Re: [tied] Re: Franco-Provençal

2009/2/19 Petr Hrubis <petr.hrubis@...>:

> 2009/2/18 Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud@...>:
>>
>>> The issue is about the use and misuse of the word "language".
>>
>> And it's the sort of argument that I expect to see among laymen,
>> not linguists. In the cases of interest the choice of 'dialect'
>> or 'language' is fundamentally a sociopolitical choice, not a
>> linguistic one. Picard, Veneto, and Schwiizertüütsch are what
>> they are, whether you call them languages or dialects of French,
>> Italian, and German, respectively.
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> ============
>>
>> Amazing.
>>
>> This is about as stupid as claiming that a horse is not a horse because it's
>> gray instead of black.
>>
>> There exists objective reasons to describe varieties as dialects or separate
>> languages.
>>
>> A.
>
> Those reasons, however, largely depend on the purpose/motivation of
> "classification". So, please, define what language/dialect is/isn't.
> Everyone will find both examples and counter-examples. ;-)
>
> Best,
>
> Petr

I should have added that, yes, there are "objective" reasons. But
those "objective" reasons are simply a pre-defined set of criteria
which have to be applied without exceptions ( = "objectively"). And
it's up to you or whoever does that classification what definition
they choose to apply.

Best,

Petr