Talk:De Colores

"de fuera"

Don't mean to quibble on wording but someone anonymously changed the wording without explanation and I do not know that I agree with the change. The two versions of the changed line are

De colores, de colores son los pajaritos que vienen de afuera

and

De colores, de colores son los pajaritos que vienen de fuera

I realize that the former is more common in the United States but I believe the latter is more traditional in general (although I have no historical documentation to prove it). To my thinking the latter makes a lot more sense regardless. As the song is discussing events outdoors one presumes the author is standing outside. Therefore in what sense would the author be discussing birds coming from outside?

I would argue that the latter phrasing is the more proper one. Here are a few sites that support my version (not that any are necessarily authoritative).

• [1]
• [2] (a recording by Pat Cummings)
• [3]
• [4]

Note that some of these disagree in other aspects.

I am inclined to change this back unless somebody wants to offer a comment.

--Mcorazao 03:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Consider first of all that De Colores is a traditional folk song whose origins and authorship are unknown (and if I'm wrong about that please update the article with whatever information you have). As such, there is no reliable original source we can go to for the correct wording; what we have is a case where a number of variations have developed and it may be difficult if not impossible to pin down what is the correct wording/spelling.

I had researched the song a couple of years before writing the first version of this article, and while doing so encountered numerous minor variations in the words and had come up with what seemed to be the most frequent and consistently used versions. I don't recall if "de fuera" was one of the variations; I do remember that in that same line the word "pajaritos" was sometimes rendered as "pajarillos". (Disclaimer: there may have been edits by others since then. Also, the English translation was by another contributor; I'm not sure if it's even that beneficial to the article and would not be opposed to removing it if others concur with that assessment.)

Having said all that I will also concede that I am not a native Spanish speaker and would defer to someone who is as far as what is the best wording. Even so, I would claim that for a song like this, what is grammatically and linguistically best is probably less important than what is most commonly used (at least if it's by a pretty substantial margin), even if examining usage only among Spanish-speakers. --Mwalimu59 16:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments:

• The origins are unknown. I think if anybody did find a "source" it would be a folk etymology that could not be considered authoritative.
• I agree that if there is a version that is substantially more common than another that should be used. I am not convinced, though, that the "de afuera" wording is more common. I believe it is more common in the U.S. but the U.S. hardly represents the majority of the Spanish-speaking population. And regardless, it is a common story that when Spanish enters the U.S. it tends to get corrupted so what is most common in Spanish-speaking communities in the U.S. should not be considered a reliable indicator of mainstream Spanish.
• What I seem to find in sources outside the U.S. is the "de fuera" phrasing. But this is not the result of a detailed survey, only anecdotal research. Have you done real research into the matter or is your evidence similarly anecdotal? Bear in mind that when you Google something you are far more likely to find U.S.-based sites than any others.
• In the absence of a compelling argument as to which is the more "traditional" or widely used phrasing I would argue that the author of the song presumably wrote something that made sense so it is best to go with the version that is most logical.
• I disagree about removing the translation. This is an English-language site. Presumably one of the primary things an average reader would want to know about a foreign language song is what it means.

--Mcorazao 17:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

It would probably be accurate to say that my research was also anecdotal. Most of the sites I found were English language and/or related to Cursillo or one of its variants, but at least one sticks in my mind as being from Chile.

One problem I have with the translation in the article is that it is simply a verbal translation that doesn't even attempt to rhyme or match the cadence of the music. During my admittedly anecdotal research I came across several English versions of the song, of which two in particular seemed to be in fairly widespread usage. If we're going to have an English version maybe it should be one of those instead. (It might be worth mentioning that lyrics have been discouraged and removed from other song articles on Wikipedia, but the most common reason for that is copyright, which is not an issue in this case. And it would imply removing the Spanish lyrics too, which I would be disappointed to see happen.)

If you're confident your suggestion (and any others similar to it) are better/more accurate versions of the words, please feel free to go ahead and make the change to the article. --Mwalimu59 18:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, ideally I was hoping for feedback from somebody with more cultural knowledge but, then, it is just one word.

As far as the translation, I realize that it is not poetic and there are more poetic translations out there. However, most of those are not true translations in that they do not represent what is actually being said (i.e. they just invent new lyrics that make for a nice sounding song). I believe that in this context (i.e. an educational one) the purpose of the translation should be to educate the reader as to what is being said as opposed to giving them something that is easy to sing. If there is a particular English version that is especially popular (I am not aware of one but maybe there is) that can be added as well but I would argue that this is separate from the translation.

--Mcorazao 15:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Antiquity, popularity & accuracy

If it is indeed so old and so well known, why currently is there no entry for this song in the Spanish wikipedia? And, with all respect to the contributor of the English version here, could it perhaps be made more accurate?

Hors-la-loi 19:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Never heard of it, and I'm a spaniard, and I'm also a musicologist. Perhaps is somehow well known in Hispanic America, but for sure not in Spain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.37.251.215 (talk) 22:12, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

de colores or curcillio is one of my favorite song in the history of roman chatolic.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.52.59.173 (talk) 11:27, 24 January 2014 (UTC) 

Origin

When the article says that the song "is believed to have been in circulation throughout the Americas since the 16th century, with melodies being brought over from Spain during the colonial era," does it mean that the melody itself is from Spain or that the melody is based on melodies from Spain? The article needs a better source about the song's early history (in the 16th century or possibly earlier), but i think it's still worth nothing that most people associate the song with Mexico. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2015 (UTC)