This is an archive of past discussions about Spanish language. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
File:Spanish Speaking Map.PNGImage 1, put in the article by User:XGustaX. Brazil neutralised by Marco Neves. Only on wiki english.Image 2, by user:Yug, on commons, I tryed to neutralised the former map. Is it good ? please make a clear summary, then I can improve this map."Mundohispano.png", this one is use on the spanish Wikipedia article
The colour of Brazil in this map is completely misleading. It has the same colour as the U.S., meaning something like there is a considerable percentage of the population speaking the language. According to the figures, there are 31 million Spanish-speaking Americans. But how many Brazilians do actually speak Spanish? Do you have any figures on this? So, why show Brazil as a partially Spanish-speaking nation?
Maybe the reason behind this is the following reference in the article «Geographic distribution»: "On July 07, 2005, the National Congress of Brazil gave final approval to a bill that makes Spanish a second language in the country’s public and private primary schools". The fact is that this bill simply makes compulsory for the public schools to offer Spanish as one of the possible options for foreign languages, not just English, as it used to be. However, many of my Brazilian friends say this is far from being possible in a near future, as the quantity of teachers to be trained in Spanish is huge.
Don't be ridiculous, both Brazil and the US have a huge amount of spanish speaking population. Especially in the south (Both Brazil's south and the US's south). I myself have been to Parana, Minas Gerais, Iguacu, RJ, SP, Bahia and other areas where I found a lot of spanish speaking people. I have no official figures, but Brazil is deservedly in that category. I'm sure whoever made the map has the figures handy. Sebastian KesselTalk16:54, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Before there was no obligatory foreign language in Brazil's education system. Now all high schools must offer Spanish to their pupils, and that's the only foreign language they must offer. Nowadays Spanish is more studied than English in some universities, and 80% pupils prefer Spanish to English; and that with the lei do espanhol (law of Spanish) not being implemented yet. “Escolas do Brasil vao ter espanhol obrigatório” http://www.esbam.com.br/noticias.php?idNoticia=28
Sebastian, I think you (as well as the author of this map) is taking the knowledge of Spanish as a foreign language for speaking it as a mother tongue. That's why I asked for figures of the supposed Spanish-speaking community in Brazil.
There are presently 298 million people in the U.S., 31 million of them having Spanish as their first language, i.e. about 10.4% of the total. The population of Brazil is 186 million. So, you should have something like 19 million Brazilian with Spanish as their mother language! There is no such thing! There is absolutely no similarity between the Brazilian situation and the American one.
You say you found "a lot of spanish speaking people" all over Brazil, from Paraná to Bahia. Were they speaking Spanish among themselves, or just being polite and trying to talk to you in your own language? Apart from any printed material produced for Argentinean tourists, did you see any local newspapers or magazines written completely or partially in Spanish? Did you listen to any local radio broadcast in Spanish? Is there a local TV channel in Spanish? Or, at least, some TV programmes, shows or novellas in Spanish? With the exception of possible projects promoting Spanish as a foreign language, do you know any Brazilian website or discussion group where that "Spanish-speaking community" can get information, meet and discus "in their own language" (i.e. Spanish)? Do you know any Brazilian Spanish-speaking singer, actor, writer, or politician? Is there any "Brazilian Academy for the Spanish Language", like you have in any Spanish-speaking nation, including the U.S. or the Philippines? Do you know any political party, association or movement that represents the local Spanish community?
So, how do you explain the silence of the "huge amount of spanish speaking population" that you so peremptorily state exists in Brazil? The answer is a simple one: There is no Spanish speaking community in Brazil. What happens in Brazil is the same that happens in Portugal, for that matter, and is clearly stated in the article about Brazil in the English language Wikipedia: "Spanish is understood in various degrees by most people, since it is very close to Portuguese". People understand and, to a certain degree, can speak Spanish because it is, in many ways, similar to Portuguese. But that's all. --82.102.11.14800:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)Manuel de Sousa
French Manuel, I agree with you that the situation of Spanish in Brazil and the United States is very different. However, I think you are being confused by the map, which is not comparing the US with Brazil, but only indicating where (with light green color) Spanish is commonly spoken as a second-language. This situation is similar to French in Western Canada, where there aren't much of clusters (green dots) of French speakers and more of usage as a second language (light blue). --Vizcarra00:57, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Manuel about the Brazilian relationship to Spanish being totally different to the US relationship to Spanish, which is more like the British relationship to Urdu, SqueakBox01:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Vizcarra, unlike Canada, Brazil is not a bilingual nation. I don't agree with your comments, because this would lead us to surprising results. Let me explain: Everybody agrees now (I hope!) that there are no Brazilians with Spanish as their mother tongue. They don't speak at home, they don't use it among themselves, they just speak it (with more or less fluency) as a foreign language. This is what you mean as a "second-language", right? That's why you use the light green colour on Brazil, right? OK.
But, considering this as a good method, you should also colour in light green Portugal and all Portuguese-speaking nations, because -- due to the similarity between the two languages -- we all can (better or worse) understand Spanish. Right?
Following this same logic, all Spanish-speaking nations should have a similar light colour in the map of the Portuguese-speaking nations, because Portuguese is as similar to Spanish, as Spanish is to Portuguese. Don't you agree?
Still remaining faithful to that very same principle: when we're considering the English language, all countries in the world should be painted in a similar light colour, as English is taught in nearly every school in virtually every nation. So, it is either the first or the second language of almost every human being, right?
No, the issue is not that Spanish and Portuguese are similar, but rather the number of people who speak Spanish as a second language in a region. Speaking English as a second language is not common in Mexico, most people in Mexico are unable to hold conversations in English, only in border towns and tourist areas are people able to do so. I am not sure about the penetration of Portuguese in Latin America in general, but in Mexico is negligible, so at least Mexico would not be colored in light green in the Portuguese language map. --Vizcarra20:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes but Mexicans could probably pick up Portuguese a lot more quickly than they could English. To the untrained Spanish and Portuguese ear English sounds unintelligible (as do these 2 languages to the untrained English ear) whereas all speakers of those languages can easily pick up a little bit of the other language without too much effort because of their similarity in pronunciation, grammar and words, SqueakBox20:30, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
The map is about first and second-language speakers, not about who can easily learn Spanish if they want to. --Vizcarra20:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Vizcarra, don't you understand that Brazilians happen to be somehow fluent in Spanish, for the only reason that there is a strong familiarity between the two Iberian languages? A comparable phenomenon also occurs, at least, in neighbouring countries like Uruguay, Paraguay and Argentina. This is generally called "portunhol" or "portuñol", a mixture of both languages.
As I already said, Brazil is not a bilingual nation (not "de iure" and not "de facto") and there is no proper Spanish-speaking minority in the country. Brazil happens to be surrounded by seven Spanish-speaking nations, with whom it has strong economic relations. But you can't say that Brazil is a Portuguese-speaking "island" in a Spanish "ocean". Brazil is huge. It is the largest and most populous country in Latin America (it is even larger than the U.S, if you exclude Alaska!). The Brazilians make up 51% of the South America population. So, it's not easy to tell who's the "island" and who's the "ocean"?
I think the conception of the map we have been discussing purely reflects the U.S. vision of Latin America. As it is common sense in the U.S. to think that Spanish is the only language spoken south of the Rio Grande, it is hard to understand Brazil, cause this country doesn't fit properly in that stereotype. So, the way out of this dilemma is a simple one: if Brazilians don't speak Spanish as their first language, they must speak it as a second language. Otherwise, how could they survive over there!? And, as they are now teaching Spanish in public schools, in a 20 years time (to say the most), all Brazilians will be just speaking Spanish, and this oddity will be over!
My dear friends, I said before, and I say it again: please separate fact from fiction. As Wikipedia consider itself to a be an encyclopaedia, please make every effort to have only reliable information posted in these pages. To catalogue Brazil as a Spanish-speaking nation (even as a second language) is as incorrect as it would be to consider the Netherlands or Sweden as English-speaking nations, because "everybody" speaks English over there! --82.102.42.7023:57, 22 December 2005 (UTC)Manuel de Sousa
I do understand why Brazilians are somehow fluent in Spanish, because that is one of the reasons why I am somehow fluent in Portuguese as well, because they are similar. In fact that is why I am very fluent in Italian, because Italian and Spanish aver very similar. However, the map does not discriminate on the reasons why Spanish is spoken as a second language, just that it is. And yes, Brazil is huge, it is the fifth largest country in the world, and it is not bilingual. And portunhol is also spoken in southern Brazil, in regions close to Uruguay. I, in fact, know a person who is Brazilian and speaks more Spanish than Portuguese. The fact that there are many second-language speakers of Spanish is good enough reason to color Brazil in light-color green. No matter how big Brazil is. It is not based on US-centric assumptions. I know Latin America, I speak Spanish, and I speak much Portuguese. You should not take offense on a map which is not saying much other than there is a significant amount of second-language speakers of Spanish in Brazil. --Vizcarra00:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Manuel. Statistically the number of Spanish anmd Portuguese speakers in South America are the same, and Portuguese is just as important to these Spanish speaking countries as vice-versa and to characterise Brazil in this way (ie as a Spanish-speaking nation) is false. Its obvios to me why Portuguese speakers might take offence, and US centrism is a problem trhoughout the encyclopedia, SqueakBox00:11, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
The map does not characterize Brazil as a Spanish-speaking nation, if it was it would be dark green, not light green. Do you have the statistics of Spanish and Portuguese people in South America? --Vizcarra00:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Vizcarra, I'm not offended by the map (I don't get offended easily!). I'm just trying to convince you to correct it, because it is wrong. I'm just giving my contribution to the accuracy of the English-language Wikipedia.
You have Spanish as your mother language and, because of that, you have a regular command over the Portuguese language. So, this road has two ways, after all! If there are Brazilians that can speak Spanish, because of the Portuguese language; there must also be many Argentineans, Uruguayans, Paraguayans, etc. that can speak Portuguese, thanks to their knowledge of the Spanish language.
And considering the size, population, industrial development of Brazil (when compared to its Spanish-speaking neighbours), it's much more likely that there are Argentineans, Uruguayans, Paraguayans, etc. speaking Portuguese (even if you happen not to know one of them, yourself), than Brazilians speaking Spanish. Doesn't this seam logical to you?
In my opinion, the idea that Brazil is in the process of becoming a Spanish-speaking nation is really a US-centric assumption. It is a myth, that has absolutely nothing to do with reality.
What makes you say that "there is a significant amount of second-language speakers of Spanish in Brazil"? How many are they, after all? 100 million? 50 million? 20 million? Or just a few thousands speaking "portunhol" close to the border?
Why don't you say that there is a significant amount of second-language speakers of Portuguese in, say, Uruguay? In the article on the Portuguese language in the Spanish Wikipedia, you can find: "Se habla también de forma minoritaria en las zonas fronterizas de Uruguay, Argentina, Bolivia y Paraguay, debido a la migración de brasileños en su mayor parte dedicados al comercio."
You know, as well as Spanish is now taught in Brazilian schools there are also many people from neighbouring Spanish-speaking countries enrolling in courses of Portuguese. See: "El portugués, un idioma de moda".
Again, in the Spanish Wikipedia, in article on the Spanish language there is a map of the "Mundo Hispano" where you can find the Philippines and "Los Estados Unidos", but no reference is made to Brazil.
I'm not "insisting". I'm discussing, and we keep talking about it because your arguments are not convincing enough, perhaps because you are getting off the subject by comparing the superiority of population and the importance of Brazil as a country. The map does not deal with that. It only deals with areas where Spanish is spoken as a first language (dark green) and as a second language (light green). I have a command of the Portuguese language because I studied it in school (in the US), not because I speak Spanish. In fact, I found Italian to be easier to learn than Portuguese. Why don't I say that there is a significant amount of second-language speakers of Portuguese in, say, Uruguay? Because we are talking about the Spanish language. This is not a competition of who wins, the Spanish language and the Portuguese language. --Vizcarra20:06, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Dear Vizcarra, you're right, this is far from a competition. But, please, answer my questions below. Spanish is taught as a foreign language in Brazil (just like English). If we would signal this in this map, we would have to signal almost every country in the world in a similar map regarding English, don't you think? If the problem is Spanish is becoming a mandatory subject in school, then Denmark and Portugal (and many more countries) would have to be included (in a light shade) in any map regarding English, since English is mandatory there. Really, Spanish has no different status in Brazil from, say, English. Spanish is just an important foreign language, taught to an increasing number of students. Best regards, Marco Neves21:08, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
While I am not convinced that there are more speakers from Spanish speaking South Americans etc speaking Portuguese than Brazilians speaking Spanish (I woulsd conclude an identical phenomena taking place) I do again agree with Manuel. The same certainly occurs in Spain where most people in Galicia can speak Portuguese because it is so close to Gallego, and I have known people who grew up near Salamanca who spoke some Portuguese but no other foreign language (not educated people), basically because they had had exposure and it is very easy. As an English speak it took me years to master reading Spanish, and then weeks to master reading Portuguese, and I am sure if I had started with Portuguese it would have been the same. I tend to agree that this a US centrede approach (and I think Vizcarra and I have had this US centrism debate elsewhere with Afro-Latin American etc), and I for one, believing this is an international and not a US encyclopedia, feel it is important not to reflect a US centred approach to wikipedia. So I support Manuel in wanting Brazil grey rather than green. I don't think it is a million miles from the Is the US a Spanish speaking country below, SqueakBox14:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Just a question: in Portugal (where I come from) aprox. 40% of people have learnt English (like in many other European countries). Should we be included in a light green colour (or something like that) in any map describing English-speaking countries? Marco Neves18:14, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Just for the record: I think Spanish in U.S. is a very different case, since in the U.S. there is a sizable non-immigrant community that speaks Spanish as a 1st language (not learnt in school), unlike in Brazil, where virtually no one learns Spanish at home. Furthermore, there is one state in U.S. that has Spanish as an official language (New Mexico). Light green is more than appropriate for U.S., but completely misleading for Brazil. Marco Neves18:27, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Since someone reverted the map to include Brazil again, I will have to clarify my point.
1. From this year on, English is mandatory to all Portuguese elementary school students. Furthermore, 40% of Portuguese speak English as a 2nd language. Does that make Portuguese a suitable candidate for any ligh-shade colouring in a map stating English-language countries? I think that is not so. So, why is Brazil different?
2. The situation in Brazil is the same as in surrounding countries: they are learning Spanish, as their neighbours are learning Portuguese. So, would you agree if Argentina were presented as a Portuguese-speaking country (albeit in a light shade tone) in any map?
3. There is no Spanish-speaking community in Brazil (there is a German-speaking one, though). There is no point in treating Brazil as a Spanish-speaking country. If the similarity between both languages is at stake, then Portugal must be included altogether. Don't you agree?
In a nutshell: Brazil has no place in this map. In Spanish Wikipedia, no one presents Brazil as remotely Spanish-speaking. Try ask any Brazilian if they agree with this. Best regards, Marco Neves05:53, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
What strange question this is! Those (I think it is only one person) trying to include Brazil in the map should first answer the questions I put above. Of course they can't, since their position is unsustainable by any person that knows something about Brazil. They are reading CIA fact book as if it were the Truth (disregarding the fact that it also says Brazil speaks French and English!! What a wonderful many-tongued country! A new Switzerland!). It is obvious: Brazilians speak Portuguese (apart from very little communities, as in any other country) but Brazilians learn English, Spanish and French at school (that does not make Brazil an English-, French- or Spanish-speaking country). What is the question, here? Marco Neves21:23, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
USA and the Spanish language
Latin America has been for decades the back yard of the United States, and many Americans think that it will always be that way, but it won't. Many Hispanic American countries have a great capacity of growing and Brazil has decided to lead them into the future. Brazil has just a handicap to get that: Spanish is not spoken there; yet. In July 2005 Brazilian parliament established Spanish as a subject which all high schools in the country had to offer to their pupils. Due to the huge interest (necessity) of Brazilians in learning Spanish, and to the Spanish-Portuguese resembling, Brazil is going to be a bilingual Portuguese-Spanish country in 20 years. This will let Brazil lead the rest of Latin American countries in a natural way.
Meanwhile in the USA Spanish is ignored in primary and secondary education, in spite of being the second most important language in the world (it’s said to be the international language, with English, in the future). Will USA be so short sighted as not to implement a national plan to establish Spanish as a compulsory subject in primary and secondary schools so that Americans of tomorrow be able to speak it? Will USA lose on its influence over Hispanic countries?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.36.187.45 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 20 December 2005
Just for the record: I've previously reverted this very comment, as I thought it was in the article page itself. I was wrong, and I apologize. User:Ejrrjs says What?22:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Well, because more and more americans are of hispanic ancestry I don't think it will be ignored forever. But, currently the political elite in the USA is of white protestant heritage. It will change one day, but nobody knows how long it will take. --Lucius197608:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Spanish, like English, is not an official language of the USA, but it is a Spanish speaking country.
Why is Brazil colored green and not Canada? The US is a Spanish speaking country and should be the same color as the other countries in Latin America. If you go to Google News and type in 'Spanish language' you will get an idea on the vast presence of Castilian in the US.
Zedkoman15:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
As someone who speaks Spanish almost fluently as a second-language, I'm well aware that Spanish is widespread in the US. However, it is misleading to say that the U.S. is a "Spanish-speaking country", as it implies that Spanish is our primary or official language. The US as a whole has no official language, and although Spanish has been given what would be considered co-official status in some areas, it is still far more accurate to say that the US is a country where spanish is spoken. I think this would be a compromise in wording that would please both sides of this debate. ThePedanticPrick17:33, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I absolutely disagree. We have had this argument extensively alrerady, (see above). The US is an English speaking country, for the reasons I outlined above (education and judiciary are in English, etc) and I would strongly oppose any attempt to equate the US with Sp LatAm countries on the basis that the Spanish language presence in the US is not in any way comparable to how Spanish is used in almost two thirds of Latin America, where it is in fact comparable to the way English is used in the US, or the way Portuguese is used in Brazil. Describing the US as a Spanish speaking country is about as accurate as describing the UK as an Urdu speaking country. Zedkoman, please read the earlier discussions, SqueakBox15:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
You and Claire have had a robust exchange of ideas and thoughts. Comparing the UK and the US is like comparing apples and oranges. One is not identical to the other. 12% percent of US resident have Spanish as their native language. Spanish has a historical presence in current US territory that predates the existance of English. You should read this PBS article by Phillip Carter of North Carolina State University. http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/americanvarieties/spanglish/usa/ Puerto Rico is United States territory and the language of the courts and of the schools is Spanish. In New York there is bilingual education where one could take all of their high school subjects in either English or SPanish. The regents exams in NYS are offered in both English and Spanish. This is one example of US nationwide phenomena where Spanish is utilized. Their are countless periodicals, magazines, radio and TV stations to serve the Spanish speaking population. There is even a Spanish speaking station in Bangor, Maine! I of course am not mentioning the Spanish speakers in Louisiana and the southwest of the US that have spoken Spanish since the first European exploration of that part of the American continent several centuries ago. The Urdu speakers in the UK are not equivalent to people speaking a European language like Spanish in the American continent for half a millenium. Urdu is a phenomena of the post WW2 immigration of South Asians to the UK. One can however state that Turkey is a Kurdish speaking country, Finland is a SWEDISH speaking country (even though 5% of Finns are native speakers), or that Spain is a Catalan speaking country. That might get the majority riled up, but it is true. But this article isn't about politics, it is about Spanish and its use in the world. Claire showed statistics from the Census Bureau that prove everything that I am saying in regards to the sheer number of US American Spanish speakers. Zedkoman19:32, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
I think Claire's arguments failed to gain any kind of a consensus then, and while any regional situation in the world is different from any other to characterises say the United Kingdom as a Welsh speaking nation or the US as an Spanish speaking nation is not widely considered to be the truth, and indeed will make most people think what? and not really trust wikipedia so much, SqueakBox20:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm afraid that an encyclopaedia should not cater to the whims of people...there is an old saying in Spanish regarding flies, their taste on food and the truth that I think could apply here :-) User:Ejrrjs says What?21:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Where Spanish is spoken
In the info box "Spanish (español, castellano)" it is said: "Spoken in: Most of South and Central America; Mexico and substantial minorities in other parts of North America and the Caribbean; the Iberian Peninsula; and enclaves and immigrant groups on all continents"
I don't think this is precise in two important points:
"Most of South America" - As Brazil occupies almost half the territory of South America and Brazilians makeup a bit more than half of all South Americans, instead of "Most of South and Central America", it should be something like "Half of South America and most of Central America..."
"the Iberian Peninsula" - The territory of the Iberian Peninsula is occupied by four politically independent entities: Andorra, Gibraltar, Portugal and Spain. Andorra's official language is Catalan; Gibraltar's official language is English; Portugal's language is Portuguese; Spanish is the official language in Spain, but other regional languages are also co-official there: Basque, Catalan/Valencian and Galician. So, instead of saying "the Iberian Peninsula" as one place where Spanish is spoken, it should be better if you simply say "Spain". In spite of occupying 4/5 of the peninsula, Iberia is not exactly the same as Spain. Moreover, the Balearic and Canary islands are also part of Spain, but not of the Iberian Peninsula.
I agree with point 2, however, my two cents on point 1 is that "most", in this context, does not necessarily refer to geographical area or population. When you have 15-20 countries on a continent and the vast majority of these countries speak Spanish, it is natural to say that spanish is spoken in most of that continent. I'd be okay with explaining in detail the geographic distribution and population figures for spanish in South America, but simply removing the word "most" on the grounds you suggest seems overly pedantic. ThePedanticPrick17:25, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
So, the text I propose is: "Spoken in: Half of South America; most of Central America; Mexico and substantial minorities in other parts of North America and the Caribbean; Spain; and enclaves and immigrant groups on all continents" --82.102.11.10623:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)Manuel de Sousa
Perhaps you could explain your grounds for doing so? If I'm not mistaken, Belize is the only country in Central America where spanish is not the official language. ThePedanticPrick17:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
It seems like people are trying to insert their own POV and play down the influence of Spanish in the Americas. Why not just say most of Latin America? Most of the Americas? Spanish is the most spoken language in the w hemisphere. In Europe, although Spanish is only official in Spain, it is widely spoken in Andorra and Gibraltar as a second language although it does not have official status. To say most of the Iberian peninsula is better because it is factual. Is there mention of Northern Africa? Zedkoman22:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
The whole thing has been invented to avoid saying that Spanish is widely spoken in the United States. It's done for exactly the reason you suggest. Grace Note08:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Replacement is not the best word to use there. /θ/ and /s/ developed parallel to one another from different historical sources in an earlier stage of the language. Dave06:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
As spoken in.... (don't mention the States!)
You know, there are plenty of comical sights on Wikipedia, many of them driven by POV pushing, but the contorted use of regions rather than countries to avoid noting that Spanish is spoken by many citizens of the United States is among the most hilarious. Well, if you insist on doing that, you cannot say Spain, but must parallel region for region. The same goes for Mexico. This is, of course, ridiculous, but shrug that's the way it goes. Grace Note08:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Absolutely, and the reason is your attempts to mislead by implyingh the States is a spanish speaking country. I see you are now also misleadingly stating Spanish is spoke uin some of Europe. In Frnace? Poland? England? Or where exactly. Only in Spain and the tiny Gib and Andorra do they speak it so please stop misleading people. Are you al;so claimuing it is not spoken in Mexico. So what exactly? The US is a Spanish speaking country and Mexico isn't? SqueakBox15:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
LOL. Man, one of these days you're going to have to just face up to the fact that the US ranks fourth or so in the list of Spanish-speaking countries. Why not just return the box to the list of countries, with the US in its correct place? People won't stop speaking Spanish in the States just because you fiddle with the Wikipedia article, you know. Grace Note05:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
LOL indeed. It isn't even a Spanish speaking country. They speak this language called English there. Have you ever actuially been to a Spanish speaking country? which is one where Spanish is the dominant language. If we mislead our readers we just make wikipedia into a laughing stock as everyone knows the US is an English speaking country, SqueakBox04:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Where are you from Squeakbox? I have recently made a trip from Miami to Los Angeles, crossing the country from East to West by car and then back, and in addition to the place names, so many of them in Spanish (In New Mexico even the road signs are in Spanish), you could just speak Spanish all the they down to California without having to use any English at all if you did not want to.
Alright, there's a lot of absurdity that's gone into this rehashed [ad nauseum] subject (although the last assertion there really takes the absurdity cake)... Essentially, however, the problem is US hypernationalists pushing the POV that since Spanish isn't the foremost language of the US, that the US shouldn't be mentioned, opposed by a group of hyperproud hispanoparlantes pushing the POV that since Spanish is the 2nd most widely-spoken language in the US (which makes them very proud), that the US must be mentioned. My POV is that both camps are wrong to use the arguments they're using...what should be being discussed is the affect this argument is having on the article. Nobody, AFAIK, is arguing to exclude the US from the discussion of the geographical distribution of Spanish [speakers] later on in the article. So, what's the issue? "We disagree about the infobox." The fact of the matter is that this discussion is never going to go anywhere. Neither side will convince the other. We need, instead, to come up with an agreement about the parameters that will be used in order to determine what will and will not be included in the infobox. I am, of course, compelled to agree with Grace Note's recommendation (which, as it happens, is identical to what I recommended here 9 months ago already). Tomertalk03:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Castellano vs. Español
Mexico and maybe parts of central america are the only places in the whole spanish speaking world that refer to their language as Español. Almost all of Spanish speaking countries refer to Spanish as Castellano. In Spain it is considered offensive in many places (Basque Country, Catalonia, etc.) to refer to the language as Español.
Spoken in Israel and Republic of Turkey by jews acording with the Spanish Wikipedia:
El número de hablantes de judeoespañol ronda hoy los 150.000. La mayor parte de ellos, unos 100.000, en Israel, en su inmensa mayoría personas mayores nacidas fuera del país, cuyos hijos y nietos ya no hablan judeoespañol. En Israel se mantiene una revista en judeoespañol, Aki Yerushalayim ("aquí Jerusalén") y una emisión semanal de radio en la emisora Kol Israel. Otros medios de comunicación en ladino han ido desapareciendo a medida que menguaba el número de hablantes. Las comunidades sefardíes más numerosas fuera de Israel están en Turquía, donde hay unos 15.000 hablantes. El problema al que se enfrenta el ladino, aparte del escaso número de hablantes, es la dispersión de los mismos, es decir, el hecho de que existan pocos grupos de hablantes numéricamente importantes.
