Talk:Gallurese

Untitled
moved from User talk:Gianfranco page Dear Gianfranco. No doubt about the fact that the "pure standard corsican" in not spoken in Sardinia. I was only writing about these facts:
 * Gallurese has been usually considered as a sardinian dialect (or a diasystem if you want) basically for geographic reasons (sometimes also for political reasons from non-gallurese sardinian linguists). But under this aspect, of corse it is a sardinian dialect. And naturally gallurese people is a sardinian people.
 * But analising the language, Gallurese (a dialect that I know) is in fact much more similar to southern corsican dialects (as I have heard, read and . Looking from italian we could say that it presents the same grammatical structure of italian (or corsican, many linguists says that also corsican is a italian dialect connected with tuscan). Of course, it doesn't present the last 2 centuries of french pronunciation- and word-influences and is full of sardinian terms. Only in the island of La Maddalena the dialect is relatively pure as it was southern corsican of the 18th century. But many people of Gallura, despite great similarities, looks just now at Corsica as a foreign french-speaking region. As a result of a pure linguistic analisys, gallurese is a dialect of the corsican group.
 * Sardinian is a different language, with another grammars, another rules. Gallurese people says "saldu"(sardinian) to call other sardinian languages (partic. logudorese) spoken at 10km distance villages. Also if many words of Gallurese derives from Logudorese (in Gallura logudorese was spoken in the middle-age), in fact they are two different languages.

If I speak gallurese in southern Corsica (I've tried this!), people understand me at all and think that I'm speaking a different corsican dialect (with a strange pronunciation). If I speak it in Logudoro, they perheaps understand me, but they immediately recognise me as a gallurese-speaker. It the other way a gallurese do not always understand a sardinian from Nuoro. There is a progressive mutation of the languages between Sardinia, Corsica and Tuscany. Sardinian language is hardly conservative, ancient, latin-based and historically influenced from spanish and catalan. Southern corsican derives probably from the dialect spoken all over the island before italian and french hard influences (dialect of Bastia presents now very similarities to tuscan) and before french domination, standard-italian has been for centuries the cultural language of the island). However i can give you a first little list of links about gallurese (in english and italian):
 * http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=COI
 * http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=SDN
 * http://web.tiscali.it/consultagallurese/index.html
 * http://web.tiscali.it/consultagallurese/attivita.htm
 * http://www.infosardinia.it/linguasarda.htm
 * http://www.legambientegallura.com/lo_stazzo.htm
 * http://www.sardiniapoint.it/33.html
 * http://www.unionesarda.it/unione/2000/21-10-00/GALLURA/OLB03/A05.html
 * http://www.surfspot.it/NUR/nur_lingua.htm

I need a little bit time more to give you some bibliography. Thanks for debate. DCh


 * Caro Dch,
 * thank you for your kind answer.

First of all I have to specify, since my note sounded perhaps quite hard to you and this was not in my intentions: as you might have seen, recently some "funny" people was adding Corsican language to any article regarding Sardinia, Sardinian language or every village of northern Sardinia, probably due to a personal vision of history, geography and who knows what else. So I was stressing a certain general correctness on the point, given that this alleged corsican "wide" influence seemed to imply that Sardinia had perhaps been under some corsican domination, somehow. I was getting quite... inchiettu to revert all those many addings and the request of proofs was an attempt to stop these addings if not accompanied by some explaination, nothing personal. :-)

The point is indeed an interesting question, like your notes are really interesting.

When I first "discovered" Sardinia and its many treasures, I was certainly caught by some rapture by this archaic language, and I still am, so the chance of knowing more is always very important to me. Me too, I am able to understand Corsican via the limited notions I have on Gallurese: no doubt that the two idioms are in some elements similar and quite evidently they are reciprocally influenced, the proof being in our similar practical experience (I am not able to speak it, though).

The point is perhaps the classification: your analysis is correct, except for the point of Gallurese in Corsican group (on a merely academical point of view), and what you say is true, Gallurese seems more a relative to Corsican and Italian than Sardinian, but why then it is (scholastically) included in the Sardinian family?

More than a mere matter of geography, noted that "music" is not all, I dare suppose that something else still keeps this language there, and I'd like to advance some ideas. We should perhaps verify the occasions of contact between the idioms, for the first, so we could need a little history to help us. Let's say that we could recognise that, before phoenicians, the presumed Paleosardinian (the language of Nuragici) should have been quite harmonically spread all over the island. Of course, it's true that we can say this also because there is no proof of the eventual contrary, as there isn't any in favour.

Phoenicians came and invaded the island, only two main areas remained frank from their control (and their influence), the 2 classically independent areas of Sardinia: Gallura and Barbagia. Here the contact with surrounding areas is broken, supposedly. So there should locally remain the influences of Balari that came from Spain, probably with protoiberic influences. Then Rome came, and defeated Balari, Rome was in Gallura too, as it was in Barbagia. Maybe we could presume that when Latin entered, only some part of the idiom was different, so the difference could have came later, but when?

The greatest difference could be in the age of Giudicati, could be Pisa. The quality of the presence of Pisa. Starting from the defeat of arab pirate Musetto, 1000-1050, Pisa is in the northern Giudicato with the sole "disturb" of Genoa (Doria), then it will remain there as the main dominator. As you know, we know most of medieval sardinian history thanks to the Pisan liber fondachi, the registry of paid taxes, which is so detailed to let us assume that Pisan presence was not a slight theoretical influence by far.

From this point perhaps the languages begin to part, along time producing what lets you now summarise that there is some Italian and some Tuscan in gallurese. But what happened to Corsica, of which we know so little? The institution of a common Regnum Sardiniae et Corsicae (1297) does not allow us to consider that particular relationships were established between the islands just as an effect of this institution, being the main action of Aragona, at that time, the first conquer of Giudicati, mainly Arborea, and it took quite a century or something more. Pisans remained in Sardinia for a while, as their romanic architecture and some of their idioms.

Is the Tuscan ingredient of Gallurese coming from there? In this case, a tuscan influence would have affected a Sardinian version, resulting in a modified Sardinian version (then it still is a Sardinian version). It would consequently be classified as a Sardinian language for a genetical reason.

But: we were considering Sardinian as if Corsicans could modify it, this was the hypothesis. Wait a minute, why not the contrary? Why not a Sardinian influence on Corsican? Yes, Gallurese is "different" from the rest of Sardinian language, but the reason for this difference is really corsican influence? or could it be perhaps that Corsican has been influenced by Sardinian?

Or could it be eventually that they both were influenced by the same factors, received in their own territories separately and with different actions, finally producing not so distant results? I dont't know where Corsica started from, but I can imagine from history that external influences could consent this hypothesis.

Sardinia has a wider population, and in its history has been more subject to foreign influences than Corsica. Invasions and taxes would probably have caused an eventual movement in the direction of the minor island, less probably the other way. Also, the little distance between Corsica and Tyrrhenic (tuscan) islands would let us suppose more frequent practical contacts, while in Sardinia these contacts were more decisive on a point of local administration.

Contacts between the two islands were again intense in 17th century, when France entered in commercial relationship with Sardinia, provoking (not completely unintentionally) a certain contraband in the Bocche; the need of using a common jargon on the coast is of evident relevance. Its diffusion however is not so wide, presumedly.

Besides there is still another question: all the authors directly include gallurese among sardinian versions and never mention corsican, which is not I hope only for simple chauvinism. There are besides enough polemics and differences among the authors, but we just cannot find one proposing this, eventually as a provocation. Alghero's Catalan, apart from the fact that we know very well its origins and its historical reasons, is not included even if in time it changed, a little at least, from the pure Catalan that today we know, still a mere geographical reason doesn't produce its inclusion in Sardinian.

Wikipedia is not a research field, so we cannot develop but a gnosiologic debate, consequently we cannot stop at question marks, if possible. I am re-reading some texts by Blasco Ferrer (apart from his undoubted deep competence, I like him because, differently from the ordinary italian academical habit, he quotes and explains very correctly very objectively the theories that oppose his owns, without a partisan slashing criticism - it is therefore a complete source). I will try to investigate there, in the time it will take, while I have already asked my Sardinian friends to let me know some more.

By now I think you could start adding notes about La Maddalena in the Sardinian language page.

Your links are very interesting, I hade read some already and I'll read the other ones soon, I'll gladly come back on the point. By now I thank you of your notes, and I'll try to find something more to get closer to our target.

A presto :-) -- Gianfranco

To Gianfranco, another list of contributions about the relationship between gallurese and corsican (sorry for the long url):
 * http://groups.google.it/groups?hl=it&threadm=3c62ade2.10605325%40News.CIS.DFN.DE&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DGallurese%2Be%2BSassarese%2B(era%253ARe%253A%2B%255Bit%255D%2BDialetto%2Blombardo)%26hl%3Dit%26btnG%3DCerca%2Bcon%2BGoogle
 * http://www.uniud.it/cip/min_tutelate_scheda.htm
 * http://eiha.crs4.it/cultura/opereWord/lingua/lingua.doc
 * Walther von WARTBURG "La fragmentation linguistique de la Romania", Paris, Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1967.

Saluti, dch Grazie Dch, I was just reading Le Lannou (Patres et paysans de la Sardaigne - a precious document containing a fascinating discovery of Sardinia in the '40s) in these last days and I had found the elements reported in the google's group.

In the net I also found this interesting work of Mauro Maxia that, going toward your position, rather than mine, notably contains a very detailed study on Corsicans in Sardinia:
 * http://interromania.free.fr/media/pdf/maxia/studii_storici_sui_dialetti_della_sardegna.pdf (the introduction is in Gallurese)

I have to admit I haven't finished reading it (it's a hard working period for me), but his conclusion seems to be that both Sassarese and Gallurese should be included in a new group of Sardo-Corsican languages.

Okay, there is a similarity with tuscan (not an extraordinary proximity, however) and this is not discussed. We know why this similarity exists. I personally would add other tyrrhenian similarities, also, and I even remember of a great lesson given to me by a simple young fisherman from Santa Teresa, that explained me that he was better understood in Portugal than in Pisa, underlining me the /g/ and /j/ phonemes that reached Iberia passing by Genoa.

Similarities do exist also with Maremma, sothern Tuscany-northern Latium, with which (Maxia correctly notes) there were no relationships. All this would tend to suggest that a common evolution had interested the areas. So which would be the Darwinism to apply, if it was for similarities? Maxia believes that, in analogy among themselves, all the coastal areas of Tyrrhenian sea should have lived an evolutive moment perhaps at the same time.

But the point is not obviously the similarity, it would not be sufficient to our point. Current central logudorese sardinian is not similar, in phonetics, to medieval logudorese sardinian (cfr. Pittau ), although no one would ever deny (Non vi è chi non veda, Maxia would say) that it is the same language. How much did it change, from what was it changing? What happened in Gallura? From what Gallurese started?

I think that, hearing the pure turning to italian language of both logudorese and gallurese people when they abandon their respective natural idioms, and considering the relevant similarity in the use of their second language, it is fair to consider that the genetical root is common, even if the "musical" result is different; but this is my opinion. In it I cannot see the corsican as suppressing and subsituting sardinian. Yes, an influence is evident. Reciprocally too?

I am not an extremist lover of academical centralisms (and I repel the ipse dixit), but I just cannot avoid thinking at the fact that these elements were known also by those who created the study of Sardinian language and are today reputed the masters of this research. These authors don't dare affirm that corsican is spoken in Sardinia (by Sardinians, obviously).

Now, Dch, how do you think we could render and summarise the different positions? Would we start from a scholastical classification or hould we put all together as a series of interpretations?

In bonora :-))) -- Gianfranco

I agree, but the introduction of "Studi storici" was in northern corsican....!!! :-)))))
 * Ooooooooooooooooooopssssssssss!!! :-|

[A nos bidere su-e custu sidu (sardinian)/Avvidecci su chistu situ (gallurese)/A videcci su quistu situ (southern corsican)/A vedecci su quistu situ(northern corsican)]. dch

Requested move 15 July 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved to Gallurese. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Gallurese dialect → Gallurese language – Ethnologue, Glottolog, and the Endangered Languages Project (ELP) all consider Gallurese to be a language unto itself rather than a dialect of either Sardinian or Corsican, and I feel the article name should be changed to reflect such. I'm being cautious because per this ANI discussion, someone moved a bunch of pages, including this one, to refer to their subjects as languages. This ended up being controversial, resulting in the page being moved from Gallurese language to Gallurese dialect. However, even at the time of that discussion, Ethnologue, Glottolog, and the ELP considered Gallurese to be a language rather than a dialect. ~Cherri of Arctic Circle System (talk) 07:28, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * A move to , the original name of the page, could satisfy everyone. Wikipedia does not require appending "language" or "dialect" if there is no ambiguity in the base name. Cf. Arabic, Urdu, Ahirwati and Maay Maay.  —  AjaxSmack  02:56, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I suppose, though I'm unsure whether there's much controversy over whether Gallurese is a language or a dialect at this point. ~Cherri of Arctic Circle System (talk) 04:00, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Even if there wasn't/weren't a controversy, I'd favour unadorned ; "language" is superfluous. —  AjaxSmack 16:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. ~Cherri of Arctic Circle System (talk) 21:14, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.