Talk:Cantabrian language

Untitled

83.61.108.158, I acept your changes at the moment because I don´t want to begin a war of editions during the development of the article. But I would thank you to login in next time, and begin a discussion before make debatable changes.Uhanu 05:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Dialect not language

Most authors speak of Cantabrian as an Astur-Leones dialect. There is not a single verifiable and reliable source in the article validating the denomination "language". It is not even accepted as such by Ethnologue (that even consider Extremadurian fablas a language, though linguistically closer to A-L). Unless this can be verified soon, I will move this page to Cantabrian dialect from its current location and rewrite the intro accordingly. The current title is POV. Regards, Asterion^talk 12:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Seconded. The Spanish page is an absolute disaster. It could perhaps be moved to a combined A-L page.

Boynamedsue (talk) 22:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S Do you sometimes play that game where you show the other Asterion round the Labyrinth? bns —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boynamedsue (talk • contribs) 22:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

He he, you got me there. I love Borges! Asterion^talk 14:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Compared to Castilian

There is a line "...and especially to the variety most distinct from standard Castilian." Is it accurate to refer to Castilian as standard? RJFJR (talk) 22:26, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Sources

We need valid sources for this article. Even the Red Book one is down (so it doesn't apply anymore). I would like to see some sources clearly stating Cantabrian is a language and not a group of Dialects with more than obvious differences.

Also, I suggest moving the article to Cantabrian DialectS with an S in the end until Cantabrian is proven to be a single dialect, or language. This is not going to happen as far as I can tell, given that these dialects are more distant one another than some languages that are commonly regarded as independent (Swedish and Norwegian, for example, are, closer in every possible way, than Pasiegu and Lebaniegu).

Wikipedia is not about what we would like things to be, it's about describing how it is.62.15.163.166 (talk) 13:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

The problem I see with your proposal is that no language is really anything but a group of dialects, though a written standard might provide the illusion of unity. About Pasiego and Lebaniego being so far apart, I find it difficult to believe. Jotamar (talk) 17:22, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, that is an old tricky reasoning, with an easy counter-example: if languages are anything but groups of dialects, then we might as well think Cantabrian Dialects are just dialects of either Spanish Castilian or Asturian, and should be listed as such.

Languages are groups of Dialects whose speakers find themselves as speakers of the same thing. Example: Basque Dialects are further removed than many languages, but their speakers consider themselves speakers of the same language. The opposite might be said for Swedish and Norwegian, whose speakers consider different languages even though they share mostlinguistic features.

Summarizing: if you think Cantabrian is a language, somebody needs to provide this article with some verifiable sources that clearly state so; I say veriafiable meaning: papers by liguists, books by liguists, and such. Meanwhile, the only thing that is obvious, is that there are some romance codialects (sister dialects evolved from latin) in different parts of Cantabria, which differ from/relate to Castilian Spanish and Asturian (and from/to each other) in a certain number of linguistic features (which should also be listed, and sourced).

Lebaniegu and pasiegu aren't so far apart as, let's say, Portuguese and Spanish, but they as far apart as Eonaviego and East Aturian (which are, again, regarded as different languages). I could list 10-15 isoglosses in the blink of an eye (with sources, of course, more could surely be found), mind that East Asturian differs from Lebaniegu in 9 isoglosses, as recognised by the Asturian Language Academy).62.15.163.166 (talk) 11:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm not aginst the move you propose, but I would prefer to wait for a couple of weeks, because there might be people opposing the move who are not active in WP right now. On the other hand, even though you seem to have a very precise personal criterion to tell language from dialect, I must remind you of this: There is no universally accepted criterion for distinguishing a language from a dialect. (Taken from Dialect#Dialect_or_language). --Jotamar (talk) 15:48, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 08 September 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Reasonable objection by Kwami has not been addressed. Jenks24 (talk) 10:15, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

---

Cantabrian dialect → Cantabrian language – Harmonization with other Astur-Leonese languages (Asturian language, Mirandese language, Extremaduran language). – Article editor (talk) 22:02, 8 September 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 13:08, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

@Article editor: And the existing Cantabrian language to Cantabrian language (disambiguation). This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose In which linguistic source is this considered a "language"? AFAIK Cantabrian is considered a transitional dialect between Asturian and Castilian. — kwami (talk) 04:50, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
• Comment As I already said in Talk:Leonese_dialect#Requested move 9 September 2015, the difference between language and dialect is irrelevant in modern linguistics. It's also worth mentioning that in a language continuum, all dialects are transitional dialects.

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Cantabrian dialect. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091219081137/http://revistaalcuentros.iespana.es/n6/asturiano_oriental.pdf to http://revistaalcuentros.iespana.es/n6/asturiano_oriental.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090222090430/http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/index.php?pg=00206 to http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/index.php?pg=00206
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100710042808/http://ast.wiktionary.org:80/wiki/C%C3%A1ntabru-Castellanu to http://ast.wiktionary.org/wiki/C%C3%A1ntabru-Castellanu
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091207083151/http://revistaalcuentros.iespana.es/ to http://revistaalcuentros.iespana.es/

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:46, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Spanish or Leonese?

Obviously there is no single correct answer, as it always happens with language classification in areas of dialect continuum. I can't accept any wording stating this classification is right, and all the other are wrong. --Jotamar (talk) 15:56, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

"Current dialectology regards Cantabrian as a dialect of Spanish. Nevertheless, it is not surprising that Cantabrian Spanish, historically linked to the Astur‐Leonese dominion, possesses certain features that Castilian Spanish never inherited or were lost early in its formation process. The old Leonese intonation survives in certain areas of the Kingdom of León that were hispanicized at an early date. This situation results in a continuum extending across the north‐ western Iberian Peninsula with blurred interdialectal boundaries where a variety of intonation patterns can be found".

See: http://prosodia.upf.edu/home/arxiu/activitats/4th_workshop/protegit/Cantabrian_final.pdf--Cántabro (talk) 11:43, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

So what? --Jotamar (talk) 18:03, 26 May 2017 (UTC)