?Castellano o Espa?ol?

[Marianopolita]

En resumidas cuentas-

When I checked the comments in the blog this morning there were forty-three. I read the majority to get a feel for the opinion of a very small number the world's Spanish-speaking population and a few comments were really well-expressed in a few lines evidencing linguistic knowledge, going right to the grain of the issue. The ones I find interesting are: #3, #7, #11, #10, #18, #19, #26, #28.

Norma, you were on point in your post by stating from the get go that this issue is polemic in Spain and not in Latin America although some Latin Americans do use and prefer one term over the other. In short, the preference does not carry the same social and political implications as it does in Spain. Out from the comments that I selected that were of interest to me, what seems to bother Latin Americans more is the designation of terms such as "hablas mexicano", "hablas colombiano", "hablas cubano", etc. and these types of references to the varieties of Spanish that exists in Latin America was referenced in post #15 in the thread.

In language discussions both academic and non-academic one will hear designations such as "Dominican Spanish", "Mexican Spanish", "Colombian Spanish" etc. these terms are used to refer to "Spanish spoken in the Dominican Republic", "Spanish spoken in Mexico, "Spanish spoken in Colombia" etc., the terms are not used to indicate that these are separate languages. These terms are used in reference to lexical varieties, regionalisms, "modismos", argot, and as the linguists say "giros" y "vocablos" typical of each country but the rules of grammar and syntax are that of the Spanish language.

Once again the comments in the blog, some in this thread and ones I have heard in conversation etc. reiterate my point in post #14- knowledge is power. If you empower yourself with the historical, political and linguistic knowledge that is required to understand this issue, you will easily separate knowledgeable comments from ones that are based on little foundation and come to your own conclusion as to what term is more preferable for you to use as a Spanish-speaker. The irony in the discussion among those who insist on one term being "correct" as opposed to the other is they continue to debate in the same language.



-LDG.

 

[El_Uruguayo]

I don't think that anyone will be confused as to what language is being referred to when one says "espa?ol", it is implied that it means castillian. But again there is an issue the un espa?ol doesn't necessarily speak espa?ol, so would they be less "espa?ol" if "espa?ol" isn't their first language???

This is reallly an issue having to do with spain and countries where the spanish immigrated to on a large scale. In Uruguay and Argentina for instance, the regular term is castellano (casteshano). The reason being is that Uruguay and Argentina had massive waves of immigration from spain in the early 1900s, and again in the 30s during the spanish civil war(note that it was after the war the castellano became the lingua franca) , and later. I believe the reason it is refered to as castellano is because not all immigrants from spain spoke castellano, there were also large numbers of basques, catalans, and gallegos - so the term is used to diferentiate one spanish language from another. There are still older people who speak catalan, basque, and gallego(is more of an accent/dialect than a language) in these places, so the terms are still in use today. It's not an issue of sounding smarter, or a snob thing, it's a precision thing - castillian is a more precise term.

Some of the young people in Arg. and Uru. think that the term castellano refers to the type of spanish spoken in these countries (vos shamas a tu amigo a decirle que esta shoviendo sha), I'm not sure on that. Wether the pronunciation of the y and ll is closer to the original castillian - I have my own convuluted theory as to why things are pronounced this way - I can tell you if you wish.

So anyhow, In the case of Uruguay, and Argentina there is relevance in saying castellano, due to communities that live there, which have strong ties to spain, and many people holding dual citizenship, etc. Perhaps in other countries of latin america, saying castellano to diferentiate from other spanish languages has lost is relevance, either because spanish immigration slowed down greatly, or because the spanish immigrants that went to other countries where mainly castillian speaking.

So again, I reiterate, it's not a snobby thing to say castellano, it just may be more of a relevant term depending on where you are. In the DR for instance people looked at me funny when I said castellano, some even corrected me and said "quieres decir espa?ol."

 

[asopao]

So again, I reiterate, it's not a snobby thing to say castellano, it just may be more of a relevant term depending on where you are. In the DR for instance people looked at me funny when I said castellano, some even corrected me and said "quieres decir espa?ol."

Is sad to say, but DR is a very ignorant country. average Joe doesn't even know the history of the DR, let alone the long history of some European country like Spain, that is needed to understand this whole issue.

You can go to many countries in Latin American, to people that say " espa?ol", and ask them questions like :

Do you know who Mohammed Al-Mansur ( Almanzor) from the Caliphate of Cordoba was?

What percentage of people on the streets you think are going to give you a satisfactory answer?

So, if they don't even know basic Spanish history like this, how the hell they are going to have an " intellectual" conversation on what is Castilian language? So around 70% of the responses you got on the site are just " baboserias of the ignorami"

That Cuban guy, " Otero", didn't know what he was talking about, he said " que dialecto de castellano hablas"? what the hell is this garbage?, what that has to do with the issue? So, do you speak Balearic Catalan, or Barcelonean Catalan? Isn't it Catalan regardless? :tired: This guy is an idiot. Btw, he even said it himself, he is NOT a liguist.

Spaniards know best, because Castillian came from Spain, duh! if more than 80% call it " Castillian" , then it is " Castillian", period! Spaniards know their history and how their language evolves.

Then some said that " Castillian " became " something else because it adopted from other languages, like Arabic, Amerindian languages, etc". This is nonsense. When Cordoba collapsed to Castile around 1205, There was Castilians started a campaign of " Castellanizacion" of Andalusia. The Castilian language was imposed on the population, the same it was imposed on the Canarians, When Castile conquered the Canary Islands at the beginning of the 15th century.

Catalan and Portuguese also borrowed heavily from Arabic, so what?