Talk:Arvanitika

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Vickytsakas.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move debate was: moved by User:Aldux, 17:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Proposal

Move Arvanitic language to Arvanitika. This was discussed and didn't find consensus earlier (see Archive page), but that discussion was deeply flawed both procedurally and in terms of content. It took place in the context of an insanely disruptive POV-pushing edit war, in a climate of totally irrational combativeness, and with no contact to the actual literature. As several of the parties involved back then are no longer active, I hope we can now settle this in a more constructive way.

Arguments for Arvanitika

1. Although "Arvanitic", the anglicised version, is certainly possible as an ad-hoc formation according to the usual word-formation rules of English, the Greek version "Arvanitika" actually has significantly more currency in the English-language literature, including the Ethnologue entry and all the recent important publications.
2. It is also identical to the self-identifying term used by the Arvanites themselves in Greek.
3. It doesn't require the addition of the disambiguating term "... language", since it unambiguously denotes the language by itself (as opposed to the ethnic group or its members etc.). Hence, the simple name without "... language" should be used according to WP:NAME#Languages, both spoken and programming and WP:NAME#Use common names of persons and things.
4. Since it doesn't require the "... language" tag, it avoids the POV issue of whether Arvanitika is in fact a separate language or not. The current title of Arvanitic language is biased towards the separate-language POV, which - to put it mildly - is not the mainstream view in scholarship. "Arvanitika" is neutral.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Support

• Support per nom. Also, Trudgill uses Arvanitika, and states that in modern scholarship it is either called Arvanitika or "Albanian". The "Arvanitic" nomenclature seems rather dubious to me, as it was extracted from the "alternative names" section from Ethnologue, and according to the article in question there have been problems in the past with the accuracy of those sections (we even came across one - the Arberichte, which is also found in the "alternative names" section). Whatever it is, it seems to be a neologism, and Arvanitika does better in a Google test. --Telex 12:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Arvanitika/Arvanitas are Albanians and of story

Arvanitika Are very much the same people as Albanians. Physical traits of Arvanitika correspondents with Albanian one, notice that Dinaric race (wich is dominant in Albanians) also dominate north western Greece=Arvanitas native land.Trojani 10:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Wrong page. This page isn't about anybody's physical traits. Languages do not have physical traits. This page is about language and nothing else. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Aigest 07:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC) I can not see how it can be called Graeco-Albanian language?! If you go to the sample in the end of the article you can see it that is pure Albanian language. I think this term (Graeco-Albanian) should be removed. Even if there are loanwords from Greek language it is purely an Albanian dialect.

The name has nothing to do with linguistic "purity" or lack thereof. It is merely a reflection of the fact that Arvanitic is an "Albanian" language spoken by Greeks, just like Judaeo-Spanish is the Spanish spoken by Jews, not a mixture of Castilian and Hebrew. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 11:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Aigest 14:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC) I don't think this comparison is acceptable. What about the language spoken by albanian emigrants that live in Greece? Yes they speak Greek but their language can not be called Albanian-Greek language!!! When you compare or decscribe languages, it has nothing to do with the etnicity of the people who speak that language. Yes there are a lot of people in all the world who can speak English but this doesn't make that Bulgarian-English or Japanese-English. There is another method for the classification of languages and it's not based on the ethnicity of the people who speaks it. And that's why I wrote that comment.

The designation "Graeco-Albanian" is here because it has been used to refer to the language. It's not important whether you agree with the authors who used it or not.--NetProfit 16:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

As far as I can reconstruct, the use of the term in that paragraph was chosen as an English translation of the term ellinoalvaniki (dialektos), used in one of the more influential early linguistic treatments, by Fourikis. It seems to have been a somewhat tactical choice originally, in the context of an edit dispute, to avoid a more straightforward use of the appellation "Albanian", against which some editors were showing a somewhat irrational dislike. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Aigest 06:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC) Then it should not be used in the space dedicated to language. 1. It's not a Greek dialect 2. It's an Albanian dialect. I think this term should be moved toward the ethnicity of the people who speaks that language and not to the language itself. Anyway even the ethnicity of the people who speaks it is disputed. As per the Albanian side the Arvanit are the descendants of Albanian migrants to Greece, migration which happened from 12th to 15th century and which also can be seen in Arbëresh who live in Italy. As per Arvanits some declared themselves as Greek descendants some as Abanian-Greek descendants and some as Albanian descendants. It should be mentioned also, that there is not a single school in Greece in Arvanit language (although there are more than 300.000 speakers) and this is one of the reasons of its propable future extinction

Sourced text will not be removed and unsourced text will not be added.--NetProfit 07:59, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, I'm not particularly attached to that sentence in the intro. Whatever the thing has been called besides "Arvanitika" makes for a long list, there's no real need to do that in the intro. As for the offensiveness, that's also treated a bit further down. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Where did you get the rubbish "Arvanites are insulted by being called Albanians", never in my life I heard such a thing. Why should a minority be offended by being called what it really is? I think that part should be removed for 2 simple reasons: 1) there is no way for the author to possibly know what all Arvanites think about their ethnicity, and cannot give a judgement only on the sample interviewed by him (if he actually did) 2) consideration of this kind are totally irrelevant and possibly dangerous for the good relationship between the two countries Etimo (talk) 19:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Language attrition

In recent times, linguists have observed signs of accelerated structural convergence towards Greek and structural simplification of the language, which have been interpreted as signs of language attrition, i.e. effects of impoverishment leading towards language death (Trudgill 1976/77; Thomason 2001, quoting Sasse 1992).

What does this mean? How can simplification in itself really be a sign of possible future language death?NetProfit 17:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the wording is a bit unclear then. The structural simplification is not in itself a cause of the impeding language death. It's a side effect, but a very characteristic one, of the attrition process, i.e. of the gradual loss of native-speaker competence that results from gradual decline of communicative practice, imperfect language learning by subsequent generations, etc. It's a phenomenon regularly observed in such situations and pretty well studied. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Unreliable source

http://www.albanianhistory.net/ is an unreliable source to say the least and original research is used again.Also the term was wrong and Geographic and this need be mentioned.Megistias (talk) 19:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Arvanitika and Epirotic language are synonyms

Arvanitika and epirotic language are synonyms and is nothing to dispute here , this is well sourced , in case that you want not to mention certain things is OK with me , but we are her to write the history as it is and not to write as we like.

‘’ Marin Barleti The story of life and deeds of Skanderbeg, the prince of Epirotes. Rome 1506-1510’’

‘’Pjeter Bogdani Cuneus ProphetarumCvnevs prophetarvm de Christo salvatore mvndi et eivs evangelica veritate, italice et epirotice contexta, et in duas partes diuisa a Petro Bogdano Macedone, Sacr. Congr. de Prop. Fide alvmno, Philosophiae & Sacrae Theologiae Doctore, olim Episcopo Scodrensi & Administratore Antibarensi, nunc vero Archiepiscopo Scvporvm ac totivs regni Serviae Administratore" (The Band of the Prophets Concerning Christ, Saviour of the World and his Gospel Truth, edited in Italian and Epirotic and divided into two parts by Pjetër Bogdani of Macedonia, student of the Holy Congregation of the Propaganda Fide, doctor of philosophy and holy theology, formerly Bishop of Shkodra and Administrator of Antivari and now Archbishop of Skopje and Administrator of all the Kingdom of Serbia) (The Band of the Prophets)”Albanian Academy of Science Tirane 2005’’

‘’Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Correspondence on the Albanian Language1705-1715 [1]’’. --Besa Arvanon (talk) 13:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

To the roman the byzantine and the Ottoman empire.The albanians descent in Epirus in 1000 ad and move more to the south while living with the Greeks there.It was never part of Albania but of the Byzantine and the Ottoman empire since it has to do with 1000 AD and after.500 years later the name appears as a historical anachronismMegistias (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Is this you personal opinion i mean you tell the story with very much passion?!--Besa Arvanon (talk) 14:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

You are a troll and a sock puppet and a disruptor that logged on from dozens of times after being repeatedly banned.Megistias (talk) 14:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

What you can expect form self hating people without clear ethnicity as you are --Besa Arvanon (talk) 14:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Arvanitika as an ancient greek dialect

Can Arvanitika been seen as the remains of an ancient Greek dialect?

Reference:In a sense, Tsakonian is both an endangered language and an endangered dialect, 7 just like Arvanitika, and its loss will be a loss for the Greek language and for Greece as a nation.[2]Dodona--Burra (talk) 10:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

No, absolutely not. And it has nothing to do with Tsakonian either. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I will add further reference and this interesting linguistic study.

Reference: Given that Ancient Greek had both the question usage and the "fear"-complement usage and that there are numerous uncertainties about the prehistory of Albanian, it is tempting to think of these Greek-Albanian parallels as innovations that spread from Greek to Albanian, but such a spread would have occurred, if at all, in an early, pre-Balkanizing, period of contact between the languages. Alternatively, the occurrence of both the question usage and the "fear"-complement usage in Ancient Greek and Albanian could be taken to warrant positing these as inheritances from Proto-Indo-European, even if they are not found elsewhere in the Indo- European family. Source : Author Brian D Joseph : Is Balkan Comparative Syntax Possible? [Version of August 28, 1998] [3] Dodona--Burra (talk) 10:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Arvanitika is Albanian and not Greek.Language Name :Albanian, Arvanitika.We only know the Albanian of the middle ages and nothing at all before this.Arvanitika/Albanian cannot be an ancient Greek dialect.Megistias (talk) 10:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Further reference from : Κωνσταντίνος Μπίρης. Αρβανίτες, οι Δωριείς του σύγχρονου ελληνισμού. Αθήνα. 1981.Dodona --Burra (talk) 11:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Heheh, this is funny. Two years ago, we had hordes of Albanian contributors hotly arguing that Arvanitika was just simply Albanian, and hordes of Greek contributors, quoting Biris, arguing just as hotly that it was not. Anyway, Biris is not a reliable source when it comes to linguistics. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Well you are right but now it is another status because it is accepted that Arvantika is a form of Albanian.Dodona --Burra (talk) 14:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Epirotik language/Arvanitika/Tosk Albanian is a dialect of ancient Greek language

Reference:"Speakers of these various Greek dialects settled different parts of Greece at different times during the Middle Bronze Age, with one group, the 'northwest' Greeks, developing their own dialect and peopling central Epirus. This was the origin of the Molossian or Epirotic tribes." "[...]a proper dialect of Greek, like the dialects spoken by Dorians and Molossians." "The western mountains were peopled by the Molossians (the western Greeks of Epirus)." Borza, Eugene N. (1992). In the Shadow of Olympus: the Emergence of Macedon (Revised Edition). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Dodona--Burra (talk) 10:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

This says that its Greek.Megistias (talk) 10:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

You are so fast , unbelievable, yes it is a dialect of Ancient Greek,Epirotika .Dodona--Burra (talk) 10:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

This refers to the Greek language and the Greeks not the Albanian and the Albanians.Megistias (talk) 10:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop trolling.Megistias (talk) 10:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

i am not trolling.stop offending and insulting me Dodona --Burra (talk) 10:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

No need to talk of trolling, but Megistias is obviously right: The "Epirotic" your source is talking about is ancient Epirotic Greek, it's not the same Epirotic as the later Epirotic Albanian you find mentioned under that name in early modern sources. The one has nothing to do with the other except the name. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Epirotic Greek, it's the same Epirotic as the later Epirotic Albanian, it is not a misname, but currently it is and also a misunderstanding, I would like to mention these modern sources that after all are comparable .

1.Reference .' 'Barleti repeatedly stresses the national aspect of his work. Scanderbeg is not only an impressive hero, but also the saviour of his native country. When he is compared with Alexander the Great and Pyrrhus, these are not arbitrarily chosen models from antiquity, but national heroes, for Alexander's Macedonia and Pyrrhus' Epirus are for Barleti synonymous with his own country. Mostly he calls it Epirus, but also often Albania' Source : A Heroic Tale: Marin Barleti's Scanderbeg between orality and literacy Minna Skafte Jensen (b. 1937) Ass. professor of Greek and Latin, Copenhagen University, 1969-93. Professor of Greek and Latin, University of Southern Denmark, 1993-2003. Member of the Danish, Norwegian and Belgian Academies of Sciences and Letters. Main fields of research: Archaic Greek epic and the oral-formulaic theory; Renaissance Latin poetry in Denmark.[4]

2.Reference Albania Synonims (Shqipëria) Arbania/Arbanon, Epirus The Republic of Albania (Republika e Shqipërisë) since 1991. Previously the People's Socialist Republic of Albania (1976); the People's Republic of Albania (1946); the Kingdom of Albania (1928); and the Republic of Albania (1925). Although its independence was recognized in principle in 1912, it was made a protectorate of the Great Powers. Source :"Albania" Concise Dictionary of World Place-Names. John Everett-Heath. Oxford University Press 2005

3.Reference : “The fate of Albanian people and territories during Roman rule was that , they lived as free people but in social hierarchy they had a place between Romans civil right and slaves who had not right at all , the first mention with the name Albanoi or Arber was by Ptolemy of Alexandri 2nd c. A.D one of the free Illyrian tribes. The Illyrian military began to play important role in Roman life ,seven of Roman Emperors were Illyrians and they ruled in succession, the Illyrian Emperor Dioclean administrative reorganization Albanian territory in three provinces : Praevalitana, with Shkodra (Shkodër) as its administrative centre, Epirus Nova, Dyrrachium as its capital, and Epirus Vetus, with its central city at Nikopois. “ Source : Antonina Zhelyazkova Albanians identities .. International center for minority study and intercultural relations. Sofia .BULGARIA 1999 [5]

4.Reference : The political situation in Albania prior to the Ottoman invasion had been very complicated because of the high level of feudal partitioning of the country. There were several independent principalities ruled by the most powerful Albanian feudal lords: of Durrës in Central Albania, ruled by Carlo Thopia; of despot Spat in Epirus; of the Balsha family in Northern Albania; of Theodore Muzaka of Berat, comprising the lands around Berat…….By the beginning of 1386 the lord of Yanina, the Florentine Esau Buondelmonti declared his vassalage to the Ottomans and confirmed it appearing in person in the town of Edirne. In the same period, his southern neighbour and rival Albanian despot Gjin Bua Spata, had to do the same. Until his death in 1400 despot Gjin Bua Spata more than once resorted to Ottomans help in the wars he waged against the Rhodes Knights Hospitallers, who at that time made efforts to gain a firm foothold in Lepanto and Corinth. Individual members of the Albanian clan of Muzaka also became Ottoman vassals” Antonina Zhelyazkova Albanian identities 1999.. International center for minority study and intercultural relations. Sofia .BULGARIA1999 [6]

5.Arvanitia was synonym of Albania called by Greeks (Arvanites ) , Arvanites came partly from Epirus spoke a form of Albanian language and consider themselves as real Greek. Oxford English Dictionary 2007

6.According to the anthropological studies of Theodoros K. Pitsios, Arvanites in the Peloponnese in the 1970s were physically indistinguishable from other Greek inhabitants of the same region. This may indicate that either the Arvanites shared extant physical similarities with other Greek populations or that early Arvanite groups extensively incorporated parts of the autochthonous Greek population.Dodona --Burra (talk) 10:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Its a misnaming and any other theory against all logic and sources.

• 1.Barletti is a medieval writer.Irrelevant.
• 2.Irrelevant.You used this and your other source many times and repeatedly rejected and debunked by me & by admins and by your mentor.
• 3.Irrelevant.
• 4.Once more irrelevant
• 5.A typical anachronism.Irrelevant.
• 6.Indicating that they mixed with Greeks and therefore changed anthropologically or that they were Greeks that were Albanised in the past.Irrelevant and actually against your claims"autochthonous Greek population" so albanians were newcomers and had nothing to do with epirus or illyria.What is weird is that you used the above and similar ones all the times and they were all rejected but you just keep at it.

Megistias (talk) 10:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

The bias you show is very clear,please do not offend, as you see this is a combination of sources of course relevent, i suggest you not to complain about me around because is nothing to complain for, the references are considered most of them worth by my Mentor and i respect him,very much better then you i am affraid, sorry ee..and for the news if you do not like it,P.S Mixed with the Greeks ??.Dodona--Burra (talk) 15:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Albanian and Arvanitika have Nothing to do with Ancient Greek nor do albanians or arvanitesTree for Albanian.You only want to provoke me and its very clear since you use a source saying that Epirotes were Greeks and simply declare from your imagination that they were albanian.Megistias (talk) 18:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

References

Arvanitika: Ε Μπούκουρα ε Δέουτ/Ε bukura e dheut

Anybody interested in reading something in Arvanitika, can do so by clicking here: [7] (p. 39) It is a folk-tale, from Salamina (Koulouri); in Italian its title can be roughly translated as "La Bella del' Mondo". Original source: Πέτρου Φουρίκη, Η εν Αττική ελληνοαλβανική διάλεκτος, περιοδικό Αθηνά, τεύχος 45 (1933). Guildenrich 23:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I think this is already in the Albanian Mythology section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_mythology or here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_Bukura_e_Dheut translation "Beauty of the Earth"

Book link

Die Nutzpflanzen Griechenlands‎ by Theodor von Heldreich, gives names of cultivated trees and plants in Arbërishte, using the alphabet devised by Karl Reinhold. [[8]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guildenrich (talk • contribs) 21:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

This Noctes Pelasgicae image is kind of pointless.diffMegistias (talk) 23:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Arbërishte

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:58, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Arvanitika → Arbërishte — Native equivalent Arbërishte[9]. --Guildenrich (talk) 14:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Disagree. 1) This is the English wikipedia and the articles should bear English equivalents. I don't see the reason for having a language-article in its native form in this wikipedia especially when a different name is widely used in English, otherwise all these articles could be named after the native name, for example Albanian language→Shqip, Hungarian language→Magyar, Greek language→Hellinika, German language→Deutsch, French language→Français etc. See WP:NCCN. 2) The Arvanites call themselves Αρβανίτες and their language Αρβανίτικα, since most of them don't speak Arvanitika anymore. I bet that the term Arbërishte is rather unknown for the vast majority of them. 3) In English language and sources these people and their language are mentioned as Arvanites and Arvanitika or Arvanitic respectively. 4) There will be kinda confusion with Arbëresh of Italy. 5) In the case of Arbëresh, I think that this is the name used in English sources for the language, so it is totally different from the Arvanite case. 6) A glance at the rest of wikipedias reveals that they also use names close to "Arvanitika", the form that is used in other languages too. - Sthenel (talk) 16:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Fourikis

Before anyone reverts consider what Fourikis in association with Koumaris wrote in 1932(published after his death about a decade later)

• Άγνωστο πόσες μορφές ηρώων τού Ελληνικού Πανθέου φέρουν στις φλέβες τους Αλβανικό αίμα.

So if you do revert me on grounds of rs or any other policy consider that if another user cites Fourikis in a relevant to the sentence article you will have absolutely no reason to revert him since you would have supported Fourikis as a source.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 20:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't sound to me as if he was speaking literally of the "pantheon" in the sense of ancient gods, as your edit summary elsewhere seemed to imply. He's just speaking figuratively of the national "pantheon" of historical heroes, i.e. 1821 and all that, making the point that many 1821 fighters may have been of Albanian background. Fourikis is cited in modern literature as an authority on the linguistics of the local dialects in Attica around the turn of the century; in that role he seems reliable enough. I don't care about him as a source on history beyond that. Btw, are you sure that sentence is actually by him? Because elsewhere on the web it's credited to "Εγκυκλοπαιδικό Λεξικό «Ήλιος»" – or did he write an article in that? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

(But, other than that, I have no problem with your removal. As far as I can see, the ref was only included to prove that older Greek authors had no problem calling the language Albanian, something that some Greek wiki editors earlier were fighting against.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

The Encyclopedia was published by Koumaris and contained parts written by many different authors(Fourikis had died about a decade earlier). The Athena article written also by Fourikis has many theories of how she was an old Albanian god inherited from the Pelasgians that's why I assumed that the pantheon refers to the ancient gods too.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 20:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Those Pelasgian theories were of course popular among Arvanite-related writers at one time. Obviously, RS status on 20th-cent. dialectology is one thing, RS status on prehistory quite another. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

No objection to the removal from the lead, though a hedged mention of how older Greek authors referred to the language in the body of the article wouldn't hurt. Athenean (talk) 20:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It wouldn't hurt although if we do include the Graeco-Albanian use by Greek authors then it'd be better not to cite Fourikis, because he used the term because of political motivations. Fourikis was a member of the (old) Arvanitic League since the age of 19 and he had made statements that would be defined as ultranationalist by modern standards so when nationalist dictators like Metaxas took control of the country he had to become reserved. The book cited by Fourikis was published in the 1920s initially then in 1934 with some edits and then the same year Metaxas became dictator of Greece in 1936 with even more edits.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Like I said earlier, I do not object to removal of "Graeco-Albanian" from the lede, however, a mention in the "Names" section seems appropriate. Fourikis should be used as an example, not as a ref, so that should be ok. Also, no need for boldface, really. Athenean (talk) 07:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

'The Athena article written also by Fourikis has many theories of how she was an old Albanian god inherited from the Pelasgians' care to share...?87.202.35.131 (talk) 03:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

OR

Removed this [10] as OR. Do we have a source for this, or does it come from nothing more than Zjarri's imagination? This is precisely the type of claim that needs to be sourced. The process of assimilation could have begun at any time, even from the moment the Arvanites settled down. After all, in the Ottoman Empire, only religion mattered, and the Arvanites were of the same religion as their neighbors. Anybody Orthodox Chrisitans who received and education received it in Greek. Athenean (talk) 07:32, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

its worded oddly for a number of reasons and you mention one already...also be careful editors not to make your source (even if it has its fair share of inaccuracies) say something it doesnt do especially if it says almost the opposite ie be careful where you insert your text if theres a citation floating around87.202.63.131 (talk) 12:23, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Athenean the definition of assimilation requires the adoption of foreign to a group of people traits and at the same time the rejection of any past cultural traits and as such the assimilation of Arvanites began in that period.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 13:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Uhm, that does sound rather OR-ish. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:53, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

There was no "process of assimilation" because most of Arvanitais were bilinguals since the late Byzantine period, Christian Orthodox and self-identified as Greeks (citations ready). The Albanian dialect was usefull to Greeks and other nations of the Balkans during the Ottoman occupation, when Turc-Albanians were high rank officials and landlords. Similarly, the Greeks in Turkey were bilingual in Turkish and Greek, in Egypt in Arabic and Greek and so on. After liberation the Arvanitika had not much use and was gradually abandoned, the same way that Greeks originating from Turkey do not speak Turkish after one generation. After all there was not much to read and study in that language.
--Euzen (talk) 17:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Read the literature, instead of spreading your tendentious speculation. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Official name per ISO documentation

According to the ISO documentation of the dialect it's official name is Arvanitika Albanian[11].--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 12:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Typical cherry-picking. The overwhelming majority of sources refer to it simply as "Arvanitika", that's the article title, that's what we call it here. If you want to change the title to "Arvanitika Albanian", you should request a page move, which will almost certainly not succeed. Athenean (talk) 18:34, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

That's the official ISO name of the dialect(you can't cherry pick sources regarding official ISO names, since there's only one ISO). Please don't revert again official ISO documentation names. Btw I added that it's commonly known as Arvanitika.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 18:43, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

There is nothing "official" about ISO. The article name is "Arvanitika", that's what we call it in the first line. Your edit is tendentious. Athenean (talk) 18:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Athenean reverted again the ISO 639 macrolanguage standard name, so I'll ask for some outsider input.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 18:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

ISO is the only source that calls it that, while the overwhelming majority of sources simply call it "Arvanitika" (and that's why the title of the article is "Arvanitika"). Yet you ignore the majority of the literature and simply cherry-pick the one source that supports your POV. So go ahead, seek all the outsider input you want. But don't be surprised if you don't like the results. Athenean (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

(unindent)I started the RfC so people who actually know what the ISO naming is will respond.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 19:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Good, because your insistence that ISO is "official" clearly shows you don't. Athenean (talk) 19:13, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Should the ISO standard name of this dialect be deleted?

I added on several language articles the ISO 639 macrolanguage but on Arvanitika it has already been reverted twice by a Greek user. I don't understand why the standard ISO name should be deleted from the lead, when it is the official ISO standard name.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 19:05, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

The way this RfC is phrased is problematic. There is nothing "official" about ISO, while ZjarriRrethues, an Albanian user, didn't just add, but changed the first line of the article from "Arvanitika" to "Arvanitika Albanian". This in spite of the fact that the overwhelming majority of sources simply refer to it as "Arvanitika", which is also why the title of the article is "Arvanitika" and not "Arvanitika Albanian". Athenean (talk) 19:12, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

ISO is an acronym for International Organization for Standardization so please don't make OR deductions about how official it is. The title is Arvanitika per WP:COMMONNAME , which my wording made obvious[12] but that doesn't change the official ISO naming, which is Arvanitika Albanian. Btw if you disagree with my ISO naming edits why didn't you delete them on all articles I added them, but only on an article about an Albanian dialect of Greece?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 19:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

No your wording didn't make anything "obvious", it just created confusion and made a mess. The title of the article is Arvanitika, yet after your edit the first line of the article read "Arvanitika Albanian...". ISO is just one source out of many, there is absolutely nothing "official" about it, and your insistence that it is "official" is comical. When this is finally made clear to you by the RfC, I expect you to revert yourself on those other articles as well. Also based on my experience, I'm going to guess the only reason you edited those other articles was so as to "lay the groundwork" (so to speak) for your move here, which seems to be what you were really interested in, seeing how you almost exclusively edit Albania-related topics. After all, it seems you lost interest in adding the "official" ISO name to other articles after you did so here. Athenean (talk) 19:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I didn't make a mess as you say and I added it on two more articles after Arvanitika, so please don't make such deductions about the cause of my edits. Btw ISO is the only source that provides official and standard names, so my insistence isn't comical as you label it.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 19:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

ISO is indeed the "only source", as you put it, but not in the way you think. It is the only source that refers to it as "Arvanitika Albanian". If you had actually read the article and done a basic search, that would be clear to you. And the article makes clear that Arvanitika is a dialect of Albanian right in the first line, so yes, your insistence on this is quite comical. Athenean (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

(unindent)Athenean in your latest edit you were arguing the many similar to ISO sources that exist, but they don't and ISO is the only official source about standard names.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 20:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I think there is a comprehension issue here. ISO is the only source that refers to is as "Arvanitika Albanian", your insistence that it is "official", and that this makes it somehow take precedence over other sources is nonsense. ISO is just one source out of thousands, and your changing the first line of the article to conform with a minority view based on a single source is tiresome and tendentious. Anyway, I am tired of repeating myself, so I'll let you have the last word. Athenean (talk) 20:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

(unindent)Athenean ISO codes are the official standard names. The state of France is commonly known as...France but it's official name is the French Republic. Languages have official ISO codes and documentations, which are their international, official and standard names. Btw by reverting me twice you didn't actually remove the official name since like all language articles the infobox links to ISO 639-3. The international standard name of Arvanitika is Arvanitika Albanian regardless of wikipedia and commmon names as the name of Bahrani Arabic is Baharna Arabic [13]--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 20:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

For the last time (for real this time), languages do not have "standard official" names. Countries do. Languages don't. Athenean (talk) 21:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

[14] the infobox of the article does lead to that. ISO 639-3 is the international standard.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Agree With Zjarri, should be included --Vinie007 21:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Pffffft, now you're using the infobox as an argument? I would expect that after yesterday's discussion, you eould know better than that. Athenean (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

(unindent)I would expect you to understand that |extinct isn't language codes. Btw ISO 639-3 is the only international standard, so don't make or deductions.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

• ISO 639-3 naming is not "official." This is more of a comment on this discussion rather than whether or not the term should be included in the article. I have no connection or POV with this particular language, but I do object to the description of the ISO name as "official." The ISO's purpose in creating language codes is to ensure that there is a common way for computer systems and other entities to represent languages, not to dictate "official" naming for the languages themselves. SIL, a private organization which is the registrar for ISO 639-3, even states this clearly themselves: ISO 639-3 is a code that aims to define three-letter identifiers for all known human languages. There's nothing there about attempting to standardize the names themselves. Again, I have no POV on what the WP:COMMONNAME for this language is, but relying solely on ISO 639-3 just because it happens to be from ISO is fallacious. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 23:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

• The debate about "official" status is a red herring. Of course, Orange Suede Sofa is quite right about the status. Languages don't have "official" names, because languages (unlike states) are not constituted, owned and administered by institutions. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Maybe official is too strong a word then, but ISO is an international standard so should it or shouldn't it be on the lead?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 00:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Another thing I said in my posting above at first and maybe shouldn't have deleted: the actual name strings used in the ISO standard are pretty irrelevant. The only important thing about the standard is the existence of the three-letter code. "Arvanitika Albanian" is not really a name by any normal measure anyway: it's a description, meaning "the dialect of Albanian also known as Arvanitika". Its binary form seems to be largely dictated by general naming schemes inherent to that standard, but doesn't necessarily reflect normal naming practice. Apart from that, as a name, it's pretty tautological anyway. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

As tautological as the definitions of Central American Spanish or High German languages can be. Does it make sense to add it among the alternative names on the lead?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 01:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

What part of "Arvanitika Albanian" is not really a name by any normal measure anyway do you not understand? Athenean (talk) 01:15, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I asked FutureP a question about the tautological nature of the issue.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 01:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

This is getting funnier and funnier. Do you know what "tautological" means? Athenean (talk) 06:15, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Do you know how many articles have similar definitions?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 06:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

You didn't answer my question. Athenean (talk) 07:05, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Athenean please read wp:npa.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 07:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:NPA? Why exactly? Athenean (talk) 07:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes the best way to respond to an isolated personal attack is not to respond at all.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 07:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

If you could show me where on earth you see a personal attack...You know, disagreeing with someone does not constitute a personal attack. I think you're the one who needs to read WP:NPA, because you evidently do not know what a personal attack is. Athenean (talk) 07:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, how about this:

• Use the ISO name in the infobox as it is used in similar articles.
• Don't include the ISO name in the lead unless there's a WP:RS indicating that this indeed used as an alternate name.

Thoughts? Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 07:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The ISO name is not really a name, it's just a descriptor of the three letter string. It is also tautological and redundant, since Arvanitika is a dialect of Albanian, and this is well known. As far as I know, only ISO uses that designation, it is not used as an alternate name by any of the sources I have seen in the literature. Athenean (talk) 07:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

It is a good solution OSS and the term itself is used by scholars [15]--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 07:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

On closer inspection [16] I only see one or two sources at most use "Arvanitika Albanian" (the ones that do so in parentheses are another story), so it has no real place in the lead or the infobox. Virtually all sources just use simply "Arvanitika", since Arvanitika Albanian is just redundant. Athenean (talk) 07:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Your At most two sources is wrong because [17][18]--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 08:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I meant "one or two" as a figure of speech, not literally (I shouldn't have to explain this). Two, three, whatever. The point is, that very few sources use it, because it is redundant. Athenean (talk) 08:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

It is used as an alternative name and I've already agreed with OSS.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 11:04, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I find user:Orange Suede Sofa proposal very logical and appropriate. Use the ISO name in the infobox as it is used in similar articles and don't use it in the lead unless there's a WP:RS indicating that this is used as an alternate name. Aigest (talk) 12:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

References

Map

Groan... maps again.

The map is of XXth century not of 19th century. As I've mentioned in the edit summaries an eg would be the Albanians in Ioannina or Albanians in Nish area which were expelled in 1878 by the Serbian army. You can see that they are not represented as Albanian speaking pockets or areas in this map. I invite users not to make OR deductions which will lead to useless disputes. Aigest (talk) 15:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

You are making or deductions. In your initial revert you said that this is about a present situation because the work the map is based is written in 2000 (?). What's simple to understand is that today or at least from early 20th century Albanian has become extinct in several painted placed (for example Trudgil's map doesn't mention Arvanitika in Athens, Megara, Egina in 1900)Alexikoua (talk) 17:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

It seems that this is just one of Balkanian's or deductions. Can you plz verify the source you base your argument? Alexikoua (talk) 17:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

People are confused about the scope and purpose of this map. It's supposed to be a dialectological map (and obviously a rather simplified one), not a demographic map. Its purpose is not to delineate precisely the regions where Albanian is present from those where it is not. Its purpose is to delineate, within the Albanian speech area, which parts belong to which dialect group. Thus, the only relevant piece of information that the reader should, and can, take from this map for this article is that "all Albanian dialects spoken in SE Greece belong dialect group X, whereas those in NW Greece belong to a different one." The outer boundaries of the Albanian-speaking area, for this purpose, can legitimately be shown in an approximated fashion, and for a map of this coarse resolution this is hardly avoidable. Minor enclaves and exclaves, such as the presence of the traditionally non-Arvanitic city area of Megara or the distribution across this or that minor island, are quite irrelevant here. The same goes for the distinction between areas where the language is still alive and those where it may have become marginalized or completely extinct recently. If Arvanitic has today ceased to be actively spoken in this or that part of Attica, it is still true that the varieties remembered by the last remaining Arvanitic-speaking grandmother were part of the same dialect group and not some other, and as such that is still a relevant part of what this map needs to convey. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, can people please (not "plz"!) avoid inventing new jargon, such as "or deduction". It's difficult enough to keep some semblance of sense in these discussions even without that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:48, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, I always found "or deduction" (even more so in lower case) especially ugly. Athenean (talk) 18:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

"The outer boundaries of the Albanian-speaking area, for this purpose, can legitimately be shown in an approximated fashion, and for a map of this coarse resolution this is hardly avoidable." - sure but the map is quite inaccurate for Epirus too...some non albanian speaking areas are shown as albanian speaking and vice versa...i mean really now do we need maps that badly no matter their quality? and Trudgills(?) *map* is quite bad as well..the vlachs are moved eastwards, greek is spoken in the place of albanian in some areas, it disappears from macedonia and thrace...i know i know but i still had to vent since maps in border areas are the source of much friction..87.202.140.28 (talk) 05:25, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Population

We had 30–150k, citing Trudgill and Ethnologue. But I can't tell what the Trudgill is, and Ethn. actually says 50k. Anyone have a datable citation? — kwami (talk) 08:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Completely false image

The map "File:Griechisch Isoglossen 1900.png" (here) seems completely inaccurate to me concerning the distribution of Arvanitika. First of all, it is well known that in Euboea there are Arvanitic communities in the southern part of the island, in the villages of Karystia. Even in this region the larger towns, Karystos and Marmari - and their surrounding areas - weren't Arvanite communities. This map not only presents this region as purely Arvanitic, but - interestingly - this "white area" is expanded in more than half Euboea. Maybe it's the first map that shows Arvanitika as the prevailing language even in central Euboea and the fringes of its northern part, including the area from Chalkis (!) to Aliveri (!) and Kymi (not including the latter though), a region that was never Arvanitika-speaking.

Secondly, only a small part of Boeotia is white, and Argolis isn't white at all, both with many arvanitic villages, while Attica is almost totally white (!). Additionally, colouring whole areas to show that a language was spoken in a number of their communes, implying that there aren't other languages spoken in these areas and nearby communes, is misleading. To me, the whole map (and the original map) is completely false, inaccurate and misleading concerning language distribution, not the isoglosses, and shouldn't be used for this purpose.--Ymaea (talk) 12:32, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Arvanitika. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060313102742/http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf to http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060313102742/http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf to http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927143936/http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/sgramley/LgCont-LgDeath(Thomason9).pdf to http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/sgramley/LgCont-LgDeath(Thomason9).pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060313102742/http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf to http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927143936/http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/sgramley/LgCont-LgDeath(Thomason9).pdf to http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/sgramley/LgCont-LgDeath(Thomason9).pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060313102742/http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf to http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:01, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Arvanitika. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/sgramley/LgCont-LgDeath%28Thomason9%29.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060313102742/http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf to http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/Jack_Chambers/globalisation.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/sgramley/LgCont-LgDeath%28Thomason9%29.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Addition of reconstructive languages as 'older forms'

The addition of languages without historical attestation does not provide any serious information in infobox especially when they are placed in a wrong field. Reconstructed languages have been reconstructed for a specific purpose by linguistic community and should not be presented as 'older forms' in lede.Alexikoua (talk) 00:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

You let PIE stay, that's why I reverted you. It's acceptable now. AlexBachmann (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)