-Western is now supported by most linguists.” So? Even if true, this has little bearing on this article, aside from the infobox." The point is there is confusion over the Gallo-Italic languages and Venetian. There are two major groups of Italian Dialects spoken in Italy: the Northern (Settentrionale) dialects; and the Central-Southern (Centro-Meridionale) dialects. They are divided by the La Spezia–Rimini Line, which is an isogloss, a geographical line that divides the Italian dialects in terms of linguistics. It roughly follows the divide between the Italian regions of Tuscany and Emilia-Romagna. The line can also be thought as dividing the Western Romance from the Central (Italo-Dalmation) Romance, Sardinian Romance and Eastern Romance, the main four groups of Romance languages. But if Italo-Western is considered instead, there is no confusion over which group the Gallo-Italic languages and Venetian should be put into. --Mrjulesd (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1) I doubt the average Italian sees Standard Italian as a dialetto. This is irrelevant to this article, though.
2) Specifically by the common people. This is noted at Sardinian language. It is irrelevant to this article, though.
3) "Wrong"? Should the disagreement not be noted? Including the actual disagreement does not take a lot of text (hold on and you'll see).
4) So it is about them having characteristics of both Gallo-Romance and Italo-Romance? Sure, but that's something for Gallo-Italic languages, which is about that topic.
5) Linguistically no distinction can be made. Sociolinguistically, that's a different matter. This is irrelevant to this article, though
6) First of all, that's dialects in the popular sense, not the linguistic sense. Secondly, that hinges on Gallo-Italic, among others belonging to Italo-Dalmatian, which is not the mainstream view.
7) That's why politics has opted not to call them dialetti. But especially when languages are less dissimilar politics and/or sociological factors can lead to them popularly being referred to as "dialects", even though these are easily distinct enough to be separate languages. Low German, Alemannic, and Bavarian in the Germophone sphere come to mind. Note that there Low German is commonly seen as a dialect, even though it is vastly different from Standard German. There is even a village in India where they speak two completely different Sino-Tibetan languages, but whose inhabitant see as dialects of the same language. This should illustrate that such criteria are useless to linguistics and thus irrelevant to this article.
8) I don't understand what you're saying. What has the acceptance of Italo-Western to do with whether or not Gallo-Italic would be part of Italo-Dalmatian? --JorisvS (talk) 13:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page etiquette

[edit]

Could we please observe some basic talk page etiquette here? Mrjules is making this almost completely unreadable between screwy formatting, random bold, posting walls of text and not threading his posts.

Guidelines request that we "keep the talk page attractively and clearly laid out, using standard indentation and formatting conventions." See WP:TPYES for more info. The Dissident Aggressor 22:45, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Italo-Romance languages

[edit]

Hi all, a new article on Italo-Romance languages has just been proposed at AfC (Draft:Italo-Romance languages). I have declined this meanwhile, as it seems to me that the new information would be better merged into this article. However, it is not my field so I could easily be wrong. If a consensus of those aready working here is that the new article would be a useful supplement, I will be glad to revisit this. Doric Loon (talk) 13:08, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doric Loon, thanks for your feedback.
The reason why I proposed a new separated page is that "Italo-Dalmatian" and "Italo-Romance" (the one my draft is about) are two totally different kind of classification, as the first is based on pure Linguistics (genealogy, morphology, phonology, etc), and the second on Sociolinguistics (the fact to be Romance dialect spoken in diglossia with Italian as Ausbau language).
In fact, they cover two different areas, as the first excludes the whole Northern Italian languages, while the second includes almost them all (by including Gallo-Italic languages).
They belong to different worlds, as the second is even the most taught in Italian universities, and that's why I'm pretty sure they sure be treated distinctly (as it is on it.wikipedia), in order to avoid confusion. Stévan (talk) 13:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Stévan, thanks for the explanation. My own field of expertise is Germanic languages, which are different but not dissimilar in the linguistic methodology, and there I would not want to see such a distinction. But maybe things are different in Italy. I would like to hear from third parties. Doric Loon (talk) 14:04, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Doric Loon, hopefully someone will join the topic.
What I can say to be clearer is that the hearth-of-the-matter is Gallo-Italic: it is genealogically Gallo-Romance (then not Italo-Dalmatian), but has been living in diglossia with Italian during the last centuries, and still having Italian as "roofing language", so it is sociolinguistically considered a Italo-Romance area at the same time.
Both interpretations are correct, they just belong to different fields of study. Stévan (talk) 15:23, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Doric Loon, sorry for pinging you again, but I noticed one more relevant thing.
In this page we have a citation of "Italo-Romance", which is the following:
«Italo-Dalmatian can be split into:
but that link directs to Italo-Western, that is the supergroup which includes also Western Romance instead, and where you can see a diagram showing Italo-Romance in the meaning of my draft.
This even more confusing, and sounds definitely like we are missing a page there. Stévan (talk) 13:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Italo-Dalmatian_languages&oldid=1207757841"