Saturday, July 17, 2004, 07:17 GMT
Juan,
I have an interest in knowing how the European Spanish variety and accent is dealt with in the Americas. I have a feeling that there are certain countries where it would have more prestige than others. There are many countries all the way from California to the tip of Chile. I think it's an interesting topic although it would take a wide study. Obviously, English RP (Received Pronunciation) has much more prestige in Commonwealth countries than in the United States and it's all due to very recent ties amongst all these countries. That doesn't mean, of course, that some US Americans will not be lured into this particular philosophy, especially those with European roots. Could it be that RP has more prestige in Canada than the US? I don't know but the Queen of England is still the symbolic head of state of Canada and some of the differences in language and spelling in Canada are definitely British.
I'd like to know if this also happens with Castilian and the different Castilian-speaking countries. I'm not trying to prove that this is the right thing just if it actually happens. I work in the tourism trade and quite a lot of Latin American tourists I meet over here will tell you something like: "My grandfather was born here or there (somewhere lost in Spain)". You can't imagine just how many upper class (it's just a term) tourists come from the other side of the pond and, lately Spain is receiving thousands of new working class residents from Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina, for example.
For instance, the cubans from Miami you meet over here are always bragging about their Spanish ancestry no matter how dark they are. It's as if the other part didn't exist. I agree that a lot has to be done regarding self-esteem and knowing who one is and euro-centrism definitely affects everybody since it's part of a widely accepted social belief in the ruling classes of the Western world. There seems to be two sides to this question. To simplify the first one would be: the Spaniards came here and robbed us but the second side is: the ones who robbed us are, after all, our forebears. As I told you previously the Spaniards who stayed in Spain mainly robbed other Spaniards and never had children in the Americas. And the great majority in the first centuries (15th to 18th centuries) were Castilian-speaking Spaniards mainly from Castille and Andalusia.
I think there must be different traditions in different countries regarding this question and I would like to know why. Maybe the elites of certain countries have kept a more recent tie (19th and 20th centuries) with European Spanish culture and universities than others. It's just an idea right now but from what I've read about Colombia that could well be a reason and then great Spanish waves of migrants continued thorughout the 19th and 20th centuries; the last great one was after the Spanish Civil War (1936-39) when most of our best scholars and professors fled to many Latin American countries. Their contribution to 20th century Latin America has been studied elsewhere.
I have an interest in knowing how the European Spanish variety and accent is dealt with in the Americas. I have a feeling that there are certain countries where it would have more prestige than others. There are many countries all the way from California to the tip of Chile. I think it's an interesting topic although it would take a wide study. Obviously, English RP (Received Pronunciation) has much more prestige in Commonwealth countries than in the United States and it's all due to very recent ties amongst all these countries. That doesn't mean, of course, that some US Americans will not be lured into this particular philosophy, especially those with European roots. Could it be that RP has more prestige in Canada than the US? I don't know but the Queen of England is still the symbolic head of state of Canada and some of the differences in language and spelling in Canada are definitely British.
I'd like to know if this also happens with Castilian and the different Castilian-speaking countries. I'm not trying to prove that this is the right thing just if it actually happens. I work in the tourism trade and quite a lot of Latin American tourists I meet over here will tell you something like: "My grandfather was born here or there (somewhere lost in Spain)". You can't imagine just how many upper class (it's just a term) tourists come from the other side of the pond and, lately Spain is receiving thousands of new working class residents from Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina, for example.
For instance, the cubans from Miami you meet over here are always bragging about their Spanish ancestry no matter how dark they are. It's as if the other part didn't exist. I agree that a lot has to be done regarding self-esteem and knowing who one is and euro-centrism definitely affects everybody since it's part of a widely accepted social belief in the ruling classes of the Western world. There seems to be two sides to this question. To simplify the first one would be: the Spaniards came here and robbed us but the second side is: the ones who robbed us are, after all, our forebears. As I told you previously the Spaniards who stayed in Spain mainly robbed other Spaniards and never had children in the Americas. And the great majority in the first centuries (15th to 18th centuries) were Castilian-speaking Spaniards mainly from Castille and Andalusia.
I think there must be different traditions in different countries regarding this question and I would like to know why. Maybe the elites of certain countries have kept a more recent tie (19th and 20th centuries) with European Spanish culture and universities than others. It's just an idea right now but from what I've read about Colombia that could well be a reason and then great Spanish waves of migrants continued thorughout the 19th and 20th centuries; the last great one was after the Spanish Civil War (1936-39) when most of our best scholars and professors fled to many Latin American countries. Their contribution to 20th century Latin America has been studied elsewhere.