File talk:Romance languages improved.PNG

is Dalmatian Easter or Western Romance?

Eastern. See Dalmatia. and the chart btw. Mallerd (talk) 12:52, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

nope —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.61.5 (talk) 02:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, according the language's own article, it belongs with the Italian dialects, with which it forms the Italo-Dalmatian subbranch of Italo-Western. -Kaimoconn (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Albanian
Why is Albanian in this chart, since it is not a Romance language? Borrowing vocabulary (even significantly so) does not affect genetic relationships; if it did then English would belong in this chart as well. -- χγʒ͡ʒγʋᾳ (talk) 22:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree I believe English (and to some extent Scots) should both bee put in this chart. as English descends from French (spoken by the upper classes) and Old English/Anglo-Saxon (spoken by the lower classes). --SJ3000 (talk) 17:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

English, as well as Scots, is absolutely not a descendant of French! What you're saying is that English used to be a dialect of French which have since then diverged enough to be considered a language for its own sake, which is obviously not the case. What English did is borrow heavily from French, but just as Spanish is not Semitic, and Romanian is not Slavic, so is English not Romanic.

This is analogous with genetic relationships among humans: even if you and your roommate/significant other have lived with each other for eons, and share a ton of in-jokes, secrets, and stuff, you still are not siblings, your mothers are still not the same woman, your genes are still as different as the first time you guys met and didn't even know what to call each other. On the other hand, even if your brother goes to jail for murdering you because you were extremely kind and he hates kind people, and even if your sister undergoes twenty cosmetic procedures to change her Asian looks because she is ashamed of the same heritage you are so proud of, you still remain siblings, because, like it or not, the same woman gave birth to all of you. So, yes, I agree Albanian should be removed from this list.-Kaimoconn (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

To extent, why isn't standard Italian not in this chart? It says dialects, I guess that includes Venetian, Piemontese etc. Mallerd (talk) 12:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe the author feared that saying "Italian" would imply only the standard variety, and so said "Italian dialects" figuring people will know that Standard Italian and the colloquial dialects belonged to the same branch. He probably did not put them in separate nodes because he also feared that if he did, it would imply that Standard Italian has diverged the most from all dialects, and that all of them are more related to one another than they are to Italian. The question remains: Why not just join them by "and," as in "Standard Italian and Italian Dialects" to avoid such ambiguity? -Kaimoconn (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Some questions
What means "italian dialects"? Portuguese is not Gallo-Romance? Who made this chart? Who proposed this classification? --Little bishop (talk) 23:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

First off, in Italy, each area has its own language which differs significantly from Standard Italian, in fact, just enough to be considered a language in its own right (although usually still, at least partially, mutually intelligible with Standard Italian and one another) but which is for socio-political reasons considered a dialect of the same language as languages of other areas and that of standard Italian. That is why they are collectively referred to as "Italian dialects."

Second off, nope, Portuguese is not Gallo-Romance like French and Catalan. Rather, it is Ibero-Romance, like Castillian Spanish and Galician. Think about how Spanish and Portuguese are mutually intelligible. Both Ibero-Romance and Gallo-Romance are branches of Western Romance, however, so you're still pretty close! :p

According to the "File" page, this chart was created by Sheitan and Bogdan Giuşcă but improved upon by Arnaullv. I think the chart is open to a couple of tweaks here and there (especially the Eastern Romance languages), but all in all, the proposed classification is not something many linguists would regard as inaccurate today. -Kaimoconn (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)