Rui Monday, June 13, 2005, 19:23 GMT
Quoting Jordi :
«Unfortunately, I have no time to translate this text written in official Galician by Camilo Nogueira, a Galician himself, but it could be a start to argue the re-integration of Galician in the Galician-Portuguese-Brazilian language.
Nogueira defends the fact that Galician has always been the same language as Portuguese and that the phonology of the Rías Baixas (Galician Coast nearer to Northern Portugal) is actually nearer Portuguese than the official Galician norm of the Xunta. Therefore, a Galician agrees with what I previously said how "rural" or "popular" Galician can often sound much more Portuguese to the untrained ear than Galician. In Spanish National TV, Galician fishermen and peasants are often subtitled whilst the official politicians speaking in Galician are never subtitled since, the latter, use a variety which is pefectly understandable to all Spaniards whilst the former sound strangely Portuguese and are hard to follow.
The first question would be. Do the Portuguese and Brazilians have the feeling that the text of Nogueira is actually much closer to Portuguese than Spanish?
Nogueira says that even the spelling should evolve to become more Portuguese (nh for ñ, lh for ll; making it closer to the shared mediaeval Galaico-Portuguese language in many cases.)
Please red the full original text:
http://membres.lycos.fr/questione/artigos/nogueira1.html »
My answer is yes, that text can be read almost as Portuguese, just with some strange words, most of them look like Portuguese medieval archaisms, and just a few syntactical differences (different clitics location).
About the spelling, I think at least a few of the differences correspond to real pronounciation differences between spoken Galician and Standard Portuguese (Lisbon-Coimbra pattern), like in "junta" x "xunta"; though between Galician and Portuguese as spoken in North Western Portugal the pronounciation is much more alike. Yet my knowledge of spoken Galician is very limited, so I can't be sure.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rui Monday, June 13, 2005, 19:33 GMT
Sad news to everyone interested in literature in Portuguese Language: poet Eugénio de Andrade died today. I'll try to translate and publish here a couple of his poems as soon as I have free time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Im Memoriam Monday, June 13, 2005, 19:44 GMT
http://portugal.poetryinternational.org/file/Andrade.jpg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
yannick to Im Memoriam Monday, June 13, 2005, 20:04 GMT
Your name is "In" Memoriam surely?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Im Memoriam Monday, June 13, 2005, 20:06 GMT
nope (latin)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
xuloChavez Monday, June 13, 2005, 23:30 GMT
I still thing that, unfortunately, there is no basis to say that galician has been artificially kept at a distance from portuguese. C Nogueira doesnt give any justification to his claim that Rias Baixas galician is closer to portuguese than official norm, and anyway I know its not: It doesnt have the z/c sound that is present in the rest of galicia and not in portugal, but thats it.
Jordi insists that galician peasants sound a lot more portuguese than politicians, but that again is just a superficial impression: native galician intonation is indeed a lot closer to portuguese than to spanish, but all other phonetic traits are very well established, almost all speakers agree on a correct use thats very different from lisbon norm, and I doubt very much that this is result of spanish influence (im talking phonetics here, not vocabulary which definitely shows the impact of castilian spanish), let alone a political will.
With respect to written norm, I would like it to agree as much as possible with mainstream portuguese, but unfortunately even minor changes like using nh would be complicated: this letter combination is already used to represent a nasal n in unha/algunha etc, which in official portuguese I believe is uma etc. Other changes like using g/j instead of x wouldnt make any sense since spoken galician nowhere makes this difference
So to sum up, I think Academia Galega make a conservative but decent job in when elaborating the official norm for galician. After all, not to forget that galician did have a sustantial literary tradition in modern times, and any official norm that went too strongly against the uses its uses could be easily be accused of trying to impose a made up language on the galician speakers
Still galician & portuguese are still perfectly intercomprehensible now. Phonetic differences are strong, but because the words used are the same its only a matter of gaining familiarity with a different accent rather than learning a different code before being able to communicate effectively. With portuguese friends I always use galician and the communication is perfect.
Quoting Jordi :
«Unfortunately, I have no time to translate this text written in official Galician by Camilo Nogueira, a Galician himself, but it could be a start to argue the re-integration of Galician in the Galician-Portuguese-Brazilian language.
Nogueira defends the fact that Galician has always been the same language as Portuguese and that the phonology of the Rías Baixas (Galician Coast nearer to Northern Portugal) is actually nearer Portuguese than the official Galician norm of the Xunta. Therefore, a Galician agrees with what I previously said how "rural" or "popular" Galician can often sound much more Portuguese to the untrained ear than Galician. In Spanish National TV, Galician fishermen and peasants are often subtitled whilst the official politicians speaking in Galician are never subtitled since, the latter, use a variety which is pefectly understandable to all Spaniards whilst the former sound strangely Portuguese and are hard to follow.
The first question would be. Do the Portuguese and Brazilians have the feeling that the text of Nogueira is actually much closer to Portuguese than Spanish?
Nogueira says that even the spelling should evolve to become more Portuguese (nh for ñ, lh for ll; making it closer to the shared mediaeval Galaico-Portuguese language in many cases.)
Please red the full original text:
http://membres.lycos.fr/questione/artigos/nogueira1.html »
My answer is yes, that text can be read almost as Portuguese, just with some strange words, most of them look like Portuguese medieval archaisms, and just a few syntactical differences (different clitics location).
About the spelling, I think at least a few of the differences correspond to real pronounciation differences between spoken Galician and Standard Portuguese (Lisbon-Coimbra pattern), like in "junta" x "xunta"; though between Galician and Portuguese as spoken in North Western Portugal the pronounciation is much more alike. Yet my knowledge of spoken Galician is very limited, so I can't be sure.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rui Monday, June 13, 2005, 19:33 GMT
Sad news to everyone interested in literature in Portuguese Language: poet Eugénio de Andrade died today. I'll try to translate and publish here a couple of his poems as soon as I have free time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Im Memoriam Monday, June 13, 2005, 19:44 GMT
http://portugal.poetryinternational.org/file/Andrade.jpg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
yannick to Im Memoriam Monday, June 13, 2005, 20:04 GMT
Your name is "In" Memoriam surely?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Im Memoriam Monday, June 13, 2005, 20:06 GMT
nope (latin)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
xuloChavez Monday, June 13, 2005, 23:30 GMT
I still thing that, unfortunately, there is no basis to say that galician has been artificially kept at a distance from portuguese. C Nogueira doesnt give any justification to his claim that Rias Baixas galician is closer to portuguese than official norm, and anyway I know its not: It doesnt have the z/c sound that is present in the rest of galicia and not in portugal, but thats it.
Jordi insists that galician peasants sound a lot more portuguese than politicians, but that again is just a superficial impression: native galician intonation is indeed a lot closer to portuguese than to spanish, but all other phonetic traits are very well established, almost all speakers agree on a correct use thats very different from lisbon norm, and I doubt very much that this is result of spanish influence (im talking phonetics here, not vocabulary which definitely shows the impact of castilian spanish), let alone a political will.
With respect to written norm, I would like it to agree as much as possible with mainstream portuguese, but unfortunately even minor changes like using nh would be complicated: this letter combination is already used to represent a nasal n in unha/algunha etc, which in official portuguese I believe is uma etc. Other changes like using g/j instead of x wouldnt make any sense since spoken galician nowhere makes this difference
So to sum up, I think Academia Galega make a conservative but decent job in when elaborating the official norm for galician. After all, not to forget that galician did have a sustantial literary tradition in modern times, and any official norm that went too strongly against the uses its uses could be easily be accused of trying to impose a made up language on the galician speakers
Still galician & portuguese are still perfectly intercomprehensible now. Phonetic differences are strong, but because the words used are the same its only a matter of gaining familiarity with a different accent rather than learning a different code before being able to communicate effectively. With portuguese friends I always use galician and the communication is perfect.