Moderator:eskandar
Rémy LeBeau wrote:For example, if after Algerian independence, the Algerian government standardized Algerian Darija, made it the official language (calling it Darija, or something else that didn't include "Arabic"), and from independence until today a literary tradition had built up around this standardized form of Algerian Darija, then I don't think anyone would seriously object to calling it a language descended from Arabic (as opposed to a dialect of Arabic)
eskandar wrote:Azeri and Turkish are not mutually intelligible enough to be considered one language
Regardless of what criteria you use to distinguish between a dialect and a language, I think Azeri would be considered a separate language and not merely a dialect of Turkish. (For that matter, why doesn't anyone argue that Istanbuli Turkish is a dialect of Azeri? )
it has its own country (the Republic of Azerbaijan), although most Azeris live in other places such as Iranian Azerbaijan
-Azeri and Turkish differ phonologically, have largely different vocabulary, and slight differences in other aspects such as grammar
I think a good example would be to compare Azeri and Turkish to Portuguese and Spanish. Portuguese (Azeri) speakers can understand a lot of Spanish (Turkish), but not necessarily everything. Spanish (Turkish) speakers can understand written Portuguese (Azeri) decently, but less so, and have a hard time understanding spoken Portuguese (Azeri). The two are separate, but closely related, languages.
Rémy LeBeau wrote:For example, if after Algerian independence, the Algerian government standardized Algerian Darija, made it the official language (calling it Darija, or something else that didn't include "Arabic"), and from independence until today a literary tradition had built up around this standardized form of Algerian Darija, then I don't think anyone would seriously object to calling it a language descended from Arabic (as opposed to a dialect of Arabic)
I don't think this is an ideal example - Algerian Arabic has its own unique features, as New Zealand English does, but its level of mutual intelligibility with other Maghrebi dialects (Moroccan and Tunisian especially) is comparable to intelligibility between English dialects (New Zealand, Australia, UK, etc). I get your point, but I do think that people (including linguists) would seriously contest calling Algeria Darija a separate language from Arabic in the situation you proposed. Maltese is even more divergent, and still you could make an argument that it's just a dialect of Tunisian Arabic.
Rémy LeBeau wrote:Perhaps my example was not the best, but my point is that it is these kinds of social conditions that go a long way when distinguishing a dialect from a language, and it is more due to them that we don't refer to the modern romance languages as dialects of Vulgar Latin than it is to grammatical, vocabulary or pronunciation differences.
More specifically related to Azeri and Turkish, after doing a bit of googling, it seems that Azeri and Turkish have developed independently of each other, with an Azeri literary canon going back to the 14th century. How can Azeri be a dialect of Turkish if it developed independently of Turkish?
renata wrote:They belong to the same branch of Turkish languages, so probably they are just two dialects of a same Turkic language.
Rémy LeBeau wrote:Even in the case of these smaller languages, their claim to recognition as languages is underpinned by the social awareness of the speakers of their language, which itself, just like in the larger languages, has been developed by standardization and regulation of the languages, teaching of the languages, official and semi-official usage of the languages, and in some cases the forming of literary canons. You can even use this as a contrasting point for the so-called Italian dialects; how many of them have an equivalent to Asturian's ALLA? How many of them have a written standard? Definition as a language owes just as much to social awareness and institutions as it does to linguistic differences from related languages, in some cases, more.
eskandar wrote:renata wrote:They belong to the same branch of Turkish languages, so probably they are just two dialects of a same Turkic language.
Spanish and Portuguese belong to the same branch of Romance languages (Ibero-Romance), so they are just two dialects of the same Romance language. English, Dutch, and German belong to the same branch of Germanic languages (West Germanic), so they are just three dialects of the same Germanic language. Just because languages are closely related doesn't make them dialects of each other.
yunus wrote:I think Azeri Friends have right to claim that their native language has nothing to do with Turkey's Turkish and they are right. If we look for it, we can find lots of differences between the two. But nothing changes the fact that when i watch Azeri TV channels or come upon an Azeri tourist i understand everything they speak, ( and like the way they speak ) even if i have not studied Azeri for ever. And i am happy for this. Let the Turkey's Turkish be a sub language of Azeri, no problem. I just ask to keep a good eye on the similarities not the differences.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests