Talk:Catalan Countries

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Danielhythloday, Beethoven, please discuss your issues here, instead of edit-warring and discussing via edit summaries. For what it's worth, I don't think Tabarnia is an appropriate "See also". There is little or no connection between it and the subject of the article. Scolaire (talk) 19:51, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid it didn't work, Scolaire. That user insists with including Tabarnia here, while refusing to give rational argumentation as one can see in his last edit summary... --Beethoven (talk) 22:27, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, Beethoven, it didn't work because because you did not post here saying, "I believe that Tabarnia should not be added because...". Instead you continued to edit-war with him. Next time it happens I will report you both at the Administrators' noticeboard, and you will be blocked. Scolaire (talk) 07:24, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was waiting for Danielhythloday to explain us here in Talk page in a rational way why he believes "Tabarnia" should be added on this article. It's not the first time we see IPs or users trying to include "Tabarnia" in different articles related with Catalonia, including this one. Those actions seem more related to vandalism than anything else. I honestly think the least he could do is to expose his arguments, before doing something that had already been reverted months ago. But since this specific user insists with it, I'm going to start exposing why I think there is no connection between Tabarnia and the Catalan Countries. Judging by his edit summaries, I think the issue here is more related with the particular conception he has of the Catalan Countries. And this is something that has already been discussed many times here, but it seems we are going to have to discuss it again:

  • Catalan Countries: the historic term used to designate those territories where the Catalan language, or a variant of it, is spoken. The first use of the term dates back to the 19th century, by a Valencian jurist and historian. During the 20th century it became popular, specifically after Valencian writer Joan Fuster works. It's a term used when studying and analyzing linguistics related with Catalan language and its variations. For example on publications like this one: Etymological dictionary of the scientific names of the birds of the Catalan Countries (2017).
  • Tabarnia: it's the name invented by a very small satirical/joke organization against Catalonia's independence, named "Barcelona is not Catalonia", that would want to create a new region inside Catalonia named "Tabarnia". That name was popularized in social networks a few months ago. Not a single political party supports them. At their website they don't talk about Catalan Countries, because it's not related with their activity. Among the activity of this peculiar organization, one can see on their website: Disguising as Civil Guards to visit Puigdemont's home (until police kicked them) or talking about the alleged genetic origin of Tabarnia, such as Homo Tabarniensis... Almost all of their content is related to jokes.

I can't understand how one can make a connection between those two, rather than trying to advertise or popularize the organization activity. --Beethoven (talk) 14:24, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The term "Països Catalans" is a socio-political concept that uses arguments based in linguistic priors to draw a political argument. It is a loaded concept because it uses diacronic linguistic criteria to draw a map with political terminology used with political significance

The term "Països Catalans" is said to be coined by the Spanish jurist Benvingut Oliver i Estellés (born Bienvenido Oliver y Esteller) in his work (in Spanish) "Historia del Derecho en Cataluña, Mallorca y Valencia". (I cant find the place where the phrase is used, and Wikipedia references are circular. Can you tell how did he used the term? All versions of Wikipedia Wikipedia entry on the man suggests his main contribution was precisely this coinage. oh well.)

Anyway, the concept of "Països Catalans" had almost zero impact in Catalanism, not to mention the Catalan society at large, until 1962, when the essayist Joan Fuster i Ortells published the essay "Nosaltres, els valencians", an essay with no linguistic pretensions.

Now, linguistic arguments, and the maps drawn using such arguments, never use the term "país", "country" or its synonyms to draw linguistic usage maps, because those are nor linguistic concepts. If you take a look at WALS maps, or the Ethnologue maps, or any cartography based on linguistic arguments, you won't see such terminology in use.

So "Països Catalans" is a socio-political construct modernly (1962) built to project the image of a "large Catalan socio-political entity" based only on the maximal extension of the use of Catalan as a mother tongue.

"Tabarnia" is a socio-political construct of a "large Catalan socio-political entity" modernly (2017) created upon the interpretation of the "identity" meaning of a large series of electoral votes in the last 20 years of Catalan elections.

Both "Països Catalans" and "Tabarnia" are ideologically-built sociopolitical concepts; the difference is that "Països Catalans" is a concept used to be taken as a historical entity (which is debatable) and "Tabarnia" is a concept used to be used as a reflection on the utility of such concepts as "Països Catalans".

Another way to put it is that defenders of the "Països Catalans" concept take it as a historically based entity while the advocates of "Tabarnia" says there's so much arguments in favor of the "tabarnia" concept as there is about "Països Catalans". As of today, "Tabarnia" is at least as an important a concept as it is "Països Catalans". So it deserves a "See also". OMGDanielhythloday (talk) 18:27, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As best I understand it from reading the Tabarnia article and its talk page, the concept of "Tabarnia" is of a political entity juxtaposed with an independent Catalonia. "Tabarnia" is a contiguous area of land within Catalonia, which claims "independence" from Catalonia as Catalonia claims independence from Spain. It uses "Barcelona is not Catalonia" as Catalan independentists use "Catalonia is not Spain". It does not claim linguistic, cultural or political affinity with any other similar area of land, inside or outside Catalonia. Therefore it is not a reflection, negation or parody of the Catalan Countries. In other words, there is no connection between it and the subject of this article. Scolaire (talk) 11:00, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You don't fully get it Scolaire: Tabarnia does claim a social, political (and even cultural and economical, as well as geographical) affinity of the territories comprising "Tabarnia" against the rest of Catalonia: they are (so the argument goes) the richest, best educated, more progressive and urbanite part of Catalonia; linguistically they represent those embracing bilinguism against the "Catalan only" or "catalan first" parts of Catalonia; as national identity goes, they identify as a nation with the rest of Spain, etc. Does it builds a solid argument for the independence of Tabarnia? You may well think it doesn't, but (so the argument goes) this is exactly the case with "països Catalans", a term used over and over again since 1965 to "build a nation" out of a concept that results from the mix of political terminology with linguistic criteria. In any case, if you can't see the linkage between both concepts, the defendants of the Tabarnia movement do see it very clearly, and I leave here just a bunch of examples to check it for yourself
This isn't the first time I've been told I "don't get it", and it's not the first time I've had a whole lot of links to Spanish newspapers/blogs/whatever thrown at me as though my idea of a fun evening is trying to make sense of a Google Translation of a load of propaganda. Yet somehow I've managed to make significant, encyclopaedic edits to at least four Catalan independence-related articles, all of which have stood the test of time, while others continue to edit by adding their POV personal views supported by citations to vaguely-related newspaper opinion pieces, blogs etc.
Now, you didn't address my point at all, which was that "Tabarnia" is a contiguous area of land that is compared to the contiguous area of land that is Catalonia, as opposed to the area of land, the islands, the sovereign state, and the parts of other countries that are the Catalan Countries. When you can show that the Tabarnia movement has designated a number of different areas as países Españoles explicitly as a counterpoint to the països Catalans (and please have the decency to translate the relevant part into English for me), then I will accept that the one is the counterpart of the other. But seeing as you have failed to do that at Tabarnia and Talk:Tabarnia, it's unlikely you can do it here. Scolaire (talk) 19:30, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Scolaire "got it" perfectly. His sentence «the concept of "Tabarnia" is of a political entity juxtaposed with an independent Catalonia» is totally correct, as this is how it has been established by the Tabarnia organization. Honestly, I'm having a hard time assuming good faith Danielhythloday, after having read your first sentences. Thus, before addressing the links you shared, I'm going to comment a little on what you said at the beginning, which is just straight propaganda. First, an obvious clarification: there's no way to know how many Catalans "support" Tabarnia, because a survey/study on this has never been done. We can only look at support from political parties resulting from last Catalan election; in this sense, the support for Tabarnia would be 0%, because all Catalan political parties have publicly rejected the Tabarnia idea. There are only 2 political parties that have publicly expressed support for Tabarnia (PxC and VOX), but none of them contested the last Catalan elections. They are practically non-existent parties. It is important to keep this in mind, because everything about Tabarnia comes from the same Tabarnia organization, which is also a very small one. On the other hand, it's important to remember that the territory they created (Tabarnia) doesn't correspond to any social, linguistic, political, cultural, economical or geographical affinity different from the rest of Catalonia. The Tabarnia organization created a territory based exclusively on manipulation of electoral results. This Wikipedia map compares the Tabarnia region (as defined by the organization) with the Catalan election results. You can clearly see the arbitrariness and artificiality of Tabarnia, which has no uniformity. They include in Tabarnia Catalan regions where there is a clear majority of votes in favor of Catalonia's independence parties. And of course, the vote in favor of unionist parties does not imply that they are in favor of Tabarnia. This is the reason why Tabarnia has been defined as a an attempt at gerrymandering (La Vanguardia). Now, reviewing what you have commented: no, the territories comprising Tabarnia aren't the richest in Catalonia (Girona and Lleida have higher GDP per capita and this EU NUTS 3 regions GDP (PPS) shows Lleida is also higher). No, they are not "best educated" (in fact CEO data shows that those supporting Catalonia's independence have a higher level of studies compared with those that are against it). I could continue, but I think you got the point (kinda ironic attributing the "defense of bilingualism to Tabarnia", when the organization promotes monolingualism in Spanish only).

Now, in your comment you also deformed the concept of Catalan Countries like you did in the past. In an attempt to compare "Tabarnia" with the Catalan Countries you literally said: «Does it builds a solid argument for the independence of Tabarnia? You may well think it doesn't, but (so the argument goes) this is exactly the case with "països Catalans", a term used over and over again since 1965 to "build a nation"». Catalan Countries defines a linguistic reality, like "Francophonie" does with French. Catalan Countries is not a term designed neither to "build a nation" nor to declare independence from Spain, France and Italy (and eliminate Andorra?). It is a synonym of Catalan-speaking territories. This is exactly how it is defined, for example, at the United States Library of Congress book Subject Headings. And, since I'm a Catalan, I can affirm this is exactly how this is studied in Catalan schools: Catalan Countries as a linguistic area, to analyze Catalan language and its variations depending on the territory. But they do not teach it to us "as a nation" or "project of independence". Simply because it is not this.

Now finally at last, regarding your links... In Talk:Tabarnia you were already told that none of the links you shared affirm what you say. You also included again the link of the signatories to change the square name. The majority of your links come from blogs or opinion pieces, where they barely mention Catalan Countries (most of them one single time). For example at your "" link titled "Praise of Tabarnia", this is literally all they say about Catalan Countries (translated to English): «Tabarnia is the rational thing in front of the irrationality of the Catalan Countries and that Catalonia that has a cowardly and deliquescent president in Flanders and a party of failures like the CUP».

It seems you are trying really hard to make a connection between two subjects that are objectively different. You try it more than anyone in the Tabarnia organization, because they have always declared (and this is how it appears on their website) that their goal is to avoid the independence of Catalonia and that they will use satire, humor against the independence movement. Its activity and objective simply has nothing to do with the Catalan Countries. Although in the past there have been movements and concepts that tried to imitate or were based on the Catalan Countries, like the "Madrilenian Countries" (Países Madrileños; you can check it, it's real), Tabarnia is simply not one of them. --Beethoven (talk) 22:15, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Catalonia is not a country, why are we using that term?[edit]

Why are we translating Països Catalans to "countries" in English? They don't meet the accepted definition in English: Right? We should consider a different term, or adding a section in the article to clarify the etymology. CatalanSpaniard (talk) 14:38, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"We" are not translating Països Catalans. Reliable english language sources do it so. Insofar those reliable English language sources presenting the "Catalan countries" do not divagate about what you are mentioning, "we" shouldn't do it (it's original research). That's independent of whether the concept behind is politically charged or not (it is, but the extent that should be reflected in the lead is a hotly-debated subject in this talk page).--Asqueladd (talk) 15:23, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's not original research. What reliable English sources do so? CatalanSpaniard (talk) 23:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[1][2][3][4], to name a few..--Asqueladd (talk) 23:54, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
They are not really reliable English-language sources, they are produced by non-native speakers and translate the term, it has little currency in English. The translation sounds really weird because whatever Catalonia may or may not be, Valencia, Algherro and the Baleares clearly aren't "countries" in the English sense of the word. I believe the article refers to an essentially Catalan concept Països Catalans and should be entitled that, with the translation mentioned in the lede. Boynamedsue (talk) 21:47, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is no single "English sense of the word". It has multiple meanings (see Wiktionary). In this article it is used in the sense of an area that has a distinctive nature or characteristic. The Black Country is an area in England; it is not independent of the UK, nor even in any way autonomous. The Big Country was a film about the American West, not a sovereign state. The Basque Country is a region that includes two Autonomous Communities in Spain and an area of France. As regards sources by native English speakers, "Catalan Countries" is used repeatedly in a British publication, Historical Dictionary of the Catalans, written by Helena Bufferty, an Englishwoman, and Elisenda Marcer, a Catalan, and edited by Jon Woronoff, an American. It's also found in The Welsh Language: A History, by a Welsh writer, in Frommer's Guide, and on the BBC website. --Scolaire (talk) 14:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
None of those sources use Catalan Countries without first glossing it into Catalan after, I think there may be a case for a dual English/Catalan title in that format. The Basque Country is very much an anomaly, it is a translation from French with long currency, not a neologism. The Big Country is a poetic term for an imprecisely defined area, and so is not analogous. The structure (The-demonym-Countries) exists nowhere else in English.
--Boynamedsue (talk) 09:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Low Countries? I know "Low" isn't a demonym, but it does describe a grouping of heterogeneous areas (states and parts of states), and it shows that the structure "The-descriptor-Countries" is perfectly good usage in English, so your argument about "the English sense of the word" doesn't stand up. See also the use of "The Anglophone Countries" here, here and here. I don't understand "without first glossing it into Catalan after". Do they do it first or do they do it after? Frommer's Guide and the BBC don't mention Països Catalans at all! And what difference does it make anyway? We know that it's Països Catalans in Catalan. We know that Països Catalans translates into English as "Catalan Countries". And we know that it's called the "Catalan Countries" by reliable sources written in English by English speakers. That is a good and sufficient reason for naming the article "Catalan Countries". Scolaire (talk) 10:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The question is whether "Catalan Countries" is current English usage, more so than "Països Catalans", and I'm not convinced that it is. "Catalan-speaking regions" would be the more natural form in English. But this is partly about a political concept that is wholly Spanish, the idea that the regions in which Catalan is spoken have a commonality that can be expressed in a political way. This concept is translated into English by the organisations that feel this is important as "Catalan Countries", and I really am not convinced that academia or general usage outside of Spain has truly adopted this use. If we take out wikipedia derived sources and those that are published by organisations on the public payroll in Spain, particularly Catalonia, there's very little left.
The Low Countries are countries; Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg. No equivalent statement can be made about the component regions that make up the Paisos Catalans. Only one is definitely a country Andorra, whereas another (Catalonia) is arguably one. I haven't got access to Frommer's guide, but it is a guidebook, and so perhaps of dubious use for wiki, and the BBC puts it in quotations, showing it is not a familiar English term.--Boynamedsue (talk) 14:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just re: Anglophone countries, I have never said that groups of countries cannot be grouped together using (the+adj+countries), this is obviously true. But to do that, all the things being described need to be countries, and only one or two of the things grouped in "Catalan Countries" are countries in the English sense of the word.--Boynamedsue (talk) 19:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The Low Countries" refers to a coastal lowland region in northwestern Europe forming the lower basin of the Rhine–Meuse–Scheldt delta...Geographically and historically, the area includes also parts of France and Germany such as the French Flanders and the German regions of East Frisia and Cleves.
At any rate, I have stated my reasons why the article title is appropriate and you believe you have demolished them one by one. Give yourself a clap on the back. There is no point in continuing this discussion. Goodbye and happy editing. Scolaire (talk) 10:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Map and Roussillon being Described as Catalan Speaking[edit]

The map describes Roussillon aka Pyrénées-Orientales as being Catalan Speaking, but doesn't provide a source. I used to live in Barcelona, and have visited Pyrénées-Orientales, I find that extremely hard to believe. The best source I could find was this from the Generalitat of Catalonia, which means its reliability is questionable. It's all in Catalan but it says they sent out a couple thousand questionnaires to Roussillon, their results are that 34% can speak Catalan, which seems high but the number who say that they usually use Catalan is only 1.2% of respondents, and 4.4% say they generally use French and Catalan, by comparison 87% of the respondents say they usually speak French. If Catalan Speaking means that there are people who happen to speak Catalan located in the area, then I guess it makes sense but otherwise to me it seems like it's a French speaking region, and the maps legend should be modified. Alcibiades979 (talk) 22:04, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Catalan is the traditional local language of Roussillon, which means that about one century ago the number of speakers was 100% of the population or very close to it. The decrease in the number of speakers is due to language shift and immigration, as it also happens with so many European regional languages. --Jotamar (talk) 23:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't disagree with that analysis, however where I currently live for instance the traditional language would be Tupi but today it would be described as Lusophone. I guess then the question is how long ago would the language have to have been spoken in order for the reclassification to take place? I think there'd be little disagreement in saying that today the language of Perpignan is French and not Catalan same as with the rest of Pyrénées-Orientales. Also looking at the age demographic data from Gen Cat's study I'm thinking you would have to go back further than a hundred years to get close to 100% Catalan speakers. "Catalan speaking" could be changed to "Historically Catalan speaking" to better reflect the present day situation. Alcibiades979 (talk) 10:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Historically Catalan speaking" could be interpreted as meaning that there are no Catalan speakers left, however that's not true. Native people of Roussillon call themselves Catalans and I guess that they consider the Catalan language a part of their identity, even if they might not speak it often. --Jotamar (talk) 11:11, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't that be reflected by a source though if such is the case? The article as a whole seems to lack sources and seems to have two arguments: one that there is a catalan cultural domain, and then two Catalan independence. I mean the article as a whole has six images, two are maps, and four are for Catalan independence, this is kind of weird. Be that as it may, Pyrénées-Orientales does not speak Catalan, there is a minority who do but the vast majority speak French, and this is backed by Reliable Sources, so it is incorrect to say it speaks French. We could say instead that the Dark Grey represents the "Catalan Cultural Domain" this would probably more representative and more for other domains in the Dark Grey area where Catalan is not the main language, such as Barcelona. Alcibiades979 (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The concept of Catalan Countries is indeed linked to Catalan nationalism, no doubt about it. What exactly would you change in the article? --Jotamar (talk) 23:46, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]