--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister wrote:
>
> There was some Romance substrate underlying Aragonese.
>
Which is precisely the Pyrenaic language studied by Elcock and García
de Diego.
> I've seen it labeled as Mozarabic but I think that's an anachronic
misnomer.
>
Actually, Ethnologue has classified Aragonese under a Pyrenean-Mozarabic
grouping separate from Hispano-Romance.
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=2730-16
> Aragonese seems to be derived from a Castillian dialect with Basque
and other substrates
>
Not really. Aragonese isn't Castilian at all, but a different
Hispano-Romance language which in the Low Middle Ages was not only
spoken in most of Aragon (except the eastern Catalan-speaking strip),
but also in Navarre and Rioja as well as the westernmost parts of the
Kingdom of Valencia (originally a mixed ethnical state within arbritrary
borders much like modern Iraq), but since then it has been gradually
replaced by Castilian and now it's endangered. However, the regional
Spanish spoken there (especially in non-urban areas) has a different
accent than native Castilian and lots of Aragonese lexicon.