1199:
in
English-language contexts in Europe, so an English pronunciation which paralled Spain Spanish would be the ticket. Australia is far distant, and they're renowned for brisk speech, but it's very much the same. Indians travelling to Europe already know English English, as well as their native languages. Other peoples I don't know enough about to make an informed guess. /Gaˈli.sja/ is a pronunciation used in an entire continent, but it won't appear in any Castilian article not dealing with dialects or international varieties. All I'd want in an English-language forum is a single pronunciation which suited as many people as possible. In an article on Spain, why not /ɡəˈlɪθiən/? It's 'authentic' (which is past a tired phrase) and European. A secondary one should be resorted to only when absolutely necessary. Why listing a North American pronunciation, when I think you both are European (in origin), is the first thing that occurs, seemed outlandish. But you've both explained why you have and I get why that is, I think: it's just difficult (and complicated) to explain (particularly on this forum) why citing sources still might not resolve the issue.
2119:
cowardly. I’m not embarrassed to have one source: I’m embarrassed that something I wrote might not be worthy of a reply. If people do not want to engage with me, I will have to take that as some kind of lesson. But these pronunciations do not naturally belong in articles about Spain, not when the pronunciation in the nearest variety of
English does correspond more exactly to the Spanish. What I would say about gəˈlɪʃən is predictable: it’s much more common for the fact that there are two of them, and very many dictionaries don’t distinguish this. Don’t take this as evidence: you have to be looking for this, and also to care about it. I will save you some trouble and say I do. Tell me a reason gəˈlɪʃən should be in the article, over gəˈlɪθiən, or ˈmɜrθiən, or vəˈlɛnθiən? These are not learned pronunciations, they are simply well understood in the UK. If you’re dealing with Spain it will not do to pass over them. I’m looking for some assurance that my edit won’t be reverted by people desperate to say they don’t care about it anyway.
2141:
perception—especially about language, which is notoriously subject to perception bias. If there's a dictionary (not a corpus of text, which has different criteria) that establishes "gəˈlɪθiən", then fine: put it in there among the other pronunciations supported by major dictionaries. As I said earlier, I'm not even fussed about the order in that case: if one of the dictionaries describes it as the primary pronunciation, put it first. I can't make assurances for the actions of any other editors, obviously, but this has been what I've been trying to say from the beginning. Your last edit, however, removed the other pronunciations and their citations, which is a different action, and pretty clearly didn't have consensus on the talk page at the time you did it.
2152:
know why, you are free to keep ‘gəˈlɪʃən’ in place. But I would laugh rather than invoke my tenuous right to. It may be well-known to you that the
British travel frequently to Spain, and have done now for at least three decades. There is precious little room for ambiguity in their pronunciation of Spanish place-names. Barcelona will remain Barselona from prior acquaintance with that city. But Murcia, Valencia and Galicia have all been ‘-θiə’ for quite long enough now in UK speech, and quite earnestly I can’t think of an American who would seriously make a point of speaking differently with reference to the peninsular. Let no-one say this is irrelevant to the article.
613:
constructed language based around said medieval language, which is what I'd imagine as a
Galician speaker. If you think Galician and Portuguese are co-dialects of a common language, go ahead as long as you're not disrespectful to Galician, but take in mind people don't treat them as such. Also it's worth noting that "Galician-Portuguese" is just the name given to the medieval Galician spoken in the former Kingdom of Galicia by historians. The language was simply known as Galician at the time. Historians call it "Galician-Portuguese" because the Portuguese people started calling it Portuguese after their independence, and each language evolved with their own history.
1180:, do we list all five of these pronunciations in the Corpus? No, as you understand. I know in practice which ones are and aren't used: if you ask I'll list each of them. There's a problem about (not with) the OED. That's that too many people refer to it. Too many people are looking for too many things, all the time, all over the world. But they do look at it. As I say, I've no idea why it's behind a subscription wall, the Britannica certainly isn't (maybe the Americans should buy it from us and make it freely available) but that does mean we can be fairly sure there aren't more than these five pronunciations in the Anglosphere. Now, the one I
2156:
American pronunciation, as far as all my empirical is able to tell me. I’m asking you to be aware of this, and not to take me for a damn fool, at least you didn’t. The silence was a better lesson than strenuous capitalisation, and I was not in the mood for witless post facto third party responses. But I have a bit more to back me up than (only!) the OED, thanks a lot. ‘Gəˈlɪʃən’ is absolutely not staying in the article as a testament to the importance of sourced content. I would feel no qualms at all about removing the pronunciation for my own sound reasons.
1048:
a regional pronunciation, rather than an international one, and wouldn't miss from an article on
Spanish Galicia. If many countries have a common language this is the kind of thing that happens; this is a hindrance to native speakers of English. It's certainly not helpful. I can say that much. But I can't say any more unless somebody gets back to me in some way, either to rebut or enquire or whatever. Do not ignore me. Otherwise I'm going to remove both of your cited pronunciations as redundant parochialisms.
845:
of sociolinguistics. Which is based on modern state boundaries. But from a historical-linguistic point of view, "Galician" cannot be separated from
Northern Portuguese; it's part of a coherent Northern Portuguese dialect continuum. "Galician" is essentially just a catch-all name for the northernmost dialects of Portuguese, and a standard language based on them. Alternatively, especially for the medieval period, one might subsume all dialects as far south as the Douro (or even further) as "Galician". --
31:
1694:
dictionary, thank you. We don’t take the infallible authority of the OED, we say what we say and the OED follows our lead. At the same time, it’s likely to include the greatest number of variant pronunciations known. By the same token, not all of these will be ubiquitously listed elsewhere. Of course, caute, but my claim is still that this pronunciation is very common, even though it’s not listed in other places. The only place I know it will be listed is in the OED.
961:
pronunciation of the word "Galician" is "galego", without "sh", "th", or "s", so resorting to the "original pronunciation" to resolve how the word is pronounced in
English would be ineffective.) Each language has its own pronunciation of words describing foreign places, which may be different to the ones used in said places (for example, the Galician word for "English" is pronounced /in'gles/, even if /'inglis/ would still be pronounceable in that language).
1927:
glad you went with your instincts on ‘angstrom’. But I didn’t ask you to pick up the thread, and I have quite a clear idea why such a pronunciation might get into the dictionary. Not at all inclined to suspend judgment on ‘any fool who thinks he can quote the OED...’ on that basis. Now, this debate closed when two participants left it. But you chose to resume it, for what reason, I can’t fathom. I told you very shortly how much I wanted to discuss with
705:(Galego, Galician language); from that same century Galician and Portuguese literatures evolved and developed with little mutual interaction until today; and from the 16th century Iberian authors generally differentiate Portuguese and Galician, and from that moment you would find that most scholars or visitors cite Galician language as closer to Portuguese than to Spanish, but in its own space. In any case, virtually any person in Galician call it
368:
279:
258:
85:
64:
289:
174:
153:
22:
184:
2667:, i.e. a form of medieval Latin with some obvious influences from Romance, however those documents, from about the 10th century, only exist for northern Spain (Central Spain was under Arab/Muslim rule), so what could they possibly prove? Notice that the first documents written in Castilian proper, rather than Latin, are from central-southern Spain (
1189:
kind of forum dealing with education. The final (and listed, first, as primary 'British' pronunciation) is /ɡəˈlɪsiən/. Again, simply: no. You would only hear it from a
Chilean Spanish teacher. Only two pronunciations are marked regional; one I didn't know about, one I find (at the very least) out of place. You see how tricky it is citing
2432:"The language is officially regulated in Galicia by the Royal Galician Academy. Other organisations without institutional support, such as the Galician Association of Language and the Galician Academy of the Portuguese Language, include Galician as part of the Portuguese language, as the Galician-Portuguese variant."
996:'European', rather than, say, North American or Australasian. I hope I'm explaining this properly, but this is to me like insisting on an 'English English pronunciation' in an article on Chile, when I know the natural English pronunciation in the article would derive from North American. That's when I'd go to Webster.
1447:
But do note that this phenomenon occurs, because we ourselves tend to underestimate our foreign-language capabilities. There are native (tending to be RP) speakers who would attempt to use it, genuinely believing that this is the only way to 'do justice' to the word. The common pronunciation is given alongside it.
2097:
cowardice does come as news. That is my edit exactly as I would have wanted to first make it, before any of this reached a pitch. If you’ll revert that, I’ll abide by the decision. But don’t do it just to make an example of me. I put the edit there believing (and still believing) it to be a contribution.
551:) are presented without favoring one over the other. Congratulations. It's rare to see such examples of neutrality in Knowledge. Still, the title states it is a language. Maybe the title should be changed to something like "Modern Galician-Portuguese", or "Galician speech"? Please give it some thought.
2151:
Thank you, what I did not do was leave an edit summary. But I think the edit and the explanation (clarification) I gave were clear enough. Why are you so mistrustful of the empirical? This is as clear-cut to me as I would wish it. As soon as I can list UK pronunciations for Idaho towns for who has to
1175:
the same understanding that our pronunciation will be considered 'more acceptable' in these countries. Apart from anything else, they're well aware people imagine them ill-travelled, so they tend to place still more importance on showing that they understand local pronunciations and cultures. I don't
1156:
That's the problem; it doesn't say that in the OED Corpus. There are five pronunciations given in the OED Corpus, one of which is marked specifically as
American: /ɡəˈlɪʃən/. The point is that in absolute terms, of course, American English has most speakers. But that doesn't qualify the pronunciation
1047:
I was hoping somebody might respond to this. I don't have to prove the absence of the pronunciation 'Galishan' from online dictionaries. I believe somebody has to make the case for listing a non-European pronunciation of a word which I'm perfectly convinced my
American counterpart would understand as
824:
Even from a pure linguistic point of view, the difference between dialect and language is quite problematic: there's no clear distinction and "dialect" isn't even a linguistic term (being the term isogloss a better one). In the end it all boils down to socio-politics, where some prefer to use dialect
2016:
What’s the template for that? It’s true, I’m not too conversant with the format. I’ve been a reader for years but not properly an editor. I got a request to take a matter to the talk page, I did, but I didn’t know you could link to the corpus directly before I began it. The edit wouldn’t have looked
1453:
is a lot simpler: the pronunciation in the link is common UK English. It's not an example of overpronunciation; we simply say /gəˈlɪθiən/ because it's no more effort in our speech. There are five pronunciation given in the not yet 'fully-updated' original 1933 edition, but this narrows to two in the
1198:
could - can - be generally used by internationals in the region, without them sounding naïve, or unworldly - something I know people are concerned about. You did ask about numbers, so I'll try my best. Americans travelling to Europe would wish to learn the 'proper' (the 'local') pronunciation to use
2518:
There are yet more meaningful claims that can be made about these relationships, however the sentence, as it has been removed, currently isn't making a claim about the features of the languages. It seems to be a unsubstantiated quibble about terminology. And regardless of what was intended, it is
1951:
This is an open forum, and you've just written that because you don't like what I said. Too bad I say. And it's too bad that you don't respect me, because guess what: I don't care. I also don't pretend to be the ultimate authority on anything, which is quite obvious from my posts. But you don't get
1350:
don't seem to agree with you. (In answer to your last question, I could give you my impression of North American usage—which is that /ɡəˈlɪʃən/ seems much more common than /ɡəˈlɪsiən/—but that has absolutely no value in deciding what should go on a Knowledge page. It's an impression, not a reliable
1193:
English pronunciation from any source, let alone the ones that are free online: none of this confirms my chosen pronunciation is widespread. But, in my judgment, in this international context, the UK pronunciation as I give it: /ɡəˈlɪθiən/ is both: not too at variance with the 'local' pronunciation
1005:
I live in the UK, and I am not in Europe as often as I'd like to be. But I've been a student of Spanish, in Europe, for ten years, through the medium of English. Please tell me why there should be an 'optional' North American English pronunciation in the article? To me it's just superfluous to list
865:
This point is very minor, but international editors ought to bear in mind that a given pronunciation in any English dictionary (even a very commonly given one) may not actually reflect the spoken form of the word. It's very rare that this happens, but it does sometimes. I just haven't heard anybody
844:
So it doesn't make sense to separate Galician out from Portuguese from the point of view of historical linguistics and dialectology – given that Galician simply descends from the same northern dialects of medieval Portuguese that Northern Portuguese also descends from –, only from the point of view
840:
From a purely linguistic point of view, it's actually pretty simple, as a Portuguese linguist friend once pointed out to me: Galician is more closely related to Northern Portuguese than Central Portuguese (on which Standard Portuguese is based) is to Northern Portuguese, so from a purely linguistic
768:
I get what you mean, but there is no controversy at all when calling that kind of whine "white wine". On the other hand, Galician has been referred to as both a language and a dialect, so it is not a similar case. And there are cultural organizations who have been lately claiming that both Galician
2211:
that ‘the only place I know it will be listed is in the OED.’ The word ‘merely’ doesn’t seem to me to apply in such a statement. I’m sorry it shouldn’t be in five dictionaries, but not truthfully surprised, and it doesn’t make me reflect that I might be mistaken. It’s accounted for. I’m not in the
2155:
You really think I give no thought for sources. Indeed I said as much, before I knew who I was talking to, or how they’d respond. ‘I don’t know, on the whole, I might try...’ What is this? I’m here to tell a Belgian and North American they’re missing a trick. ‘Gəˈlɪʃən’ may be, is in fact, a North
1973:
You picked this argument with me, thinking I might still have needed schooling, after a month’s silence from the people whose answers I'd actually sought. I was already feeling embarrassed. You do not need to chase me up to rub that in still further. But having read my post and seen the absence of
1824:
You're conveniently forgetting about the Wiktionary thread I linked to and the fact that three different pronunciation dictionaries (which are much more descriptive than prescriptive) published in a span of the last 9 years don't mention that variant at all. We have reasons not to trust the OED on
1446:
Yes no, I think you've got an American ex-military man placing a bit too much faith in the King's there! There's not a lot to disagree with about /ɔːŋstrœm/. I could imagine it, but it would be a strained middle-class pronunciation in RP, which wouldn't hang together with the rest of the sentence.
2096:
That’s alright, I don’t intend to contest the matter further. I profoundly regret the edit summary I first left, but I can’t retract it now: that is exactly what I thought. I might be sorry it turns out I was arguing against the apparent record; both listed pronunciations remain foreign to me. My
1926:
You picked this argument with me, thinking I might still have needed schooling, after a month’s silence from the people whose answers I sought. I was already embarrassed. I have no respect for you trying to re-open this debate. You were right to send me the thread link, and I read through it. I’m
1188:
be said in the UK is /ɡəˈlɪʃ(i)ən/ (though I'd remove the brackets; as I say, I've never heard /ɡəˈlɪʃən/ out of anybody's mouth), but it would sound sloppy, the person would not in any way be interested in the region. The next one I see (apparently) listed is ɡəˈlɪʃn/. Absolutely not. Not in any
1117:
Given the dictionary results so far, dismissing either or both of /ɡəˈlɪʃən/ and /ɡəˈlɪsjən/ as "parochialisms" is simply at odds with the reliable sources. So there are different pronunciations in two fairly large portions of the Anglosphere; that's English. (I don't much care about the order of
825:
to lessen the perceived importance of the language (or to imply dominance, correctness) and other prefer language to enhance it. If you follow a hispano-romance language tree you'll find that galician-portuguese was the same thing many years ago (and before that they were latin) until they split.
696:
Mhhh... In the 13th century it was clear that Galician-Portuguese had two dialects, locally evolved from Vulgar Latin: Galician and Portuguese. So it's not whether Galician is a dialect of Portuguese -it is not, it don't derives from Portuguese, rather the other way around-, but what is the exact
1024:
If you accept my word on the OED Corpus - maybe you don't - I see 'Galishan' is listed as a North American pronunciation. I had previously been unaware of its existence. In my judgment then it's not 'local', nor 'English' in any sense. How Americans, in America, never travelling outside America,
808:
No one calls Galician or Portuguese "Galician-Portuguese" in modern times though, even less "Modern Galician-Portuguese". In a modern context "Galician-Portuguese" is mainly used to describe the medieval language spoken in the Kingdom of Galicia and the County of Portugal during the middle ages.
2501:
This sentence doesn't really make sense from a linguistic perspective. "Galician-Portuguese" is the term used for the common ancestor or modern Galician and modern Portuguese, this is just a name. You can meaningfully claim that "Galician-Portuguese" was called, at the time, "Galician". e.g.
2140:
I hope I haven't been treating you as an idiot, and I think I understand what you've been saying. The point that I haven't seen you prioritizing is the requirement for reliable sources for what goes in the article, and the comparative irrelevance of my, your, or any editor's personal opinion or
792:
Nonsense. There is no true linguistic clear cut between "language" and "dialect" and all major Galician institutions, both academic and political, refer to Galician as a full-fledged language. You can find "Croatian language" and "Valencian language" in the Knowledge, having those but "Galician
2206:
A wearying explanation is a wearying explanation. What I don’t understand is you know I’m not conjuring it out of the air. It may be one source, does that have to be a problem? Must it be? That’s going to be the case too often in practice for it to be a barrier to revision of a page. I said to
1693:
I didn’t say the source said ‘UK’, I said I heard a pronunciation very frequently and I had a source that could bear me out. Now, you don’t quite get to say ‘they could have made it up’ on the basis that there was a listed pronuncation you couldn’t explain. I know why those get included in the
2118:
vəˈlɛnʃə, ˈmɜrʃə, and gəˈlɪʃə is good, it’s valid, it’s fine, but in the part of the world where it really matters, it will mark you out as an outsider. You’ve dealt with me like a complete idiot, telling me I might try simply looking the word up from the first. This I am not, nor scared, nor
1170:
I know it's closer to the original (apart from anything else, there can be political implications to using Castilian pronunciations in those regions). Many Americans (academics, tourists, businesspeople, whoever) are fascinated by 'Europe' (this is their phrase: they can of course distinguish
995:
I can't link to, for example, the Oxford Living Dictionaries because those are cut down. I can't link to the OED Corpus because that's behind a subscription wall (when it should of course be freely accessible). I do think of 'Europe' as an entity, and, if you care, I do still consider myself
612:
I might be 4 years late but naming it "Modern Galician-Portuguese" is stupid. You could also name the Portuguese language article that way by your logic. No one calls either language that way, even if most linguists consider them two co-dialects. "Modern Galician-Portuguese" could refer to a
960:
You are right in that the Galician pronunciation of the word "Galicia" is "Galithia", but in this case we are not discussing the pronunciation of a Galician word, but the pronunciation of the English word for "Galician", so the Galician pronunciation is not relevant. (In fact, the Galician
2411:
I was reviewing the article and I just noticed there are two sections ("Classification" and "Ortography") talking about the same topics: relationship with Portuguese, reintegrationism, ortography and political overtones. I propose to merger them and change "Ortography" to a subsection of
1225:, are you yourself North American? Is /ɡəˈlɪʃən/ actually more common than /ɡəˈlɪsiən/? Does one predominate? I should say we definitely do say /fəˈnɪʃən/ in the UK, it's just we're close to modern Spain and if we were travelling there we wouldn't say anything but /ɡəˈlɪθiən/.
2599:. Coimbra was "reconquested" in 878 and repopulated with Galicians, according to chronicles; we knew the name of one of his early bishops post conquest: Nausti, who was buried back in Galicia, in Trobe near Santiago de Compostela, where we have his tombstone and epitaph (cf.
583:
1086:
of the dictionary resources I have found (oxforddictionaries.com, Merriam-Webster, Collins Dictionary, dictionary.com, WordReference, TheFreeDictionary, and my Larousse English–Spanish dictionary) show /ɡəˈlɪθjən/ as the pronunciation—almost all of them show -ʃən, -ʃɪən.
2435:
The regulating body is already in the infobox, and the page of other similar languages (Catalan, French, Spanish, Portuguese, German) does not include the regulating body in the first section of the article. This information should be moved to one of the subtopics.
1161:
say trying to go back to the 'original pronunciation' is futile, because after all we're not speaking Galician. No, we're not. I barely speak a word of that language for one. But I'm driving at a little more: North Americans learn Latin American Spanish first, so
638:
I see. But what if the Google search results are atrociously wrong? I mean, using Google search as the way to regulate what is academically accurate and what is not, is like using the Yahoo forums or the Youtube comments section to write a paper for University.
966:
Additionally, I'd like to split this into two different points: whether or not "Galishan" exists, and whether or not "Galithian" exists, because one does not imply or reject the other, so adding or removing either pronunciation should be considered
2675:, however this conception, that has been repeated uncritically for more than one century, ignores the findings of modern Sociolinguistics, which shows that when mutually intelligible linguistic varieties meet each other, complex processes of
1974:
any response, you felt quite free to wade in a month later specifically to tell me something I'd probably worked out for myself by then. I'm not in the slightest interested why, and I'd ask that we draw this discussion to some kind of close.
870:'galisha'; maybe 'galishia', but otherwise it's easier in English to pronounce it more or less as in Castilian: 'galithia'/'galisia'. 'Galisha' just doesn't sound like an English word: sounds more like Italian to me. That's all I'm going on.
754:. Sociolonguistically it may be somewhat odd, but linguistically would be the only accurate way, I guess. It would be much appreciated if you could give it some thought, not only for this article, but for others related to linguistic issues.
587:
2073:
I see that after that whole discussion you've ignored the lack of consensus and prioritized your favored pronunciation against the weight of multiple other dictionaries. "Getting consensus" doesn't mean "waiting until no one is looking".
1122:, it's unclear from your comment whether the OED Corpus shows widespread use of /ɡəˈlɪθjən/ in English, though; does it? The absence of the pronunciation from so many other dictionaries seems to weigh against its inclusion.
2752:
1575:
Hold on a second. They say nothing about it being common in the UK, they just include it. If it were in any way common, why three different pronunciation dictionaries don't even mention it?! At best, it's the same as with
2464:
The tilde has some other functions. Sometimes the tilde is written to show that there is not a diphthong among two vowels which happen to be alongside one another within the same word "aínda" (yet). If the tilde ..."
717:("Galician language"), in spite of personal opinions on what's the relation of modern Galician and modern Portuguese. Ditto for Academia and universities. We could merge Galician with Portuguese articles and name it
35:
2514:
Although currently referred to as Galician-Portuguese, Portuguese has undergone more change since the 14th century than Galician, making Galician-Portuguese more similar to modern Galician than modern Portuguese.
1291:: Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (3rd ed.), Cambridge English Pronouncing Dictionary (18th ed.) and Routledge Dictionary of Pronunciation of Current English. I'd say that's a strong argument not to include it.
2600:
2742:
2496:
Although currently referred to as Galician-Portuguese, until the 14th Century it was Galician, as the Portuguese language only comes into existence in that period. The Portuguese language developed from
2185:. Knowledge is not the repository of all that is right and true. I'm not taking you for a "damn fool". I'm trying to talk to you as someone who wants to follow the guidelines of the site you're editing.
2757:
2549:
There is a very common idea among Spanish Philologists, according to which all modern Iberian Romance languages originated in the northernmost area of Spain and then travelled south, as if they were
2372:
If the page on IPA for Galician is to be believed, Galician /o/ (along with /u/ and /ɔ/) is reduced to in word-final position, meaning that the pronunciation should be either , or indeed /ɡaˈlego/.
1995:
I'm done explaining myself when I did nothing wrong. You should've closed the discussion yourself if you didn't want me or other users to reply. I'm not a psychic to know that kind of stuff.
1006:
it; if I were North American, I'd want to know what the 'European' pronunciation was, which, because my native language is still English, would probably mean the pronunciation in the UK.
2212:
cut and thrust, but I’ve been editing for long enough. I can’t ‘go and be right somewhere else’ when the revision I want to make pertains to this site and the people who consult it.
1628:
I'm not saying that it is, I'm saying that it's very likely that it's not an established pronunciation. It's questionable whether we should include it in this article. I wouldn't.
2603:). During the 9th and 10th centuries southern Galicia and northern Portugal were heavily settled with people that came from central and northern Galicia: cf. Paulo Martinez Lema,
2461:"The "tilde" (´) is a small line written over some vowels to show in some cases which syllable carries the accent, "paspallás" (quail), "móbil" (mobile) "cárcere" (jail, gaol).
911:
the region in which it is spoken, without a thought to their country of origin. Please give what I say a little more of a hearing, and tell me how we progress with this issue.
591:
1246:
They'd reply to your post if you put half the energy you put into writing it into finding a reliable source for the pronunciation you want to have in the article. This is
769:
and Portuguese are dialects towards each other. Not trying to be a smart aleck, but seriously maybe it will be nice if Knowledge naming convention rules slightly changed.
2659:
First, there is no real solid evidence about where the modern Iberian Romances were born. For example, the theory about Castilian/Spanish being born around the city of
2671:), from about the 12th century. Second, the main idea about the dialects of Northern Spain advancing south and entirely replacing the local forms of Romance is that
2314:
2310:
2296:
488:
484:
470:
1171:
constituent countries), and so, travelling in the Continent, our islands, or Proper, they tend to use a UK-derived pronunciation in international contexts, on
2578:: «si tu vols far un cantar en frances, no·s tayn que y mescles proençal ne cicilia, ne gallego, ne altre lengatge que sia strayn a aquell» (cf. Pär Larson,
907:
No English speaker in Spain says this. No North American in Europe says this. I can tell you the common, international, English, pronunciation of this word,
1184:
is acceptable in the UK is /ɡəˈlɪθiən/ (not fastidiously /ɡəˈlɪθjən/), more or less in line with Castilian: not, or maybe with Galician. The next one which
2412:"relationship with Portuguese", making the article more tidy and the flow of information more organic. Please let me know about your view about this idea.
345:
2797:
2737:
1166:
know I'm safe using a North American's pronunciation of Santa Cruz, in Bolivia (/ˈsæntə kɹuːz/) in my English, in Latin American countries: precisely
335:
1346:. The OED Corpus is exactly that: a corpus of text, not an expert opinion. You're going through it and drawing inferences; and meanwhile, the actual
2767:
841:
point of view Galician belongs to a clade including both Northern Portuguese and Galician, and as such would have to be subsumed under "Portuguese".
135:
125:
2802:
2747:
1428:
which no native speaker would use), but still - it may be nothing more than their invention. I'm not saying that it is, but it's not improbable.
2262:
2782:
2604:
240:
230:
2772:
2272:
1521:
I could imagine it, but it would be a strained middle-class pronunciation in RP, which wouldn't hang together with the rest of the sentence.
2787:
2480:
1387:
No, no, don't mistake me, the corpus is a dictionary like any other, as well as the nearest thing we have to a complete reference. If this
547:
The article is well written. It doesn't seem to have any bias of any kind, and both views of Galician as a dialect of Galician-Portuguese (
311:
826:
2792:
893:
more often heard "galisha" than "galithia" from native English speakers, but my observations don't count as a reliable source either.
784:
654:
101:
448:
2762:
2292:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
2510:
You can also meaningfully claim that Galician-Portuguese is more similar to modern Galician than it is to modern Portuguese. e.g.
721:(and then also the respective Wikipedias, Wicktionaries, etc.) but that would be sociolinguistically and historically senseless.--
2181:, and by that guideline simply don't belong on Knowledge. It doesn't even matter if you're right, if it can't be documented from
384:
206:
2777:
2732:
2595:
In the region of Coimbra, in northern central Portugal, there is a Mozarabic (i.e. non-Portuguese) substrate in toponymy, cf.
2380:
302:
263:
972:
PS: Maybe the more common(?) "Galisian" pronunciation should be listed as the first one, leaving "Galishan" as the second one.
2539:
701:
Galician is its own kind of animal at least since the 14th century, when we record the fist examples of Galician cited as
92:
69:
2357:
44:
2190:
2079:
1356:
1176:
know how to go away and find an article that will prove this: you just have to believe this or I can't continue. Now,
1127:
898:
197:
158:
2673:
the winning side (i.e. the northern Christian kingdoms) imposes its language and culture on the conquered territories
2506:
Although currently referred to as Galician-Portuguese, until the 14th Century it was referred to simply as Galician.
1829:
is used at all, you're probably strongly exaggerating how common it is, otherwise it'd be included in more sources.
2643:
850:
2635:
933:
2313:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
487:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
396:
2535:
1342:'s comment is the important point. I appreciate the research you've done, but your entire paragraph amounts to
2570:
The first international mention to Galician-Portuguese, as a language of culture, is recorded in 1290, in the
2476:
2263:
https://web.archive.org/web/20061102180041/http://www.instituto-camoes.pt/cvc/hlp/biblioteca/novaproposta.pdf
830:
2348:
2254:
1764:
2273:
https://web.archive.org/web/20111208141453/http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/hemeroteca/2002/02/22/973946.shtml
2201:
2186:
2146:
2113:
2091:
2075:
1902:
1898:
1826:
1768:
1524:
1425:
1384:
1352:
1280:
1222:
1218:
1177:
1123:
894:
780:
650:
561:
2472:
2654:
2639:
2332:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
2320:
943:
846:
683:
632:
601:
526:
506:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
494:
50:
2253:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
776:
667:
646:
573:
557:
2612:
2526:
If we are going to reintroduce some form of this claim, it should be specific and, very importantly,
2468:
2266:
2217:
2161:
2124:
2102:
2022:
1979:
1935:
1893:
I've just looked through the aforementioned pronunciation dictionaries to check the pronunciation of
1699:
1459:
1396:
1374:
1230:
1204:
1053:
1030:
916:
875:
772:
726:
642:
579:
2439:
2415:
2389:
810:
794:
614:
21:
2443:
2419:
2393:
2376:
1413:
1247:
814:
798:
618:
2663:
or in some other center-of-north peninsular area is based on a number of old documents written in
2276:
672:
The title does not need to be "accurate". It is only important for the title to be in common use.
449:
https://web.archive.org/20080511234830/http://www.consellodacultura.org/docs/lyngoage_galega_2.pdf
310:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
205:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
100:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
2714:
2000:
1957:
1910:
1834:
1633:
1433:
1296:
1092:
982:
402:
2317:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
2282:
1221:, Hello again, I was just wondering has this given you any more thoughts? I was meaning to ask,
491:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
2333:
507:
2688:
2567:
First, I absolutely agree with removing that sentences; I just want to point a pair of facts:
2558:
2246:
452:
430:
420:
2083:
879:
938:
760:
678:
628:
596:
522:
398:
367:
2521:
Our language is the legitimate one! That language they speak next door is a bastard tongue!
2340:
1079:
514:
2608:
2213:
2172:
2157:
2135:
2120:
2098:
2068:
2018:
1990:
1975:
1946:
1931:
1758:
1695:
1470:
1455:
1407:
1392:
1370:
1333:
1241:
1226:
1200:
1119:
1049:
1026:
927:
912:
871:
751:
742:
722:
438:
294:
97:
1763:
So again, we're just supposed to take your words on faith. That's not how it works - see
1075:
2706:
2373:
2299:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
473:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
2339:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
513:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
2726:
2710:
2668:
2208:
2011:
1996:
1968:
1953:
1921:
1906:
1830:
1688:
1629:
1443:
1429:
1366:
1339:
1292:
1214:
1158:
1088:
978:
1250:, you won't convince anyone by trying to write your way around the issue of sources.
1074:
I don't know what OED says, but Oxford Dictionaries Online shows /ɡəˈlɪsjən/ as the
2684:
2676:
2629:
2554:
2182:
2178:
1347:
1343:
1025:
pronounce the word 'Galicia', is not relevant to me. In Europe, we say 'Galithia'.
886:
189:
1905:
as the main one. You can't expect 100% consistency in pronunciation of loanwords.
834:
658:
565:
2306:
480:
288:
278:
257:
2305:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1573:
Galician is a lot simpler: the pronunciation in the link is common UK English.
673:
479:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
284:
179:
84:
63:
2596:
400:
2709:
and offer her/his opinion on that talk-page? So there, not here. Thank you!
1475:
You need to use the replyto template if you want to notify me of your reply.
2718:
2692:
2647:
2616:
2562:
2543:
2447:
2423:
2397:
2383:
2362:
2221:
2194:
2165:
2128:
2106:
2026:
2004:
1983:
1961:
1939:
1914:
1838:
1703:
1637:
1463:
1437:
1400:
1378:
1360:
1300:
1234:
1208:
1131:
1096:
1057:
1034:
986:
949:
920:
902:
854:
818:
802:
730:
689:
622:
607:
534:
173:
152:
2530:. I have no citations in mind for the example sentences I have provided,
1771:
is common is on you. As far as I can see, the OED doesn't comment on that.
1015:
And this UK pronunciation just happens to coincide with Castilian Spanish.
2388:
That might be true for some dialects, but not for standard pronunciation
676:
is not white at all, but we still use that obviously "inaccurate" title.
307:
1952:
to try to silence me just because I disagree with you. It's ridiculous.
1369:
They duly didn't reply to my post and I hope I was quick on the uptake.
435:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
2605:
Ad Populandum: toponímia e repovoamento no sul da Galiza alto-medieval
1929:
whoever this was who thought it might be clever to take up the mantle.
2660:
578:
In Knowledge, we use the most commonly used names for articles (see:
1626:
We simply say /gəˈlɪθiən/ because it's no more effort in our speech.
2458:
A tilde is ~. An acute accent is ´, which is what is described in:
1388:
889:
go, they're on much better footing than "it sounds wrong to me". I
2267:
http://www.instituto-camoes.pt/cvc/hlp/biblioteca/novaproposta.pdf
443:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
202:
1416:
for problems with using the OED as a source for pronunciations.
2753:
Knowledge level-5 vital articles in Society and social sciences
2277:
http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/hemeroteca/2002/02/22/973946.shtml
403:
361:
15:
2283:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080102053522/http://www.l-v.es/
2580:
La lingua delle «cantigas». Grammatica del galego-portoghese
458:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
453:
http://www.consellodacultura.org/docs/lyngoage_galega_2.pdf
2574:
of the Catalan Jofre de Froixà, where it is simply called
2553:
on the map. Needless to say, that idea is preposterous. --
2429:
Also, this paragraph doesn't belong in the introduction:
2257:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1901:. There's no surprise - all of them list the variant with
1338:
I hadn't meant to take this long to reply, but, in short,
1897:, which is perhaps the most common Spanish loanword with
809:
Other than that it's used by linguists or politicians...
419:
I have just added archive links to one external link on
2743:
Knowledge vital articles in Society and social sciences
2250:
697:
relation of modern Galician and modern Portuguese. But
424:
2758:
C-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
2286:
1767:. The burden of proving that the pronunciation with
306:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
201:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
96:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
2636:
Iberian Romance languages § Origins and development
2309:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1825:this, at least that's my view. If the variant with
1420:as transcribed by the OED is less problematic than
885:Dictionaries can certainly contain errors, but, as
483:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
2597:TOPONÍMIA MOÇÁRABE NO ANTIGO CONDADO CONIMBRICENSE
1279:None of the following list the pronunciation with
2488:Removal of claim with dubious linguistic content.
2707:the talk-page of Rábade: "From rabad or ribat?"
2679:take place, and the result is hardly ever just
2295:This message was posted before February 2018.
469:This message was posted before February 2018.
2705:Can someone knowledgeable pls take a look at
8:
2017:so aloof if I’d known, and that’s my fault.
594:(919 results). Common name is very obvious.
2519:much more akin to nationalist claims that "
2404:Merger of "classification" and "ortography"
861:English pronunciation of 'Galicia' in Spain
2466:
770:
640:
252:
147:
58:
2523:" than anything with linguistic content.
2454:Erroneous use of tilde in Grammar section
2245:I have just modified 3 external links on
2492:I've removed the sentences, just added:
2638:? Why should that be "preposterous"? --
1194:(we're not too far distant from Spain)
932:We don't progress unless you show some
254:
149:
60:
19:
7:
1078:pronunciation and /ɡəˈlɪʃən/ as the
300:This article is within the scope of
195:This article is within the scope of
90:This article is within the scope of
1424:(for which they use the non-native
1118:which order they're presented in.)
582:). Compare Google Search hits for:
49:It is of interest to the following
1527:isn't a native vowel, as you know.
14:
2249:. Please take a moment to review
1391:works, it should do as a source.
423:. Please take a moment to review
2798:Mid-importance language articles
2738:Knowledge level-5 vital articles
2532:they may even be factually false
1414:Wiktionary:Beer_parlour#angstrom
1157:for the article on its own. You
750:What you say makes great sense,
543:Neutrality in the article's name
366:
287:
277:
256:
182:
172:
151:
83:
62:
29:
20:
2768:Top-importance Galicia articles
2681:one variety replacing the other
860:
340:This article has been rated as
320:Knowledge:WikiProject Languages
235:This article has been rated as
130:This article has been rated as
2803:WikiProject Languages articles
2748:C-Class level-5 vital articles
1464:17:53, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
1438:22:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
1401:17:54, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
1379:17:54, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
1361:15:44, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
1301:15:01, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
1235:12:59, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
323:Template:WikiProject Languages
1:
2783:Top-importance Spain articles
2177:Your "own sound reasons" are
1209:10:20, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
1132:00:54, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
1097:23:01, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
1058:18:26, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
1035:22:56, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
987:20:12, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
950:18:17, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
921:17:24, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
903:01:38, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
880:21:03, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
314:and see a list of open tasks.
209:and see a list of open tasks.
110:Knowledge:WikiProject Galicia
104:and see a list of open tasks.
2773:WikiProject Galicia articles
2693:22:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
2648:02:13, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
2634:Like in the animated map at
2617:09:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
2563:00:16, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
2363:09:09, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
2222:03:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
2195:15:53, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
2166:00:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
2129:23:07, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
2107:19:54, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
2084:15:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
1580:. At worst, they made it up.
855:02:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
793:dialect" would be ludicrous
535:18:13, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
113:Template:WikiProject Galicia
2788:All WikiProject Spain pages
2719:10:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
2544:20:35, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
2408:Hi all fellow Wikipedians,
2368:Pronunciation of local name
2027:16:56, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
2005:10:33, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
1984:09:58, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
1962:04:01, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
1940:03:47, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
1915:19:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
1839:19:18, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
1704:19:02, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
1638:10:03, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
1076:British & World English
215:Knowledge:WikiProject Spain
2819:
2384:09:20, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
2326:(last update: 5 June 2024)
2242:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
731:15:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
719:Modern Galician-Portuguese
690:22:32, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
588:Modern Galician-Portuguese
500:(last update: 5 June 2024)
441:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
416:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
346:project's importance scale
241:project's importance scale
218:Template:WikiProject Spain
136:project's importance scale
2793:C-Class language articles
835:11:33, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
659:09:59, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
608:15:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
566:14:19, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
339:
272:
234:
167:
129:
78:
57:
2763:C-Class Galicia articles
2448:03:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
2424:03:42, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
2398:03:49, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
1454:published 1989 edition.
819:22:51, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
803:03:54, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
623:22:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
2238:External links modified
412:External links modified
2778:C-Class Spain articles
2733:C-Class vital articles
1080:North American English
303:WikiProject Languages
36:level-5 vital article
2307:regular verification
1082:one. To summarize,
542:
481:regular verification
466:to let others know.
427:. If necessary, add
2536:AquitaneHungerForce
2297:After February 2018
699:sociolinguistically
586:(192,000 results),
471:After February 2018
462:parameter below to
93:WikiProject Galicia
2351:InternetArchiveBot
2302:InternetArchiveBot
2287:http://www.l-v.es/
934:wp:reliable source
476:InternetArchiveBot
45:content assessment
2484:
2471:comment added by
2327:
2247:Galician language
2202:Nitpicking polish
2187:Nitpicking polish
2179:original research
2147:Nitpicking polish
2114:Nitpicking polish
2092:Nitpicking polish
2076:Nitpicking polish
1385:Nitpicking polish
1353:Nitpicking polish
1344:original research
1223:Nitpicking polish
1219:Nitpicking polish
1178:Nitpicking polish
1124:Nitpicking polish
936:for your claims.
895:Nitpicking polish
788:
775:comment added by
661:
645:comment added by
584:Galician language
533:
501:
421:Galician language
409:
408:
390:
389:
360:
359:
356:
355:
352:
351:
326:language articles
251:
250:
247:
246:
198:WikiProject Spain
146:
145:
142:
141:
2810:
2665:latín romanceado
2658:
2655:Florian Blaschke
2640:Florian Blaschke
2633:
2572:Regles de trobar
2361:
2352:
2325:
2324:
2303:
2205:
2183:reliable sources
2176:
2150:
2139:
2117:
2095:
2072:
2015:
1994:
1972:
1950:
1925:
1904:
1900:
1828:
1770:
1765:WP:VERIFIABILITY
1762:
1692:
1526:
1474:
1427:
1411:
1348:reliable sources
1337:
1282:
1245:
946:
941:
931:
887:reliable sources
847:Florian Blaschke
764:
746:
703:lyngoagem galego
686:
681:
671:
629:User:Vanjagenije
604:
599:
577:
549:Galaicoportugués
529:
528:Talk to my owner
524:
499:
498:
477:
442:
434:
404:
381:
380:
370:
362:
328:
327:
324:
321:
318:
297:
292:
291:
281:
274:
273:
268:
260:
253:
223:
222:
219:
216:
213:
192:
187:
186:
185:
176:
169:
168:
163:
155:
148:
118:
117:
116:Galicia articles
114:
111:
108:
87:
80:
79:
74:
66:
59:
42:
33:
32:
25:
24:
16:
2818:
2817:
2813:
2812:
2811:
2809:
2808:
2807:
2723:
2722:
2703:
2652:
2627:
2490:
2456:
2406:
2370:
2355:
2350:
2318:
2311:have permission
2301:
2255:this simple FaQ
2240:
2199:
2170:
2144:
2133:
2111:
2089:
2066:
2009:
1988:
1966:
1944:
1919:
1756:
1686:
1468:
1405:
1331:
1239:
944:
939:
925:
863:
758:
740:
684:
679:
665:
602:
597:
592:Galician speech
571:
545:
532:
527:
492:
485:have permission
475:
436:
428:
414:
405:
399:
375:
325:
322:
319:
316:
315:
295:Language portal
293:
286:
266:
220:
217:
214:
211:
210:
188:
183:
181:
161:
115:
112:
109:
106:
105:
72:
43:on Knowledge's
40:
30:
12:
11:
5:
2816:
2814:
2806:
2805:
2800:
2795:
2790:
2785:
2780:
2775:
2770:
2765:
2760:
2755:
2750:
2745:
2740:
2735:
2725:
2724:
2702:
2699:
2698:
2697:
2696:
2695:
2624:
2623:
2622:
2621:
2620:
2619:
2588:
2587:
2586:
2585:
2584:
2583:
2528:properly cited
2516:
2515:
2508:
2507:
2499:
2498:
2489:
2486:
2473:193.144.51.216
2455:
2452:
2405:
2402:
2369:
2366:
2345:
2344:
2337:
2290:
2289:
2281:Added archive
2279:
2271:Added archive
2269:
2261:Added archive
2239:
2236:
2235:
2234:
2233:
2232:
2231:
2230:
2229:
2228:
2227:
2226:
2225:
2224:
2153:
2064:
2063:
2062:
2061:
2060:
2059:
2058:
2057:
2056:
2055:
2054:
2053:
2052:
2051:
2050:
2049:
2048:
2047:
2046:
2045:
2044:
2043:
2042:
2041:
2040:
2039:
2038:
2037:
2036:
2035:
2034:
2033:
2032:
2031:
2030:
2029:
1866:
1865:
1864:
1863:
1862:
1861:
1860:
1859:
1858:
1857:
1856:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1852:
1851:
1850:
1849:
1848:
1847:
1846:
1845:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1841:
1797:
1796:
1795:
1794:
1793:
1792:
1791:
1790:
1789:
1788:
1787:
1786:
1785:
1784:
1783:
1782:
1781:
1780:
1779:
1778:
1777:
1776:
1775:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1724:
1723:
1722:
1721:
1720:
1719:
1718:
1717:
1716:
1715:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1711:
1710:
1709:
1708:
1707:
1706:
1661:
1660:
1659:
1658:
1657:
1656:
1655:
1654:
1653:
1652:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1648:
1647:
1646:
1645:
1644:
1643:
1642:
1641:
1640:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1585:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1448:
1381:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1211:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
990:
989:
974:
973:
969:
968:
963:
962:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
952:
862:
859:
858:
857:
842:
822:
821:
806:
766:
765:
748:
747:
736:
734:
733:
713:("Galego") or
693:
692:
626:
625:
610:
590:(10 results),
544:
541:
539:
525:
519:
518:
511:
456:
455:
447:Added archive
413:
410:
407:
406:
401:
397:
395:
392:
391:
388:
387:
377:
376:
371:
365:
358:
357:
354:
353:
350:
349:
342:Mid-importance
338:
332:
331:
329:
312:the discussion
299:
298:
282:
270:
269:
267:Mid‑importance
261:
249:
248:
245:
244:
237:Top-importance
233:
227:
226:
224:
221:Spain articles
207:the discussion
194:
193:
177:
165:
164:
162:Top‑importance
156:
144:
143:
140:
139:
132:Top-importance
128:
122:
121:
119:
102:the discussion
88:
76:
75:
73:Top‑importance
67:
55:
54:
48:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2815:
2804:
2801:
2799:
2796:
2794:
2791:
2789:
2786:
2784:
2781:
2779:
2776:
2774:
2771:
2769:
2766:
2764:
2761:
2759:
2756:
2754:
2751:
2749:
2746:
2744:
2741:
2739:
2736:
2734:
2731:
2730:
2728:
2721:
2720:
2716:
2712:
2708:
2700:
2694:
2690:
2686:
2682:
2678:
2674:
2670:
2666:
2662:
2656:
2651:
2650:
2649:
2645:
2641:
2637:
2631:
2626:
2625:
2618:
2614:
2610:
2606:
2602:
2598:
2594:
2593:
2592:
2591:
2590:
2589:
2581:
2577:
2573:
2569:
2568:
2566:
2565:
2564:
2560:
2556:
2552:
2548:
2547:
2546:
2545:
2541:
2537:
2533:
2529:
2524:
2522:
2513:
2512:
2511:
2505:
2504:
2503:
2495:
2494:
2493:
2487:
2485:
2482:
2478:
2474:
2470:
2462:
2459:
2453:
2451:
2449:
2445:
2441:
2437:
2433:
2430:
2427:
2425:
2421:
2417:
2413:
2409:
2403:
2401:
2399:
2395:
2391:
2386:
2385:
2382:
2378:
2375:
2367:
2365:
2364:
2359:
2354:
2353:
2342:
2338:
2335:
2331:
2330:
2329:
2322:
2316:
2312:
2308:
2304:
2298:
2293:
2288:
2284:
2280:
2278:
2274:
2270:
2268:
2264:
2260:
2259:
2258:
2256:
2252:
2248:
2243:
2237:
2223:
2219:
2215:
2210:
2203:
2198:
2197:
2196:
2192:
2188:
2184:
2180:
2174:
2169:
2168:
2167:
2163:
2159:
2154:
2148:
2143:
2142:
2137:
2132:
2131:
2130:
2126:
2122:
2115:
2110:
2109:
2108:
2104:
2100:
2093:
2088:
2087:
2086:
2085:
2081:
2077:
2070:
2028:
2024:
2020:
2013:
2008:
2007:
2006:
2002:
1998:
1992:
1987:
1986:
1985:
1981:
1977:
1970:
1965:
1964:
1963:
1959:
1955:
1948:
1943:
1942:
1941:
1937:
1933:
1930:
1923:
1918:
1917:
1916:
1912:
1908:
1896:
1892:
1891:
1890:
1889:
1888:
1887:
1886:
1885:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1875:
1874:
1873:
1872:
1871:
1870:
1869:
1868:
1867:
1840:
1836:
1832:
1823:
1822:
1821:
1820:
1819:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1815:
1814:
1813:
1812:
1811:
1810:
1809:
1808:
1807:
1806:
1805:
1804:
1803:
1802:
1801:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1766:
1760:
1755:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1748:
1747:
1746:
1745:
1744:
1743:
1742:
1741:
1740:
1739:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1734:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1690:
1685:
1684:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1680:
1679:
1678:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1674:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1670:
1669:
1668:
1667:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1639:
1635:
1631:
1627:
1624:
1623:
1622:
1621:
1620:
1619:
1618:
1617:
1616:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1579:
1574:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1564:
1563:
1562:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1523:Yes, because
1522:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1472:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1461:
1457:
1452:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1435:
1431:
1423:
1419:
1415:
1409:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1398:
1394:
1390:
1386:
1382:
1380:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1358:
1354:
1349:
1345:
1341:
1335:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1302:
1298:
1294:
1290:
1286:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1249:
1243:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1232:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1197:
1192:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1174:
1169:
1165:
1160:
1155:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1067:
1066:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1046:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1004:
1003:
1002:
1001:
994:
993:
992:
991:
988:
984:
980:
976:
975:
971:
970:
965:
964:
959:
958:
951:
948:
947:
942:
935:
929:
924:
923:
922:
918:
914:
910:
906:
905:
904:
900:
896:
892:
888:
884:
883:
882:
881:
877:
873:
869:
856:
852:
848:
843:
839:
838:
837:
836:
832:
828:
827:213.143.50.85
820:
816:
812:
807:
804:
800:
796:
791:
790:
789:
786:
782:
778:
774:
762:
757:
756:
755:
753:
744:
739:
738:
737:
732:
728:
724:
720:
716:
715:lingua galega
712:
708:
704:
700:
695:
694:
691:
688:
687:
682:
675:
669:
664:
663:
662:
660:
656:
652:
648:
644:
636:
634:
630:
624:
620:
616:
611:
609:
606:
605:
600:
593:
589:
585:
581:
580:WP:COMMONNAME
575:
570:
569:
568:
567:
563:
559:
555:
554:All the best
552:
550:
540:
537:
536:
530:
523:
516:
512:
509:
505:
504:
503:
496:
490:
486:
482:
478:
472:
467:
465:
461:
454:
450:
446:
445:
444:
440:
432:
426:
422:
417:
411:
394:
393:
386:
383:
382:
379:
378:
374:
369:
364:
363:
347:
343:
337:
334:
333:
330:
313:
309:
305:
304:
296:
290:
285:
283:
280:
276:
275:
271:
265:
262:
259:
255:
242:
238:
232:
229:
228:
225:
208:
204:
200:
199:
191:
180:
178:
175:
171:
170:
166:
160:
157:
154:
150:
137:
133:
127:
124:
123:
120:
103:
99:
95:
94:
89:
86:
82:
81:
77:
71:
68:
65:
61:
56:
52:
46:
38:
37:
27:
23:
18:
17:
2704:
2701:An etymology
2680:
2677:Koineization
2672:
2664:
2579:
2575:
2571:
2550:
2531:
2527:
2525:
2520:
2517:
2509:
2500:
2491:
2467:— Preceding
2463:
2460:
2457:
2438:
2434:
2431:
2428:
2414:
2410:
2407:
2387:
2371:
2349:
2346:
2321:source check
2300:
2294:
2291:
2244:
2241:
2065:
1928:
1894:
1625:
1577:
1572:
1520:
1450:
1421:
1417:
1288:
1284:
1248:WP:NOTAFORUM
1195:
1190:
1185:
1181:
1172:
1167:
1163:
1083:
937:
908:
890:
867:
864:
823:
777:Atlantic sir
771:— Preceding
767:
749:
735:
718:
714:
710:
706:
702:
698:
677:
668:Atlantic sir
647:Atlantic sir
641:— Preceding
637:
627:
595:
574:Atlantic sir
558:Atlantic sir
556:
553:
548:
546:
538:
520:
495:source check
474:
468:
463:
459:
457:
418:
415:
372:
341:
301:
236:
196:
190:Spain portal
131:
91:
51:WikiProjects
34:
1283:for either
967:separately.
940:Vanjagenije
761:Vanjagenije
680:Vanjagenije
598:Vanjagenije
2727:Categories
2609:Froaringus
2450:CadavoBis
2426:CadavoBis
2400:CadavoBis
2374:saɪm duʃan
2358:Report bug
2214:Gherkinmad
2173:Gherkinmad
2158:Gherkinmad
2136:Gherkinmad
2121:Gherkinmad
2099:Gherkinmad
2069:Gherkinmad
2019:Gherkinmad
1991:Gherkinmad
1976:Gherkinmad
1947:Gherkinmad
1932:Gherkinmad
1759:Gherkinmad
1696:Gherkinmad
1471:Gherkinmad
1456:Gherkinmad
1408:Gherkinmad
1393:Gherkinmad
1371:Gherkinmad
1334:Gherkinmad
1242:Gherkinmad
1227:Gherkinmad
1201:Gherkinmad
1120:Gherkinmad
1050:Gherkinmad
1027:Gherkinmad
928:Gherkinmad
913:Gherkinmad
872:Gherkinmad
752:Froaringus
743:Froaringus
723:Froaringus
674:White wine
2497:Galician.
2440:CadavoBis
2416:CadavoBis
2390:CadavoBis
2341:this tool
2334:this tool
1351:source.)
866:actually
811:KaIIaikoi
805:CadavoBis
795:CadavoBis
615:KaIIaikoi
515:this tool
508:this tool
385:Archive 1
317:Languages
308:languages
264:Languages
39:is rated
2711:Arminden
2481:contribs
2469:unsigned
2381:Contribs
2347:Cheers.—
2209:Mr KEBAB
2012:Mr KEBAB
1997:Mr KEBAB
1969:Mr KEBAB
1954:Mr KEBAB
1922:Mr KEBAB
1907:Mr KEBAB
1831:Mr KEBAB
1689:Mr KEBAB
1630:Mr KEBAB
1578:angstrom
1451:Galician
1444:Mr KEBAB
1430:Mr KEBAB
1422:angstrom
1418:Galician
1412:But see
1367:Mr KEBAB
1340:Mr KEBAB
1293:Mr KEBAB
1289:Galician
1215:Cousteau
1159:Cousteau
1089:Cousteau
979:Cousteau
785:contribs
773:unsigned
655:contribs
643:unsigned
521:Cheers.—
431:cbignore
373:Archives
2685:Jotamar
2630:Jotamar
2576:gallego
2555:Jotamar
2551:falling
2251:my edit
1285:Galicia
1173:exactly
1168:because
707:gallego
531::Online
460:checked
425:my edit
344:on the
239:on the
134:on the
107:Galicia
98:Galicia
70:Galicia
41:C-class
2669:Toledo
2661:Burgos
945:(talk)
711:galego
685:(talk)
603:(talk)
439:nobots
47:scale.
1895:Ibiza
1186:could
212:Spain
203:Spain
159:Spain
28:This
2715:talk
2689:talk
2683:. --
2644:talk
2613:talk
2601:here
2559:talk
2540:talk
2477:talk
2444:talk
2420:talk
2394:talk
2377:Talk
2218:talk
2191:talk
2162:talk
2125:talk
2103:talk
2080:talk
2023:talk
2001:talk
1980:talk
1958:talk
1936:talk
1911:talk
1835:talk
1700:talk
1634:talk
1460:talk
1434:talk
1397:talk
1389:link
1375:talk
1357:talk
1297:talk
1231:talk
1205:talk
1182:know
1128:talk
1093:talk
1084:none
1054:talk
1031:talk
983:talk
917:talk
899:talk
891:have
876:talk
851:talk
831:talk
815:talk
799:talk
781:talk
727:talk
651:talk
633:talk
619:talk
562:talk
464:true
2315:RfC
2285:to
2275:to
2265:to
1903:/θ/
1899:/θ/
1827:/θ/
1769:/θ/
1525:/œ/
1426:/œ/
1287:or
1281:/θ/
1217:, @
1196:and
1191:any
868:say
489:RfC
451:to
336:Mid
231:Top
126:Top
2729::
2717:)
2691:)
2646:)
2615:)
2607:.
2582:).
2561:)
2542:)
2534:.
2483:)
2479:•
2446:)
2422:)
2396:)
2328:.
2323:}}
2319:{{
2220:)
2193:)
2164:)
2127:)
2105:)
2082:)
2025:)
2003:)
1982:)
1960:)
1938:)
1913:)
1837:)
1702:)
1636:)
1462:)
1436:)
1399:)
1377:)
1359:)
1299:)
1233:)
1207:)
1130:)
1095:)
1056:)
1033:)
985:)
919:)
909:in
901:)
878:)
853:)
833:)
817:)
801:)
787:)
783:•
729:)
709:,
657:)
653:•
635:)
621:)
564:)
502:.
497:}}
493:{{
437:{{
433:}}
429:{{
2713:(
2687:(
2657::
2653:@
2642:(
2632::
2628:@
2611:(
2557:(
2538:(
2475:(
2442:(
2418:(
2392:(
2379:|
2360:)
2356:(
2343:.
2336:.
2216:(
2204::
2200:@
2189:(
2175::
2171:@
2160:(
2149::
2145:@
2138::
2134:@
2123:(
2116::
2112:@
2101:(
2094::
2090:@
2078:(
2071::
2067:@
2021:(
2014::
2010:@
1999:(
1993::
1989:@
1978:(
1971::
1967:@
1956:(
1949::
1945:@
1934:(
1924::
1920:@
1909:(
1833:(
1761::
1757:@
1698:(
1691::
1687:@
1632:(
1473::
1469:@
1458:(
1442:@
1432:(
1410::
1406:@
1395:(
1383:@
1373:(
1365:@
1355:(
1336::
1332:@
1295:(
1244::
1240:@
1229:(
1213:@
1203:(
1164:I
1126:(
1091:(
1087:—
1052:(
1029:(
981:(
977:—
930::
926:@
915:(
897:(
874:(
849:(
829:(
813:(
797:(
779:(
763::
759:@
745::
741:@
725:(
670::
666:@
649:(
631:(
617:(
576::
572:@
560:(
517:.
510:.
348:.
243:.
138:.
53::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.