Google “Spanish is the official language of Spain” and you get things like this:
Those certainly don’t sound like what I’d call “Spanish”.
[Haven’t read the rest of the thread yet, but wanted to toss out what my old German teacher told us.]
So you’re saying: “Also ist er Mist” doesn’t mean “It’s mist, too”?
I have been guilty of unintentionally spreading misinformation in GQ, but when shown the error of my ways, I have promptly apologized. Being seen chewing on crow is much less humiliating than persisting that 2+2=5.
And, sir, if I felt trollish, I could advance equally as many cites, from supposedly-respected sources, demonstrating to you why gay sex is evil. And you would be entirely justified in rejecting my cites and reading me the riot act about my behavior.
I believe you have made your point, such as it was. What you’ve done to your own credibility, on the other hand, is somewhat less easy to define.
No, lissener, it’s not. I read the original thread. That’s not what you said. You can claim you meant something else until the end of time, but it doesn’t change the fact that what you said was clear - and clearly wrong.
And it doesn’t change the fact that your cites don’t prove what you claim they do, for reasons I’ve already addressed.
Oh, and “Britain”, or “Great Britain” (an appellation given originally by the French to distinguish it from the other Bretagne - the French departement of Brittany) is an island. Ireland is a different island. Look at a map.
That cite is not accurate either, though; Galicia, culturally, retains clues to the area’s originally Celtic inhabitants, but the language is a Romance language closely related to Portuguese; completely different branch of the Indo-European tree than the Celtic languages.
My dear friend and fellow doper (Native BBC-English speaker and fluent in Spanish since childhood) and I (Native Spanish-speaker and fluent in English since childhood) were filling out some questions that were sent to us in Spanish; our conversation was in English. After much discussing we couldn’t find an exact translation for “feedback” in Spanish that fit the exact same meaning it does in English (in the context we used it). We frequently discuss how difficult it is to translate simple words without losing a whole lot of nuance in the process*.
One mistake that lissener seems to have made is not remembering that translation is not an exact science. There is a whole culture behind each world.
*In the meantime, can someone tell me how to translate “empalagar/empalagoso” into English? That is our holy grail.
Will “nauseatingly sweet” do?
I think lissener is an emotionally unstable basket case who can’t tell truth from lies, and he has no credibility at all with me. But we’ll always have this:
Cloying?
But it’s not closely related to what we call “Spanish”, right? 
Sigh. I have been the one saying all along that there is debate on the question: that there is obviously no absolute consensus. I have acknowledged before that there are examples out there of “Spanish” in the translation. I have only said, therefore, that no one has the right to call me “wrong” for pointing out the other widely accepted translation. And further, that the logic, and sources that I have found, lead me, personally, to support the “Castilian” translation. I have said over and over again that I do not claim to be the final arbiter on the one right answer; I have only claimed my right not be called “wrong” and accused of dishonesty. I really am gonna try to make this my last word on the subject; this thread has devolved into nothing more than a new round of people who have apparently not read the thread in its entirety, or not read the thread, or who just plain aren’t listening. So I’m just not really interested in repeating it all again, over and over. Honestly, I have never before on these boards witnessed anything like this. Such an innocuous bit of arcana, sculpted into this insane maelstrom of hatred–it just leaves me utterly, utterly bewildered. That the simple and trivial *fact *that the most common, the standard, translation of the Spanish Constitution labels the official language as “Castilian”–that this simple fact–could become the basis for such an episode of, of violence, I don’t imagine I will ever understand.
correction:
Can you conceive of the idea that some of these people–possibly even all of them–have read the thread, read the cites, are listening, and still sincerely believe that you were wrong originally, and are wrong now?
Daniel
-
They label it “Castillan” simply to differentiate it from the other languages spoken in Spain–languages with bear little to no reseblance to “Spanish”.
-
“Violence”? WTF are you talking about? Advocating voilence against a fellow Doper is verboten, you know that.
-
Your understanding is wrong, therefor you are wrong.
:: shakes Magic 8 ball::
Babelfish says “cloying.” Duh.
But Excalibre, thanks for your post on page 1. It really was interesting and informative and made me wonder if I should look more into linguistics - every time I read something like that, I regret not having studied the subject.
Right. That’s what you’ve been doing - finding cites that you don’t really understand and certainly cannot evaluate, and attempting to argue something untrue based on them.
Except that the “limited context of the discussion” was the name of the Spanish language; your parallel doesn’t work at all for that purpose, as no one uses “British” as a name for a language. No one says, for instance, “I wrote a letter in British.” The phrase “British languages” is probably used to refer to languages spoken on Great Britain - English, Welsh, Scots, and Scottish Gaelic. Just like the phrase “Spanish languages” can be used to describe Spanish, Galician, Catalan, Basque, Asturian, Aragonese, Caló, Aranese, A Fala de Xálima, and probably others I’m forgetting. But “Spanish” as a term for a single language only describes one of those languages, and that’s the context of the discussion - your correction of Nava’s use of the word “Spanish”. “British” isn’t used as a term for any language. Evaluating your claim in the context of the discussion at hand just makes it worse, because there is zero parallel to the terminology used to describe Spanish or any other Spanish language!
Instead of trying to use meaningless babble to justify it, we can simply look at it this way: “Spanish” as an adjective can refer to people or things from Spain, as I already pointed out - including other languages. “Spanish” as a noun can refer only to one language. “British” as an adjective is comparable to “Spanish”, but as a noun, it’s not, as there is no “British language”.
But again, I don’t believe you when you say this is the point you were trying to make, as this point would have been completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand; it would have been a complete hijack, and had you honestly felt compelled to discuss the terminology used in the Spanish Constitution and why it was chosen, you would have explained that.
It’s simply not plausible that that’s what you really meant to discuss. I’m sorry, but from the context and from what you said, it’s clear that you wanted to point out that the official language of Spain was “technically”, “pedantically” Castilian, a claim that I (and everyone else) have already evaluated and found to be false.
:rolleyes: Duh.
No. This is more of your after-the-fact justification. Had you meant to discuss the wording of the Spanish Constitution, you would have mentioned it. And again, it’s less plausible yet because the wording of the Spanish Constitution was not under discussion, and had no actual relevance to what was the discussion. Again, remember my distinction between a word and its referrent? The official language of Spain is the same no matter what you call it; there is simply no reasonable argument to be made that it has to be called by one certain name in that context.
That official language goes by two names in Spain; you jumped in to correct another poster for not using the exact same name as is used in the Constitution. That wasn’t a pedantic nitpick, that was a pathetic attempt to show off your own knowledge in a field where you don’t have very much of it. You further made a laughably wrong assertion about what the noun “Spanish” refers to, one that is clear, no matter how you try to claim you didn’t mean any such thing.
And as you now understand, the language goes by two names, and there was a delicate political decision in terming it “castellano” in the Constitution. The fact that one particular term was used in the Constitution quite obviously doesn’t make it an “official name” of any sort.
Reread the thread and see how utterly obnoxious you were in it if you’re still confused. Poof! Bewilderment gone!
And next time, remember that when you’re talking about something you don’t know much about, chances are good someone around here will know a lot more about it. Like the Spaniard you corrected. Or Colibri, who is fluent in Spanish. Or me, who is not quite fluent but who has studied the social situation of those languages and the politics of Spain’s minority languages, both inside and out of school. So your bit of “trivia” - what little of it had any basis in reality (and this only if we generously pretend that you meant something entirely different than what you said, and simultaneously ignore the completely erroneous comparison to the terms “British” and “English”) - is not exactly some secret bit of knowledge that the rest of us were unaware of.
Yeah, and you have yet to prove any sort of relevance to this statement.
One that you completely misinterpreted, and then presented in such an incomprehensibly awful way that you actually stated that “Spanish”, as a term, is used to describe “Basque”.
No, only the ones that are completely implausible. I’ve explained exactly why your “clarifications” are not plausible. This is reminiscent of your whinging that no one had read your cites, except in that case, your cites didn’t say what you claimed they did.
No. Again with the martyr act. Stop whining and at least acknowledge that what you said was wholly wrong - you were and still are wrong that one term is more “technically correct” than the other, you were wrong in asserting that the use of the terms was parallel to “British” and “English”, and you were vastly, vastly wrong in implying that “Spanish” was some sort of umbrella term used to describe other languages. Even allowing for you to continue pretending that that’s not what you meant, what you said was not “not waterproof legalese” but simply badly, badly wrong, and you should know that spouting bullshit in GQ is liable to get you called out.
Next time, try for some understanding of the “arcana” you intend to share.
No. There is, once again, no parallel between the uses of “British” and “Spanish” in the sense under discussion. Thus your analogy simply did not explain anything. “Spanish” is frequently used to describe a language; “British” is not. No parallel whatsoever.
So what do you call this? “Now, speaking prescriptively, the official name of the language that most people think of as ‘Spanish’ is, technically, ‘Castilian.’” Congratulations: you’ve found one official circumstance that used the term “castellano”. You have found no official circumstance in which the term “Castilian” was used; it has been explained to you, over and over, that the term “castellano” does not only translate as “Castilian”. You should have gotten the point of this by now, but I’ll make it explicit: languages do not have “official” names.
You were trying to argue that there was an “official” or “correct” term for the language. Even your new argument doesn’t make any sense, because if there was an official name, it would be “official” in all contexts - you said, quite explicitly, “So, considering all the context, and ‘prescriptive’ versus ‘descriptive’ usage issues, it is more accurate to say ‘Castilian is the official language of Spain’ than to say ‘Spanish is the official language of Spain.’” Which is false, as I have explained, as Polycarp has explained, as Colibri has explained.
Spin it now however you like. You were trying to argue that Nava should have said “Castilian” instead of “Spanish”. If that weren’t what you meant, you would have corrected it before launching into your ridiculous argument.
All you’re doing is pathetically attempting to backpedal and claim you didn’t say what you plainly said. This is fucking sad, lissener.
This is not an “insane maelstrom of hatred”. Jesus Christ, dude, you need drugs - whatever ridiculous melodrama you’re experiencing, none of the rest of us are.
“Violence”? Bite me, you pathetic, self-pitying fuck. Being told you’re wrong is not “violence”, especially when it’s true. And you and I both know that that was not what you said in the original thread. One need only read it to see what you actually said and how different that is from how you’re spinning it.
You could have salvaged some dignity if it weren’t for your self-pity and your constant lies to try to make it seem as though, somehow, you weren’t wrong. “No, no, see, I know I said X, but what I meant was something totally different!” Mean whatever you like, you sad little man. The rest of us can only evaluate what you say. For all any of us knows, you “meant” that the Bolshoi is having one of its best seasons in years. I only know what you say, and what you said in the original thread does not harmonize with what you’re claiming to have said, or what you’re claiming to have meant.
Jesus Christ you’re pathetic.
My dear friend and fellow doper (Native BBC-English speaker and fluent in Spanish since childhood) and I (Native Spanish-speaker and fluent in English since childhood) were filling out some questions that were sent to us in Spanish; our conversation was in English. After much discussing we couldn’t find an exact translation for “feedback” in Spanish that fit the exact same meaning it does in English (in the context we used it). We frequently discuss how difficult it is to translate simple words without losing a whole lot of nuance in the process*.
One mistake that lissener seems to have made is not remembering that translation is not an exact science. There is a whole culture behind each world.
*In the meantime, can someone tell me how to translate “empalagar/empalagoso” into English? That is our holy grail.