Tbh regional languages aren't really rising around Western Europe outside Spain(and even in Spain it's mostly limited to Basque and Catalonian), France is hardly special in this. Even Britain and Ireland are merely attempting at preserving the current levels, not exactly reversing the trend.Thing is, it's hard to consider "locals" as one entity, would it be only due to inner French migrations in these regions since centuries and outer migrations since the XIXth.
Basque Country (Vasconia is more of an historical term, a bit like calling English Midlands "Mercia") and Corsica are the main preservers of a regional identity that include language. Basque language use remains essentially limited to both more aged populations and to school for the younger ones, with less than 1/4 in French Basque Country overall (much less between 25/49, which is roughly around 15%) able to understand it, which is (contrary to Spanish Basque Country) in constant decline.
Corsican language is in a better shape, with nearly 1/2 of the population claiming to understand it. But it's in similar decline nevertheless (UNESCO pointing that it's in danger of extinction).
Breton might be spoken by a bit more than 10 000 persons, understood by 300 000 persons.
Overall, while language plays an important regional identitarian role, they're not exactly thrilling and no one knows the demographical rise in use that Welsh does knows.
Combined with knowledge of German what is the % reached? Curiously enough in Aosta, while more people claim to know French many more people claim to be native speakers of Franco-Provenzal, although both are overshadowed by Italian which surprisingly reaches 3/4 of the population in native speakers.It's actually one of the languages that manages to do a bit better. There's roughly 1/3 of the population claiming to understand it (the others thirds being people not understanding it at all, and people understanding it a little). That said, most of the locutors are aged, and young population that is at least partially understanding it is meager : less than a fifth under 30 years old. Occitan does seems to manage better, but the sheer number of locutors is a bit of a statistical illusion. Note that regional identity is far less politic than in Basque County or Corsica.
Probably more than a few hundreds Germanic settlers : possibly on par with a significantly weakened Britto-Roman population in the Vth Eastern England.England. Something like a few hundred Saxons ended up making the whole thing Germanic
There's a difference between "not really rising" and "almost clinically dead and surviving mostly thanks to the most aged demographics". There is simply no equivalent to ethnolinguistical movements in France that could be compared to Catalonia, Spanish Basque Country (or, for what its worth, regional identities in Spain), Flanders, Scotland, etc. No matter how hard FH members would want it so. The closest equivalent would be Corsica, and it's closer to independentist movement in Wales in the sense of its popular impact : most of the linguistical identities is actually not really based on linguistical use.Tbh regional languages aren't really rising around Western Europe outside Spain(and even in Spain it's mostly limited to Basque and Catalonian), France is hardly special in this. Even Britain and Ireland are merely attempting at preserving the current levels, not exactly reversing the trend.
This is not how it's calculated : many people with a knowledge of German in Alsace doesn't know Alsatian dialect, as knowing French and knowing Picard or Norman dialect aren't really combinable, in a relevant manner that is.Combined with knowledge of German what is the % reached?
Which is essentially the same : Franco-Provençal is a distinct dialect of French, not unlike Gascon-Bearnes is for Occitan. Claims around Arpitan mostly raised in the 70's when maoists wanted their "totally-non-french-culture-we're-colonised-people-too" playground.Curiously enough in Aosta, while more people claim to know French many more people claim to be native speakers of Franco-Provenzal
That's true but still hardly a case of French expectionalism per se, at this point is more like Spain and the UK(only with Scotland) are the outliers, while Germany, Netherlands Italy and France are largely unitary in virtually all territories(the deal with the Northern League is a separate matter, but in any case they stopped being a regionalist party de jure recently)There's a difference between "not really rising" and "almost clinically dead and surviving mostly thanks to the most aged demographics". There is simply no equivalent to ethnolinguistical movements in France that could be compared to Catalonia, Spanish Basque Country (or, for what its worth, regional identities in Spain), Flanders, Scotland, etc. No matter how hard FH members would want it so. The closest equivalent would be Corsica, and it's closer to independentist movement in Wales in the sense of its popular impact : most of the linguistical identities is actually not really based on linguistical use.
I know it's not the same, but I wonder what the % would be if we include that, it's a bit like Aostans learning standard French instead of their dialect, or South Tyroleans learning German, it's next closest thing that is useful.This is not how it's calculated : many people with a knowledge of German in Alsace doesn't know Alsatian dialect, as knowing French and knowing Picard or Norman dialect aren't really combinable, in a relevant manner that is.
You don't think Franco-Provenzal is its own dialectal group distinct from the Oc and Oil grouping?[/QUOTE]Which is essentially the same : Franco-Provençal is a distinct dialect of French, not unlike Gascon-Bearnes is for Occitan. Claims around Arpitan mostly raised in the 70's when maoists wanted their "totally-non-french-culture-we're-colonised-people-too" playground.
Nobody argued this : what my point was is that the process went particularily early on in France and went further than most European countries.That's true but still hardly a case of French expectionalism per se
Most people able to speak Alsatian doesn't really consider it as a German dialect, regardless of the linguistical realities : German is more taught in Alsace because Germany is close and there's a lot of commercial (8% of the Alsatian population works in Germany) and cultural ties as Italian is more often taught in Provence and Savoy, or Spanish in the South-West.I know it's not the same, but I wonder what the % would be if we include that, it's a bit like Aostans learning standard French instead of their dialect, or South Tyroleans learning German, it's next closest thing that is useful.
It's definitely more akin to Oil language : that there is in Franco-Provençals traits you find in Occitan is unsurprizing (Crescent region have many Oil features, it doesn't make it its own thing nevertheless). There's a tendency (supported by UNESCO) to label every Oil dialect as its own language : Picard, Normand, Wallon, Poitevin, etc. on really REALLY shaky grounds.You don't think Franco-Provenzal is its own dialectal group distinct from the Oc and Oil grouping?
Are many Alsatians fluent in Standard German as well? (EDIT: nevermind, you answered above). For a comparison, in Italian Sudtirol German-speakers use (well, used) local vernacular at home, but are taught Standard German at school (mostly the same with the Slovenian minority*, and also in Aosta where official bilingualism is Italian and French, not Italian and Arpitan, the latter being in significant decline).It's actually one of the languages that manages to do a bit better. There's roughly 1/3 of the population claiming to understand it (the others thirds being people not understanding it at all, and people understanding it a little). That said, most of the locutors are aged, and young population that is at least partially understanding it is meager : less than a fifth under 30 years old. Occitan does seems to manage better, but the sheer number of locutors is a bit of a statistical illusion. Note that regional identity is far less politic than in Basque County or Corsica.
The problem is that dialect and language are not properly defined. What you really have is seven billion+ idiolects, groupings of which linguists classify as dialects and languages (and so on) as convenient. One linguist's dialect can easily be another's language. There is no objective way to differentiate the two (and no, "mutual intelligibility" does not work objectively -- not only does it fail to deal with dialect continuums, intelligibility very often works one way but not the other).It's definitely more akin to Oil language : that there is in Franco-Provençals traits you find in Occitan is unsurprizing (Crescent region have many Oil features, it doesn't make it its own thing nevertheless). There's a tendency (supported by UNESCO) to label every Oil dialect as its own language : Picard, Normand, Wallon, Poitevin, etc. on really REALLY shaky grounds.
This is true, but "language" and "dialect" do keep a somewhat-more-than-solely-intuitive usefulness that is hard to away with, like similarly useful concepts that indeed fall apart at closer scrutiny such as "word" or even "phoneme".The problem is that dialect and language are not properly defined. What you really have is seven billion+ idiolects, groupings of which linguists classify as dialects and languages (and so on) as convenient. One linguist's dialect can easily be another's language. There is no objective way to differentiate the two (and no, "mutual intelligibility" does not work objectively -- not only does it fail to deal with dialect continuums, intelligibility very often works one way but not the other).
Which is why a said more akin to, and not overly precised the degree of closeness : but as the distinction between language and dialect is essentially about its institutionalisation and its standardization, and when it's plainly obvious that Franco-Provencal is neither...The problem is that dialect and language are not properly defined..
The Andean countries are both Quechua-speaking and Spanish-speaking. Mexico is a Nahuatl-speaking and a Spanish-speaking country. For the purposes of this topic, the only Latin American countries that we can consider "successful" are Cuba and the Dominican Republic. Everywhere else has failed to completely assimilate its native population.
And Argentina, but we could argue that in both countries there were no Assimilation and what we see in them was a Population replacement, after the massacre and expulsion of the original inhabitants.What about Uruguay?
The disappearance of Occitan and other languages in France was remarkably quick in the XIXth, thanks to centuries of diglossic relationship with French where they lost administrative and cultural purpose. At the difference of what happened in other european countries, the assimilation to a French linguistical and political culture did involved social ascencion on a more or less egalitarian footing (transversal class-wise). There's few countries that were this successful structurally : Great-Britain, Netherlands and...well, that's it, and France worked on a much more diverse cultural ground.
It's not to say it was right, but eventually, it was essentially peaceful if with coercive elements.
Natives make up around 0.5% of the Brazilian population and those that aren't uncontacted can understand or even use Portuguese as their primary language.The Andean countries are both Quechua-speaking and Spanish-speaking. Mexico is a Nahuatl-speaking and a Spanish-speaking country. For the purposes of this topic, the only Latin American countries that we can consider "successful" are Cuba and the Dominican Republic. Everywhere else has failed to completely assimilate its native population.
Don't get me started on that!And then you have the proponents of Savoyard language, totally different from Francoprovencal, yes siree..
Certainly one of the main, if not the main, factors.How did public schooling factor into this exchange from the Òc language(s) to French?
Arles being firmly in the Occitanophone zone... The best equivalence would be Romand.Arlesian perhaps or Arlatine in reference to the old kingdom?
And Argentina, but we could argue that in both countries there were no Assimilation and what we see in them was a Population replacement, after the massacre and expulsion of the original inhabitants.
Still I would Consider Latina America a Successful case of Cultural and Linguistic assimilation, The Spanish did not completely assimilate all the cultures in America, but a solid 90% of america Speak Primarily Spanish, and is Primarily Roman Catholic. We could argue that is was not a complete success, but say it´s was a fail, is a stretch.
I guess this is a bit beside the point, but was the linguistic assimilation prior to that mostly traceable to the new industrial transportation and information technology or actually the various social changes themselves were the deciding factors(with technology only indirectly affecting that)?Certainly one of the main, if not the main, factors.
Note that intitutionality of Occitan was already a thing of the past in the XIXth century, and that its unity was degraded from the XIIIth century onward, but mandatory schooling in French (including consideration of Occitan as a sub-speech which led to some "linguistical hygenism" up to punishment) really did a number on it. It wasn't the only factor, tough, and in the 30's a majority still spoke Occitan as well as French. What eventually helped killed it was mass-media : newspapers and televisions.
I wonder why did Franco-Provenzal end up closer to Oil when most of the territories lies in the Rhone and its tributaries being connected to Provencal speaking areas while there is a bit more rugged terrain between it and Oil dialects.Which is why a said more akin to, and not overly precised the degree of closeness : but as the distinction between language and dialect is essentially about its institutionalisation and its standardization, and when it's plainly obvious that Franco-Provencal is neither...
So far, then, we have to consider that this ensemble of sub-dialects is definitely closer to Oil ensemble, too close to really be considered on its own.
Do you think there is a legitimate case to name some Oil dialects languages or are all too similar?It's definitely more akin to Oil language : that there is in Franco-Provençals traits you find in Occitan is unsurprizing (Crescent region have many Oil features, it doesn't make it its own thing nevertheless). There's a tendency (supported by UNESCO) to label every Oil dialect as its own language : Picard, Normand, Wallon, Poitevin, etc. on really REALLY shaky grounds.
And then you have the proponents of Savoyard language, totally different from Francoprovencal, yes siree..
Not really, it was way more institutional and began in the Late Middle Ages with the disappearance of Occitan scripta in official texts, than in upper classea and upper-middle class use, including cultural (organs that were formerly dedicated to Occitan litterature switched to French at the Renaissance or disappeared quickly).I guess this is a bit beside the point, but was the linguistic assimilation prior to that mostly traceable to the new industrial transportation and information technology or actually the various social changes themselves were the deciding factors(with technology only indirectly affecting that)?
It less "ended up" than it probably was from the beggining.I wonder why did Franco-Provenzal end up closer to Oil when most of the territories lies in the Rhone and its tributaries being connected to Provencal speaking areas while there is a bit more rugged terrain between it and Oil dialects.
They're forming a coherent dialectal ensemble, which exchanged and formed a whole much more easily than, say, Bourguignon and Auvergnat. Some Oil dialects are quite specific (especially when benefiting of their own chanceries) but they eventually formed a same French continuum on which standardised French arose (which is not, contrary to what is still often claimed, the same as Francian). People nowadays have lost the habit to hear different dialects, which makes them more foreign to the ear : but really, the common ground far outweight the differences and all that defines French language compared to other Romance languages, can be found there.Do you think there is a legitimate case to name some Oil dialects languages or are all too similar?
Given that the English genome is slightly more Germanic than Celtic almost everywhere except Cornwall and eastern Northumbria, I would say there were many more than that.England. Something like a few hundred Saxons ended up making the whole thing Germanic
Is that the case for more diverging(linguistically speaking at least) regions like Brittany, French Vasconia and Corsica? Do the locals resist promotion of the local language?