Talk:Andalusian language

This isn't a language. Is a one of mutch dialects of castilian or spanish.--Kabri 11:07, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

What's the difference between a dialect and a language? I've never heard an Andalusian speak, but I speak fairly good Spanish so I could tell you whether or not if it is Spanish by hearing them.

Cameron Nedland 23:14, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

not a language, neither a dialect

There's no andalusian dialects. The real thing it's that in Andalusia there are several spanish dialects. That's all

I guess

the entirety of the article is distorted. The Andalusian version presents some (though arguable) historic facts on the side of Andalusian but they are omitted in the English version. Thus the current form of the article highlights a pro-Castillian POV. Behemoth 20:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnologue

It is listed in the Ethnologue Report, as a regional variant of Spanish. See the entry for Spanish, where Castillan is only one of the variants.

Note that the Ethnologue classification of dialects is sometimes disputed. Consider the classification of Spanish as a group of related languages (that some call dialects, others call languages), as many "dialects" are often not even mutually understood with the standard language (here the Castillan variant for Spanish), and carry their own distinctive grammatical features, spelling, intonation, and specific vocabulary not understood in the "standard" language.

Notably, the influence from African Arabic (and also from Judeo-Spanish) have remained in Andalusian, since the reconquest of Andalusia by the Queen of Castille.

Vandalic language remnants in Andalusian language?

BTW, the article on Vandalic language suggests that Andalusian may contain some survivals of Vandalic. Whether that is true, whether it is notable enough to be mentioned in this article, or whether it should be corrected in the article on Vandalic or not, respectively, I honestly don't have the foggiest, but I thought I should mention it here anyway, because the other article does make that suggestion. Maybe someone who really knows about these things could shed some light on the matter? -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 09:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unsubstantiated & Biased Article

"The peculiar linguistic features of Andalusian developed from vulgar Latin in parallel to Castillian Spanish as the vernacular language of the population during the period of Arab and Berber domination Al-Andalus, and it is therefore as distinct not just in form but in origin from standard Spanish as Galician is from Portuguese." The above statement is false, the romance variant that developed in the Arabic-dominated Al-Andalus was Mozarabic, not Andalusian. Andalusian is an offshoot of Castilian that absorbed many Arabic and Mozarabic influences after its introduction to southern Spain after the Reconquista. The author gives no reference for the above statement, and the only reference on the page defines Andalusian as a Spanish dialect, which I can attest to, as I'm a native speaker of Andalusian. Castilian is not unintelligible to me, nor have Castilian speakers I've spoken to had much difficulty understanding me. Isn't mutual unintelligibility the criterion for defining separate languages? This page seems rather non-neutral, to say the least. Andrewharrington2003 21:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In all honesty, I cannot see the point of the article either. Originally it was created by someone as an attack page to criticise a particular kind of Andalusian nationalism. In its defense, I have heard about the so-called Mozarabic connection but it is certainly not widespread. My main problem with this is the actual article name. Perhaps it should be renamed to Controversies regarding Andalusian Spanish (I know, it sounds awful!). Regards, --Asterion^talk 01:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a section regarding the debate about whether Andalusian is a language or a dialect on the Andalusian dialect page. I think maybe this page should be merged into the Andalusian dialect one, and maybe expand the section about this debate (even if it is a politically contrived "controversy"). What do you think? Andrewharrington2003 12:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds reasonable to me. I am an admin but I am reticent to delete the article myself as I do not think it meets the criteria for speedy deletion. I suggest we wait a week or so and then take it to WP:AFD. Cheers, --Asterion^talk 17:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]