1. The WordReference Forums have moved to new forum software. (Details)

Spanish, Portuguese which is more conservative?

Discussion in 'Etymology, History of languages and Linguistics (EHL)' started by killerbee256, Mar 27, 2012.

  1. killerbee256 Senior Member

    American English
    I know Spanish and Portuguese and I’m interested in the history of languages, and I’m wondering which of these Iberian romance languages is more conservative, represents early Iberian romance? In some ways I want to say Portuguese as it lacks diphthongs; but I wonder if Portuguese had diphthongs earlier in its development as some words like dormir are stem vowel changing o-u in first person present similar to Spanish o-ue in the same word & tense. Portuguese maintains use of Cedilla which Spanish has discarded. Also Judeo-Spanish is said to sound like “Portuguese accented Spanish” to modern Spanish speakers, and it’s basically a snapshot of 15th century Spanish. However Portuguese is more divergent in some ways mãe, pai vs. madre, padre. For “thank you” Spanish uses gracias while Portuguese uses obrigado, a cognate to gracias, graças exists but the meaning has changed, like wise Spanish has obligado but the meaning is different if related to obrigado.
     
  2. Outsider Senior Member

    Portuguese (Portugal)
    It depends on which metric you use, as your own examples show.

    Not as far as I know. It's a characteristic trait of Portuguese that stressed short vowels did not turn into diphthongs as they did in Spanish. But then again who's to say that o > ue is a greater change than o > u? It's only the spelling that creates that impression.

    That's mostly just a spelling convention, so it doesn't really tell you that much.

    I'd never heard that description before. I do see some archaic features in Judeo-Spanish, although there are innovations/simplifications as well, but I wonder if the term "Judeo-Spanish" isn't a bit misleading. There used to be a "Judeo-Portuguese" language/dialect as well, and although Wikipedia describes it as "extinct" perhaps it was more the case that, since there were fewer speakers of Judeo-Portuguese than of Judeo-Spanish living in the diaspora, the former language eventually merged with the latter. If so then modern Judeo-Spanish might reflect ancient Spanish, but with a little bit of ancient Portuguese mixed in.

    Yes. Overall I tend to think that all Romance languages are more or less equally far apart from Latin -- but in different directions. It seems to me that terms like "conservative language" are only useful when some metric or set of metrics is assumed (perhaps implicitly).
     
  3. Ben Jamin Senior Member

    Norway
    Polish
    I have recently heard to a course in Ladino, and the “accent” was clearly Spanish, but some sounds conserved from the XV century Spanish, like the sound [ʃ] where contemporary Spanish has ‘j’ make it sound “more” Portuguese.
    Ladino like Spanish has no nasal vowels, is syllable timed, and conserves all ‘o’ as [o], while Portuguese has changed many of them into .
    In my opinion Portugues is phonetically much far away from Latin than Spanish:
    • Nasal vowels
    • Stress timing
    • Loss of many consonants (like in French)
    • Loss of many vowels (in speech)
    • Conjugated infinitive
    Compare (L/S/P):
    mater / madre / mãe
    pater / padre/ pai
    volare / volar / voar
    arena / arena /areia
     
  4. Miguel Antonio Senior Member

    Galicia
    Galego (Rías Baixas)
    I had a similar feeling when I watched the Spanish TV Documentary El Último Serfardí. It's on You Tube, the full version. I'm afraid posting a link there is against forum rules, but it's easy to find.

    Other than that, I cannot add much to the excellent explanations by Outsider.
     
  5. CapnPrep Senior Member

    France
    AmE
    Well, a diphthong is certainly more complex than a simple vowel, and not only orthographically. And diphthongization of o has definitely had a greater impact on Spanish (in terms of the number of words affected, and the effect on the entire phonological system of the language) than the metaphonic raising of stressed o to u exemplified by Portuguese durmo. However, Portuguese also has a much more pervasive phenomenon of raising unstressed o to u (not generally indicated in writing). Taking this into account, the proportion of forms of dormir with a "conservative" pronunciation (i.e. containing a mid vowel [o] or [ɔ]) is:
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2012
  6. killerbee256 Senior Member

    American English
    Is this Universal throughout all Portuguese dialects? I know that Brazilian Portuguese is more conservative in its phonics.I’ll have to “open my ears” more to see what people around me here in Rio Grande do Sul sound like.
     
  7. Outsider Senior Member

    Portuguese (Portugal)
    If the unstressed syllable is the last one, then yes. Otherwise, it varies with dialect, with the Brazilian dialects generally being more conservative in this respect, as you say.

    Latin probably had nasal vowels, though not in the same place as Portuguese. So, is Portuguese the most innovative language because it reinvented nasal vowels, or Spanish because it lost them altogether?... :)

    Timing seems to be a disputed concept in linguistics.

    As far as the loss of consonants is concerned I think you're right, though there are also words here and there that Spanish simplified more (e.g. duda, según...)

    The "loss" (or sometimes perhaps just devoicing) of many unstressed vowels is more difficult to compare. For instance, I noticed that in Latin poetry there were some elisions at word boundaries that are similar to the ones made in spoken Portuguese and French... but not in Spanish.

    The conjugated infinitive may be an innovation, but then Portuguese still uses the future subjunctive, which has fallen out of use in Spanish...

    I'm not sure what you mean by "mid vowel"... But supposedly Latin short "o" was pronounced [ʊ], so neither [o] nor [ɔ] are the original sounds. If anything, the Portuguese vowels may be slightly closer to the original, in as much as Latin near-high [ʊ] would have been somewhere between Portuguese [o] (mid-high) and (high), whereas Spanish [o] is a mid vowel and [ɔ] is low-mid.
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2012
  8. berndf Moderator

    Geneva
    German (Germany)
    Where did you get that from?:confused: After all I know, the Latin short vowels are assumed to have been lower and more central than their long counterparts (with the exception of "a"), i.e. close to the German vowel system. Click.

    [ʊ] is then the sound of the short "u" and not of the short "o". In Vulgar Latin (see here) /ʊ/ and /u/ then merged to /u/ following the loss of phonemic vowel length. But I have never heard or read anywhere that the short "o" should ever have been [ʊ].
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2012
  9. CapnPrep Senior Member

    France
    AmE
    I mean some variety of o, from [o] (mid-close) to [ɔ] (mid-open), as distinct from u ( or [ʊ]).
    Me neither. But there is a mistake in the table you refer to. Short ŭ merged with long ō in VL to produce the phoneme /o/ in proto-Romance.
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2012
  10. berndf Moderator

    Geneva
    German (Germany)
    Of course. I should have spotted that. Stupid mistake.:eek:
     
  11. tFighterPilot Senior Member

    Israel - Hebrew
    I think everyone are missing the fact that Iberian Romance isn't a language. Is there any proof that the entire peninsula ever shared a language?
     
  12. berndf Moderator

    Geneva
    German (Germany)
    Iberian Romance is a language group and nobody here said anything to the contrary. The term "conservative" is meant with respect to Classical Latin.
     
  13. tFighterPilot Senior Member

    Israel - Hebrew
    Well, Classical Latin never reached anywhere outside Italy in ancient times, so if anything it should be compared with Vulgar Latin, which again wasn't a single language. The original poster, however, did ask which was closer to the "early Iberian Romance"
     
  14. berndf Moderator

    Geneva
    German (Germany)
    Since Classical Latin is the point of departure for all Latin vernaculars, or at least the closest approximation we know, the way the question is asked is valid.

    Italian dialects were probably just as different from the standard language as Iberian ones, maybe even more. Colonial dialects often tend to stay closer to the standard as they do not compete with traditional vernaculars of that language but are directly derived from the standard.
     
  15. killerbee256 Senior Member

    American English
    That is an interesting point, dialect leveling of Roman settlers combined with the Language shift of the native Iberians would lead to a less varied more consistent dialect.
     
  16. Angelo di fuoco Senior Member

    Germany
    Russian & German (GER) bilingual
    First of all, if you take the literal meaning of "obligado" and "obrigad@", it's the same. There's no difference in meaning, but there's a difference in use. It's only the translation to English of this word in a special context that makes you think that it's different.
    The same about gracias & graças.

    And then, until now you've considered only phonology and the meaning of some random, even if frequently used words.

    If you take grammar into account, the results will be largely different: Portuguese grammar is more conservative than Spanish, and Galician even more so.
     
  17. Outsider Senior Member

    Portuguese (Portugal)
    I messed up that part about the vowels. My apologies to all, and especially to CapnPrep. I shouldn't post so late in the evening... :eek:

    In fairness, I think Killerbee's point may have been that the Latin word for "thank you" was gratias, which is precisely the etymon of Spanish gracias, whereas Portuguese obrigado/a comes from a different Latin source, with a different (I assume) original meaning. In a sense, this word did not change on the way from Latin to Spanish, but changed significantly on the way from Latin to Portuguese (graças still exists with a related meaning, but it's no longer used specifically for thanking people). Of course, there are plenty of cases where the opposite happened...
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2012
  18. killerbee256 Senior Member

    American English
    Typical semantic shift, in a sense obrigado with its literal meaning of "I'm obligated to you" less literally "I owe you one" reminds me of the origins of por favor “for my favour” and Ciao/tchau from Venetian sciào vostro, “I’m your slave,” or less literally "At your service, if you ever need it."
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2012
  19. Ben Jamin Senior Member

    Norway
    Polish
    One should be careful about mentioning “Italian dialects” in this context, as it can make somebody believe that Latin was a vernacular of all Italy since times immemorial. The subjugated peoples of Italy adopted Latin only gradually, and the “Italian dialects” are often marked by the earlier, preroman substrate. Many of today’s “Italian dialects” (in official use in Italy) are classified by linguists as separate Romance languages (like Romagnolo which is classified as a Gallo-Roman language, just as French, or Nnappulitano which has a complex substrate, consisting in a large degree of Greek).
     
  20. berndf Moderator

    Geneva
    German (Germany)
    Yes, of course. In this context "Italian dialects" obviously means "dialects of Latin spoken in Italy".
     
  21. Ben Jamin Senior Member

    Norway
    Polish
    Thanks, I thought you meant the dialects formed after Latin was dead.
     
  22. merquiades

    merquiades Senior Member

    France
    USA Northeast
    It depends how you look at the question. From a purely Spanish point of view, Portuguese seems older and more conservative, so probably closer to Latin. In fact Portuguese helps me understand old Spanish literature. Just a few thoughts: 1) phonetics- the pronunciation of consonants like f, s,z, g, j, x used to be pronounced like in Portuguese but have shifted into very different sounds in Spanish. 2) orthography in old Spanish resembles Portuguese (ç, ss, x). 3) Portuguese keeps alive some verb tenses lost in Spanish (future subjunctive, pluperfect indicative), also the preterite is used more like in older versions of Spanish. 4) In morphology, dipthonging occurred intensively in Spanish, but hasn't occurred in portuguese yet (sorte, porto, terra not suerte, puerto, tierra) 4) Lots of words that have long since died out in Spanish are still used in Portuguese (coitado...)

    All these make me believe Portuguese to be the more conservative of the languages.
     
  23. miguel89

    miguel89 Senior Member

    Argentina
    Spanish
    I also have this impression when I read something in Portuguese, but perhaps it is purely subjective. It would be interesting to know what is the impression of Portuguese speakers when reading in Spanish.
     
  24. Hulalessar Senior Member

    Andalucía
    English - England
    When asking if one language is more conservative than another it assumes that there is some yardstick for measuring change and that you have decided what you are measuring. What weight should be given to phonological, morphological and lexical changes?

    Many of the things I buy here in Spain have instructions on them in both Spanish and Portuguese. Comparing the two it is obvious that you are looking at two closely related languages. However, listen to someone read them out loud and it is a different story. The other day I was listening to a concert from Lisbon and could understand nothing of what the announcer said. (That contrasts with listening to a concert from Italy where I can at least usually follow the drift.) It is a well-observed phenomenon that intelligibility between spoken Portuguese and Spanish is essentially only one way. Whilst phonological changes only need to be minimal to prevent intelligibility (cf this thread) this suggests that at least on the phonological front it is Spanish and not Portuguese that is the more conservative.

    Someone said that all Romance languages are similar to each other apart from French; I would be inclined to add to that Romanian and Portuguese. If one disregards geography and politics, then the Romance languages can be seen to comprise an inner circle of languages (e.g. Spanish, Catalan, Occitan and Italian) that have more in common with each other than with those in the outer circle of languages (e.g. French, Portuguese and Romanian) exhibiting distinct wayward tendencies. Such a classification is though perhaps no guide to degrees of conservativeness since Romanian has preserved three genders and some of the cases of Latin.
     
  25. merquiades

    merquiades Senior Member

    France
    USA Northeast
    Probably what throws you off in Portuguese are all the reduced vowel sounds in unstressed syllables. Everything becomes a kind of schwa sound and whole syllables drop off complete. Maybe also the nasal combinations they have. All vowel sounds in Spanish are pure, just like in Italian. So I'd agree that regarding vowel sounds Portuguese is highly innovative. But as for consonants it's the opposite. Spanish has changed weakened or modified probably most consonants in some way or another.
    Put two languages together, even if linguistically they are basically the same, with one of them modifying consonants, the other vowel sounds, I suppose intelligibility will obviously occur.
     
  26. Outsider Senior Member

    Portuguese (Portugal)
    I might say something similar about Spanish. For example, regarding phonology: yes, overall Portuguese is more conservative as far as f, g, j are concerned. But as far as the sibilants are concerned, it's more complicated. Portuguese did retain the voiceless-voiced contrasts that were lost in Spanish: ss vs. -s-, ç/c vs. z, x vs. j/g. But then Portuguese is (overwhelmingly) seseante, while at least standard Spanish still distinguishes s from c/z in speech. Of course, most Spanish dialects are actually seseantes, too. On the other hand, unstressed vowels are definitely more conservative (closer to Latin and Italian) in Spanish than in Portuguese, as others have remarked...

    We also often notice words in Spanish that are now old-fashioned or have changed meaning in Portuguese.

    Catalan vowels, at least in some of its dialects, are not that far apart from (European) Portuguese vowels. The acoustic impression which the two make is remarkably similar, although I would add that at a deeper level, when one adds other linguistic dimensions, Spanish and Portuguese are overall clearly closer to each other than either of them is to Catalan.
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2012
  27. elwizard

    elwizard Junior Member

    I don't believe Portuguese is more conservative than Spanish (or the other way around). That's because all are living languages, so perhaps Portuguese changed in some aspects of the language and Spanish could be changed in other aspects, as it could be grammar, syntax or others, differents from Portuguese. Perhaps your overall appreciation outside the iberian area could be that, but, in fact, all living languages has got that. Dead languages don't success this. :rolleyes:
     
  28. Erick404 Senior Member

    Rio de Janeiro
    Portuguese - Brazil
    Yes, I have some native Spanish speaker friends living here in Brazil who use words like todavia or interceptar in the spoken language, which are almost only found in written portuguese.

    Actually, I doubt that most of these words that are common use in Spanish but old fashioned in Portuguese can trace their origin all the way down to spoken Latin, but I have the feeling that the opposite (common use in Portuguese with old fashioned cognate in Spanish) is much less common.
     
  29. killerbee256 Senior Member

    American English
    I'm not a native speaker, but in the case of Brazil the same is true. Some forms and usages common in Spanish are considered formal or old fashioned in Brazilian Portuguese. I sometimes use Creio que instead acho que and I am always corrected by people. And most notable in most of Brazil people don’t use tu. Thought it should be noted that European Portuguese is conservative in its grammar while Brazilian Portuguese is more conservative in phonics. So I think some things that are formal in Brazil are in common use in Portugal. Overall I get the feeling that Old Portuguese and Old Castilian were close enough to be considered dialects of each other, but the political separation of Portugal and Spain caused them to drift apart.
     
  30. HUMBERT0

    HUMBERT0 Senior Member

    Before the emergence of the different Iberian kingdoms, in the VI century the common day speech may not have been that different throughout the entire peninsula, and maybe the dialectal continuum was not as marked and still didn’t hinder intelligibility. I wonder how other languages such as Old Gallego and Leones-Arturiano used at their respective courts before the successful emergence of the dialects of nascent Condados of Castille or Portugal, influence the latter? Maybe the latter are less conservative in all aspects.
    Saludos
     
  31. killerbee256 Senior Member

    American English
    Well at the time Gallego was and debatably still is a dialect of Portuguese.
     
  32. CapnPrep Senior Member

    France
    AmE
    And/or vice versa… ;):D:confused::mad::cool::p
     
  33. merquiades

    merquiades Senior Member

    France
    USA Northeast
    Old Galego was the parent language of both modern Galego and Portuguese. Divergence between the two occurred after the border was set up and political separation became permanent.
     
  34. Outsider Senior Member

    Portuguese (Portugal)
    Indeed. It's purely a matter of labels. Academics call the medieval language Galician-Portuguese to emphasize that the two simply weren't distinguished.
     
  35. Miguel Antonio Senior Member

    Galicia
    Galego (Rías Baixas)
    King Alfonso X of Castile chose to compile a series of songs to Our Lady in Galician*. Why? I wouldn't know, I wasn't born yet...

    Quite frankly, I fail to comprehend why so many people insist on underrating Galician language (of old and of today) by making such kind of comments. Would you be so kind as to state your case?

    Personally, I'm for 'or' but not 'and'. The 'politically correct' answer is rather:

    Which I agree to.


    * Or Galician-Portuguese, if you will.
     
  36. Outsider Senior Member

    Portuguese (Portugal)
    It was the language traditionally used by peninsular troubadors, as I understand. (I wonder, though, if this was extensive to the whole of Iberia, or just the central and eastern western regions; surely in the east Catalan/Valencian/Occitan would have been the preferred choice...)
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2012
  37. Favara Senior Member

    Catalan - Southern Val.
    Here Provençal (Occitan) was regarded as "the most beautiful language", and was widely used in poetry. I've never heard about any Valencian/Catalan author from that time using anything other than Provençal, Catalan, Latin or (rarely) Arabic.
     
  38. relativamente Senior Member

    catalan and spanish
    Portuguese has made also important innovations that are far from conservative. Specially the extensive use of infinitives, for example in conditional sentences.
    Even has created the “personal infinitive” that is typical of Portuguese
    I copy and paste from wikipedia
    [h=2]Infinitivo pessoal[/h] [h=3]Formação[/h] O infinitivo pessoal é formado a partir do infinitivo impessoal, adicionando-se as desinências iguais às do futuro do subjuntivo: -, -es, -, -mos, -des, -em. Por isso, nos verbos regulares esses dois tempos se confundem.
    Exemplo: cantar, cantares, cantar, cantarmos, cantardes, cantarem. [h=3]Uso[/h] Costuma-se usar o infinitivo pessoal quando:

    • refere-se a um sujeito próprio, diferente do da oração principal;
    Para conseguirmos sair, alguém precisa destrancar a porta.
    • o sujeito a que se refere é expresso antes do infinitivo;
    Para nós conseguirmos sair, precisamos abrir a porta.
    • o sujeito é indeterminado na terceira pessoa do plural.
     
  39. Angelo di fuoco Senior Member

    Germany
    Russian & German (GER) bilingual
    I don't know much about Latin, but as for all I know the extensive usage of infinitive constructions is one of the most distinctive features of Latin syntax, rather than object clauses common to most of Romance (and other modern Indoeuropean) languages. Of course, the usage is not exactly the same, but I imagine that Portuguese personal infinitve has inherited many functions of the Latin infinitive clauses.
    The fact that future subjunctive and personal infinitve are morphologically identical for almost all verbs may be confusing, but they are distinct forms: "no caso de ires à praia irei contigo" is not exactly the same as "se fordes à praia irei contigo".
     
  40. XiaoRoel

    XiaoRoel Senior Member

    Vigo (Galiza)
    galego, español
    Last edited: May 11, 2012
  41. Outsider Senior Member

    Portuguese (Portugal)
    Well, I agree that they're distinct forms, but the semantic difference between them in those two particular sentences is vanishingly small at best. :)
     
  42. Angelo di fuoco Senior Member

    Germany
    Russian & German (GER) bilingual
    Sorry for the error...
    Yes, in those two sentences it is small, but if you add final clauses and the like, the difference will greatly increase.
     
  43. merquiades

    merquiades Senior Member

    France
    USA Northeast
    The use of "ter (tener)" as an auxiliary verb to form the perfect tenses is an invention of Portuguese. Spanish keeps traditional Latin "haber" to form the perfect tenses (also impersonal expressions such as "haber de", "hay que", "hay") which has grown archaic in Portuguese.

    El empleo del verbo "ter-tener" como auxiliar para crear los tiempos compuestos parece ser una invención del portugués. El castellano sigue prefiriendo "haber" para crear el perfecto (al igual que las expresiones impersonales como "haber de ", "hay que", "hay"). En este caso, el uso de "haber" es más antiguo
     
  44. Angelo di fuoco Senior Member

    Germany
    Russian & German (GER) bilingual
    Hoy leí algunas poesías en catalán antiguo (Ausias March, entre otros) y vi varios ejemplos de empleo de "haver" en el sentido de "poseer". ¿La extensión del uso de ter-tener-tenir-tindre será un proceso común a todas las lenguas iberoromanas? En particular me gustaría saber si en catalán es un proceso propio o si el castellano ha contribuido a hacer que tenir-tindre se use como verbo de posesión.
     
  45. merquiades

    merquiades Senior Member

    France
    USA Northeast
    El uso de "tenir" en catalán corresponde más o menos al de "tener" en castellano (posesión + auxiliar + el impersonal hay/hi ha) pero no se usa en perífrasis verbales para expresar obligación o necesidad (tener que = haver de), pero parece que hoy en día "tenir que" se está imponiendo y en este último caso es obvio que es por influencia castellana.
    También en español antiguo "haber" podía ser sinónimo de "tener" y se usaba a veces para indicar posesión. Luego fue sustituido paulatinamente por "tener" excepto en el caso de los auxiliares. En portugués se perdió por completo. Me gustaría saber por qué.
     
  46. skizzo Senior Member

    porto, portugal
    english
    Haver is still used in European Portuguese as an auxiliary verb.
     
  47. XiaoRoel

    XiaoRoel Senior Member

    Vigo (Galiza)
    galego, español
    En todo el hilo hay un problema de base, que es considerar el portugués como dialecto originario del latín vulgar. Esto es un mito de la lingüística portuguesa, pero no se sostiene a la vista de los datos históricos.
    Portugal es una unidad geográfica moderna, que designó en Edad Media el territorio de la antigua Gallaecia Bracarensis, a partir del nombre de la actual Porto.

    Antes del s. XII no existe Portugal como reino independiente, por lo que no se puede hablar de portugués. Sólo tras la toma de Lisboa, se puede hablar de rasgos dialectales portugueses en la lengua común a los ya diferenciados reinos de Galicia y Portugal, y sólo con el deplazamiento del poder real al sur (Lisboa-Coimbra serán ahora los centros de las innovaciones lingüísticas)empezo ya la deriva que acabaría separando el portugués del gallego que es un dialecto directo del latín.

    Tanto Galicia como Portugal (y Asturias y León) pertenecieron a la provincia romana de Gallaecia, con capital en Braga que con Lugo y Astorga forman la red administrativa romana. Gallaecia es la primera nación que se separa del Imperio Romano, con la llegada de los suevos en el primer decenio del s. V. Tras la invasión musulmana a comienzos del s. VII, la antigua Gallaecia no es ocupada por los sarracenos, y los pequeños contingentes de bereberes que campaban por la zona, por el 740, rompen su alianza con los árabes y se retiran. Pronto la frontera segura se establece ene el Miño, donde destaca el obispado de Ourense. La siguiente línea de frontera con los musulmanes será en Duero, quedando en disputa las tierras del Mondego (con importantes núcleos mozárabes, cosa importante en la deriva fonológica del portugués). Coimbra cambia de manos varias veces hasta quedar definitivamente en manos del ya independiente reino de Portugal, reconocido por el papa de Roma a mediados del s. XII (hablo de memoria, pero cualquiera puede corregir las fechas, hay abundantes materiales sobre la reconquista portuguesa en la red).
    Por tanto ya es una contradictio in terminis hablar de Portugal, y por ende de la lengua portuguesa, antes de 1125.
    Si analizmos los textos medievales escritos en gallego a ambos lados del Miño, veremos que no hay grandes diferencias (es decir, casi no hay diferencias) entre lo que escriben en Tui o Ourense y lo que escriben en Braga o Porto.
    Sólo a partir del s. XV, y con esfuerzo grande de la corte (los miembros de la familia real son escritores ellos mismos) la prosa portuguesa empieza a diferenciarse de la ya declinante lengua escrita gallega (los últimos documentos son de la época de la muerte de la reina Juana, sobre 1520 ó 21) y la aparición del estilo italiano en poesía, es decir, del Renacimiento afecta de lleno al portugués que con su proipio nombre continuará el gallego medieval que hasta el s. XVIII es una lengua oral (con excepciones escritas) y que sólo se normaliza como lengua escrita a partir del s. XIX.
    Además el gallego sufre desdel s. XV una erosión como lengua B frente a la lengua A en la diglosia (que no bilingüismo) que afectará de manera importante al léxico (muy especialmente en los ss. XIX y XX), pero no a la morfología, la fonética o la sintaxis.

    La pérdida de la claridad vocálica del portugués de Portugal (aparte idiotismos y usos léxicos) es lo que más diferencia las lenguas de Galici y Portugal.
    Pero dentro del portugués europeo, la región que hay entre el Duero y el Miño, de primitiva lengua gallega, todavía se opone al resto del portugués en mantener la indiferencia entre /v/ y /b/ que sólo se realizan como oclusiva bilabial sonora (y sus alófons fricativo) [b/ß], la ch se pronuncia como en gallego [y en español y no como palatal fricativa sorda (en el resto del sominio de la engua portuguesa), las vocales átonas no se debilitan como al sur del Duero y son claramente perceptibles, muchos hechos de léxico común (en la lengua rural y marítima, muchos celtismos de substrato, que al sur del Duero son substituídos por arabismos de superestrato).

    Ya no hablemos de cultura popular, de ocupación y uso de la tierra, de técnicas marineras, y un largo etc.

    Por tanto, el Portugués no crea ni elimina ni cambia nada desde el latín vulgar, sino desde el gallego medieval: infinitivo histórico, uso de haber, perífrasis verbales, no creación de tiempos compuestos, orden de los clíticos, todos son elementos que el portugués recibe de la lengua base gallega.

    Por eso en caso de ser dialecto alguna lengua de la otra (con dialecto me refiero a un hecho diacrónico, no sincrónico), lo sería el portugués del gallego. En la actualidad son lenguas muy próximas, pero con un 10/15 % de diferencias , especialmente de tipo fonético.
     
  48. Miguel Antonio Senior Member

    Galicia
    Galego (Rías Baixas)
    Ben falado, Xiao!
     
  49. skizzo Senior Member

    porto, portugal
    english
    These sounds in portuguese altered a lot:

    Originally:

    ss/s(initial) = s^
    s (between vowels) = z^
    ç/ce/ci = ts
    z = dz
    ch = tsh
    x = sh
    rr/r(initial) = R
    ou = ow
    ô = ô
    ei = ej

    Then (around XVI century)

    ss/s(initial) = s^
    s (between vowels) = z^
    ç/ce/ci = s
    z = z
    ch = tsh
    x = sh
    rr/r(initial) = R
    ou = ow
    ô = ô
    ei = ej

    Now:

    ss/s (initial) = s
    s (between vowels) = z
    ç/ce/ci = s
    z = z
    ch = sh
    x = sh
    rr/r(initial) = ʁ
    ou = ô
    ô = ô
    ei = ɐj


    There has been a massive simplication since the original sounds.
    Basically, nowadays there is no distinction between "passo" and "paço", "sinto" and "cinto", "coser" and "cozer", "couro" and "coro", "cheque" and "xeque".
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2012
  50. Ben Jamin Senior Member

    Norway
    Polish
    What kind of sounds are s^ and z^?
     

Share This Page