Talk:Language policies of Francoist Spain

The usage of the word "Dialect"

User:Error on the Spain under Franco article has recently written following summary of the question:

Language politics in Francoist Spain were based on Spanish nationalism. Only Spanish was official, the usage of the rest was discouraged as minor "dialects".

A sample for this usage -still widespread in the 70's and later- could be following quote in [1], from an (sadly unnamed) school book from 1939

«-¿Se habla en España otras lenguas más que la castellana?

«-Puede decirse que en España se habla sólo la lengua castellana, pues aparte de ésta tan sólo se habla vascuence que, como la lengua única, sólo se emplea en algunos caseríos vascos y quedó reducido a funciones de dialecto por su pobreza lingüística y filológica.

 »-.¿Cuáles son los dialectos principales que se hablan en España? -Los dialectos principales que se hablan en España son cuatro: el catalán, el valenciano, el mallorquín y el gallego.»

To us, a quote like this looks -to be mild- a little bit outlandish, but mirrors almost exactly a -till recently- common usage in France (see Language policy in France).

It also has to be noted that during the XIX century and even later, sentences similar to this, were a "watermark" of liberal thinking (or even republican, f.i. Alejandro Lerroux's following ).

I was having that quotation in mind when writing "dialect" and the separate status of Basque. --Error 00:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

areas vs languages

In my opinion, it's not very useful this "areas" categorization: it will not be easy to found great diferences between the kind of repression in Mallorca or Barcelona, in example. I propose the categorization by languages, closest to the article's subject: Catalan/valencian ; Basque ; Galician; Aragonese and Asturian (if possible) ; Caló ; Former spanish colonies. --Joan sense nick 10:55, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. The only exception I can think of is the somewhat different handling of Navarre and the other three Basque provinces. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:37, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know. We still have to gather more info. My impression (and working on the info Joan gave) is that the "levels" of repression varied more on geographic than on lingüistic boundaries. But i might prove wrong

Beyond some common restrictions (spanish only on any level of administrative language,...), the rest seems more to depend on the attitude of the local (provincial) state and party authorities.

And, for sure, attitudes regarding valencian (let's use the term) were different than with catalonian catalan.

OTOH a strict regionalization (in the non bilingüal areas) makes little sense to me.

Joan has pointed two often forgotten problems, Caló and native african languages. Here the problem would be, first to gather info and second to elucidate how francoist handling was different to republican or earlier governments. --Wllacer 08:22, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

From the external link, I understood that the situation in Valencia was milder than in Catalonia (a bit strange since Valencia was the last Republican territory).

About Navarre, I would guess that some staunch Carlists would barely speak Spanish. It would be interesting if they were treated very differently from other Basque areas.

By the way, going to the extreme, non-bilingual areas are just both Castiles and maybe Andalusia, Extremadura and Canary Islands if we don't want to deal with the political status of the respective variants.

The regional division favors (I think) a fact-based and dispassionate contribution, while sections by language encourage

• "language x was very repressed"
• "No, it wasn't. You separatist."
• "Yes it was, you fascist"
• ...

--Error 00:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think sections by language encourage such attitudes, neither other ones. I trust in the common sense of we contributors, just take a look to most articles here!. --Joan sense nick 00:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

We could have sections by language with subsections for regional differences. This could lead to dealing with the political implications of the substitution of French by English as the ordinary second language.

We could also have sections by time instead.

--Error 01:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

rename article

The title of the article sounds strange. I propose "Languages policy of Francoist Spain" or "Languages repression in Francoist Spain". A WP precedent is Racial policy of Nazi Germany.

The article's subject is the repression that Francoist regime exerted over languages other than Spanish. The title "language politics" seems to refer, for example, to the promotion of Spanish language abroad, or to the promotion of the language unity in Latin America... --Joan sense nick 22:16, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

"Repression" is POVish and could seem to let out of scope things like the apparition of Standard Basque, or political stances in favor of minoritary languages, by say nationalists, the left or the church. The agents I'd like to see mentioned are not only the Francoist government, hence in Francoist Spain.

Following your example "Racial policy of Nazi Germany" does not cover, say, Polish attitudes towards Jews. Racial politics in Nazi Germany could, though.

Language policy in France has a similar title, but it covers beyond official policy.

--Error 01:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Can you give some exemples of such "agents"? Can this be considered as "politics in Francoist Spain"? Note that "Francoist Spain" means "the regime of Franco in Spain", (since not all the spaniards were francoists). It's not the same as "Spain under Francoist dictatorship", or "Spain (1939-1978)". By the way, what you mean in your reference on the apparition of standard Basque? Francoist Spain stopped this process. See [2]. I insist in renaming. --Joan sense nick 00:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

By points:

The Montserrat monks, the Arantzazu monks, ETA, the universities, the Polisario, whoever led the Guinean independentism, Radio España Independiente, the Barcelona publishing industry, Joan Manuel Serrat,... i.e., anyone that mixed language and politics in Francoist Spain.

I think that Francoist Spain should cover the Spanish history of the period and the structure of the regime in the same article, just as Nazi Germany (Nazi Germany, or the Third Reich, refers to Germany in the years 1933–1945, when it was under the control of the National Socialist German Workers Party, or Nazi Party, with the Führer Adolf Hitler as chancellor and head of state. Third Reich, used as a near-synonym for Nazi Germany, is the English for the German expression Drittes Reich, roughly Third Empire, but the second word is seldom translated. It refers to the government and its agencies rather than the land and its people.), Habsburg Spain (not everybody was a Habsburg!), Communist Romania (Communist Romania refers to the period of the history of Romania when its government was dominated by the Romanian Communist Party.), Fascist Italy or Weimar Germany. We have Spanish State, though, for that particular formula.

From the Euskaltzaindia link, Standard Basque practically started in 1968. I don't know enough about the political ideas of the iniciators to give the political angle justifying its mention here, but I guess there is one. From memory, I think that there was a simplification that supporters of an orthography with h has a different ideology than those supporting h-lessness.

I insist in the current title.

--Error 02:10, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I think "Franco-era Spain" is a bit more common in English. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Certainly, Joan Manuel Serrat can be a subject of "politics in Francoist Spain" using Error's definition. But it's not a common use, in my opinion. Besides, everything, everyone, can be a political subject, but... it sounds a little bit strange, aint'it?. I think an article refered to the Franco's regime attitude on languages is more clear.

Otherwise, if the subject of this article is the evolution, the events, related to languages, in this period, we can use something like "Languages in the Franco-era Spain", but i think such issues should be simply included in Spain under Franco or Spanish state. --Joan sense nick 01:37, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

The issue of La la la in the Eurovision Song Contest 1968 is certainly political.

About Francoist/Franco-era, I don't know which is commoner. Whatever you find.

I'd like "Spanish State" to just deal with the expression.

--Error 02:57, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Spain under Franco is much, much better. I would like to mention that Franco, after stopping the war, simply banned all things that were used by the "losing army" to divide people (which is the same tactic used by the Roman Empire: people don't fight for politics/religion/language/culture reasons if they have the same). It's a shame that once he died, all that work was quickly undone by nationalists, because now these silly confrontations are starting again. As I said, I would like to have it mentioned in the article, but I can't find a NPOV source (I could use 'teaching books' from that era, though). [Drjones, too lazy to log in] 16 July 2006

I assume that means Language politics in Spain under Franco; the other would be a much broader topic. - Jmabel | Talk 15:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

While your comments indicate that we are a million miles apart on our politics, I agree that you have proposed a better title. I will move it. - Jmabel | Talk 16:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Spanish Sahara

I find HISTORIA / 60 AÑOS DE CARNÉ DE IDENTIDAD:

«La ONU nos ha encargado custodiar este registro, una de las claves para determinar el censo de cara a un futuro referéndum con garantías sobre la autodeterminación del Sáhara», concluye el comisario mientras muestra un DNI con media luna y caracteres arábigos.

but Antonio García García has a Spanish-only DNI from El Aaiún. Maybe there were different DNIs for natives and Christians. --Error 01:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

SAHARA: 25 AÑOS DE VERGÜENZA: La asimilación legal entre lo que se llamó "españoles peninsulares" y "españoles nativos" o "nacionales saharauis" a los que se proveyó de un DNI bilingüe castellano-árabe era completa.

?? Either they are legally the same or they have different DNIs. --Error 01:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Dubbing decree

I find in Muy Historia, nº 3 (enero-febrero 2006), page 44, 23 April 1943 as the date for the compulsory dubbing of foreign movies. However I am not capable of finding it in BOE (thanks, Wllacer).--Error 17:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

If it is not present at the BOE, it means that it was a low level norm ( IIRC "orden ministerial" downwards) -it means it had only internal value at the department, an no further legal status (could be legally challenged thru a "contencioso-administrativo" (translation?)), and had either only to be published on the "Boletin oficial" of the departament (education and armed forces) or not at all ("circulares" and such), and AFAIK none of these resources are -yet- online

By that time IIRC all the media activities fell under the jurisdiction of the Party ("Secretaría General del Movimimiento-Prensa y Propaganda"). It could be another way to search --Wllacer 08:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Supporters and adversaries

I cut "Many speakers of other languages had supported the Second Spanish Republic, which Franco's forces defeated in the Spanish Civil War, bringing Franco to power" because, conversely, there were also "many speakers" of other languages who supported Franco, not only in the Galician, Balearic, Navarrese and other areas which started the Francoist uprising, but also in the Republican held zones (most notably, conservatives in Catalonia and the Land of Valencia and, to a lesser extent, in the Basque country) thus the former reference doesn't make much sense, in my opinion. In other words: while "separatism" was indeed an issue, provided the fact that not all the speakers of other languages where nationalists (in a contemporary sense), then, it was more the Left/Right divide which fueled this war, not a linguistic question whatsoever.

On the other hand, I am not sure about it, but Franco himself may have been a Galician speaker. Anyone knows about this? Mountolive 17:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

"Castilian"

"Spanish" was recently changed to "the Spanish language (as Castilian is more widely known)". I believe this is wrong. There is no question that in Spanish, castellano and español are interchangeable, but this is not the case for their English-language equivalents. "Castilian" in English has the narrower connotation of specifically Castilian dialect; for example, the dialect of Andalusia is not "Castilian", but it is emphatically "Spanish". As far as I know, Franco made no efforts to suppress regional variation within the Spanish language. - Jmabel | Talk 01:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

But I see that our article Spanish language contradicts me on this. I'll take the issue there. - Jmabel | Talk 01:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I am responsible for that Spanish/Castilian distinction. Please feel free to edit it as you see fit if it is not accurate. Mountolive 02:51, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested 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 request was: moved Kotniski (talk) 11:33, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Language politics in Spain under Franco → Language policies of Francoist Spain — Or Language policy in Francoist Spain, as in Language policy in Latvia and Language policy in France, though I think the plural is better as there wasn't one single language policy.

The article Spain under Franco has been moved to Francoist Spain. I also think "Language policies of [country]" is clearer and more precise than "Language politics in [country]". The Celestial City (talk) 19:36, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Language policies of Francoist Spain. 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/20160815141940/http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/hemeroteca/2003/10/10/2061491.shtml to http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/hemeroteca/2003/10/10/2061491.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160815145453/http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/hemeroteca/2003/10/11/2064478.shtml to http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/hemeroteca/2003/10/11/2064478.shtml

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) 22:15, 16 December 2017 (UTC)