Are there any cases where two varieties of the same language are treated as separate languages, or where two distinct languages are treated as varieties of the same language. If so, why?
-
2Those two words, dialect and language, have technical and informal meanings, and also can be fixed in use culturally. Dutch, a language, is in an understandability continuum with Low German (Plattdeutsch), High German (standard German), and Bavarian/Austrian (that is, neighboring communities can understand each other but further along they can't), so Dutch could be considered a dialect of German. Chinese is considered a single language informally, but people who speak what is sometimes called the Cantonese dialect, can't understand Mandarin (and so is really a separate language).– MitchOct 14, 2011 at 16:30
-
3I was born in Serbia and I living abroad for 15 years. Totaly agree with @Dan Velleman, its a political question as well as linguistic. As for the Google translate (@hippietrail), I consider its not explained well enough from Googles´ side. The problem is that Serbian language has 2 alphabets - Cyrillic and Latin macthing 100% all letters between them. They have equal status being both oficial alphabets, yet most places on internet would show only one option when you choose Serbian and that is Cyrillic. The closest to use in latin alphabet is Croatian, matching 99% of words with small discrepa– user1817726Jan 25, 2015 at 0:27
Add a comment
|
3 Answers
You're using the words "language" and "dialect" as if they were mutually exclusive: as if some people spoke "languages" and other people spoke mere "dialects." But that's not how linguists use those words. Think of them instead as referring to two different levels on the same hierarchy.
- Everyone speaks a language.
- Everyone speaks a dialect (or "variety"*) of whatever language they speak.
For instance, I speak the Midland US dialect of English. Asking whether I speak a dialect or a language is like asking whether I was born in Michigan or in the United States. The answer is "both," because one includes the other. Saying "I don't speak a dialect, I just speak proper English" would be like saying "I don't live in a state or territory or in Washington D.C., I just live in the US," which is pretty much nonsense.
So maybe it makes sense to rephrase your questions, like so:
- Are there any cases where two varieties of the same language are treated as separate languages for political reasons?
- Are there any cases where two distinct languages are treated as varieties of the same language for political reasons?
In both cases the answer is "yes." For #1, look at Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian. Most linguists consider these all to be local varieties of the Serbo-Croatian language, but native speakers will insist that they're different languages. For #2, look at the language situation in China, where for instance Mandarin and Cantonese are treated as varieties of the same language even though they're distinct languages by any non-political standard.
*Most linguists wouldn't consider "dialect" to be derogatory. But in non-technical talk, it is often used derogatorily — as in "That's not a real language, it's just a dialect." So I like to use the word "variety" just because it makes it clear that I don't have any derogatory meaning in mind. That's just a personal preference, though, and as far as I'm concerned if you want to say "dialect" that's fine too.
-
+1 @Dan Velleman: Thanks, I'll make an edits to the question. FYI, the source of the question was this article first appeared in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Hooked on Ebonics -- which is a linguist response to the how at the end of 1996, the Oakland, California school board inspired nationwide debate with its endorsement of Ebonics as a separate language.– blundersOct 14, 2011 at 16:48
-
1Yeah, that's an interesting case. There are a lot of grammatical subtleties to African American Vernacular English, a.k.a. Ebonics, that other English varieties don't share (e.g. the distinction between he working and he be working). And acknowledging them might have been a good thing. But calling AAVE a separate language was clearly incorrect from a linguistic point of view, and, yeah, probably politically motivated. Oct 14, 2011 at 17:37
-
8@blunders, it seems to me that your opinion is founded on a misunderstanding of "language" and "dialect". A language can't become a dialect, nor can a dialect become a language. Any particular variety isn't a "language" or a "dialect" in isolation, but only compared to other varieties. What I speak is a different dialect compared to British English, but it's a different language compared to Dutch. There's no way to classify it as a language or a dialect in isolation.– JoeOct 14, 2011 at 19:08
-
2I agree with Joe -- you still sound confused about what "language" and "dialect" mean. Also, the idea that one way of speaking could have more "linguistic value" than another is complete nonsense. You absolutely will not find a serious or well-respected linguist who believes that sort of thing. Oct 14, 2011 at 19:31
-
3I've just been travelling in the Balkans and people seemed happy to talk about Serbocroatian in Serbia and when I remarked that Google Translate only did Croatian because Serbian had to be Cyrillic, they insisted it's the same. This surprised me a bit too. Now the situation between Bulgarian and Macedonian is a different matter. Highly charged and contentious! Oct 25, 2011 at 22:51
"A language is a dialect with an army and navy" (a famous saying)
-
4
-
2Politics (and power) trump linguistics when it comes to some things. Oct 25, 2011 at 22:52
Actually a dialect CAN become a language as has been seen in France and in Spain. By decree of their then ruling class, the ruling class´particular dialect was enforced as the national language. As someone once said: a language is just a dialect with an army to make it stick. But, to address the original question: Moldavan and Romanian are basically the same language, divided by state borders, difference in script and former Soviet policy of autonomous member states in the Union. In modern day, either side of the border considers the other country to speak just a dialect of Romanian. So, here the distinction between language and dialect is merely political/nationalistic. As has already been pointed out above,many languages are just continua within a language family
