Planet-Love.com Searchable Archives

According to both Pimsleur and Lonely Planet, the Spanish language is more commonly referred to as "castellano" in Latin America (rather than espanol).

Have you guys that have been to Colombia found that to be the case?

Gracias

... in response to Colombia... castellano o espanol?, posted by Looking4Wife on Feb 21, 2005

Castillian Spanish is the Spanish of Spain.  The major differences are the vosotros form of the verb (second persaon familiar plural, covered by ustedes in LA) and the letter "c: is pronounced th.  

Listen to the songs of Marta Sanchez.  She is unmistakably from Spain because of her pronunciation of the letter "c".  

Spain's Spanish is considered pure just like the British consider their English the pure English.  In CR, they use vos instead of tu for second person singular familiar.  I heard they also do this in Argentina.  It all originated in the old world and there are evolutions which occured in the Americas.

... in response to Re: Colombia... castellano o espanol?, posted by kented on Feb 22, 2005

Say Zaragoza.   and Spain's Castillian Spanish is only pure because it comes from there and they say it is.

but latin american Spanish is the Castillian language as well.

... in response to Colombia... castellano o espanol?, posted by Looking4Wife on Feb 21, 2005

My wife really never refers to her Spanish as castellano but she does FIRMLY believe that Colombians speak the most "pure" form of Spanish which is generally believed to be castellano.  After some years of living in Colombia I am finally starting to pick up regional accents like. "Their from Medellin," or "He is from Bogotá,"  I can damn sure pick up Mexican, Cuban and Puerto Rican accents but not like the wife.

Very seldom do you see, "Se habla castellano,"in a shop window.

... in response to Not Really, but..., posted by Gator on Feb 21, 2005

ALL the Latin Americans think that they speak the best and purest form of Spanish.  Well, maybe cubans and dominicans don't...

... in response to Re: Not Really, but..., posted by thunderbolt on Feb 21, 2005

test

... in response to Colombia... castellano o espanol?, posted by Looking4Wife on Feb 21, 2005

[This message has been edited by jediknight]

spanish is a general term that is used to describe the languages spoken in spain and latina america, just like english is used to describe the language in the us, england and australia for example, although each country has it's own accent and vocabulary, but in general it's english.

when colombians use the term castellano, they are referring to the language in spain from the region of castilla,they use it to differentiate it from the other languages in spain like catalan, vasco and gallego which are used in different regions. castellano is used to describe a "pure" form of the language, backed by the royal spanish academy.

... in response to Re: Colombia... castellano o espanol?, posted by jediknight on Feb 21, 2005

they are different languages from Castillian and not simply a derivative or a dialect.  "Spanish" is generally referred synonymously to Castillian because it is the dominant language of Spain and the language that was transported to the Americas.  

... in response to Colombia... castellano o espanol?, posted by Looking4Wife on Feb 21, 2005

Gallego and Basque and a few others depending on the region.

... in response to yes, since in Spain they also speak Cata..., posted by Malandro on Feb 21, 2005

As far as I know, Gallego is very similar or identical to portuguese, spoken in NW Spain.  Basque, obviously, is a completely different language.  Catalonian is considered a separate language, but similar to spanish.  Also, there are distinct dialects in Asturia, Leon, Aragon and Andalusia.

However, L4W, unless you aim to speak the language perfectly (which most likely you won't), don't focus on details like this.  People will know that you are a foreigner, and as long as you understand them, and they understand you, you will be fine.

... in response to Re: yes, since in Spain they also speak ..., posted by thunderbolt on Feb 21, 2005

as far as I know Gallego is NOT identical to Portuguese but more like Portuguese than Spanish.  Siblings whereas Spanish and Portuguese would be like first cousins.  

I believe Catalan is somewhat like both French and Spanish .

... in response to yes, since in Spain they also speak Cata..., posted by Malandro on Feb 21, 2005

So as to not sound TOTALLY ignorant when I set foot in Colombia, will I be saying:

1.  Hablo castellano un poco

OR

2.  Hablo español un poco

Gracias

... in response to Hablo castellano (o español) un poco?, posted by Looking4Wife on Feb 21, 2005

both are used.

... in response to yes, since in Spain they also speak Cata..., posted by Malandro on Feb 21, 2005

Even though Basque is a regional language in spain,it is far different from spanish.It is one of the few languages in europe that pre dates latin and have no latin structure at all.There are some common words with spanish,from centuries of people living with the 2 languages.Tia and Tio being an example.
If you go to www.Jaialdi.com,a web site that talks about a Basque celebration I will attend this year in Boise Idaho,go to the bottom left of the page and click on the red and green flag you will see the same home page in Basque.Not like anything you have seen before,not at all like spanish.
Both of my paternal grand parents immigrated to the US from Lequitio,Viscaya Espana early in the 1900's.There were 6 children including my father,who spoke only Basque when he started school but learned english early and had no accent like the old people that immigrated.None of the 6 married a Basque and none of my generation speaks Basque,even though we heard it spoken alot as kids.
The Basques are perhaps the oldest civilization in the world,going way back in  pre recorded history.The famous cave paintings in southern France were done by Basques.
Basques are known alot because of ETA,a seperatist group that wants to succeed from Spain.They were thought initially responsible for the Madrid Train bombing.
There is still alot of animosity in the Basque country about the outcome of the spanish civil war when Hitler backed Franco with his air force to decide the war.There was a  famous bombing of the Basque capital of Guernica by the German air force.Picasso,also a Basque did a famous painting of it. Franco  became dictator of Spain untill he died in the 70's.It was illegal to speak Basque under the Franco regime.
Interestingly,there is actually a political move with the legislature in Spain for the Basque country to succeed from Spain and for some strange reason it is being takin seriously.
There are lots of Basques names in South America.Basques were well know as navigators on the early spanish expeditions.Many people have been here so long they do not even know their name is Basque.Bolivar was a Basque.Uribe is also a Basque name.
My name,Eiguren,has a version spelled Eguren in South America,both names coming from an earlier spelling,Eigiguren.Peru has a famous Basque poet,Jose Eguren.Lots of others with the name in south Ameriuca,even though it is a farely rare Basque name.Alot of Basque names end in things like zable or aga,as in Aristazable or Arriaga.

Pete

... in response to Basque is totally different, posted by Pete E on Feb 21, 2005

Pete,

Thanks for the info.  I love history, so that was fascinating to me.  Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that there are Basques in France as well as Spain.  If I remember correctly, my ex-wife had a first cousin who married a guy who was French Basque.  But, I only met him once.  I got another question.  Since I am basically what we call Heinz 57 ( a mutt), do you think that Teresa Heinz Kerry would adopt me?  I could use the money. ha

                          OkieMan

... in response to Re: Basque is totally different, posted by OkieMan on Feb 21, 2005

One of the other posts I mentioned I think its 3 provinces in France and 5 in Spain,I'm not sure the exact number,I should know.It was all Basque territory initially untill  it was split by Spain and France.But now people do seem to make distintions between French Basques and Spanish Basques,but they were one and the same in the past.Now they might be effected by political isssues.I know of no big political issues in France like in Spain.

Pete

... in response to Basque is totally different, posted by Pete E on Feb 21, 2005

I met a Basque girl when I was in Spain sevral years ago and she took me to her city, San Sebastian and I met her family. Her parents and brothers hated Franco with a passion and even after his death referred to him in a real derogatory manner.
The Basque cuisine in reportedly the best in Spain and I ate some lovely meals there and also drank wine out of a goatskin pouch.
Bilboa another Basque city recently opened a Guggenheim art museum and it has become a big tourist attraction.

... in response to Re: Basque is totally different, posted by AGUILA on Feb 21, 2005

The Basques call San Sebastian Doresti,the Basque name for it.There are lots of culinary clubs there,basically these guys take turns cooking for each other.Its just a few miles south of the French border.I think its five provences in Spain and three in France that are considered the Basque country.
Lequito,where my family comes from is about 40 or so miles south on the coast.
The other famous Basque city is Pamplona.When we were talking about bullfighting a few weeks ago I found one source that said the Basques got it from Roman Soldiers who had some sort of a bull fighting thing they did.The Romans were never able to conquer the Basque region,only parts of it.
Of course you have to be a little bit crazy to run with the bulls in Pamplona.One friend of mine was there in the days leading up to the event.In the bars the big question was are you going to run with the bulls?He said sure.He was even thinking about it.But when it came down to it he thought better of it.

Pete

... in response to Re: Re: Basque is totally different, posted by Pete E on Feb 21, 2005

Pete,
I see where in your last post you confirmed what I thought about the French Basque area.  Also, you were talking about Pamplona.  Is that where the famous "running of the bulls" takes place?  I have seen new coverage about it many times, but I was not sure exactly where in Spain they did that.  Man, you could not pay me enough money to let those bulls chase me.  As the old saying goes, "My Momma didn't raise no fool"!

                          OkieMan

... in response to Re: Re: Re: Basque is totally different, posted by OkieMan on Feb 21, 2005

Yes,
Pamplona,in the Basque country,the site of the famous running of the bulls.I agree,looks pretty stupid to me.But add a few drinks and some macho pride and they are out there with Toro.

Pete

... in response to Basque is totally different, posted by Pete E on Feb 21, 2005

Thanks Pete, very interesting.  Did you ever make it over to the Wool Growers in Los Banos.  Great Basque restaurant, not fancy, but good food.

Take care,

Mark

... in response to Re: Basque is totally different, posted by markxport on Feb 21, 2005

Mark,
No,I never went there,only a Basque restaurant in San Francisco and Winnemucca Nevada.I hesitate to tell them I'm Basque,they start talking Basque to me.One old guy said,
"you're not Basque,you just have the name.
I speak zero Basque,worse than my spanish.Its supposed to be extremely difficult,almost impossible to learn as an adult.

Pete

... in response to Basque is totally different, posted by Pete E on Feb 21, 2005

is the language that was transported to the Americas and that is what is spoken there.  Two people so far have said Castellano is the most "pure" form of Spanish.  That is not correct.  Catalonian, Galician are their own languages and are NOT Castillian.  

I believe Franco also banned Catalonian during his reign.

... in response to good info Pete my point being that Caste..., posted by Malandro on Feb 21, 2005

Hey, I think I heard that Franco also banned Franco-American Spagetti-O's!  Just kidding!  Seriously though.  That guy was a real nut case.  Just like so many of the other dictators that we all were discussing recently.

                        OkieMan

... in response to Re: good info Pete my point being that C..., posted by OkieMan on Feb 21, 2005

Right,and this guy ruled Spain untill the 1970's,long after Hitler was dead in his bunker and the Italians strung up Mussolini,his Natzi buddies.
BUT,Spain has made  great improvements since then.Support for ETA,basically the Basque terrorists,is very low in the Basque population.

Pete

... in response to Re: Re: good info Pete my point being th..., posted by Pete E on Feb 21, 2005

at least the 1980's.  A friend of mine's father is a history professor specializing in the Spanish colonization of the Western US.  He did research in Spain and even bought an apartment in Madrid back in the 1960's that he still owns.   Anyway, he said back then Mexico was more developed than Spain.

I remember my social studies books from the 70's characterized Spain as Third World.

... in response to I think Spain was considered "Third..., posted by Malandro on Feb 21, 2005

At least where my relatives lived they were poor.I remember my grandmother sending her care packages.She used to send womens nylon stockings to her sisters.I guess they could sell them for alot more over there.
I also remember friends traveling there in the 70's.The good hotels were the ones with the Mercedes in front,the Germans knew how to find them.
I think they moved up alot.We think of them as first world but I'm not sure that applies to the whole country.
I think Spain was very poor by European standards untill the last 20 years or so.

Pete

... in response to Re: Re: good info Pete my point being th..., posted by Pete E on Feb 21, 2005

Well, until that bombing in Madrid spooked the spanish enough so that they voted in some Leftish govt; I thought that they were doing well.  But, now, who knows?  In my opinion, Europe is in deep do do!  For one thing, they have way too many camel jockeys running around, influencing their different government's policies.  That goes double for France!  I think that no matter what, Jacques Chirac is a jerk, but, make no mistake, he has a very large Arab population in his country; and they are influencing policy!   I think the biggest group there is Iranian, but I am not sure.  At any rate, as far as I am concerned, the French are a bunch of losers!  President Bush is over there right now, trying once again to appeal to them.  Maybe he will get some help or concessions with this Iraq problem, but overall, the European leaders are a bunch of wet noodles and pacifists!

                           OkieMan

... in response to Re: Re: Re: good info Pete my point bein..., posted by OkieMan on Feb 21, 2005

Inasmuch I do not support a lot of EU's foreign policy, almost all of it, you are simplifying a rather complex phenomenon.

First of all, regarding France.  It does NOT have a large Iranian population, but a lot of Arabs.  However, this is not really a determining factor in its foreign policy.  First of all, it is dependent on foreign oil, which it receives from Arab countries (they do not have Alaska and Texas).  Its raw resources come from its former African colonies, most of which are muslim, and could be a target for destabilization if the Jihaders will put their mind to it.  It also wants to be a world power, but without ideology, it can only assert itself by being contrary to whatever US wants to do.  The bottomline is, it stands to lose everything if it supports Bush (at least in the short term), while gain a lot by being against him, especially if Americans will lose in the end (which is the bet made by the French leadership).  Hopefully, they will lose the bet, but frankly it is too early to say now who is loser.

If you are entrusted with the foreign policy, you have to optimize it, so that risk to your country's interests and citizens is minimized.  France is doing precisely that.

Spain I believe is still doing quite well.  The former government basically involved itself in a major scandal following the bombing, and that propelled it out of office.  Besides the new government, while pulling out of Iraq, contributed significantly to the contingent in Afghanistan.

... in response to re France (long - you have been warned), posted by thunderbolt on Feb 22, 2005

France's population now is 15% Muslim, mostly Algerian, Tunisian and Morrocan,all countries whose second language is french.
The French Government is very mindful of this in any decisions they make. When we went into Kosova to help out the Muslims there during the ethnic cleansing, you didn't see any French protests then.

... in response to Re: re France (long - you have been warn..., posted by AGUILA on Feb 22, 2005

France routinely invades its former colonies - without much foreign protest.  French backed the gov't in Rwanda that presided over the genocide - again noone protested.  They for God's sake blow up nukes in Tahiti of all places - and again nobody protests.

Weird, ha?  Inasmuch as they are mindful of the muslims who live in France, french politicians do not base their policy solely on that.  If the arab countries were to blow up something there, or block oil, or something of that nature, you can rest assured the reaction will follow ;)  France is the most trigger happy country out there when it comes to protecting its 'interests'.

... in response to Re: Re: re France (long - you have been ..., posted by thunderbolt on Feb 22, 2005

Hey, maybe some terrorists will try to ruin the French wine and cavier markets.  Then maybe the French will act like they give a crap about the Arab terrorists groups!
I can't speak for anyone else, but I have always thought that a country that thinks eating snails is good food was more than a little strange!

                             OkieMan

... in response to Re: Re: re France (long - you have been ..., posted by thunderbolt on Feb 22, 2005

France's policies are very scewed when it comes to antagonizing the Muslims. They would not let our planes fly over their airspace from England when we bombed Libya. Some ally!
They gave Sadam assurances that Uncle Sam would not invade him and did all they could to be a thorn in our side.
I can't recall when they have ever taken the side against a Muslim nation in the last 30 years. In the first Iraq war although they sided against Sadam they still were on the side of the majority of the other Muslim countries against Sadam.
Unfortunately their policy and those of an increasing number of western euro countries with large Muslim populations are being influeneced by this ever increasing population.
An english writer this past year wrote an excellent book  on how if current birthrate trends continue, Muslims will be in the majority in the EC by the the year 2050.

... in response to re France (long - you have been warned), posted by thunderbolt on Feb 22, 2005

every country will do what it believes it is in its best interest.  France's precarious reliance on foreign sources of energy make it unwilling to go along with the US.  

although I am not sure they "gain alot" by being against Bush, rather they don't lose anything.  

I believe that 90% of Spaniards were against the Iraq invasion but Aznar sent troops anyway.  He was quite popular but his tenure ended in catastrophe when they tried to blame the train bombing on ETA instead of muslim terrorists.  

but I believe it was Aznar who contributed to Afganistan as well before the new government was elected last year.  I am not sure if the new government would have offered troops if they were not already there.

... in response to Good perspective on France, posted by Malandro on Feb 22, 2005

There was even probably popular support for Neville Chamberlin when he temporarily avoided facing reality before WW2.The short sigtedness and gutlessness of the general population can be very disheartening.But when you have one group telling you something costly isnecesary and another group saying it is not who would you like to believe?
There is a desire to not get involved or not sacrifice anything on the part of  a general population.Kind of a mass inertia against doing anything.Why us?Its not our problem.
Thats where leadership is important.A  LEADER does not just take a poll of his largely uninformed populace and decide what to do based on that.That was Clintons style,his poll was the polls.If a leader,with his
access to huge amounts of imformation,and a responsibility for what could happen decides it is in the best interests of his country to do something he needs to sell it to his  country.
A WORLD leader is a person who can even go beyond just
just thinking about the immediate effects of an action on his own country and look at the long term effects for the world.Tony Blair is such a person I think.Anzar I'm not sure,but I think similar.
Actually there was a huge misread of the US involvement in Vietnam.Yes we eventually got out.But the US population mostly went along with  a bad set of choices by the government for years.We automatically supported the president for the most part untill the failed policies became overwhelmingly obvious.Saddam Housein took this as a sign of American weakness and lack of will.He misread American resolve.He was described as a brinksman who didn't know where the brink is.So now his butt is in Jail instead of running his country,a very good outcome I would argue.

Pete

... in response to Hopefully Blair doesn't follow Anzar, posted by Pete E on Feb 22, 2005

Pete,

You mentioned Neville Chamberlain.  Now, there was a man who could have really lead his nation, but instead was a stupid pacifist.  History has not been kind to him.  I lived in England for two years, and I got to know many of the Brits.  They have monuments build to Churchill, nothing for Chamberlain.  But, it seems that the many European countries don't remember the sacrifices of those days.  They find it easier to "hide their head in the sand" too.  Mark my words, it will come home to roost, one day!  In my opinion, it already has; the European governments just don't know it yet!

                                 OkieMan

... in response to Re: Hopefully Blair doesn't follow Anzar, posted by OkieMan on Feb 22, 2005

Churchill lost his relection as prime minister right after the war.Real short memory or short on gratitude over there.
Goog luck Tony.You are my hero even if your countrymen are not big on you right now.

Pete

... in response to But - - , posted by Pete E on Feb 22, 2005

Pete,
You are right, he did lose that election.  However, if memory serves me right, he had one more go at it.  At any rate, I was looking at the "big picture".  After all these years, I think history has been very kind to Mr. Churchill; not so with Mr. Chamberlain.  Through the passage of time, many events and people involved in those events can be seen in a better light; be it for good or bad.

                                OkieMan

... in response to But - - , posted by Pete E on Feb 22, 2005

In my opinion 3  real giants of world leaders have come out of England in the last 60 years.Churchill,Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair.
And Margaret Thatcher didn't ride in to fame as someones wife like  Hilary.She got to her position the old fashioned way.She earned it.

Pete

... in response to And - - , posted by Pete E on Feb 22, 2005

Yeah, I agree about those people.  I lived in England when Maggie was first elected.  Most of us americans (Air Force types) were very impressed with her.  She certainly served her country with honor and distinction.  I came back to the States in July of 80, just in time to help elect Ronald Reagan.  He is certainly one of my heroes!  Today, I bought my first batch of Ronald Reagan postage stamps.  Cool.

                                OkieMan

... in response to Re: Re: Re: good info Pete my point bein..., posted by OkieMan on Feb 21, 2005

The problem with France is we saved their ass twice and they have never forgiven us for it.
There is lots of negativity in europe about the US.They resent our power.Plus there is a pacifist reaction to WW2.
Kind of like we got in to after WW1.We didn't want to get involved.Kind of a desire not to be responsible for anything.
There seems to be no thought at all about what a terrible oppresive regime Iraq was.Anybody who can't tell the difference between George Bush and Saddam Housein really has their head up their butt.Like night and day to any person whom is willing to THINK about it,not just negatively react.

Pete

Pete

... in response to Re: Re: Re: Re: good info Pete my point ..., posted by Pete E on Feb 22, 2005

Pete,

 True, how true!  I think that DeGaulle was a major pain in the posterior, even though he did help some.  But, as you said, I think that much of the French attitude goes to the examples that you cited.  Also, Europe as a whole has become so socialized, not only in their government, but in the culture as well.  Pure and simple, in almost all cases, they will never see eye to eye with us.  It is just convenient for them to now blame President Bush and his policies on Iraq, etc.  But, no matter who is in the White House, the Europeans will find a way to make the US and "the bad guy". I have travelled to Europe quite a bit, but it was several years ago.  Even then, they were having a big problem with many of their immigrant citizens; mainly from camel jockey land!  Mak no mistake, those people are having a very adverse affect on European politics!

                                  OkieMan

... in response to Re: Re: Re: good info Pete my point bein..., posted by OkieMan on Feb 21, 2005

I was in Spain when Franco was alive and I will say this much, that sucker kept the prices cheap. My buddy and I had a 4  bedroom apartment on the beach in Torremolinas for $160/month! That was the going rate.
We went to Majorca and stayed at a 4 star hotel right along the water and paid $10 a day and it included 3 meals.
A heineken at the grocery store cost 9 cents back then (this was summer of 1975, months before he died)
Things were unbelievable cheap because Franco had installed all these price controls on everything. I would agree that it was 3rd world back then.
Lots of german tourists all over the place and also lots of english. The real fish and chips crowd on budget vacations.
You would be hard pressed to go out partying everynight and eat out every day and spend $100 for the week back then.

... in response to Franco, posted by AGUILA on Feb 21, 2005

Aquila,

That was an interesting story.  I did not realize that the prices of goods and services were so low back then.  What took you over there, at that time?  I have some cousins who were stationed in Spain in the 60's and 70's.  One of my cousins married a lady of Spain, so to speak.  They have been married now for over 30 years, and live in Wichita, Kansas.  They had two children, who are obviously grown now.  Unfortunately, I have not gotten to be around them in the last several years.  But, I remember them telling me stories about their time in Spain.  My cousin's wife is a little petite lady, and wouldn't you know it; her name is Maria!  What a shock, huh?  She is sweet too.

                         OkieMan

... in response to Re: Franco, posted by OkieMan on Feb 21, 2005

I went there when i was in college back in 75.