Category Archives: Europe

The CIA Spiderweb

Its tentacles extend through all of US society. Even if it is not the CIA itself, there are 60 other intelligence agencies working for the federal government. You might think this is an indictment of the federal government, but most folks in state governments work very closely with the Deep State and the entire National Security apparatus.

I also believe that the CIA is very deeply embedded in corporate America and in the nation’s elite, the 1%. If you hang around a lot of very wealthy types, you will suddenly be amazed at how many of them have CIA connections. Go to a dinner party of multimillionaires, and it will seem like every other person has some sort of an Agency connection.

It is also my opinion, though I cannot prove it, that the CIA is deeply embedded in corporate America. It would not surprise me if many high-ranking executives have Agency connections. I have known quite a few MBA types who told me that they wanted to go work for the Agency in some way or another. Furthermore, almost all of the shenanigans that the CIA engages in overseas is for the benefit of US corporations and the US 1%. Since the CIA is basically the roving death squad/revolutionary force of the US ultra-rich individuals and corporations, it would surprise me if US corporations had no links to them. Why would they have no links to their very own personal revolutionary army/death squad/hit team.

So as you can see in the Daily Kos case, the Agency is also deeply embedded in the Democratic Party. The way I see is that the Democratic Party is CIA from top to bottom. They have been forever now. The Republican Party is also CIA, and ideologically they are much closer, but the truth is that on foreign policy, both parties follow the CIA agenda which is called “the bipartisan foreign policy consensus.” This is why the parties show little difference on major foreign policy questions. The Democratic Party wants to implement the CIA agenda in a more sedate and moderate way and the Republicans want to implement it in a much more aggressive, belligerent and militaristic way. Really I am not sure if they Agency cares.

I am told that the Agency doesn’t even really care who is President. Their attitude is that they just do whatever the Hell they want to no matter what the President or Congress wants. Government oversight of the CIA ended in the mid-1970’s with the Church hearings which set up a number of CIA oversight laws which have been violated ever since. In this climate, there is no way we could ever have a re-run of the Church Committee.

The CIA’s attitude is that Presidents come and go, but the Agency and its Deep State pals are the ones who really run the government in connection with corporate and 1% elites (the US oligarchy), so who cares who is President anyway.

It is also true that the CIA does not care who runs the CIA. CIA heads are appointed, and the CIA has no say in who they are. They reportedly did not like Pannetta from the moment he came in, and they thwarted him and ordered him around the whole time he was in. This is because the people who really run the CIA are the career people, not those flunkies that are appointed by this President or that. A new book just came out stating that Pannetta while had of the CIA was terrified of the CIA career people who ordered him around and violated his directives every step of the way. The same book also said that Obama was very afraid of the CIA too for much the same reason.

The problem is that anyone who really takes on the CIA and the Deep State gets “the Kennedy treatment.” Most politicians know this, and they do not want to die so they go along.

Another factor is converging beliefs. The 1% and the US corporations share the same foreign policy agenda as the CIA. Both political parties share the CIA’s foreign policy, and if you do not go along, you will be run out of the party very quickly, especially if you are an underling. At the state level, almost all state politicians share the CIA agenda and furthermore, the CIA has infiltrated all state governments and spies on them constantly. The CIA interrogates all newly elected governors to see if they pass CIA approval. They also terrorize them by telling them that they will be under constant surveillance. See Jesse Ventura’s videos about that.

At the media level, it is now clear that the entire US media is CIA, from the “right” to the “left.” Operation Mockingbird was a CIA program designed to take control of the US media.

The Church Committee hearings showed that almost all of the top US journalists and editors were CIA employees or assets, including some very famous people.

Washington Post executive editor Ben Bradlee was CIA for decades. In fact, to this day, the scuttlebutt is that not only has the Washington Post been CIA forever, but the WP is still one of the most CIA-controlled papers in the US. Other papers including the Los Angeles Times and New York Times area also CIA connected but not to the same degree that the WP is. The WP is more or less a CIA house organ.

The Church Committee halted Operation Mockingbird but I am told that like COINTELPRO, it was reinstated under new names and continues to this day as intensely as it did in the past.

You wonder how the CIA gets all these editors and writers to toe their line? They pay them. Yes, the CIA pays out vast sums to US editors and other presstitutes to be agency assets and write what the Agency wants them to write.

In addition, the CIA buys off many foreign leaders. We know this because John Paul Roberts once asked a CIA agent how the US gets so many countries to agree with the US. The agent answered, “That’s simple. We pay them.”

If one wonders why so many European leaders reflexively toe the US line, it is because many of them are bought off by the CIA. With cash. After Tony Blair left as Prime Minister of the UK, he very quickly moved into an extremely high paid position in the private sector. That reeks of CIA. See how this works? I would not be surprised if Angela Merkel (head of the US colony called “Germany”) and the rest of the heads of the US colonies in Europe are paid off by the CIA.


Filed under Britain, Democrats, Europe, Government, Journalism, Politics, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA

Syrian Girl: “Warning: Biological Weapons False Flag on Syria Possible”

My hero, Syrian Girl, in an upload from about a year ago. Now the Zionist enemy along with US imperialism are plotting to deprive Syria of its much-needed biological weapons. Keep in mind that both the US and Israel have large biological weapons stores. Syria needs these biological weapons in case of an existential threat to the state by a foreign nation invading Syria in which case it would be correct and proper to use them against the invaders to safeguard the nation from the invading enemy.

I have done a lot of research into the chemical weapons attacks in Syria that have been going on for some time in Syria. 100% of them were done by the rebels and 0% of them were done by Syria. This is clear. The Sarin gas used was a homebrew cooked up by the Al-Nusra Front in Turkey.

Leave a comment

Filed under Israel, Middle East, Regional, Syria, Turkey, USA, War

Syrian Government Sarin Gas Attack on Damascus Was Actually a Turkey Al Nusra False Flag Attack

The largest Sarin gas attack of the dozen or so that occurred during the war was the one that supposedly killed 1,400 people in a suburb of Damascus, supposedly done by the Syrian government firing shells at a rebel controlled neighborhood. This attack actually  never even really occurred, that is, there were no Sarin shells fired by the Syrian government at the rebel held district in the capital. Instead there was some sort of a chemical weapons attack, but Al Nusra attacked their own neighborhood. Some rebel fighters and some of the rebels’ hostages were dosed with Sarin as a result of this attack but the Sarin levels were very low, so low as not to do any damage to those who got dosed.

What happened instead was that Al Nusra had many government supporters as captives. They capture civilians who support the government all over Syria and hold them as hostages, moving them around the country. Often they are Christians and/or Alawites. They move them around for a while, and after some time, maybe a year, they frequently just kill them.

First Al Nusra shot some Sarin shells at their own neighborhood and later blamed it on the government. Then over the next day or two, they moved many of their civilian hostages into a death room in the basement of a large building. Here they tied them up and left them in a room full of hissing gas containers. The gas containers had either carbon monoxide or hydrogen cyanide in them.

The containers hissed away until the people died. In a number of cases, hostages were finished off by having their necks slit. Others were beaten to death or shot. Then the bodies were hauled up to a “sun room” on the top of the building where the dead were laid out and wrapped up in gauze or cotton. These are the photos that you saw of line after line of civilians including children supposedly gassed by Assad. Some people brought up there were not dead so they were finished off, often by slitting their throats, in the sun room.

Many symptoms of the “Sarin gas attack” were reported, however there are certain symptoms that always occur after a Sarin attack, and these never occurred. Therefore there was no Sarin attack, and they were killed with another chemical agent. At any rate, the blood levels of Sarin found in the bodies were so low as to be harmless. In addition, bodies have a certain appearance after dying of Sarin, and none of the dead bodies had this appearance, instead they looked dramatically opposite. This also rules out Sarin.

At any rate, the British MI5 proved that the Sarin attack was not done by the Syrian government. They got samples of the Sarin used in the attack and compared it to Sarin stockpiles of the Syrian regime. The Syrian Sarin has a particular signature as there is only one type that they make in their chemical weapons factories. This Sarin did not have the Syrian signature of the Syrian state’s weapons. Also, this Sarin appeared to be some sort of a homebrew. Curiously, Al Nusra members were caught with Sarin in Turkey a while before this attack. This was apparently some of the Sarin they were using in their Sarin gas attacks.

The British MI5 warned the Black Face of the Empire, Barack Obomber, that the Sarin gas was not made by the government and therefore the attack could not possibly have been done by Syria. Obomber, Kerry and 100% of the Western media had immediately accused Syria of the attack after it was done. A complex narrative or voluminous evidence, all fake, was then assembled to prove that Syria did this attack.

A crucial piece of evidence was said to be a Syrian government radio transmission from Defense Headquarters acknowledging that Syrian forces had committed the attack, but wondering who ordered it as the Defense Department knew nothing about the attack and had not ordered it. This call was said to have been intercepted by Israeli intelligence and the call was then relayed to US intelligence. Apparently this phone call never occurred and the Israelis just made up the whole thing just like the Biggest Liars on Earth always do. It is amazing that the Western media would treat any Israeli intel as worth anything considering their treacherous record.

The barrage continued for some time after the attack, with the controlled Western media constantly increasing the drumbeat for war with Syria. One year prior, Obomber had said that Syria’s use of chemical weapons would be a “red line” that the US would not allow to be crossed. Precisely one year to the day after the red line speech, the Syrian government supposedly gassed its people with Sarin, killing 1,400 of them. Do you honestly think the Syrian state would be so audacious and stupid as to do an attack like this precisely one year to the day after a red line warning? Of course not.

What happened was that Al Nusra, the Turkish government and maybe other parties cooked up this false flag attack, of course using the one year anniversary of the red line speech to rub it in.

The drumbeat for war continued, with neocons and humanitarian bombers leading the charge and demanding that Obomber bomb Syria. Just one week before Congress was to vote giving Obomber authorization to go to war with Syria, the MI5 told the US that there was no way to pin this attack on Syria. Deprived of his rationale for the war, Obomber withdrew his demand that Congress declare war on Syria.

However, the Western media continued to relentlessly accuse Syria of killing 1,400 people in the gas attack. They have now succeeded in rewriting history. Wikipedia, a good source of modern history as seen by the West, is actually more or less written by the CIA. That is, much of modern history as described by Wikipedia is actually history as falsified by the CIA. Wikipedia’s modern history is “history according to the CIA.”

So in a sense, Wikipedia is a CIA outlet or asset as they are on the same page as the CIA when it comes to everything. Wikipedia’s page on the Sarin attacks, predictably, contains the now proven lie that the Syrian government did the attacks and 1,400 pro-rebel civilians were killed. Actually the death toll was far less – maybe 400-600, all of the dead were pro-government civilians held as captives by Al Nusra.

It has now been proven in an Seymour Hersch using Hersch’s CIA sources that the Al Nusra attack was cooked up by the Turkish government in concert with Al Nusra. At the moment, there is no direct evidence of the involvement of the US or any other government in this attack.

Even after he was told Syria did not do it, Obomber and his criminal aides like John “Satan” Kerry continued to relentlessly accuse Syria of using Sarin gas to attack its civilians.

The Western media, especially the US media, continues to accuse Syria of this crime even though it has now been proven that it was false flag. Not one single US news outlet, newspaper, newsmagazine, TV news or radio news has covered the story about this false flag. Only New York Magazine’s Hersch article discusses this. The Deep State controlled media has fallen down on the job again and US journalism is confirmed as a completely worthless, corrupted and controlled propaganda outlet of the US Deep State.


Filed under Democrats, Government, Israel, Journalism, Middle East, Obama, Politics, Regional, Syria, Turkey, US Politics, USA, War

Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?

Via the Saker. Excellent piece. I agree with every single thing he says in this interview. That’s actually pretty amazing isn’t it? I mean in a typical Western news piece about Putin, Russia and the Ukraine, it starts out, “Once upon a time…” and after that, it’s just one lie and distortion after another. What Saker is telling is simply the truth. These are the facts. No spin, no lies, no crap, the real deal.

Of course this is an organized campaign.

I started really worrying about the US news media only recently. During this Ukraine mess I noticed that 100% of the US media was in total lockstep with every single story along the way. That didn’t seem to make sense. I thought we had freedom of speech? I thought we had freedom of the press? Apparently not. The stories and storylines were so similar to the point of nearly being carbon copies of each other that it really got me thinking. How could there possibly be such stunning uniformity in all of the stories coming out about Ukraine and Russia?

Really that is only possible if all of the media is on the same team so to speak. And so apparently they are. I do not know how exactly all of this works out. I read a while back that the CIA actually owns a lot of the US media outright. And Operation Mockingbird is old news. Some of the most famous US journalists of the last 70 years were on the CIA payroll. In fact, looking through the list of top US journalists who were CIA assets, I was starting to wonder which top US journalists were not on the CIA payroll!

And what I have heard is that Operation Mockingbird was shut down, but it was then continued under a variety of new names, sort of like COINTELPRO with the FBI.

A number of the largest US papers have been regarded as CIA assets for a long time now. The Washington Post is notorious. The LA Times and the New York Times are also mentioned a lot. We hear repeatedly about US reporters calling their CIA contacts to run stories by them first to see if they get the go-ahead.

The Agency and the Deep State run the press in other ways. First of all, the people who run the media are Establishment types in the worst 1960’s sense. They are part of the system. The same system that maintains US imperialism, the CIA, the Pentagon, the corporate state, the national security establishment and the whole mess. In other words, they are all part of the same system. All of the editors and owners of these media outlets are part of the same US elites that run the whole imperial project.

And the US corporations and the US ruling class rich are all part of the US imperial project. In fact, most of that project is simply run for their benefit. Corporate interests and the interests of the 1% are the raison d’ etre for the whole National Security State. What’s it all about? It’s all about the money. Most world politics has typically all been about the loot, at least in recent years. Most wars are all about money. At the end of the day, most wars are bankers’ wars.

Looking at the shocking sameness of the stories, it seems pretty clear that the Deep State or the CIA simply plants stories in the media. The media then simply runs with them. Whether or not the media is knowingly running lies as stories is uncertain, but corporate journalism is a very dirty game where you start lying when you get out of bed and you’re still fibbing away when you tuck yourself in at night.

Perhaps they just run the stories and believe they are true without really checking them out. It is quite possible that they believe their own lies. They actually think that they are telling the truth. I have no idea. I do not that almost zero real investigative journalism is going on in the corporate media anymore. When you constantly run planted stories without even bothering to figure out if they are true or not and then squash any attempts to discover the actual truth behind events, at that point, there is no Fourth Estate anymore. You’re a PR firm for the US Deep State.

I would also like to point out that the Deep State has deep ties to US capitalism. In fact, US corporate capitalism and the ruling class are the same thing as the Deep State. The Deep State is simply the foreign policy and statist branch of the US ruling class and US corporations. In the US, the market and the state are blurred. The corporations and the rich run the state and populate it with their agents. The state exists solely for the benefit of the ruling class and corporations and in order to attack and wage class war on everyone else.

So the state is the problem as the Libertarians are always screaming, but the private sector is the problem too. The state is run by the private sector elites to fulfill their domestic and foreign policy objectives. The state and the market are one. The capitalists are the state and the state is the capitalists. They’re all the same thing.

I am not sure if you all can wrap your heads around that or not.

Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?


Russia Insider interviews The Saker


The latest hot topic in the Russian media. Russian politicians are talking about it. Historical precedent and behavior of Western media suggests that they are.

A major topic in the Russian media is mystification with how Putin is portrayed in the Western media.

Wildly popular at home, and seen as a decent, modest, an admirable person, and Russians don’t understand how there can be such a disconnect with Western impressions.

Recently, leading Russian commentators and politicians have been suggesting that this can only be explained by a deliberate campaign to defame Putin, by governments or other groups.

Yesterday, at a briefing to foreign journalists, Sergey Ivanov, Putin’s chief of staff, arguably the 2nd most powerful man in Russia, spoke of an “information war” consisting of “personal attacks” on Putin.

The western media hit a new low…


The day before another member of Putin’s inner circle, Vyasheslav Volodin, made similar remarks, telling foreign journalists “an attack on Putin is an attack on Russia.”

The logic, they argue, is that by defaming the leader of a country, you weaken his power domestically by undermining popular support for him, and internationally, by rallying popular opinion to support policies against that country. The ultimate goal, they argue, is to weaken the country itself. They also talk about regime change.

They argue that if one looks at the facts, that there is evidence of ongoing character assassination which cannot be explained by a vague popular zeitgeist in the West, but is more likely the result of a dedicated effort to introduce this defamation into the news flow.


Newsweek has been one of the most virulent Putin-bashers for years.


The issue of manipulation of news by intelligence services has been in the news recently with revelations that the CIA and German Secret Service (GSS) have long-running programs to influence how media executives and top journalists convey and interpret the news, including direct cash payments.

Here are some examples they point to:

  • Portraying him as a scheming dictator trying to rebuild a repressive empire.
  • Claiming he personally ordered the murder of a number of journalists, and personally ordered a KGB defector to be murdered with radiation poisoning.
  • Frequently citing unsubstantiated rumors he is having an affair with a famous gymnast.
  • Allegations that he has stashed away billions for his personal benefit, without providing evidence.
  • Recent article in Newsweek claiming he leads a luxurious and lazy lifestyle, sleeping late.
  • Recent article in NYT focusing on a supposed personal arrogance.
  • Hillary Clinton mentioning in speech after speech that he is a bad guy, a bully, that one must confront him forcefully.
  • Frequently using pejoratives to describe his person – “a jerk and a thug” (Thomas Friedman this week in the NYT)
  • Misquoting him on his regret about the collapse of the Soviet Union.
  • Articles about a supposed super-luxury villa built for him in southern Russia.
  • The over-the top headlines in the western media (they were worst of all in Germany) portraying him personally responsible for murdering the victims of MH17.
  • And soft stuff – magazine covers making him look sinister, monstrous, etc.

RI sat down with The Saker, a leading analyst of Russia in international affairs, and asked him what he thinks:

So, is there any credence to this line of thinking, or is this conspiracy theorists running wild?

There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the US is waging a major psyop war against Russia, although not a shooting war, for now, and that what we are seeing is a targeted campaign to discredit Putin and achieve “regime change” in Russia or, should that fail, at the very least “regime weakening” and “Russia weakening”.

And the Economist has been the very worst of them all…


So this is a US government program?

Yes, Putin is absolutely hated by certain factions in the US government two main reasons:

1. He partially, but not fully, restored Russia’s sovereignty which under Gorbachev and Yeltsin had been totally lost … Russia then was a US colony like Ukraine is today … and,

2. He dared to openly defy the USA and its civilizational model.

… a free and sovereign Russia is perceived by the US “deep state” as an existential threat which has to be crushed. … this is a full-scale political assault on Russia and Putin personally.

So what the Russians are saying, that the constant personal attacks against Putin in the global media are partly the result of deliberate efforts by US intelligence services, … basically, planted stories…

Yes, absolutely

It seems like “Operation Mockingbird” all over again… Are you aware of other instances aimed at Putin?

(Editors Note: Operation Mockingbird was a CIA program started in the 1950s to influence the US media, which was gradually exposed by investigative journalists starting in the late 60s, culminating in sensational televised congressional hearings in 1975 which shocked the nation, forcing the program’s termination. Critics maintain that the same tactics have continued since, under different programs. Wikipedia)

Yes, of course. Since this defamation has very little traction with the Russian public … Putin’s popularity is higher than ever before .., there is an organized campaign to convince them that Putin is “selling out” Novorussia, that he is a puppet of oligarchs who are making deals with Ukrainian oligarchs to back-stab the Novorussian resistance…

… So far, Putin’s policies in the Ukraine have enjoyed very strong support from the Russian people who still oppose an overt military intervention…

… but if Kiev attacks Novorussia again – which appears very likely – and if such an attack is successful – which is less likely but always possible – then Putin will be blamed for having given the Ukrainians the time to regroup and reorganize.


Warm and fuzzy…


So you are saying that if the Ukrainian military strengthens its position enough to deliver a serious blow to the East Ukrainians, the US can use this as a method to strike at Putin’s support base…

Yes, that’s right … there are a lot of “fake patriots” in Russia and abroad who will reject any negotiated solution and who will present any compromise as a “betrayal”. They are the “useful idiots” used by western special services to smear and undermine Putin.

Is it limited to government special ops, or are there other groups who might have an interest in doing this?

Yes, well here is something that most people in the west don’t appreciate… there is a major behind-the scenes struggle among Russian elites between what I call the “Eurasian Sovereignists” (basically, those who support Putin) and what I call the “Atlantic Integrationists” (those whom Putin refers to as the “5th column).

The western media talks about this as the struggle between Russian liberals and conservatives, reformers and reactionaries, right?

Well its sort of like that, but not exactly…

The former see Russia’s future in the Russian North and East and want to turn Russia towards Asia, Latin America and the rest of the world, while the latter want Russia to become part of the “North Atlantic” power configuration.

The Atlantic Integrationists are now too weak to openly challenge Putin – whose real power base is his immense popular support – but they are quietly sabotaging his efforts to reform Russia while supporting anti-Putin campaigns.

Regarding the revelations of CIA activities in Germany, do you think this is going on in other countries, in the US?

I am sure that this is happening in most countries worldwide. The very nature of the modern corporate media is such that it makes journalists corrupt.

As the French philosopher Alain Soral says “nowadays a reporter is either unemployed or a prostitute“. There are, of course, a few exceptions, but by and large this is true.

This is not to say that most journalists are on the take. In the West this is mostly done in a more subtle way – by making it clear which ideas do or do not pass the editorial control, by lavishly rewarding those journalists who ‘get it’ and by quietly turning away those who don’t.

If a journalist or reporter commits the crime of “crimethink” he or she will be sidelined and soon out of work.

There is no real pluralism in the West where the boundaries of what can be said or not are very strictly fixed.

Ok, but is it like what has been revealed in Germany, …similar specific operational programs in France, the UK, Italy, Latin America, etc.

Yes, one has to assume so – it is in their interests to have them and there is no reason for them not to.

As for the CIA, it de facto controls enough of the corporate media to “set the tone”. As somebody who in the past used to read the Soviet press for a living, I can sincerely say that it was far more honest and more pluralistic than the press in the USA or EU today.

Joseph Goebbels or Edward Bernays could not have imagined the degree of sophistication of modern propaganda machines.

If the US is doing it, can’t one assume other governments are too? Are the Russians doing it against western leaders?

I think that all governments try to do that kind of stuff. However, what makes the US so unique it a combination of truly phenomenal arrogance and multi-billion dollar budgets.

The US “deep state” owns the western corporate media which is by far the most powerful media on the planet. Most governments can only do that inside their own country … to smear a political opponent or discredit a public figure, but they simply do not have the resources to mount an international strategic psyop campaign. This is something only the US can do.

So foreign governments are at a great disadvantage in this arena vis-a-vis the US?


Saker commentary:

I want to add here a totally shameless plug for Russia Insider. Guys – keep an eye on what RI is doing. Not only has the editor and publisher, Charles Bausman, assembled a first-rate team of contributors (including several I consider as friends), but the format used by RI is an ideal complement to what I try to do here: whereas I tend to privilege long detailed analyses and a few shorter news items here and there, RI offers a steady stream of news items covering a very wide variety of related topics interspersed with always interesting opinion pieces.

Frankly, I consider this very good and very needed stuff, and a very effective way to debunk the lies of the Empire’s main stream media.  Good guys, doing good things, in a good format.  In other words – I consider checking the RI site at least once a day a “must”.

Kind regards to all,

The Saker


Filed under Capitalism, Economics, Eurasia, Europe, Geopolitics, Germany, Government, Imperialism, Journalism, Political Science, Regional, Russia, Ukraine, USA, War

Ukraine Mini-SITREP: Very Ominous Developments

The latest from the Saker. It really looks like the Ukie Nazis are getting ready to attack. There’s never been any cease-fire. There’s been fighting all along the ceasefire lines for some time now. From what I can tell, both sides seem to be equally guilty of breaking the ceasefire. A major US figure just arrived in Kiev for consultations with Poroshenko.

Every time a major US figure goes to Kiev for consultations with the president, the Nazis launch a serious attack soon afterwards. It’s obvious that the Kiev is owned lock, stock and barrel by Washington. There are 1,000 CIA agents in Kiev right at this moment, and they have been there for some time. At one time, there were 1,000 FBI agents there too. From what I can tell, the CIA station in Kiev seems to be running the Nazi government there.

The voentorg is the illicit Russian supply line to the rebels. Don’t believe Russian denials. Russia has been supplying these rebels with large amounts of material for some time now. After the ceasefire, Russia cut off the military aid supply. The rebels were furious over this, which shows that the rebels are not just Russian puppets. The rebels want one thing, and the Russians want another. On the other hand, if the rebels wish to say launch a huge offensive, they will have to get Russia to agree to it because Russia holds the purse strings.

Saying that the rebels are puppets of Russia is like saying that the Viet Cong and the NVA didn’t really exist except that they were puppet forces of the USSR and China. It’s stupid Cold War talk for idiots. 78% of Americans believe this crap, so apparently 78% of the population are straight up retarded.

Anyway, the voentorg has started up again recently in a very big way. The implication here is that Russia thinks that the Nazis are getting ready for a huge offensive.

This short post is just to inform you of the latest developments in the war in the Ukraine.

Following the use of a tactical ballistic missile against Donetsk by the Ukies, Zakharchenko has declared that the ceasefire was basically over.

Strelkov has made an official appeal warning that according to this information the Ukies were massing troops in preparation for an attack.  According to Strelkov, the Ukie plan is for a very short and very rapid “push” towards Donestk and the Russian border to make any Novorussian state non-viable and thus to negotiate from a position of force.  True, Strelkov does have a record of exaggerating threats in order to minimize them, but this time there are some strong signs that his analysis is shared by the Russian military, and these signs are the most ominous signs of all.

Russian sources – including the excellent Colonel Cassad blog – report that the voentorg aid-spigot has been fully re-opened including for some major deliveries.  While, of course, I am very happy that the Novorussian resistance is getting much needed equipment (and specialists), this kind of full reopening of the voentorg also indicates to me that the Russian intelligence services have concluded that an attack is very likely, possibly very soon.

I have been following the situation in Banderastan pretty closely and I can only say that the cracks in the regime are visible all over the place.  Whether Poroshenko and his US master’s really believe that an attack can succeed (I doubt it) or whether they really want to force Russia into openly intervening (which I see as almost inevitable), the fact is that starting a major war might well be the only way to save the Poroshenko regime which currently is in free fall.

It is quite possible that Strelkov’s blunt warning and, even more so, the reopening of the voentorg will convince the Ukies that Russia is ready to intervene and that their attack will not be allowed to succeed.  What concerns me is that the Poroshenko regime (and his CIA patrons) might decide that even a defeat at the hand of the Russian military is preferable to the current death spiral: not only can a war save the regime, a Russian intervention would finally make the AngloZionist dream come true.  Putin will try his utmost to avoid falling into this trap, and that means that Russia will have to provide massive covert support and aid to Novorussia.  As for the Novorussians, they have to be strong enough to stop the initial assault.  If they succeed, then the offensive will be effectively dead. But Strelkov is right, if the Ukie break through the Novorussian lines, then Russia will have to intervene.

This is an extremely dangerous situation.

1 Comment

Filed under Eurasia, Europe, Geopolitics, Regional, Russia, Ukraine, USA, War

Germanic Influence on French

I knew that French had some Germanic influence, but I did not know where it was from. I thought maybe it was from the Gauls. But it turns out it was from a Germanic group called the Franks who apparently ruled France for many years. There are a number of German languages called variations of the word Franconian in Germany, mostly right over the border from France – Moselle Franconian, Rhine Franconian, etc.

The piece is correct that northern France is more Germanic. Southern France or the Occitan region is more like Spanish or Catalan.

As a result of over 500 years of Germano-Latin bilingualism, many Germanic words became ingrafted into the Gallo-Romance speech by the time it emerged as Old French in AD 900. And after the Franks abandoned Frankish, the Old French they spoke tended to be heavily Frankish influenced, with a distinctively Frankish accent, which introduced new phonemes, stress-timing, Germanic grammatical and syntactical elements, and contained many more Germanic loans not found in the Old French spoken by the native Gallo-Romans.

Even though the Franks were largely outnumbered by the Gallo-Roman population, the position of the Franks as leaders and landholders lent their version of Old French a greater power of influence over that of the Gallo-Romans; it thereby became the basis of later versions of the French language, including Modern French (see Francien language).

It is for this reason that Modern French pronunciation has a rather distinct and undeniably “Germanic” sound when compared to other Romance languages, such as Italian and Spanish, and is a major contributing factor in why there exists a distinction between Northern French varieties spoken in regions where Frankish settlement was heavy (langue d’oïl) vs. those where Frankish settlement was relatively slight (langue d’oc).


Filed under Balto-Slavic-Germanic, Europe, European, France, French, German, Germanic, Germany, History, Indo-European, Indo-Hittite, Italic, Italo-Celtic, Italo-Celtic-Tocharian, Language Families, Linguistics, Middle Ages, Moselle Franconian, Regional, Romance

Spanish-Italian Mutual Intelligibility

See this video here.

This is an interview with the director of a documentary called Rio De Onor which I would really like to see, except that it is in Italian. Rio de Onor is a town on the border of Spain and Portugal where an odd Senabrian Leonese with Galician influences lect full of Portuguese words is spoken. It is probably similar to Mirandese, but I think it is in a different branch of Leonese than Mirandese is. Rihonores-Mirandese mutual intelligibility (MI) is not known. The town is split. Half of the town is in Portugal, and the other half is in Spain! The residents typically spoke Rihonores, but they also all spoke both Portuguese and Spanish. They spoke Spanish and Portuguese indifferently, mixing them together along with Rihonores.

It is said that Rihonores is extinct or nearly extinct, but that does not seem to be the case. The writeup for this movie says that all of the town’s residents spoke “Mirandese” often during the filming, which took place in 1996. Rio de Onor does not speak Mirandese, but it does speak Rihonores, so the writeup must be referring to Rihonores.

I doubt if Rihonores has gone extinct since then. In addition, a recent paper was written on the grammar of Rihonores. The paper was authored in the mid-1990’s and was written in Portuguese, but I was able to read it in part anyway, especially with the help of a translator. The paper stated that residents of the town now spoke Spanish and Portuguese most of the time. They all knew Rihonores, but its use seemed to be more reserved for special occasions as if it were some sort of ceremonial language.

The town is located in a binational national park and it has a Medieval appearance about it. Rio de Onor has been losing population for some time now and there are not many people left in the town.

At any rate, I continue to see comments that Spanish and Italian are mutually intelligible. Well, I just watched 5 1/2 minutes of an interview with this Italian director, and I can tell you right now that I did not understand one single word he said. That’s a Spanish-Italian MI rate of 0%.

If you don’t know Italian but have knowledge of another Romance language, watch this video and tell me how much Italian you can understand.

I think the MI of Spanish and Italian is much exaggerated.

Leave a comment

Filed under Applied, Cinema, Europe, Indo-European, Indo-Hittite, Italian, Italic, Italo-Celtic, Italo-Celtic-Tocharian, Language Families, Leonese, Linguistics, Multilingualism, Portugal, Portuguese, Regional, Romance, Spain, Spanish

What Language Is This?

This is a very interesting lect. It is Romance, obviously, and if you read carefully, you can even see that it is once again Iberian Romance. The problem is that this is not an officially designated language but instead is considered to be a dialect of the official language. However, there is some controversy about this. At any rate, this is definitely the most divergent dialect of the official language.

 Important linguists such as Francisco Martínez Torres and Antonio Sánchez Verdú, among others, have stated that this is a fully structured language with a huge number of speakers. It is possibly transitional between two of the major languages in the area, but it is actually transitional between four languages in the area, including one extinct one and a large dialect of the official language. This dialect has been heavily affected by a major foreign language that was once widely spoken in the region about 1000 years ago but is no longer spoken here.

It is more likely that there are two lects here, a real language with poor intelligibility with other lects and a dialect which is a dialect of the official language. As such, the situation is similar to Andalucian where there is a hard Andalucian that may be a language and an Andalucian-Spanish that is a dialect of Spanish. The hard version may or may not even exist because as with Sayagues an exaggerated version of the hard speech has been used for comic effect for some time in this nation. Hence it is unknown if the hard version really exists or if it is just made up Pinocchio type lect by some comics. At any rate it is said that the hard version, which has only a few older speakers in rural areas, cannot be understood outside the region.

This lect has the same name as a large province of the state.

I believe there was a crown by this name also during the Middle Ages until it was conquered by another crown. May God have mercy on the conquerors!

Francisco Martínez Torres and Antonio Sánchez Verdú have written a dictionary of this language. It also has an official implementation, a sample of which you can see below. As you can see, it looks a lot like the official language, once again similar to Andaluz.

If you cannot figure it out, you can always look up the major dialects of the official language and it will be right there.

Creo que lo que dicen en llenguamaere es una verdad como un puño.

Sigún estadísticas muncho fiables, esisten más e cinco milentás e llenguas en to’r mundo. La farta e protegiura, l’endiferencia u l’embiste a to lo que costetuya un diferiencial idiomático e la llengua predominanta es motigo e risá a la llengua menoritaria y’un arrempujón pa qu’esapaezca. Aborica mesmo la espichan e vainte a trainta llenguas ca añá.

Solicamente l’insensibiliá y l’inorancia esprefollan er que sertores e muncho influgio social alevanten la corbilla pa escachifollalla, denquivocándose ar piensar qu’escachuflando estas jormas piculiares d’espicace puén hacer más juerte y jrande er roal d’influgio e las amoteás llenguas poerosas u uficiales, que suelen desfrutar d’asobine y’estatuto propio.

La mayoría los llingüistas conciden en su piensamiento e que toiquias las llenguas tién los mesmos raijos y que juon dimpués tresmuándose dista dar nacencia a pláticas dialeutales, pa rematar en llenguas destintas con borilis propios y parableros únicos, en remanencia con las neseziás der presonal con caraiterísticas autórtonas que riflejan la condición, er sintir y l’hestoria e la parvá e presonas que las usa.

Munchas feces, las llenguas menoritarias son acusás e no tiner riconocencia uficial, e prisentar un sejo populista u folclórico sin presonaliá propia, orviando que dengún llenguaje es er preduto e l’inorancia, sinós la risurta d’un pasao hestórico ande creyencias, suponíos, hábitos y jormas e vía en general han costetuyío un trejemaneje e remanencias.

Estas llenguas creticás y vetuperás han encarruchao la mayoría e las feces a una munchá d’hombres y mujeres qu’han ponío er fuste e su llengua en l’intuicismo y’en la presapia que surge e la remanencia e la presona humana con er medio u con otra parvá e metas sociales bien destinguías.

Asina, la valúa y’er rispeuto a estas llenguas menoritarias no tié su fuste solicamente en er parablero, sinós que dende un esfise antropológico y’hestórico costetuyen y jueban un papel e valúa imprescindible pa l’escubrición e nuevos datos u hallajos que favorecen a esprefollar remanencias intrecurturales u a poner lus a l’escarculle y’astudio d’aventos precisos.

No interesa la oficialidad del ni del ni del ni desde sectores facheriles y franquistas hasta sectores putimultilinguistas e izquierdonacionalistas unos porque son centralista y de la una grande y libre y otras porlas subenciones que reciben y que habria que repartir con las demas lenguas ibericas y que coño mola mas ir de yo hablo un idioma y tu es que no sabes hablar.

Si tu amiga quiere conocer el IDIOMA le recomiendo la pagina web de llenguamaere que ya te han puesto mas para arriba y tambien que le heche un ojo a ‘enciclopedia en.

La llengua, es el llenguaje traicional e hestórico que se usaba en la Rigión la Vega Baja, y angunas comarcas en la.

Ordenamiento llengüístico el Crasificación

Endo-uropea -> itálico -> grupo romance -> romance -> italo-ociental -> sugrupo oriental -> ibero-romance->
Grandaria jográfica
Númbero platicantes
Origen e la llengua

La Rigión (y las comarcas linderas hablantes), sus costumbres y su llengua son el preduto natural e la convevencia durante sieglos de razas destintas n’un punto detreminao la jografía pelinsular, puerta d’entrá en l’antegüedá pa las curturas traicionales y más esenvolicás de la cuenca el. Pa compriender bien los raíjos d´esta jorma d’hablar qui se da en semos d´hacer un repaso corto a l’hestoria el terraje.

Dende la previncia romana Carthaginense, a la quala seguió la bizantina Oróspeda, y que con los visigós pasó a ser Aurariola, el sureste pelinsular ya prisientaba rajos peculiares remanientes con el latino qu’allí s’hablaba y s’habló durante l’época visigótica. A l’esfaratarse´l raino visigód con l´allegá los se costetuye la Cora Todmir u Raino Teodomiro.

Este Raino que dende su nacencia jué l’único en tener otonomía drento, mantenió su habla dialeutal latina que dió dempués iba a dar en los y dista el sieglo XIII la latinia u “l´Aljamía Oriente”, una llengua romance renchía. Durante cinco sieglos se mantenió más menos viva esa llengua, lo qu´ayubó a ajuntar la traición llengüística el raino a la trayía po los nuevos conquistaores.

Del romance aquel quean parablas como ababol, abercoque, alcacil, aletría, aniaga, angor, arciprés, asina y ansina, boria, cabolo, caliche, cauz, caparra, compaña, corrental, dende, dica, falluto, juntamento, Migalo, morciego y morciguillo, murria, pagamenta, pancha, ponocha, perifolla, quijero, trompiche, truje, verrugo, vide u visibilo.

La dominación n’el Raino remata con la conquista po la parte los de.

Dende´l 1243, con los numberosos que juón a repuel-lar el Raino, pronto se jundión el romance con el, jormando este mezclije la base llengüística la llengua.

Con la conquista po la parte los del Raino, d´intre los foranos, juón premiero los curas los que vinión a predicar el a estas tierras.

El ascrebío más antigo que se conoce en llengua romance en esta Rigión se fecha a la fin del mes d´Agosto e l´año 1244 y está ascrebío en. Tamién repuellaores que vinión a ampostarse en trujión con ellos su llengua, aejando una herencia muncho siñalá que tavía premanece en parablas.

Tamién, los catalanes de l’epoca punión su parte en la jormación el. Semos d´aprecibirnos que, anque no juón pocos los que venión a repuel-lar, la mayoría los foranos de la Corona eran.

Anque, po otro lao, no es verdá eso que quasi la metá el lésico peculiar tié un raíjo, pos dañover pasa que se cuentan como parablas de, de u del mesmo romance.

Como semos visto, l´allegá contina e destintos puel-los, con caráiteres llingüísticas peculiares, su convevencia durante sieglos y su entrecambio curtural drento nuestras lindes, hación qu’apaiciá la llengua. Sus caraiteres proprias son el preduto la fusión y el mestizaje: del romance el sustrato y una grande parte la gramancia y el lésico, de y el una munchá e parablas y giros, y del las suluciones fonéticas moernas y una grande cantidá lesico.

Tos estos caraiteres s’han mantenío dica hogaño, mayormente en las zonas gambestres, pero inda comedio el sieglo XX, con la generalización la enseñanza en, el enflugio los meios de comunicación y el cá ve menor ail-lamiento d’otras tierras, aviene menguando su uso de contino, tiendiendo incia´l castellano normativo.


En l´hestoria dialeutal se dan tres epocas prencipales:


Pace ser qu’ende el tiempo los visigos (s. II A.C.), el llatino d´aquí era destinto a los otros; el cualo más dempués iba seer con el Rayno Tudmir (s. VIII) el romance, hubiendo con toa certeniá destinciones intre´l romance usao po los y el romance usao po los. El romance d´esta epoca s´amotea romance.

Romance meyebal

Con l´allegá e los destintos dialeutos romances qui trayiban los del norte, el dialeuto se mezclijó a estos dialeutos, jormándose entoces, el dialeuto meiebal, el cualo, es como una koiné romance qui mezclija caráiteres de tos los destintos dialeutos romances, juendo la base el romance otóctono, al cualo se le van amontando lésico y caráiteres qu´allegan con los las llenguas los foranos del norte.

Ansina, amás de rajos proprios y otóctonos, puedemos encuentrar una grande munchá e lésico antigo, moerno… El romance este, en la güerta desiempre foé conocío con el mote.

“Español hablado en”

Este “Español hablado en” n´es na más que´l dialeuto ultrao, juertemente enfluyío po el castellano moerno, como se vé en las munchas suluciones fonéticas que´l dialeuto adouttó del castillano, en el lésico qui remplaza muncho aina al, y gineralmente en tos laos, supuesto que los rajos que se mantién son minores en comparanza con los castillanos, los cualos abondan muncho.

To esto avinió por varios motigos: uno poique s´imponió una educancia púl-lica en español normativo; lluego unos meyos de cumunicación en español normativo, y ya p´arrematar, la questión más emportante: el castillano de siempre jué aquí la llengua los gubernantes, l´aristocracia, la classe adinerá, y po ello se conmertió n´el moelo llengüístico a deseguir, pasando´l, qu´era la plática pupular, a seer una jorma d´hablar malmirá, creticá y rediculizá, una jorma d´hablar qu´haiba que espaicer, y ansina jué como pasó con el avenir del tiempo.

Ansina, el enflujio castillano ha hacío espaecer al dialeuto cuasi entericamente, redujiéndolo a malas penas a una jelepa rajos qu´endemás se cumparten con to´l roal hispano-hablante. Sin encambio, pace ser qui s´arrima abora incia´l dialeuto una epoca güena, supuesto qu´han apaecío recién destintas presonas de detintos llugares que s´han dimponío a mantiner con via este antigo y variao dialeuto. Estas presonas son conocientes d´un dialeuto menos castellanizao, y llunchan po la dinificación y honramiento el dialeuto.

Hogaño se vién laborando, pláticas en fueros, certámenes lleterarios, juntamentos llengüísticos, alboroques del dialeuto…D´hasta ambunas presonas han proponío qui se reconosca´l uficialmente, pa los cualos quián aprendel-lo ansina puán hacel-lo.


Filed under Dialectology, Europe, Linguistics, Regional, Sociolinguistics, Spain, Spot the Language

Is Romance Mutual Intelligibility Overrated?

Paul S. writes:

I can speak Spanish decently, though I read it better, and that wasn’t a tough read. That being said, I can read Portuguese pretty well too and can’t understand it spoken much at all.

Well try doing research in Portuguese then. I can speak a bit of Portuguese, and I have been trying to read it for some time now. Lately I am doing a lot of research, and much of it is in Spanish. I use translators a lot, but even then I have to go back to the original Spanish. I can do research ok in Spanish, but it is not real easy.

I also run across a lot of Portuguese, Galician and Asturian. Research is quite hard in all of these. I am having an extremely hard time reading Portuguese, and previously I thought I could read it fairly well. Also I have a friend in Brazil, and she used to send me mails all the time in Portuguese, and honestly, I was pretty lost reading that stuff. I think Spanish-Portuguese written intelligibility is overrated.

I cannot understand much spoken Portuguese either. I watched a clip on Youtube the other day about some city council meeting in a town on the Spanish-Portuguese border, and I could not understand a word they said.

I have a feeling that the oral intelligibility of Romance is also overrated. You hear a lot of anecdotes. Eonavians said that Western Asturians could not understand one word of Eonavian, which is a Western Asturian-Eastern Galician transitional dialect!

Castillian speakers who went to Valencia to live said that after seven years, they still could not understand one word of Valencian and Catalan spoken at normal speed. However, they could understand TV announcers in those lects very well because the announcers used Castillian intonation as opposed to Catalan/Valencian intonation.

Some people from the north of Spain say that they cannot understand a single word of the hard Andalucian spoken on the streets of the big cities.

Commenter James Schipper lived in Brazil for years and is fluid in Portuguese. However, he only understood 40% of the strange lect spoken in Hermisende, Zamora, in Spain. Linguists say that this is a Galician dialect with heavy Portuguese influence and significant Leonese influences. On some linguistic maps, it is colored as a Portuguese dialect.

He was also able to understand only 25% of Alistano Leonese.

And we haven’t even left the Iberian Peninsula yet!

A while back, in a large city in northern Italy, an old woman had become lost. They took her into the police station and she was chattering away for a few hours. They kept asking her questions but she did not understand them as she didn’t speak Standard Italian. People had all sorts of theories on where she was from. Some thought Greece, and there were many other guesses. Finally a worker came in who was familiar with the strange Western Lombard dialect from the high northern Italian mountains that she spoke. The old lady and the cops all spoke a Northern Italian dialect, and none of them could understand the old lady.

On the border of France and Italy in and around the city of Menton near Nice, a lect called Mentonasque is spoken. It is close to the old language of Nizzard spoken in Nice. This is an Occitan-Ligurian transitional dialect, a halfway between Maritime Provencal Occitan spoken in France and Ligurian spoken in Italy. Nevertheless, Mentonasque speakers say that they cannot understand a word of the Ligurian spoken in Italy. And linguists now see Mentonasque as a Ligurian dialect!

One would think that if these languages were that close, one could learn one or another of them pretty easily. To some extent this is true, but not to the extent of dialects of a single tongue or very closely related languages where you can adjust fairly easy over a period of 1 hour-3 weeks.

For instance, in Asturias, there are many Castillian speakers who have been living there for some time who simply state that they cannot understand Asturian. If they were really so close, one would think they would have picked it up easily over the years.

Down in the Bierzo zone transitional between the Leonese and Galician languages, there are Castillian speakers who have been living there for years who cannot understand Leonese, Galician or Berciano. With languages like that being spoken around them all the time, one would think they would have picked up them easily over the years.

The truth is that these languages are not as close as they seem, and much has to do with intonation as the example of the Castillian speaker living in Valencia indicates. In addition, one way to tell that you are dealing with a separate language and not a dialect of a single tongue is that the other language doesn’t necessarily get easier to understand the more you hear it. The factor of motivation cannot be ruled out. The Castillian speakers above who cannot understand Galician, Leonese, Berciano, Asturian, Valencian, Catalan or Andalucian have obviously never taken the time to try to learn the language. They simply cannot be bothered. If people do not want to try to learn a language, even a very closely related one spoken around them all the time, they simply will not learn it.

It is said that after 2-3 months of close contact, a Castillian speaker can pick up Aragonese, Catalan, Asturian, Leonese or Galician. But that is if one is sufficiently motivated. The powerful variable of motivation in language learning cannot be underestimated.


Filed under Andalucian, Applied, Aragonese, Asturian, Catalan, Dialectology, Europe, France, Galician, Indo-European, Indo-Hittite, Italic, Italo-Celtic, Italo-Celtic-Tocharian, Italy, Language Families, Language Learning, Leonese, Linguistics, Multilingualism, Occitan, Portuguese, Regional, Romance, Sociolinguistics, Spain, Spanish

What Language Is This?

This one is a trick question because formally speaking, this is not even considered to be a language by linguists. Ethnologue will just tell you that this is a dialect of a national language. However, many of the speakers feel that this is a real language. It has definitely had quite a bit of independent development, including influences by foreign languages that have not necessarily influenced the other lects of nation much. There is evidence that this lect was already evolving independently as early as the year 1000. A thousand years of independent development is a lot for a “dialect.”

Structurally speaking, it is a tricky question. However, the way this lect forms plurals is very strange and much different from the national language. The national language has five vowels and this lect has 10 vowels – five regular length and five long! Articles may be cemented onto the beginnings of words.

Many intervocalic consonants are dropped and consonants are often dropped at the end of the word. There has been a truly odd sound change of vowel > vowel > consonant – o > u > g. I am not an expert of diachronic linguistics, but vowel > consonant changes seem pretty odd to me. Laterals and retroflexes go back and forth, 1 > r, r > 1. This is a common change. Observe Japanese where these sounds are in free variation. Consonants are geminated at times, a feature more common in Italy.

Consonants tend to fall out preceding other consonants, in which case the following consonant geminates.

In terms of intelligibility, people from the north of Spain often say that they cannot understand a word of this lect in its hard form. People from the south of Spain have an easier time of it. At first the lect is utterly unintelligible, but they can pick it up in a matter of minutes to hours.

Like other lects of the peninsula, one theory is that this lect has two forms Lect-National Language, which is a dialect of the national language, and Lect, the hard form, which is said by some to be a true language.

There are a few different ways of writing this lect. I have chosen one of the newer ones. As you can see, this lect does not differ much from the national language. If you understand the national language, then you can read this lect very easily. My impression is that most of the differences between this lect and the national language are phonological and not morphological or syntactic.

Just to give you a bit of a hint, many of the continent’s Jews and Gypsies came from this part of the continent, and this was a common starting point on the peninsula for Latin American colonization.

Yo´ntiendo q´ê difizi quando nunqa êtto antê s´a leio azí…pero zí qe z´abla azí…vozotrô êquxaî i penzaî a travê der qâtteyano êqqrito, i por ezo no lo beî. Pues no es por ná, pero las veces que bajo pal sú, que no son pocas, ni hablan ni escriben así, ozú que mizterio. Salú.

Pô mehó qe la trauzqa al´unifiqao, por qe te ba qeá má zolo qe la huna…Bueno, a mi la q me gûtta mâ qizá qe la k, porqe êttetiqamente paeze mâ al´arabe…Lo basqô e leio qe al pensá qe letra poné ze quearo qon la k porke azí lô hazía diferente del qâteyano…I ayudaría definí mejó l´idioma…L´tambié debería elehí lâ formâ mâ definitoria i diferente del qâtteyano. Tambié beo argunô problemâ qon lô apôttrofe…ê dezí..

Por ehemplo…

¿qomo êqqribo?:

Te voya a dar una patada.

Te viá dá una patá…¿?

Por zierto qe patâ ê qomo papâ…el prurá ze qonfunde entre “patadas y patas”. ¡¡¡Benga… a´toô…hagamô un êffuerzo pa êkkribí n. êtto ê aluzinante…

No zabeî la zenzazión tan qurioza qe ê êkkribí qomo rearmente hablo…dirêttamnente dejo de zé un paleto…a zé un curtízimo. Er poblema Hartza ê qe dezidieron poné la k pal zonio (k) en vez de poné la q, por er zimple motibo de no ezistí en câtteyano… aunque fuera mâ fazi pa lo uzuariô del qâtteyano êkkrito…

Almade, ê mu zierto lo qe izê, pero hazello de la manera qomo izê entonzê êttaremô utilizando tambié una êkkritura ahena al´andalú…De lâ dô formâ argo ze cohe der câtteyano, i no qea mâ remedio, ai qe azumillo qomo er legao de la îttoria de la lenwa…zalimô to la poblazión de êkkribí qâtteyano.

Pero qon nuêttra forma ganamô argo mâ qe ê la diferenziazión der câtteyano i er reqonozimiento de lenwa dîttinta…qon la intenzió de qe nunqa mâ naide nô riiqulize ni ze pienze qe hablamô mal. De la forma qe tu izê, zegiriamô êkkribiendo iwá qe er câtteyano i por tanto zegiriamô regiô i dominaô pol la Reá Acaemia de la lenwa.

No zé zi m´êpplicao bié..zolo una coza me dá muxa pena…En el´, adió a la S y adió a la C y adió J…I zobre tó adió a la Ñ…Adió, adió Reá Aqaemia de la Lenwa. Qrizao, no te qonfundâ…Yo Êkkribo la Z pero en realiá êttoi “seseando” por zé de Qai…La Z reqohe ambô zoniô…Er der Ceceo y er der SeSeo… La Z no ê matematiqamente er zonio Zeta…


Qrizao, la ñ no ezîtte n´…ezîtte la ni. Lete bié la ortografía d´arriba qe ê muxo mâ perfetta qe la tuya…Êtta hexa por êppertô…la w Ê un Êpperimento mio…porqe arriba ize que tié qe zé gu. Qrizao, tu zolo pienza en Zebiya, quando ai nuebe miyonê d´…

Conio!!! Z o S lo tendrá qe ezí l´acaemia andaluza de la lenwa futura…a mi me paeze de momento qe la Z ê mâ adequá. zi no l´âqquxao en 30 aniô bente pa Qai…Zebilla no ê er zentro der mundo…Joé…Pô mehó qe la trauzqa al´unifiqao, por qe te ba qeá má zolo qe la huna…

Jejeje..êkkribiendo andalú entre 400 miyones de qâteyano-êkkribientê, ten quidao lo qe puean dezirte. Cryasor, ¿no lâ´qquxao o no qierê´ qquxallo? …Hai muxa hente en Zebiya q´azetta êtta norma?…

Tu qeate qontigo mîmmo i qon tu Zebiya perzoná…

Licencia píu pa izîli al autol d’esti artículu qu’haisi pasáu tres pueblus endilgandu tol sul de Badajoç palas jablas, cuandu las jablas estremeñas, de jondu raigón astul-leonés, polus estuyus aquelláus endi jazi tiempu é abondu sabíu i atranquijáu que sonin las que s’enjiestan nel norti d’,en pueblus comu Encinasola, Cumbris Mayoris, Cumbris d’Enmeyu, Cumbris de San Bartolomé, Cañaveral de León, Arroyumolinus de León i Jinojalis (provinza de Uelba) i aína nel Real dela (provinza de) i en Cuenca de Juenti Ovejuna (provinza de), aconllegandu dejechu entadía la jabla dela localidá purtuguesa de Barrancus, renti d’Encinasola.

De jablas n’·Estremaúra, naína, en tó casu puemus jablal de enfluencias mútuas. Puéi rejundilsi esta custión en. Via intentá habla sahtamente como yo hablo a diario, sin simbolô que nunca haya usao ni cambiô que me parehcan rarô (solo uso ehte —^ para diferenciá lâ H ahpirâ y lâ S finalê que suhtituyo)

Soy, dihtingo entre la C/Z y la S. Ahpiro las hachê que me correhponden y no esahero ningún rahgo, ni me da verguenza hablah en.

Siempre m’interesó la hihtoria, y dehde hace relativamente poco, me interesa aun má aquellâ palabrâ, el lésico que s’usaba n’ n’otrah epocah. Palabrah que o han dehao d’usarse, o que dehconocemoh porque tenemoh un suhtituto cahtellano mah común y que aparece en loh dicionarioh. Palabrah como:

-Abatanao: Acohtumbrao a argo (digo ambas formâ)
-Acedía: Peh común en lâ cohta
-Chambre: Pillo
-Pechá: hartahgo, hahtío
-Púo: hartarse d’argo/d’algo
-Tarraya: Rê reonda pa pehcâ

Así podría ehtâ bahtante tiempo, buhcando palabrâ que prahticamente solo s’usan en determiná zona de Ehpaña, mâ amplia que la propia. Me parece inuti intentá hacé n’ unificao, por la sencilla razón de que un granaino no habla iguá que yo, ni un’almeriense tampoco.

Baho mi criterio, basao en pura observación, diria que l’ tiene ciertâ caracterihticâ (la mâ notable, l’ahpiración, el seseo, el ceceo y el recorte de -d/-z finalê) y que nô unifica como “________” (inserta ahi argo/algo como “lengua”, “habla”, “dialehto”…). Ahora bien: dentro der/del mihmo hay dô grandê grupô: Orientá y Occidentá, y creo que la mayoría conocemô lâ diferenciâ entre uno y otro y que yo creo que, geograficamente hablando, comprenden:

-Orientá (solo dentro d’): Graná.
-Occidentá: Huerva, Cadi.

Rearmente/realmente, no noto muchâ diferenciâ entre un gaditano con un onubense si los comparamô con un almeriense. Usamô palabrâ dihtintâ, ehpresionê dihtintâ, pero en henerá, es idéntico.

Pero ambô son, tienen unâ raicê comunê y facirmente/facilmente reconociblê. Creo que podría hacerse un “ehtánda”, com’una base, y a partí de ahí, las dô variantê que decía, acehtando otrâ má pequeñâ que se enmarcarían en una u otra variante, y tan válidâ como la que s’hable n’la capitá como la que s’hable n’la ardea/aldea mâ pequeña de to. Cuehtión de rehpeto al/ar fin y al/ar cabo.

Aun así, m’encanta qu’en mi tierra haya tanta variedá, cosa que no hay en otrô lugarê y que’s algo/argo que no quiero que pase n’.

Salús rejuertis.


Filed under Europe, Linguistics, Regional, Spain, Spot the Language