Jump to content

Talk:Catalan language/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

I ask your vote for the article Catalan language to featured articles. Please, if someone thought the article is not so excellent try to improve it. Coronellian 13:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC) 89.129.184.135 20:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Vampire help needed

I'd be grateful if someone familiar with Catalan could check out the article Count Estruc, which asserts the existence of a historical legend about a Catalonian vampire. Given the widespread interest in vampires, the absence of English references seems very odd, and I'm suspicious that this might date back no further than modern fiction by Salvador Sáinz. Could someone glance at the references and advise if they look reliable? See Count Estruc, ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guifred_Estruch and User talk:Estruch. Thanks in advance. Tearlach 17:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Those references only support the existence of Sainz's novel, article needs binning or changing to one describing the novel. Boynamedsue 18:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

This is the discussion page from Catalan wiki

"Molt bon dia Soc Salvador Sáinz, autor de un llibre sobre el comte Estruch. He de fer algunes precisions. En primer lloc el nom Guifred es inventat per mi per donar-li mes identitat a la novel.la. En aquell temps el cognom era Estruc, no Struch. La paraula vol dir fortuna, hi ha un origen de les estriges de la mitologia grega, una paraula que si sembla molt. A Transilvània no existeix el nom de vampir, inventada al segle XVIII, sinó Strigoi per mascles i strigoiaca per les femelles. En meu llibre EL CINE DE DRACULA es parla molt de tot això. La destrucció de Llers per la Legió Condor esta narrada al meu compte LAS HIJAS DE ESTRUC, publicat en Weird Tales (Madrid). La meva obra vareixa la realitat amb la ficció. Només volia aclarir aixó. Atentament. Un oblit. La data del vampir es dels anys 1174 més o menys. Era la època d'Alfons el Cast que surt a la meva novel.la." He states, in brief, that his work is a mixture of fact and fiction, but gives no precise information about the factual part. I vote for delete. Boynamedsue 18:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

right. after exhaustive googling, I can find only reference to the exitence of an oral tradition about the count. All of the reported traditions are suspiciously similarly worded, and all refer to the destruction of all possible evidence in the bombing of Llers. Sainz admits that he invented the first-name Guifred, I wonder if he invented the whole thing? Alternatively, it may be that the legend is a recent campfire story about vampires, based, or not, on folk traditions about a count there. Antway, all very vague.

Spanish not Castillian

I've altered the references to "Castillian" influence on Barcelona Catalan, to say "Spanish". Castillian, in modern English refers properly to the province of Castille. A lot of the influence on BCN Catalan comes from Andaluz dialects (I once heard a girl on the FGC talking Catalan but swapping the S's for aspirated h's "Ehtic en el trehn, em trucah dehpreh?". It sounded gorgeous), or from the catalan dialect of Spanish, which is itself influenced by the Catalan language.Boynamedsue 08:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I personally think you're wrong. A drop of water is not an ocean.

Any reputable source as evidence of the influence of Andalusian in Catalan besides a personal experience? --the Dúnadan 18:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The influence of the Andaluz dialect is very hard on all the Catalan Country, both Catalunya, Valencia, and Balearic Islands. But the word Castillian do not refers to dialect, officialy "Spanish" is said "Castellano" (Castillian) according to the Spanish 1978 Constitution. Coronellian 18:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

New studies - Number of speakers

The new study from Generalitat de Catalunya[1] states that 9,118,882 people speak Catalan.

Categorization

Please see Talk:Romance languages#Confusion in categories. Any input is appreciated. --Amir E. Aharoni 12:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Reasons to delete the "Similarities between Catalan and Spanish" section

It just have been added one section which should be removed for the following reasons (and some more):

  • Original research
  • Data taken from a non-well acredited source as RAE, IEC or AVL, but from a particular.
  • There are mistakes ("adjetiu" is a non existing word in Catalan, "y" should be the translation in Catalan of the Spanish "f" (¿?¿?¿?)...).
  • Diacritics are not considered. In catalan there are different words which distinguish just because of a diacritic: (te - té, dona - dóna, pèl - pel, ...). They cannot be considered just identical because they aren't.
  • It considers just 1938 words over the 60.000 that apear in the DIEC.
  • It has no sense to have a whole section comparing Catalan and Spanish. It can be added a comment saying how Catalan differs respect other romanic languages, but not just specialy with Spanish: Occitan and perhaps French is closer to Catalan than Spanish.

--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 00:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the removal of that section. If that section was well referenced and accurate (there is no word in Catalan that is simply an y), and referenced with linguistic sources, I would agree to its inclusion. I wouldn't say that French is closer to Catalan than Spanish, but that is a different story. --the Dúnadan 15:51, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Why user 204.176.13.6 has undid the deletion without arguing?
Note that there is a link that points to an article to be deleted (Catalan Spanish-side-by-side comparison), created by User:Xchip, the same who created the section here also to be deleted.
Note also that the information referenced here from http://aulex.ohui.net/ca-es has been added to s:ca:Comparatiu Spanyol Catala, and also will be deleted if no argument is made for avoiding it. -Aleator 16:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply and misuse, I'm still a newbie :-) so here is my reply:
  • It's not OR since it neither introduces a new theory nor defines new terms nor drives conclusions. It just enumerates.
  • Please if you have found specific mistakes feel free to correct them, that is the wikipedia spirit. And don't just remove the whole page.
  • Sorry about Adjetiu, it should be Adjectiu, please help improve the list by fixing errors as we all do.
  • If diacritics are not considered please feel free to add them.
  • 60.000 entries is like too much, the Maria Moliner dictionary has 40.000, BTW Shakespeare knew around 60k words, but he was a writer. To pass the GMAT (Graduate Management Admission Test) you need to know around 2500 english words, which is quite good.
  • It's weird here that the whole article focuses on how Catalan differs from Spanish bu there is not any section/comment to explain how close they are. Why?
--Xchip 21:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Now we can dicuss here :-)

  • It is original research. Where can you cite this data from? It wouldn't be original research if you say "in the book from NAME SURNAME, a reputated linguist, he shows that bla bla bla...". But taking a dictionary from some Internet page and elaborating some data, is original research. Why this dictionary? why not considering dyacritics? why just 1938 words? why this words? are they the most used? are they the easier to learn for a Spanish? why...? You took some assumptions, some hypotesis and you worked with it and you showed the results. This is original research.
  • No, I won't correct the mistakes because I think this is not the place. The mistakes were just to show that the original working conditions of your research (the dictionary) was not reliable.
  • First it should be taken an assumption in your research about dyacritics: you probably know that Catalan never has "á" and Spanish never has "à". Then should we consider "à" and "á" the same letter? perhaps. Should we consider Spanish "ó" the same letter as Catalan "ò". Sure not. So, one more assumption to take.
  • Are we discussing about symilarities of writting languages or symilarities about commons written language? (one more assumption to do in your research). If you are comparing the languages, you have to take the whole dictionary. If you want to compare the most used words, then you have to determine the usage of each word and ponderate.
  • Sorry but I don't see in the article any focus of difference with Spanish. The only place I see a comparison with Spanish is in the sentence "phonologically, Catalan is more similar to Portuguese than to Italian, Spanish or French". Well, 5 languages are involved in the sentence. I don't see any any reason to think that "the whole article focuses on how Catalan differs from Spanish" if you don't think also that "the whole article focuses on how Catalan differs from French" or "from Italian". Sincelely, I'm sorry but I don't see the reason of this sentence.

--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 22:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You again removed the whole section, I don't believe this should be black or white thing.

  • Translating is not OR, otherwise every sentence you write would be OR since you are a Catalan speaker writting in English...
  • Q: Why this dictionary?
    • It had a fair a mount of words, we'll add more don't worry.
  • Q: why not considering dyacritics?
    • I'd love to consider them, please help and add them!
  • Q: why just 1938 words? why this words? are they the most used?
    • Well, well add more with the time, as for the frequency usage, that is something the article is not covering so it is out of question.
  • As for you not wanting to help correct mistakes.. too bad!
  • Q: Are we discussing about symilarities of writting languages or symilarities about commons written language?
    • Then again, it's jsut a list of words that change slightly, don't overcomplicate things!
  • as for the 'the whole article focuses ... '
    • What I really mean is that apparently there is no interest in showing how related are Spanish and Catalan.

I'm quite disappointed that you removed the whole list instead of working with me to improve it. It looks like we are not going to agree, shall we get into an arbitration process by a third and unbiased person? Do you know what process do we have to follow? --Xchip 23:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

But it will continue being original research (look at Wikipedia:No original research). -Aleator 00:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I insist, you are not just translating. You are choosing a dictionary , you are choosing a method, you are choosing a criterium to avoid dyacritics, you are choosing not ponderating the word depending on its use, you are choosing avoiding phonetics, ... Moreover, it seems you are the author of the dictionary (we'll add more [words]). Then you are creating the dictionary, choosing the words in order to make the comparison. Well, this is 100% original research.
About "interest on showing how related are Spanish and Catalan", this is much different from your first asertion. I have no problem to add this information, only if it is well sourced. For example, in the article about Spanish language, you can see that in the Classification and related languages section there is a symilar paragraph. Well, it is sourced with a prestigious source as the Ethnologue. If you want to add the symilar section with the information you can get here (I even have searched it so that you can not say I want to avoid this information), I don't have absolutely any problem. It's not because of content but because of sources and original research. I hope this can solve the problem. Otherwise, we can make a request for a third part. --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 00:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
This link could be interesting, Xchip, Wikiversity:Portal:Research. I think original research is accepted there, but I am not sure at all. Hope it is useful. -Aleator 01:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Let's then go to arbitration and we go from there, I don't have much experience with this procedures, Xtv, do you want to start it? Thanks. --Xchip 18:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Why is your original research better than Ethnologue? You haven't answered. I'm not the only one who tells you that your work is original research. This is clearly against policy of Wikipedia. I think there is not much to discuss. Just one user trying to introduce his own research against most of the users... if you want to start an arbitration, I will contribute, but I think the situation don't require it.--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 23:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Similarities between Catalan and Spanish

Since many people ask how different is Catalan from Spanish I went ahead and did some analysis of an open source dictionary[1], using the Levenshtein distance on every entry shows that:

  • 21.98% of the words are the identical (whole list).
  • 25.74% only change in one letter
    • bellesa->belleza, bibero->biberon, caramel->caramelo, (whole list).
  • 20.33% of the words can be transformed into Spanish with only 2 changes.
    • evolucionat->evolucionado, ferramenta(heina)->herramienta, creença->creencia, (whole list).
  • 3.3% of the words with 8 or more letters can be transformed into Spanish with only 3 changes.

The metric used is the Levenshtein distance, and a change means an insertion, deletion, or substitution of a single character. I'd like this to be part of the article, however I can see this being removed by a small group of Catalans that don't like this fact. Any help? Thanks Xchip 16:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Besides violating WP:OR and WP:NOT, a non-random sample that includes word-derivatives (words formed by suffixes instead of an analysis of morphemes) is nonscientific. The purported similarities of vowel change apply to all Romance languages (in fact, vowel and consonant change from Vulgar Latin was the cause of the formation these languages; compare evolucionat (Cat.) - evolucionat (Occ.) - evolucionado (Sp.) - evolucioné (Fr.) - evolucionado (Pt.) - evolvuto (It.); or creença (Cat.) - cresença (Occ.) - creencia (Sp.) - croyance (Fr.) - crença (Pt.) - credenza (It.)). Last but not least, the "analysis" is based on orthography and not on phonemes; for example: bellesa and belleza imply one difference in spelling, and yet three differences in phonetics ([bəʎeza] vs. [beʝeθa]); a difference in spelling (i.e. China vs. Xina) could be almost phonetically identical (with the exception of the neutralized "a" in Central Catalan); and two identical words/phrases in spelling (i.e. les cartes both in French and Catalan), are pronounced entirely different. --the Dúnadan 16:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't see why is wrong to have a section that explains how close are Spanish words to Catalan, it is quite a common question, and this is a good answer. As you say, this analysis is based on ortography, that is correct and that is what I was tryign ot proof, I dont see how your argument of phonetics invalidates my point of ortographic closeness. If you don't have stronger arguments please add the section again, I don't see why you removed it without previous discussion.Can any non biased person mediate in this discussion? I will provide the list of words thata are the same, change in one letter and that change in two letters. I don't need to mention protuguese or french to prove my point, I just have my facts straight. BTW the past participle of 'evolucionado' is 'evoluto'.Thanks.--204.176.13.6 19:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

15:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You missed the first part of my comment: that section was eliminated not because of my purported "bias" towards the section but because it clearly violates WP:OR (and consequently, WP:NOT). Even if it didn't, the analysis is still linguistically poor, it only proves (though it never explicitly said so) spelling similarities with a language with which Catalan is not the closest: Catalan spelling similarities (aka "lexical similarities") most resemble that of Occitan of course, then Italian, and then Portuguese and Spanish, according to Ethnologue [2]. Ethnologue report is far more informative, it is based on the language as a whole and not on an arbitrary non-random sample like yours, and most importantly, since it is a reputable linguistic source, its inclusion would comply with WP:CITE and WP:Verifiability (and thus, does not violate WP:OR). Your point must be proven not by your own non-random work, but by a verifiable source. --the Dúnadan 22:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Borrowed words

"Like many modern languages, Catalan contains numerous words originally borrowed from other languages" - I think this is a little misleading as every language throughout history has words borrowed from other languages (at least as far as I know). Perhaps it would be more apporpriate just to say "Catalan contains many words originally borrowed from other languages". Does anyone have any objections? --Lesouris 07:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. It is misleading because many of the words, like 'Ramon' and 'garage' are in many, many languages. Why should we list words that are the same as words in French or Italian when we have already acknowledged that the languages are in the same family, and hence, they all decended from Latin? I am going to edit this section like Lesouris suggested. Entbark (talk) 16:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sections on grammar and Catalan names

Hi,

During my recent and very enjoyable trip to Catalonia (see also Talk:Catalunya Ràdio#iCat.fm :)) i became very curious about the Catalan language and culture and bought a bunch of Catalan books - mostly grammars and dictionaries (i am totally addicted to dictionaries and grammar books and FNAC Barcelona felt just like heaven!). I can read Italian pretty well, and some Spanish too, so it wasn't too hard to pick up Catalan.

Anyway, when i read the articles on Catalan, i found that even from the little that i learned until now, i already have a few things to add to them.

I completely rewritten the grammar section here. I don't yet know the grammar well enough to make significant improvements to the main Catalan grammar article, but i think that the grammar section in this article is a pretty good summary now, although - of course - please feel free to improve it.

I also noticed that a lot of Catalan names have an "i" in them. I guessed its meaning, but try to confirm my guess on Wikipedia. I tried looking at this article first, and couldn't find it. I eventually found it at Spanish naming customs, but i added a section to this article. I think that it is the most appropriate place.

P.S. If you know Catalan well and have a couple of spare minutes, please take a look at ca:Usuari:Amire80 :) --Amir E. Aharoni 22:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Cul-de-sac

Hi, què hi ha?
That cul-de-sac is a Catalan word that managed to enter the English language via French is just wishful thinking, or maybe even someone's idea of a joke. I can find no corroboration, on the contrary, every source I check gives the word's etymology as French. I'm removing it until someone can supply acceptable proof that it originated in Catalan. ↔ Dennywuh 16:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Garrigues

I am currently proposing that the Garrigues page should be replaced by the content now found on the Garrigues (disambiguation) page and the the material presently on the Garrigues page should be moved to a new page to be titled Les Garrigues, Catalonia If you have the time I would appreciate your comments on the Discussion page at Garrigues. I hope you will agree. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 20:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

to be removed?

Looks to me like the article would do perfectly fine without this part

Like many modern languages, Catalan contains numerous words originally borrowed from other languages: Germanic (Ramon:[2] Raymond, espia: spy,[3] ganivet: knife, guerra: war... and place names ending in -reny, such as Gliscareny), French (brioix: brioche, garatge: garage, fitxa: card...), Italian (piano: piano, macarró: macaroni, pantà: marsh, finestra: window, porta: gate...), Occitan (espasa: sword, beutat: beauty, daurar: to gild, suffixal -aire...), Arabic and Mozarabic (alcohol: spirit, sucre: sugar, alcova: bedroom... and most of toponymy like Benicàssim, Albocàsser...), from Spanish (senzill: easy, xoriço: kind of salami, amo: owner, burro: donkey...), from Basque (esquerra: left, isard: surly, estalviar: to save money... and toponymy as Aran, Benavarri or Algerri...) and from English (bar, web, revòlver...)

It is obvious that all languages take loans from others and this list of examples is neither exhaustive nor simple enough and so I'd simply remove it, maybe just leaving a reference on the most influencial language from a different linguistic family such as Arabic and/or Germanic, but I dont think it's necessary to provide examples even for these. Mountolive talk to me/don't talk to me 01:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we can rewrite and expand a section on Vocabulary and word origins, à la English_langauge#Vocabulary, which besides including examples, it is far more comprehensive, and includes a more "scientific" exposé (in percentages) of all the languages that have influenced the English language. Graphs could be nice and illustrative too. --the Dúnadan 18:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Excellent idea, but is it doable without OR?

Boynamedsue (talk) 22:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, reading English_langauge#Vocabulary, I notice it's a bit ORey. I might have a go at salvaging it. I have a couple of books with extensive research on this topic in English, but good research like that quite thin on the ground for Latinate languages.

Boynamedsue (talk) 22:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Aran

A native language is the language spoken as a first language by a person or a group. Aranese is not the native language of the majority of the people who live in Aran. http://llengua.gencat.cat/web/.content/documents/publicacions/altres/arxius/EULP2013_angles.pdf (p9) Aranese might have been the majority language there in the past, but that is another matter. At the moment it is a minority language. To say that Catalan is not a (or 'the') native language in Aran is nonsense.

I can't believe what I'm reading. What kind of input do you have about Aran? You're right that nowadays Aranese is no longer the majority language. It is Spanish, exactly as in Badalona or Sabadell. Catalan is at most a 2nd language, the number of native speakers of Catalan must be tiny in Aran. --Jotamar (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm copying the text in Aran Valley: As of 2001, most people in Aran spoke Spanish (38.78%) as their native language, followed by Aranese (34.19%), then Catalan (19.45%) with 7.56% having a different native language. The survey is not up to date, but it's unlikely that the number of Catalan speakers has increased a lot. However, the point is not that, the key point is that people with roots in the Valley always speak Aranese; speakers of both Catalan and Spanish are immigrants. In other words, Aranese is the only llengua propia in Aran. --Jotamar (talk) 19:56, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

I originally deleted the words that said Catalan was a native language in Catalonia but not in the Val d'Aran. I did this because Catalan is a native language in the Val d'Aran. I am glad you agree, as the citation you give above shows - 19% of the population of Val d'Aran speaks Catalan as its native language. That is a significant percentage of the population. Thank you for saving me the time of having to provide that reference myself. Whether this 19% are all first or tenth generation immigrants, is irrelevant because Catalan is their native language and they live in the Val d'Aran. Now that we agree on the statistics and have a consensus, I will once again remove that incorrect statement.

As I said before, please do not confuse a native language with an indigenous language. Because you are doing just that you are editing in a way that breaches several WP rules, such as pushing your own agenda and WP:POV. Anyway, I am glad we now agree that Catalan is a native language in the Val d'Aran. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 08:43, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Your distinction between native and indigenous is at least uncommon in the sociolinguistic literature, if it exists. I would ask you for a source related to that distinction and Catalan, if I didn't know that there isn't such a thing. By the way, what percentage of immigrants is enough to include a place in a linguistic area? Because after what you say even 1 single immigrant seems to be enough, and that basically means that all the descriptions of languages in WP, all of them, are wrong at the moment. Cities such as New York or London should appear as part of their linguistic area for almost every single language in the planet. Aran itself should be featured in the articles about Spanish and French (check the text in this page). Including Aran as part of the Catalan-speaking area is just deceiving for readers, I don't know what kind of motivation you have but obviously I'm not going to leave the page with such a glaring mistake. And you're going the wrong way by speculating about agendas in a question for which it's increasingly obvious that you know very little. --Jotamar (talk) 23:46, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
On a different matter, your last edition which apparently reverts mine (it really doesn't) mentions See talk page, but here you don't even bother to say a thing about it. The changes you've made are more or less acceptable, compared with the original text I edited, but this is another case of bad WP manners from you. --Jotamar (talk) 23:46, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
I think I finally understood the meaning of native language versus indigenous language. It's based on what happens in countries such as the USA, Canada or Australia. The indigenous language is the one spoken in the reservation, while the native language is the one spoken by those who put the indigenous speakers in that reservation. Sorry, that model doesn't work for Europe, at least not for now. --Jotamar (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

After 12 days with no reply, I think it's time to recover the challenged text. --Jotamar (talk) 18:25, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I think people are maybe getting too hung up on technicalities like native language and indigenous language. The template documentation just says it is the "geographic region in which it is mainly spoken". Now, if it was a question of adding the Aran valley, that might be controversial, but that's not what the edit was doing. To say "Catalonia (except Aran Valley)" is wrong, because it implies that Catalan is not spoken at all in the Aran Valley, while both disputants acknowledge that it is spoken there, and to a significant extent. Therefore Catalan is spoken in all Catalonia, without exceptions. Scolaire (talk) 12:39, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

The fact is that not mentioning Aran in the infobox leaves the information there kind of incomplete. If you cared to check the many WP maps about the Catalan language, you would see that Aran has been carefully left out from all of them. Of course, that's difficult to spot if you are not familiar with the geography of the area. What we have now is a bit as if in a map of the Irish Gaelic language, all of Ireland was uniformly coloured, arguing that there are Gaelic speakers in all the main towns. That would not be entirely false, but it would mislead the WP readers rather than informing them, wouldn't it? --Jotamar (talk) 17:13, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I was already familiar with the maps, and I was aware that Aran was left out. That, however, is a different issue. Your parallel with Ireland is interesting. Are you saying that Catalan in Aran is restricted to definable pockets, analogous to cities in Ireland? If so, it's not clear either from this article or the Val d'Aran article. But since we're talking about Irish, I would point out that the infobox in the Irish language article gives both the country and region as "Ireland", not "Ireland (except north-east Ulster)". Scolaire (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Aran is too small to find definable (linguistic) pockets in it, or at least to find a survey with such detail. However, it's obvious to me that all languages other than Aranese have spread in the valley as a result of immigration, related to the transformation of Aran from an agricultural backwater area to a thriving winter sports destination, in the last 30-40 years. --Jotamar (talk) 17:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
About Irish and Ireland, it is well known that Irish was indeed spoken in all of the island in the past, so defining its current area is tricky, as it is a time-dependent thing. However, there is no reason to think that Catalan (or Spanish) was a usual language in Aran for most of the valley's history. --Jotamar (talk) 17:40, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Again, it's over-thinking it. The field is for where the language is spoken. Catalan is spoken in Catalonia; Catalan is spoken in Aran; so to say that Catalan is spoken in "Catalonia (except Aran)" is incorrect. All the other stuff – time-dependency, immigration, indigenous language etc. – can go in the article body. Scolaire (talk) 18:45, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Ok, I won't insist on the question. There are alternative wordings, for example, instead of Catalonia (except Aran) we could have Calalonia (non-local in Aran); however my main motivation to keep the discussion alive was to find out what is my agenda, and it seems I won't be able to do that. --Jotamar (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

@Jotamar. First, about the maps, don't you know never to believe everything you see on wikipedia? Second, your analogy with Irish is back-to-front. Your reasoning might apply in a discussion about Irish, but not about English. Similarly, your arguments about Aranese might apply in a discussion about Aranese but not in one about Catalan, which is the subject of this article and the topic of the dispute. Once again, you are pushing a hidden agenda: please let it be. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, I'm very curious about what my agenda could be. Please tell me. --Jotamar (talk) 17:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Catalan language. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 02:37, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Obstinate restoration of misinformation

Twice I have corrected the caption to the map. It reads 'Catalan-speaking area in dark grey; light grey corresponds to non-Catalan sections of otherwise Catalan-speaking administrative divisions)'. This is completely incorrect. Unfortunately, over much of the area covered by the map, Catalan is now a minority language. In Roussillon, which is shown on the map as Catalan-speaking, just 1% of the population speak Catalan socially and only 8.5% regard it as their native language, as set out in the Catalan Language article in great detail, with sources. I accordingly corrected the caption to read 'Traditionally Catalan-Speaking area....'.

My edit has been reversed twice. The second time by someone who has done over 21,000 edits. This is not the first time that I have run across people who are clearly obsessed with controlling a particular article, and willing to revert any edit, whatever it's merit, just to 'defend the territory' as it were, with no thought whatsoever to promoting learning.

If this continues, Wikipedia will be progressively destroyed. Is there anyone reading this who cares? Or should I just give up? If Wikipedia is to go down the drain anyway, why bother.

If you hear me, please speak up. 

Nakashchit (talk) 10:20, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry folks. I meant to post this on 'Catalan Countries', where the erroneous caption is to be found. I have now done so. By all means, go to that article, examine and post your support - if you support truth in Wikipedia. Nakashchit (talk) 11:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Catalan language. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 21:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Catalan language. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 19:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

lead section adequate summary?

"This article's lead section does not adequately summarize key points of its contents."

what's at issue? What should be included that's not? Dog-Patch Zero-Six (talk) 15:25, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

No idea. user:Koavf should clarify that. --Jotamar (talk) 18:36, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
There's no discussion of its relationship with other Romance languages and the barest amount on its history (essentially, none). E.g. what in the section on sociolinguistics is present in the lead? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

pronunciation of Joan

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Joan#Catalan and https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/Joan#Catalan disagree. Are these all possible variants or are there also errors? https://ca.wiktionary.org/wiki/Joan#Català has only two variants. --Espoo (talk) 22:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

The lead section

I think this article's lead section is fine. Do you agree? If not, what's wrong specifically with it? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 11:25, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I agree; however the shortlead tag was added by user:Koavf in August 2017 and the lead has changed very little since then. --Jotamar (talk) 15:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
The lead should summarize the article. All it says for history is "it came from Vulgar Latin and then there was a literary revival in the 19th-century", there are no references at all to several of the subheadings like "Phonology" or "Sociolinguistics". It's basically just, "this is a Romance language, it's spoken here and there, and there was a literary revival"; that's a pretty thin lead, don't you think? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think the lead should summarize each and every section in a page. For instance, what could be said about Catalan phonology? All languages have a phonology, perhaps you could comment in the lead if it had a very special feature, for example let's imagine that it was the only language in Europe with clicks in it, that could be mentioned. However, I don't think there is anything so special about Catalan Phonology to include it in the lead. And the same goes for other sections. --Jotamar (talk) 16:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Stress-timed?

This article has been added to the category "Stress-timed languages". I regard this classification as questionable. I suggest that the editor concerned read this paper. LynwoodF (talk) 09:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Catalan speaker video

The video of the catalan speaker, is a video of the majorcan variety. I think that it would be better if it said catalan speaker (majorcan) or something like that, because that's not the standard variety. Markus2801 (talk) 21:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Good point, done. Taurus Littrow (talk) 20:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Perfect! Markus2801 (talk) 21:37, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

In the Valencian Community, Spanish and Valencian are the official languages. Catalan is not.

The article is wrong. In the Valencian Community the only official languages ​​are Spanish and Valencian. In the Spanish Constitution it is written. It is also written in the Statute of Autonomy of the Valencian Community.

In Spanish: Artículo sexto 

    1. La lengua propia de la Comunitat Valenciana es el valenciano.

    2. El idioma valenciano es el oficial en la Comunitat Valenciana, al igual que lo es el castellano, que es el idioma oficial del Estado. Todos tienen derecho a conocerlos y a usarlos y a recibir la enseñanza del, y en, idioma valenciano.

In English:

Article Six 

    1. The own language of the Valencian Community is Valencian.

    2. The Valencian language is the official language in the Valencian Community, as is Spanish, which is the official language of the State. Everyone has the right to know and use them and to receive instruction in the Valencian language.

That is why I ask that you withdraw from the article the statement that Catalan is official in the Valencian Community. That is false. In the Valencian Community the official languages ​​are Spanish and Valencian. Valencian is a language totally independent from Catalan. Even its origin is older.
--Kipsde (talk) 01:19, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

The Statute speaks about a language called Valencian. However, most people think that the language called Valencian is also called Catalan. Different names, rather than different languages. And if they are so different, how come do I understand everything they say when I visit the Valencian Community? --Jotamar (talk) 21:22, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
@Kipsde:, you are going to have to give a source that Valencian is totally different from Catalan. I'm tempted to use @Jotamar:'s argument because I can understand people from Valencia just fine, but I would rather you source it. I would also like to see a source on how it is older then Catalan. TheKaloo (talk) 00:06, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Also, the article mentions Valencia around 110 times, including in the first sentence and in the Infobox. TheKaloo (talk) 19:10, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
FWIW, an "origin is older than" claim is specious both factually and conceptually. All Romance languages are, by definition, continuations of Latin. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 01:01, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Very true, I didn't think of mentioning that. The whole paragraph was just wrong in the first place, anyway. Especially without a source. TheKaloo (talk) 18:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
@Jxlarb and Barefoot through the chollas: Saying that Valencian is older than Catalan is like saying that American English is older than British English, or that Italian is older than Latin. One of the "arguments" used by the proponents of this "theory" is that Valencia was a kingdom, but Catalonia was only a principality. Ridiculous. As to Catalan and Valencian being "totally different", just read the first pages of the Spanish constitution in Catalan and Valencian. Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
The point is that all Romance languages are continuations of Latin. One can't be older than the other. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 00:17, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
@Barefoot through the chollas: Yes, their origin is the same. What I meant is that the Catalan language was brought to Valencia by the settlers from Catalonia, so it's ridiculous to claim that Valencian is older than Catalan. It's like saying that the Americans taught the British to speak English. Taurus Littrow (talk) 19:39, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
@Taurus Littrow: Yep, you're right. TheKaloo (Talk to me) 01:14, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

[valensiˈa]? Really?

Is the pronunciation [valensiˈa] accurate? Full [i], not [j]? Also, placement of the stress implies syllabification [i.ˈa], whereas [.ˈsja] seems more likely. Any phonologists or phoneticians here to check this out? Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 15:10, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Barefoot through the chollas, a reliable secondary source would be in order here. Elizium23 (talk) 15:11, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. That's why I called out for help from a phonologist or phonetician. Either one experienced in Catalan/Valencian would be able to confirm or correct [valensiˈa] immediately and supply a solid secondary source easily. In search of the latter, I've checked the online Catalan and Valencian dictionaries, and they seem to be of no help -- syllabification is missing, and though they use [ ], it appears that they're not really interested in giving actual phonetic renditions in IPA. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 16:03, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
In the Valencian language (or Valencian dialect of Catalan, as some insist it should be called) the name of the city and region is València [vaˈlensia] and the name of the language is valencià [valensiˈa]. Both words have four distinct syllables, begin with a labiodental fricative and contain a fairly close e. Although written Valencian is very similar to standard Catalan, the spoken language sounds very different from the Catalan spoken in Barcelona. LynwoodF (talk) 19:50, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Now, a source is needed. The expectation, in light of items like [kunˈsjɛnsjə] (and general Romance phonology not necessarily Catalan/Valencian) would be a genuine phonetic rendition [valenˈsja]. Thanks in advance for supplying a trustworthy reference. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 20:15, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I cannot find one. That is original research, but I just wanted to assure you that whoever put that pronunciation there was not far off the mark. I am not too sure how common the fairly close e is; I should expect a more open sound, as Catalan distinguishes open and close e and o. However, the i is not pronounced as [j] in Valencia itself. LynwoodF (talk) 21:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
I came across a source which claims that in Catalan in general an i before a vowel is pronounced as a non-syllabic close i ([i̯]), not as [j]. Personally, I am hearing four syllables in the place name València, but maybe this is peculiar to Valencian. I am not aware whether the source is reliable. See Omniglot on Catalan. LynwoodF (talk) 17:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
I think you've struck gold. The source you found seems serious and well-intentioned, but leaves lacunae: how to represent Cat. iogurt, hiena, feia if [j] corresponds only to graphemic y? What's helpful is non-syllabic [i̯], which may be what's been driving me loony in the first few slower-speech renditions of valencià in a youtube video, in which I hear "not syllabic, yet almost [i]" at first, then [j] once she speeds up a bit (a quadrilingual -- Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, English -- friend with a good ear claims to hear only [j]; that may be constructed on expectations, but it's perhaps another nail in the coffin of syllabic [i]):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjnDEgE7-Y8
Non-syllabic [i̯] may be what is actually intended below for high registers in L'estàndard oral valencià, but not necessarily so; the description of [i] being only for very formal registers, i.e. unnatural or verging on unnatural, takes care of it:
2.3. ELS GRUPS VOCÀLICS 2.3.1. Són pròpies del valencià estàndard les realitzacions fonètiques següents: a) La pronunciació com a diftong o com a hiat (pròpia només de registres molt formals) dels grups vocàlics formats per una i o per una u àtones seguides de vocal, en paraules com ara història [istÓRia] o [istÓRja], gràcia [gRásia] o [gRásja], continuament [kontínuament] o [kontínwament]. (https://www.avl.gva.es/documents/35882/40728/Oral.pdf/97c04880-4477-48b2-a314-00e626f43674 p. LXVII)
Given the non-syllabic description, the almost explicit mention of [j] as being normal for Valencian, and similar, although with different stress pattern, in Catalan (Alex Alsina, p. 368 in The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, eds. Ledgeway and Maiden: [duˈsɛnsjə] docència, [teuˈkrasjə] teocràcia), it seems quite legitimate to present [valenˈsja] or [valenˈsi̯a] in the text. I'd opt for [valenˈsja], since it seems to be normal, but I wouldn't object to [valenˈsi̯a] (/valenˈsia/ would solve the representation problem, but not serve as a pronunciation guide even for readers who understand the phoneme/phonetics distinction). As for the stressed vowel, I sustain. It's supposedly [e] in València; I hear [ɛ] in valencià in the video. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 20:26, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
I have been doing some more listening and reading and have come to the conclusion that we are both right up to a point.
I listened repeatedly to the vlogger and watched her lips. After a nasal she seemed to using a labiodental plosive for the initial v and this sounded very much like a b. In the second syllable she was using a mid e, commonly used in standard Castilian. This is consistent with what AVL says about unstressed vowels. I was not hearing yod for the i, but I was hearing four distinct syllables, even when she became very animated.
Looking again at the Omniglot page, I scrolled further down and found some recordings, one by someone from Barcelona (typical East Catalan) and another by someone from Valencia. In both I heard five distinct syllables in consciència and no hint of yod. Strangely, the same person from Valencia made a recording in standard Castilian of the equivalent piece on the Spanish page. In this I heard three syllables and two yods.
In none of all this did I hear a non-syllabic i. Also, whoever put that on the Omniglot page seems to have no supporters. Rising diphthongs start with [j] or [w] in Spanish and this seems to be true of Catalan as well. So I dug out all the textbooks from my days studying under Paul Russell-Gebbett, still remembered in Catalonian linguistic circles nearly three decades after his death. I thought there might be something about the development of Latin i into the various Catalan dialects in Moll, Francisco de B. 1952 Gramática histórica catalana. Madrid: Gredos, but I found nothing useful. I looked in Pompeu Fabra's Gramàtica Catalana, but this has a chapter on spelling, but nothing on pronunciation, as it was aimed at a Catalan-speaking readership. Third time lucky, I found his French version of his grammar and this does cover pronunciation. He deals at length with i followed by a vowel and this is quite complex:
First of all he mentions i between two vowels. It is rendered as yod, and so this solves one of your problems.
Next he deals with initial i followed by a vowel. This is also rendered as yod.
Then he deals with i preceded by a consonant and followed by a vowel. He says that the i and the following vowel are pronounced as two syllables and he gives the examples diari, orient and unió. He goes on to point out that in everyday speech one often hears rising diphthongs with yod in words of more than two syllables. His tone suggests that he regards this as a variant from a norm, and decades later AVL is still giving both and the hiatus forms still seem to be alive and well, alongside the forms with yod. So, as I said above, we are both right!
LynwoodF (talk) 17:13, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
I didn't give formal details of the book. It is:
Fabra, Pompeu: Grammaire Catalane, 1946, Paris - page 5
Incidentally, until I found Fabra's explanation, I was beginning to wonder whether my attitude to non-syllabic vowels was being coloured by the Romanian diphthong ea. If you are interested, go to the article on Curtea de Argeș and listen to a voice speaking the name. That non-syllabic e is so brief that English speakers have difficulty perceiving it. LynwoodF (talk) 19:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Brief, indeed! (And not only for anglophones.) The Valencian yod/i seems to have sorted itself out, though, which is good. AVL's [i] described as pròpia només de registres molt formals (bold mine) suggests a status more like on life support than alive and well, and it chimes with Fabra's report of common yod (he was, after all, born in [ˈgrasja] ;-) ), as well as his implication that it's a variant from a norm. Therein the rub: which/whose norm? Apparently not normal native speakers, as the Atles lingüístic del domini català makes very clear: [j] is almost the sole response for valencià, including in Valencia itself (point 163; [katalˈa] etc. on the map show that they're not syllabifying in the transcription, alas, but marking stress immediately before the stressed vowel).https://aldc.espais.iec.cat/files/2013/06/Mapa-VIII.pdf Badia, writing in 1973, corroborates for Catalan in general that this is normal, and offers insight into the motivation for rejecting that normality: "...les diphtongues tenues pour incorrectes [ə-mu-syó] (emoció), [pa-syɛn-syə] (paciència), etc., sont aujourd'hui très répandues parmi les catalanophones. J'ai même constaté que de nombreux Catalans sont surpris quand on leur dit que la prononciation [ə-mu-syó] est une façon de castillaniser le langage." (Badia i Margarit, A.M. 1988. Sons i fonemes de la llengua catalana. Barcelona: Publicacions de la Universitat de Barcelona, p. 22).
Anyone who has hung around a bit in the linguistically engaged social sectors of Catalunya will have encountered this bugaboo: a select few features that in the natural evolution of Latin > Romance turn out to be common to Castilian and Catalan are to be rejected if an alternative is available. So... Just as a Tuscan can hold natural phonology in abeyance to issue a highly stilted [si.ˈɛː.na] rather than normal standard [ˈsjɛːna], a Catalan can finish off, e.g., emoció with [si.ˈo] rather than the usual [ˈsjo]. But with an advantage over the Italian's [si.ˈɛː.na]: in the (perfectly understandable, even laudable) effort to minimize seepage of Castilian into Catalan, less natural [si.ˈo] is embraced (by some). Et voilà, in the Estàndart Oral Valencià (acordat per la Secció de Llengua i Lliteratura Valencianes de la RACV per a l’us de l’idioma valencià), a time-honored principle at work: prescriptivists don't bother to ban what people don't do. And, whether factual or not, a convincing local-pride reason not to do it:
La i no deu pronunciar-se com a semiconsonant en paraules com tendència, ciència, preposició, Valéncia, fet que es considera un castellanisme fonètic. Pronunciarem (ten-dèn-ci-a, ci-èn-ci-a…), igualment pronunciarem els seus plurals (ten-dèn-ci-es, ci-èn-ci-es, pre-po-si-ci-ons…) https://www.llenguavalenciana.com/documents/ortografia/estandart_oral_valencia#vocals_atones
Bref, all the evidence (the Atles being crucial) seems to add up to yod as normal, hiatus as normatiu -- in this case, minoritarian at best. Who wins? The majority of speakers or prescriptivists apparently applying what someone once called "the dead hand of standardization"? Neither, I suppose. In spite of its unpopularity, [valensiˈa] does presumably exist in registres molt formals (or simply slow, deliberate speech), while the more expected [valenˈsja] is attested repeatedly by the Atles and indirectly by AVL's descriptive honesty as well as by remarks variously regretting the dipththong generally. The solution seems to be to have both in the text, either simply as variants, or labeled somehow, perhaps high register [valensiˈa], colloquial [valenˈsja]. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 17:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Given that Fabra observed the phenomenon three quarters of a century ago and that the AVL is giving both pronunciations, I think you have a point. The more natural pronunciation type seems to have made progress over the decades, and so I have no objection to your adding something to the text. I rather like the idea of distinguishing between high register and colloquial.
I notice that on some other pages the high-register pronunciations are given for the place name and the language. The ones I have found are Valencia, Valencian Community, Province of Valencia and Valencian language. I had wondered whether the stressed e in València represented an open e, but according to the AVL it does not. See https://web.archive.org/web/20160303182252/http://www.avl.gva.es/va/documents-normatius/minidestacado/01/document/Gentilici.pdf and scroll down to page 89. LynwoodF (talk) 16:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Hey, I realize that the discussion is a few months old now and there is no doubt that people pronounce it differently, but there is an official source (Diccionari Català-Valencià-Balear, by Institute for Catalan Studies) where the pronunciation with full [i] is the only one shown. Here, you can also see that the stressed e in València, previously mentioned, is represented as an open or closed e, depending on the dialect and both are considered "official" or "correct". Saugch (talk) 10:35, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Saugch. I am inclined to go with this. The original discussion touched on whether it was appropriate to take the official line or to recognize the erosion of the pronunciation with full [i], which seems to be in progress. As far as I can see, no articles have been altered as a result of this discussion. LynwoodF (talk) 12:45, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
The original point/question was to try to establish the genuine pronunciation of the third syllable (or third and fourth) of valencià rather than innocently report what may be prescriptivist wishful thinking. The evidence available at a distance leans in the direction of ['sja] as most normal, with [si'a] available for deliberate, slow, or formal registers. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 13:53, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Hot/warm: cognation vs. meaning

@Taurus Littrow: In response to your edit summary from where you undid my expansion of "hot" to "hot/warm" in the language relationships table: I'm well aware that "hot" and "warm" are different words, but nitpicking about that is beside the point. Are you sufficiently versed in linguistics to be aware of semantic shift and that languages don't bear a strict one-to-one correspondence between words?

The stated purpose of the table is not to serve as a precision dictionary but to demonstrate language relationships. The concepts denoted by "hot" and "warm" in English lie on a continuum and overlap. There isn't a lockstep correspondence between the distinctions English makes among words denoting degrees of heat (e.g., "torrid", "hot", "warm", "lukewarm', "cool", "cold", "frigid") and the distinctions other languages make among their words denoting degrees of heat. The other words in the "hot" row don't all correspond strictly to "hot": "caliente" in Spanish and "quente" in Portuguese can be used both for situations where English would use "hot" and situations where English would use "warm".

Romanian has a cognate word that is in the ballpark. What purpose is served by insisting that each row match one English word, and one English word only, such that for Romanian we must jettison a perfectly good cognate that falls in the same semantic category as the other words in the row and make it look like Romanian is an exception that doesn't have one? What reason is there to avoid denoting, as "hot/warm", the general category that the listed words relate to so that the cognate relationship can be shown to hold for Romanian as it does for the other languages?Largoplazo (talk) 19:39, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, that's not a nitpicking. Every other row has only one English word. Why make an exception for this one? Anyway, if you add "warm" to the English column, you must add its equivalent in all the other languages, and the table will become a mess. I insist that "warm" and "hot" are two clearly different words with different meanings, at least in English, Romanian and Catalan; if you don't see it, something is wrong with you. Generally, it seems to me that the person who filled the Romanian part of the table didn't know this language very well: he/she added words which sound similar to those in the other languages, but have a totally different meaning: "a prinde" could not possibly mean "to take", and "a cerceta" could not mean "to search". Now, if the purpose of the table is to reflect the cognation of words rather than their actual meaning (which I doubt), it must be clearly specified. Oh well, let's see what others says. @Barefoot through the chollas, TheKaloo, Markus2801, Saugch, and LynwoodF: Taurus Littrow (talk) 20:53, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
P.S. Were that table to reflect the cognation, like you claim, rather than the meaning, there wouldn't be a second table below saying "Catalan and Spanish cognates with different meanings". It obviously implies that the words in the first table must have the same meaning. Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:00, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Your very first question, "why make an exception?", is the essence of a nitpick (an insistence that everything be just so, with no deviation, despite the benefit that would be derived from admitting some flexibility), especially in light of the fact that I already answered it exhaustively, only for you to re-ask the very question that I had just gotten through answering.
"I insist that "warm" and "hot" are two clearly different words with different meanings, at least in English, Romanian and Catalan; if you don't see it, something is wrong with you. Since I also said that and proceeded to address it thoroughly, shall I say blatantly that "something is wrong with you"? Or shall I refer you to WP:CIVIL and engage in respectful discourse when communicating with other editors on Wikipedia talk pages?
I'm not even bothering to read the rest of your response since the pattern you established in the part I read is to ask questions I've already answered and to make observations, as though they were new arguments, that I already stated myself—and then elaborated on and dispensed with; and doing those things all while insulting me. This doesn't fill me with the expectation that the remainder is any more constructive than that. I will just wait for others to comment. Largoplazo (talk) 21:17, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't want to insult you: that claim was more a rhetorical one. It's been a long day (I'm closely following the US election) and I'm quite tired; also, your comment is quite long, so I didn't read it very carefully at first. Anyway, we must clearly mention in the article whether we put the emphasis on the cognation or on the meaning. One way or another, these things must be decided by consensus, you can't just change the clearly established pattern (one row - one English word) without asking what others think. This is why I reverted your edit in the first place. Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:29, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
You should still read what I said in the postscript; that's important: Were that table to reflect the cognation, like you claim, rather than the meaning, there wouldn't be a second table below saying "Catalan and Spanish cognates with different meanings". It obviously implies that the words in the first table must have the same meaning. Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:31, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I'll comment. Even ignoring that "Yuma's a bit too warm for me in June" can communicate Yuma's extreme heat effectively, the issue is that the rigidly immutable monosemy of "I insist that "warm" and "hot" are two clearly different words with different meanings" defeats the point of the list, which is shared lexicon. Can is not the first term that comes to mind in Spanish for 'dog', but it's legitimate and informative to note in the context of the lexical comparison that it very much exists. Ditto if there has been some degree of semantic shift that hasn't taken it out of the semantic field shared by the lexeme in the other languages (such as warm/hot). Order and formatting can easily indicate primary/secondary terms. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 21:32, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
>> Can is not the first term that comes to mind in Spanish for 'dog'. // Well, "can" it's not the first term in the Spanish column; it comes after "perro". Btw, why do "mujer/muller" belong to the second table, one with "different meanings"? It should be in the large table if we were to follow your logic. (I'm not saying your logic is wrong; just asking). Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
By the way, why is the English column at the beginning? Logically, the Catalan column should be there, since this is an article on the Catalan language, and we compare the other languages with Catalan rather than English. That would also solve the issue we're having here. And I still insist that the first column (be it the English or the Catalan) should have one word to avoid the mess and confusion. Taurus Littrow (talk) 22:14, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
I mentioned can/perro solely to illustrate that supplying more than one term can be informative. (IMO mujer/muller do not belong to the 'different meanings' list. And I have no idea why English is first. More informative might be the etymon, then Catalan.) Re the large table, I wonder of the comparison needs to include so many languages; the table resembles more something that would be useful in a Romance Languages article than an article on any single language. Though I'm a fan of le lingue sarde, and the Campidanese list is not without interest (although why Campidenese is selected of the various varieties isn't clear), it doesn't reveal much about Catalan. Deleting Campidanese might leave enough room for glossing shifts within semantic field, such as Romanian cald, or clarifying meanings in general, such as Spanish prender or parlar, Romanian a prinde, a cerceta. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 22:52, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes, the Campidanese language can definitely be "sacrificed", agreed. And we must clearly indicate what that table is about and what we want to show with it. As to the Romanian "cald", it's very similar to the Catalan "càlid"; the meaning is the same, too: warm. There are many other cognates in Catalan and Romanian (with the same meaning): ou, nou, bou, viu, mort, nascut/născut, camp/câmp, explicar/a explica, escoltar/a asculta, etc. As to a prinde and a cerceta, their meaning is quite different in Romanian, I'm afraid, although the origin is obviously the same. Taurus Littrow (talk) 23:14, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Fully agreed that the table needs a brief intro re purpose. A candid one, and the purpose should not be rooted in Catalan political-linguistic cheerleading. And yes, as continuations of the same language, it would be odd if any two modern Romance varieties didn't share a lot of basic lexicon (although obvious Latinisms such as explicar should be excluded -- somewhat less obvious than French expliquer, but still no way EX+PLICARE could have come through the grinder of Catalan historical phonology all but unscathed). A little bit of poking around reveals no small amount of overlap in Catalan and Romanian reflexes of PRE(H)ENDERE, as would be expected. Less so in the case of CIRCARE, but some. See Largoplazo's explanations above -- the point here is not to direct non-natives to precise usage, but to illustrate shared cognates. Glossing Romanian cerceta as something like 'investigate' would seem to work fine, show that it's taken a narrowing specializing shift. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 16:27, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
"Glossing Romanian cerceta as something like 'investigate' would seem to work fine." // I'd go with "to research", just like I mentioned in the edit history. The Romanian analogy for "to investigate" would be "a investiga". I'm from Moldova, so I fluently speak Romanian, although my native language is Russian. Agreed with the rest. Thanks. Taurus Littrow (talk) 16:43, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Excellent. You be the judge and jury, then. If these examples below are genuine, research is too narrow. Investigate or examine work reasonably well with them.

  • Încercam să-ți dau timp să poți cerceta camera. - I was trying to give you enough time so that you could search her room.
  • Acest studiu va cerceta Scripturile în legătură cu subiectul originii răului. - In this lesson, we will search the Scriptures to find the origin of evil.
  • Armata va cerceta Laputa cu ajutorul Sheetei. - The army will investigate Laputa with Sheeta's help.
  • Ceea ce caut cu adevărat e un mandat de percheziție baban, să pot cerceta toate ungherele întunecate. - OK, look, what I'm really looking for is one of those big, fat warrants so I can investigate all dark corners of that place.
  • Cu mare bucurie voi cerceta acest caz, superintendențe. - I will look into this for you, Superintendent, with great joy.
  • Pot cerceta mai departe, dacă dorești. = I can look into it further, if you like.
  • Cel puțin dă-mi motive pentru a-i cerceta telefonul. - At least give me grounds to search his phone.

Cheers. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 17:17, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm afraid that the range of meanings of "a cerceta" in these examples is quite narrow, and the translations as such are quite free and not very good, to put it mildly. Each of the above sentences can be translated in several different (and better) ways. "A cerceta camera", "a cerceta telefonul" - I wonder where these examples were taken from. They don't sound naturally. "Laputa", "Sheeta" - what (or who) is that? The word "baban" is very rare, too. "Superintendențe" is a mistake or a typo; it should be "superintendente". Oh well, I'd still go with "to research", as I said; this would be the first choice in most of cases. Obviously, such a widespread word can be translated in dozens of ways, but the most popular translation would be "to research", by a great margin.
P.S. "Investigate" and "examine" work well indeed, but they wouldn't be the first choice, and they have equivalents in Romanian: "a investiga" and "a examina".
P.P.S. "Voi cerceta acest caz" - The verbatim translation would be "I will study/examine this case". But again, "to study" has an equivalent in Romanian, "a studia". Taurus Littrow (talk) 18:47, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
At first I had written this: Rarety of baban, who Laputa and Sheeta might be, are irrelevant, as also any typos. I can read the examples, but I have no judgement of idiomatic accuracy. I do of English, though, and 'research' is way out on the periphery of possibilities for most of them. 'Examine' fits best. But if you say 'search/examine his telephone', 'search/examine her room', 'investigate Laputa' wouldn't normally admit cerceta, I accept your judgment.
In light of your post scripts, I'll withdraw that acceptance somewhat. Your repetition of the notion that cognates are equivalents, accompanied by what seems to be reluctance to accept 'I'll study/examine this case' as equivalent of Voi cerceta acest caz because cognates of study and examine exist in Romanian -- and this in a context in which you've argued that cognates (e.g. reflexes of PRE(H)ENDERE) are not equivalents in spite of their contextual overlap -- leaves this discussion without moorings. Two friendly suggestions. 1) Conduct an experiment with a minimum of 5 bilinguals (or near-bilinguals), Russian and Moldovan should work well. Five sentences presented in one language, using a common non-specific (i.e. not swim, write, dig...) lexical verb in slightly different ways. The task is to translate into the other language, normal register, neither excessively formal nor excessively informal. Best if the translation is requested in the native or dominant language. Compare the results. 2) Do some exploration of lexical and cognitive semantics. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 20:36, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Well, I've been doing translations for many years, from and into many languages (Russian, Romanian and English for the most part), so I have a very large practice in this regard (I'm not very well versed in theory, though). Frankly, this discussion, although very interesting, has quite gone beyond the subject of this article, which is the Catalan language. I don't have much time for discussing this stuff, either. So I say, after you redo the table, I could take a look at it and come up with some suggestions and commentaries. But for now I guess I shall take my leave. Cheers. P.S. You can give me a text and ask me to translate it; I could do it. But discussing all that theoretical stuff is quite beyond my competence and knowledge, sorry. Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:03, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Whoooossshhhh.... Point of the translation experiment missed entirely: different people will translate differently. I'm not going to re-do the table. I may tinker with it now and then, or repair some types of damage that may be done to it. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 21:34, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
"Point of the translation experiment missed entirely: different people will translate differently." - Well, you should have told it so from the start. I'm fully aware of that, of course. As I said above, those sentences can be translated in many different ways, and that is basically true of any text. Different people can translate a text differently. This is hardly a revelation for any translator. Why, even the same person can translate a certain text differently: above, I translated "voi cerceta acest caz" in two different ways. And both translations are valid. Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:48, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Barefoot, if you're looking for examples when "cerceta" means "research", take a look here: https://context.reverso.net/translation/romanian-english/a+cerceta Out of 9 visible examples, 6 are translated as "research" and 3 as "investigate":

  • a cerceta pustiul Pluto - to investigate desolate Pluto;
  • a cerceta situația - to investigate the matter;
  • colectam gene ale criminalilor... pentru a cerceta - we collected genes from murderers... to research;
  • a cerceta falsul - to research the forgery;
  • a cerceta câteva legende urbane locale - of researching some urban legends around;
  • a cerceta utilizările lemnului - to research the uses of wood;
  • a cerceta și verifica afirmațiile - to research and verify... claims;
  • a cerceta ceva despre moarte - researching something to [on the] death;
  • a cerceta o furtună - to investigate a storm.

Now this is what I'd call good examples, taken from real life. Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:41, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

I'm familiar with journals such as Studii și cercetări lingvistice and Cercetări de lingvistică, and aware that both the noun and the verb often mean 'research'. That's not in question. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 01:04, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Not a language but a dialect

IP clearly only here to expound on his personal views and not to improve the article

I'm shocked to see that the english wikipedia is so biased to consider catalan a language and not what it is, a dialect of spanish. You can ask it to anyone in the world and will tell you the same, only catalan separatists will say its a language. Therefore i ask for the wikipedia to redo this article or at least put on the banner of lack of neutrality, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.247.136.48 (talk) 10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Romance linguists have long regarded Catalan as a language quite distinct from Spanish. The only disagreement is about whether the language is part of the Ibero-Romance subgroup or should be regarded as part either of the Gallo-Romance subgroup or of a separate subgroup, which would also contain Occitan. LynwoodF (talk) 11:27, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Most people in the world know nothing of either language and therefore couldn't possibly have an opinion on the matter. I am a person in the world (with no family heritage from anywhere in Western Europe, so certainly not having a personal stake in the status of Catalonia) who is familiar with both languages and I won't tell you Spanish and Catalan are dialects of the same language. Therefore, when you say "You can ask it to anyone in the world and will tell you the same", you establish yourself right off the bat as a person guided by misconceptions.
Out of curiosity: Do you know Catalan? Largoplazo (talk) 13:26, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Well said, Largoplazo. LynwoodF (talk) 13:52, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Largoplazo I don't know if the IP speaks catalan or not, but i do. And I can tell you it's a dialect BaronVerdad (talk) 21:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
I'd meant to find out whether the IP user didn't know Catalan because in that case they'd really be talking from a complete lack of knowledge. However, while familiarity with Catalan and Spanish is a necessary condition for making one's own judgement about the matter, it isn't a sufficient condition, since it also depends on the distinction one makes between languages and dialects. Wikipedia articles base their judgement as to such things on preponderance of reliable sources.
My own opinion isn't relevant to the purpose at hand, but the differences, for me, are sufficient to justify treatment of Catalan as a separate language. Too many vocabulary differences even for the most common words; a much more involved object pronoun system, including "hom", "hi", and "en" that have counterparts in French ("on", "y", "en") but not Spanish; entirely different ways of handling certain verbal periphrastic constructions. I don't have metrics but subjectively it seems to me as different from Spanish as Portuguese is. Largoplazo (talk) 21:59, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm amused by what you removed: "Si no em creus t'ho puc dir en català sense cap problema eh, com vulguis." I would have said you'd helped make my point, with em/me, ho/lo, puc/puedo, dir/decir, sense/sin, cap/ningún, vulguis/quieras. It's almost as though you realized that yourself and thought better of it. Largoplazo (talk) 22:14, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Reliable sources say Catalan's a language, which is what matters for the article. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 01:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Good-faith attempts by others to explain to IP are appreciated, but mostly just give them and others a forum to expound their blather and stir up trouble. Collapsed per WP:NOTFORUM. Mathglot (talk) 18:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Borrowings into English

@Jotamar:, about the table of loanwords from Catalan into English: While I don't have Webster's Third International in front of me, Merriam-Webster online doesn't include Catalan in the lineage of either "cucumber" of "cul-de-sac", nor do the Oxford English Dictionary or Etymonline.com. In addition "cul de sac" is literally three unaltered French words meaning "bottom of a bag" (and the French TLFi doesn't derive it from Catalan). Can you share what Webster's Third International says about these? Largoplazo (talk) 00:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Largoplazo:, I have no idea about whether the borrowings are correct or not, I just reverted the deletion of the list because Mathglot was deceived by a previous edition into thinking that it was a false friends list. --Jotamar (talk) 00:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah, OK. Largoplazo (talk) 02:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jotamar:, thanks for correcting the section title. Based on that, I checked sources, and removed: cucumber, cul-de-sac, baracoon, and surge. Although all of these reference Gove (1993), none of these are from Catalan, according to multiple standard reliable sources. Imho we have to consider Gove as unreliable for sourcing information about Catalan etymology. If there's disagreement, please take this up at WP:Reliable sources noticeboard. No one disputes paella. That leaves only barracks to discuss, and there is disagreement about it, with most sources hedging their bets, saying "unknown", or using words like "perhaps", such as American Heritage (p. 108): <Fr <It <Sp < perhaps Catalan; NOAD says "unknown", and Websters 2nd Unabridged says <F <It <Sp <perhaps LL [Late Latin] barra. Mathglot (talk) 02:27, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Catalan under the Francoist regime:

Added more detail regarding the treatment of Catalan under Franco's regime. Tedrickja (talk) 19:02, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Definite articles in front of people's names

Is there any detail provided on this page on the use in Catalan of definite articles before peoples' names? Tedrickja (talk) 18:16, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Tedrickja. First off, when you start a new topic on a talk page, please give it a heading, as I've now done above. For more guidance about using talk pages, see Help:Talk pages. In this context, the section there that you can reach directly through the link WP:TPNEW is informative.
Next: I saw that you added this observation about the definite article to the article, but I removed it for two reasons:
  • You placed it in a section about the dialects of Catalan, where an observation about how Catalan differs from other languages is off-topic.
  • Even if it's true in Catalan (I'm unfamiliar with this feature in Catalan), your assertion that this distinguishes Catalan from other Romance languages was untrue as the same occurs in Portuguese. Largoplazo (talk) 23:24, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
I guess definite articles before given names is quite common in the Romance languages, except that it tends to be associated with colloquial styles. Catalan might be the only Romance language in which this feature is acceptable in formal styles. --Jotamar (talk) 15:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

In Valencian, at least, the use of the el or la pronoun before a name. This feature is common in colloquial Spanish, but in Valencian it is a formality. For example, if you want to say Juan won't come this evening, in Spanish you would say "Juan no vendrá esta tarde", but in Valencian you would say "El Juan no vindrà aquesta vesprada". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.45.139.97 (talk) 14:36, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Joanot Martorell and Ausiàs March

Joanot Martorell and Ausiàs March, just as Roïs de Corella, Jordi de Santjordi, Joan Fuster and many others, are Valencian poets, and therefore the section describing their writings should not be included here, but in the Valencian category. They were born in Valencia, wrote in Valencian, and, therefore, are Valencian poets. And before anybody says that Valencian is a dialect of Catalan and this should be included here for that reason, Article 3 of the Spanish Constitution recognizes the difference between Catalan and Valencian when it outlines the co-official and recognized languages in each different constitution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.45.139.97 (talk) 14:45, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tedrickja. Peer reviewers: Rdow, Rodristeph, Warddrew, Simpson Hannah, Zerocarey, MerodioJJ.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Catalan-Nationalism propaganda during Franco period

From 1939-1975 the Catalan was NOT forbidden. This is a propaganda to victimise. The first TVShow in Catalan was in 1964, and more ...

1942. The book Rosa mystica appears, by Mossén Camil Geis, edited in Sabadell and printed by Joan Sallent in Catalan.

1944. Since that year, it has been mandatory by law that universities with Romance Philology include the subject of Catalan Philology. A decree on the organization of the Faculty of Philosophy and Letters, signed by General Franco on July 7, introduces three weekly hours of Catalan Philology at the University of Granada. Josep Vergés, founder of Destino in 1939 together with Ignacio Agustí and the poet Joan Teixidor, established the Eugenio Nadal award on January 6, 1944, which made the young Carmen Laforet and her novel Nada de ella known. The award discovered narrators as important as Miguel Delibes, Ana María Matute, Rafael Sánchez Ferlosio or Carmen Martín Gaite.

1945. With the support and subsidy of the Government, the centenary of Mossén Cinto Verdaguer is celebrated.

1947. The Joan Martorell prize for a novel in Catalan is awarded. The winners are Celia Suñol, for her novel Primera Part de ella, and El cel no és transparent, by María Aurelia de Campmany. The City of Barcelona award is created.

1949. The Víctor Català prize is created at the Casa del Libro for short stories, as well as the Aedos prize for biographies, the Josep Ysart prize for essays and the Ossa Menor devised by the Galician-Catalan José Pedreira, who later changed his name to Carles Riba on his death, in his honor.

1951. A prize is awarded to poetry in Catalan with the same financial amount as Spanish. Subsequently, the award is extended to other cultural activities, such as theater and fine arts. José Mª Cruzet founds Ediciones Selecta for works written in Catalan. In collaboration with Aymà, it awards the Joanot Martorell to the distinguished veteran of the pen Josep Pla for his creation El carrer estret.

1952. During Franco's visit to Catalonia in June, the Milà i Fontanals chair for the scientific study of the Catalan language is inaugurated.

1955. The poet and writer José Mª de Sagarra receives the order of Alfonso X el Sabio on the occasion of the publication of his work in Catalan entitled Memories.

1956. The Lletra d'Or award is born, without financial reward and has as an award a gold "F", with which the best book of the previous year written in Catalan is distinguished. The first to receive it was Salvador Espriu, for Final de Laberint.

1959. The Barcelona Crítica awards are incorporated into the production in Catalan.

1960. The Valls Reading Center begins a public Catalan language and literature course. In Barcelona, ​​the Sant Jordi prize for novels is created, endowed with 150,000 pesetas, an amount intentionally analogous to that of Nadal. With a government subsidy, the centenary of the poet Joan Maragall is celebrated.

1965. The great poet and canon of the Tarragona cathedral, Don Miguel Melendres, publishes his work L'wife of l'anyell, a twelve thousand verse poem in Catalan. Bound in rich white leather, it was taken by the Archbishop of Tarragona, doctor Arriba y Castro, to Pope Paul VI, who was pleased to receive this unique sample of the Catalan language that came from Spain. The Ateneo Barcelonés sets up a course in Catalan Philology. To the National Literature Awards, the Verdaguer for production in Catalan is added.

1966. Barcelona pays homage to his illustrious son Maragall, in which Gregorio Marañón, Pere Roig, José Mª Pemán and Ruiz Jiménez take part. In the gardens that bear the name of the poet, in Montjuic, a bust is raised. Radio Tarragona organizes through its antennas some Catalan courses with specialized teachers.

1967. The Diputación de Lérida endows a chair of Catalan Language. The Barcelona Provincial Council agrees to give Catalan courses in all the cultural centers dependent on the corporation and to found the Chair of Catalan Language at the Sant Cugat Faculty of Theology (Barcelona).

1968. Editorial Destino completes the Nadal with the new Josep Plà prize, awarded to Onades sobre un rock deserta, by Terenci Moix. The list of those who won this award includes the most flowery of Catalan narrative: Baltasar Porcel, Teresa Pàmies, Cirici Pellicer, Marià Manén, Enric Jardí, Llorenç Villalonga, Jaume Miravilles or Jordi Sarsaneda. In Girona, the Prudenci Bertrana prize is awarded for the first time

1969. The Premi d'Honor a les Lletres Catalanes is born, intended for the consecration of new writers.

1970. The publication of the Catalan Encyclopedia begins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.47.35.183 (talk) 00:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://aulex.ohui.net/ca-es/
  2. ^ Ramon in Diccionari Català Anglès, Salvador Oliva i Angela Buxton, et al., Enciclopèdia Catalana, Barcelona, 2001, ISBN 84-85194-39-X.
  3. ^ Ramon in Diccionari Anglès Català, Salvador Oliva i Angela Buxton, et al., Enciclopèdia Catalana, Barcelona, 2001, ISBN 84-85194-78-0.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalan_language/Archive_3&oldid=1243456482"