Talk:Alsatian dialect

message: Does Alsatian have a standard orthography? Maximus Rex 23:12, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Orthography

message: How many alsatian speakers are there in France?--Burgas00 20:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, in 1978 around 60% of the people in Alsace, meaning about a million (probably lower now). Also in 1978, 35% of the  below 20 year olds still spoke Alemannic. Of these 35%, only 20% said that they spoke Alsatian with their friends and siblings as long as no French-speakers were present (in that case, only 3% spoke Alsatian). This means that we can at best expect 7% of the youngest generation to pass on Alsatian to their children.--Chlämens 16:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

text: How very sad that is, an entire dialect wiped out within what, 65 years or so? --JonnyLightning (talk) 04:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, the discussion is old, but this might be interesting for other readers as well: Language policy in France. --149.249.149.55 (talk) 13:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of Speakers

message: The bigoted French government has since WWII done its best to kill off all local languages in France, particularly German (in its dialects of Alsace and Lorraine.  It is probably too late to save them from demise. Instead, being from Belgium, I think we should do onto French in that country what Paris has done to German in France: destroy it. I am all for Flemish ONLY language policy in Belgium, to make everybody speak the National Language or remain uneducated (the same policy Paris enforced in Alsace and Lorraine). Doing so, the howling from Paris would rise to the seventh heaven on the charges of discrimination, bigotry and linguicide....... namely, the same that she has done to the German language and heritage in Alsace and Lorraine..   It also would help Belgium to get rid of this foreign language (French) on our soil.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.203.61 (talk) 16:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison of status

message: The inscription on the window is not in Alsatian, only in an old form of Standard German. Phonetically, it's not Alsatian since "House" is spelled with a diphthong rather than as hus.--Chlämens 04:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, let's remove it. Chl 01:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a new image. I hope it's better. J-C V 15:09, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture of inscription

message: If anyone can source the claim that Office 2007 will appear in an Alsatian version, they can reinstate the commented-out "Trivia" section. CapnPrep 00:09, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment from 4th Generation Alsatian in Texas 

message: By what linguistic standard is Alsatian considered a language? The first sentence in this article accurately describes Alsatian as a dialect. In the English language, the term dialect is not interchangeable with the term language. I strongly suggest changing title of article to something like Alsatian (dialect) to make this distinction. D'accord? Comme le Lapin 08:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Strong disagree. There is no linguistic standard, only socio-cultural-historico-political motivations (but these are also valid and should not be dismissed). And for those reasons, Alsatian is considered a regional language of France just like Breton, Occitan, Catalan, Basque, etc. CapnPrep 09:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are linguistic standards that are detached from such "socio-cultural-historico-political motivation." Disagreement with motivation does not make the scientific fact of the thing any less verifiable. The phonetics, phonology, and morphology of Alsatian are a combination of elements from other languages, as are its lexicon and syntax. It is a regional dialect. This is not a value judgment. Just as the many forms of British, American, Canadian, and Australian are kinds of English, rather than separate languages, Alsatian too is a dialect. Comme le Lapin 17:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean with "The phonetics, phonology, and morphology of Alsatian are a combination of elements from other languages, as are its lexicon and syntax"? Alsatian is a Germanic language (more specifically Alemannic) with some vocabulary borrowed from French and a few terms from Yiddish. There is no French influence (or from any other language) on syntax, phonology, or morphology worth mentioning. Even the French influence on vocabulary is quite small, much smaller than the amount of French borrowing in English. The Alemannic dialects are not mutually intelligible with German, so using this definition they are a separate language; the reason they are often considered to be German dialects is because since the decline of the written Alemannic language in the 16th-17th century, they have used Standard German as their written form. Apart from that, the distinction language-dialect is almost meaningless in linguistics and is often not bothered with. --Chlämens 18:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Pardon my lack of clarity earlier. The point I actually mean to make is, interestingly, the exact opposite of what your last statement: the distinction between language and dialect is not meaningless (it's not even almost meaningless) in linguistics and it is bothered with. The many dialects found in England are not considered distinctly separate languages, even if they border on mutually intelligible, and the same is true of American dialects; they are components of the same whole. The reason I mentioned this initially was in the interest of accuracy, but I sense in this discussion that some of us equate the designation "language" with "superior" and the designation "dialect" with "inferior." That's not at all what I mean. I'm not making a value judgment, I'm simply saying that language and dialect are not necessarily interchangeable terms. For example, in the English language, "'ink" is not necessarily synonymous with "paint," the word "flower" is not interchangeable with the word "plant," and so on. In this context, it seems "dialect" would be the more accurate term. No offense intended. Comme le Lapin 02:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The question is a political rather than a linguistic one. In linguistic terms, Alsatian is part of a dialect continuum that encompasses all of Germany. If you consider Alsatian a dialect, it has to be a German dialect, the idea of which, I suppose, most Alsatians would resent. Yet, there is to my knowledge no Standard Alsatian and the Alsatian dialects are perfectly comprehensible to speakers of adjacent Swiss or German dialects. I am from Frankfurt and I experience no difficulties in following a conversation in the dialect of Wissembourg (the northermost town in Alsace). Still, for political reasons, the French recognized "Alsacien" as a "langue regionale" - they could hardly be expected to recognize "Allemand". Thus, I suggest that we do not change the article to "Alsatian dialect".Unoffensive text or character 09:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your comment is interesting. The reason you can understand the dialects from northern Alsace is because they are Frankish dialects, like the dialect of Frankfurt, unlike the rest of Alsace which is Alemannic. The Alemannic variants are comprehensible to people speaking Alemannic variants of Germany and Switzerland. Alemannic and Frankish are not mutually intelligible though, to add to the confusion. --Chlämens 14:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To add yet further to the confusion, I have little difficulties to understand the Alemannic dialect of Sufflenheim (not far from Weißenburg) if spoken slowly and distinctly, as the transition from Alemannic to Frankish is not an abrupt one. But of course, I can hardly follow a conversation in Colmar or Mühlhausen Alsatian and in Altkirch or Pfirt I'd be completely lost.Unoffensive text or character 14:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I just realized I used German placenames throughout. Sorry, no offence intended, it's just that they are very deeply engraved in my mental map of Alsace (most Germans do not even know them nowadays). That's Souffleheim, Wissembourg, Mulhouse (Mühlhausen) and La Ferrete (Pfirt).Unoffensive text or character 14:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

text: This is not a personal matter for me, and I have no intention of  (or interest in) making a formal proposal, especially on "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." I had only made a valid suggestion, which has been nicely responded to by other users. This discussion has been relevant to the article, but seems to have reached its natural end. By that I mean, in the context of this article, this matter seems to have been resolved. Comme le Lapin 18:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I'm not sure how Alsatian qualifies as a language anymore then Schwabisch does. Besides, it seems everyone agrees that it is a Dialect, why don't we change the name of the article? Does someone here disagree? 130.71.96.19 00:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, now I see the reasoning as posted by Unoffensive. It seems a bit silly though. I highly doubt the title of a Wikipedia article is likely to change French linguistic policy for the worse. The French government deserves a little more credit then that, though there could be some improvement to their policies of linguistic preservation, even today (France is hardly alone on this count). Perhaps it would be worth noting that Alsatian is often considered a language within France due to these aforementioned political reasons. 130.71.96.19 00:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if you can find a reliable source for noting that. Otherwise, the "Status in France" section already makes it clear that Alsatian is considered a language in French government policy (without speculating about their reasoning). CapnPrep 07:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm surprised that no one has quoted my favourite aphorism on the subject.   Chomsky (whom I may not get right word for word) says that a language is a dialect with an army and a navy.   Taking one of a great range of related and overlapping dialects and calling the favoured one a language is essentially a political action whereby a language is used to endorse political frontiers.   We are more aware of it with German and Italian (a Tuscan dialext, as far as I remeber) than we are with English simply because the political unification of Germany and of Italy took place relatively recently, whereas the English state was determinedly centralising itself long before the the European invention of printing, and of Henry VIII's nationalisation of the local church, and of the bible translation sponsored by James VI / I.   France, similarly, was determindedly centalising state power - eg under Louis XIV  who thought the Rhine her 'natural' eatern frontier many generations before anyone had heard of Bismarck.Charles01 (talk) 15:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: A dialect rather than a language

message: The given SIL code of gsw is incorrect - that code is for Swiss German, which this article admits is not the same thing.  There appears to be no SIL code for Alsatian. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, not really. The code "gsw" stands for ALL Alemannic dialects, including Alsatian, even though it is derived from the term "Swiss German". There have been long discussion about this at the Alemannic Wikipedia and elsewhere, the inconvenience of the code for Swiss German also standing for all other Alemannic dialects. --Chlämens (talk) 00:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I would suggest els as code for Alsatianas it is very different from Alemanic, and only a few Alsatian writers and authors would write in Alemanic ( not to say none ), they would rather do it in Alsatian, so a SIL code for Alsatian would make sence. ALso the development of the Alsatian language do not follow Alemanic, because Alsatian speakers invent new words by generating the new word as construct of alreary existing words and ideas which take there origin in french or german but never from Alemanic. This code is available and in Alsatian alsatian is els.assisch so it make more sens for alsatians then a code of a foreign area. --citizen from Soultzbach-les-bains ( Alsace / France ) (talk) 09:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SIL code 

message: I've removed that dubious number of 96,000 speakers as the source is obviously wrong. The source says that 60% of the population of Alsace or 96,000 speak Alsatian but Alsace has some 1.8 million people, and 60% of 1.8 million is definitely more than 96,000 if my maths is right. 960,000 might be closer to the truth but as the source doesn't even provide a date, it's safer to leave it out altogether.--Colomen (talk) 21:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  96,000 speakers 

message: What's the best way to make these corrections? :
*Die bestimmten Artikels in Elsässisch =>
*Die bestimmten Artikel im Elsässischen
*Definite articles in Alsatian => The definite ...
And according to http://www.alsa-immer.eu/Elsassischa_Grammatik.xml apparently
*D'bschtemmt Àrtìkel ùf Elsässisch =>
*D'bschtemmta Àrtìkel ùf Elsässisch
--Espoo (talk) 09:58, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Güata Morga, Espoo- Thanks for the link to that grammar page. What you suggest looks right to my non-expert eyes, from my experience trying to pick up the lingo in Alsace, though I would probably omit the The in front of definite in English. I'm pinging the apparent creator of the graphics linked in the Grammar section: . The files are here on Commons: , . Eric talk 11:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  errors in files showing definite and indefinite articles