Talk:South Guelderish

English name

Is there a recognizedEnglish name of Zuid-Gelders ? If there is one, it should be used as title of this article. Sarcelles (talk) 12:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

The translation of it would simply be South Guelderish. Indeed, that does sound a little better here. Ad43 (talk) 12:43, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Varieties of South Guelderish

There is no full list of its subdialects. Sarcelles (talk) 16:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

South Guelderish and Kleverlandish

Hello,

Dutch Wikipedia has an article nl:Zuid-Gelders, that limits itself to the Netherlands and an article nl:Kleverlands, that includes some parts of the Netherlands not covered by the other one. Furthermore, the latter covers a significant portion of Germany and additional parts of the Netherlands.

http://www.wjheeringa.nl/thesis/thesis09.pdf is a study, in which almost all varieties of Northern Dutch Limburg with most of Southern Dutch Limburg and the smaller part of Belgian Limburg are grouped together in one category called Limburg. This study has the Southern part of Gelderland as quite different. South Guelderish of Gelderland is counted among Central Dutch dialects. The Central Dutch dialects go as far as to include Hollandic. Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 10:26, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

nl.wp refers (among others) to:

• Jo Daan & D. Blok, 1968 & 1969
  • fu-berlin.de mentions Jo Daan as well and has a map with "Südgelderländisch".
• Berns, J. 2002: Zuid-Gelderse dialecten
• Charlotte Giesbers, Renee van Bezooijen, Roeland van Hout, De geografische en perceptieve afstand tussen dialecten: de rol van de staatsgrens in het Kleverlands dialectcontinuüm (2006)
  • Charlotte (Hendrina Elisabeth) Giesbers, Dialecten op de grens van twee talen: een dialectologisch en sociolinguïstisch onderzoek in het Kleverlands dialectgebied, 2008 [doctor's thesis] ([1]→[2]; [3]), p. 6 has:
    "Figuur 1.2: Het Kleverlands dialectcontinuüm", a map of "Kleverlands" on which it reads: "ontwerp: Georg Cornelissen". It is similar to this map (where it reads: "Kleverändisch/Kleverlands", "Entwurf: Georg Conelissen").
    This is Kleverländisch/Kleverlands and another area than on the picture in nl.wp and at fu-berlin.de
• Indelingskaart uit: Jan Goossens (1970), 'Niederländische Mundarten – vom Deutschen aus gesehen', Niederdeutsches Wort 10, 61-80. Gearchiveerd op 6 december 2008.
  • It has Kleverländisch.
• Jacques van Ginneken, Overzichtskaart der Nederlandse Dialecten, Malmberg 1917
  • Apprently it's older and has "Geldersch-Limburgsch" with another area.
• Dr. J. te Winkel, 1898, Geschiedenis der Nederlandse taal, Uitg. Blom en Olivierse, Culemborg. Gearchiveerd op 6 december 2008.
  • Is also older and with other dialects.

Based on the things linked above, there seem to be:

1. Very old classifications from 1898 and 1917 with other areas.
2. Daan's "Südgelderländisch"
3. Goossens' and Cornelissen's "Kleverländisch"

--13:06, 20 September 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.221.40.167 (talk)

POV

This article is clearly showing pro dutch bias. Kleverlandish is a low franconian dialect. Imagine the dutch tears if we would call the low saxon spoken in the eastern netherlands low german. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.24.247.21 (talk) 10:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

It's not pro-Dutch bias. What we witness here is called WP:original research. Zuid-Gelders is a concept from Jo Daan classification of Dutch dialects based on speaker perception. Its extension to include Low Franconian dialects on the German side is not supported by Dutch or German sources. In fact, most Dutch sources using feature-based classifications don't support the unity Zuid-Gelders. Instead, the close affinity between the dialects of the Land van Cuijk in Brabant, the southeastern part of Gelderland (= the eastern part of Daan's Zuid-Gelders), the northernmost part of Limburg, and the dialects of the Cleve area in Germany has long been recognized by Dutch dialectologists (e.g. van Ginneken, Weijnen). Following Goossens, the term Kleverlands/Kleverländisch (previously restricted to refer to dialects on the German side) has been extended to all dialects of the aforementioned group, and this usage has caught up in the Netherlands without any "Dutch tears" (e.g. in works by J. Swanenberg, R. von Hout, C. Giesbers, or F. Bakker). So it is very much OR to call the dialects of Cleve and Goch "South Guelderish", but using "Kleverlandish" for the dialects of Venray or the rural dialects spoken in the vicinity of Nijmegen is perfectly supported by reliable sources (not only in academia, see here[4]). The southern extent of Kleverlandish is a matter of debate, but this is a rather minor issue.

Since South Guelderish and Kleverlandish are not in the least coextensive, a page move from South Guelderish to Kleverlandish is not advisable. IMHO, the best solution is to create an independent article for Kleverlandish based of Dutch and German sources (sources in English are rare), and move all material not related to the correct scope of South Guelderish to the new article. See also the comments in the preceding section by Sarcelles and the ubiquitious IP @93.XXXX. –Austronesier (talk) 13:29, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

PS: Whether this article South Guelderish is actually worth keeping once we have an article dedicated to Kleverlandish, is another question. Google Scholar only yields 18 results for "Zuid-Gelders" and "Zuidgelders", while "Kleverlands" gives 129 results (search results for the corresponding German and English show the same picture). –Austronesier (talk) 18:24, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

The article borders to an unsourced hodgepodge. Your have created major doubt on the viability of the concept. I have to admit, that among the 6 interwikis, two were created by me: it and nds, ages ago. Sarcelles (talk) 19:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I think we can keep South Guelderish, as long as we strictly follow the scope proposed by Daan and related sources. Sure, once we also have an article about Kleverlandish, we must make up our mind whether we should use a Daan-based classification for the big picture of Dutch dialects, or rather the feature-based classification by Taeldeman and Hinskens (in the 2013 De Gruyter volume) that is built on multiple earlier sources. You can imagine that I prefer the latter.

But at the moment, I want to get straight first the information about the various smaller proposed dialects groups, and also about how different subgrouping schemes coincide or at least overlap. The nice thing in the case of South Guelderish and Kleverlandish is that we have secondary sources that explicitly discuss the differences between the two schemes, so we don't have to resort to OR. –Austronesier (talk) 20:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Heeringa doesn't support the concept of South Guelderish. However, Taeldeman and Hinskens might be methodically good. Does their South Guelderish extend to Germany or Limburg? This talk page is more of an article than the actual article. Sarcelles (talk) 09:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sarcelles: Here's a link to Taeldeman and Hinskens' chapter "7. The classification of the dialects of Dutch" via WP Library[5]. Their classification is broad-sweep, while you can find more granular info in the remaining chapters of the volume, although rarely in a taxonomic style. As the title of the volume implies, focus is on the dialect landscape of Belgium and the Netherlands, with only little references to related varieties in the chapters about Limburgian and Low Saxon. Btw, there is no mention of South Guelderish in the entire volume. The dialect of this area are discussed in the Brabantine chapters. –Austronesier (talk) 21:05, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sarcelles: FYI: Kleverlandish has an article of its own now. –Austronesier (talk) 12:44, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Heeringa (2004) has Central Gelderland as different and North Limburg as part of an entirely different group. Sarcelles (talk) 19:21, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Official status

South Guelderish is spoken in Dutch provinces Gelderland, Limburg and possibly North Brabant as well as German [[Düsseldorf (region)]] in North Rhine-Westphalia. Low German (something else) has offical status in at least parts of [[Arnsberg (region)]], [[Detmold (region)]] and [[Münster (region)]], also in North Rhine-Westphalia. In Dutch Limburg, Limburgish has a status. Possibly it is defined legally as to include parts of South Guelderish. Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 19:22, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Stuff like that [[Düsseldorf (region)]] dosn't improve the legibility.
"Possibly": that's possible, but see WP:V, WP:NOR. --93.234.200.97 (talk) 23:57, 25 June 2024 (UTC)