Editing Occitan language (section)

===Debates concerning linguistic classification and orthography===
The majority of scholars think that Occitan constitutes a single language.{{sfn|Kremnitz|2002|pp=109–111}} Some authors,<ref>Philippe Blanchet, Louis Bayle, Pierre Bonnaud and Jean Lafitte</ref> constituting a minority,{{sfn|Kremnitz|2002|pp=109–111}} reject this opinion and even the name ''Occitan'', thinking that there is a family of distinct {{lang|oc|lengas d'òc}} rather than dialects of a single language.

Many Occitan linguists and writers,<ref>Kremnitz, Georg (2003) "Un regard sociolinguistique sur les changements de la situation de l'occitan depuis 1968" in: Castano R., Guida, S., & Latella, F. (2003) (dir.) ''Scènes, évolutions, sort de la langue et de la littérature d'oc. Actes du VIIe congrès de l'Association Internationale d'Études Occitanes'', Reggio di Calabria/Messina, 7–13 juillet 2002, Rome: Viella</ref> particularly those involved with the pan-Occitan movement centered on the [[Institut d'Estudis Occitans]], disagree with the view that Occitan is a family of languages; instead they believe Limousin, Auvergnat, Languedocien, Gascon, Provençal and Vivaro-Alpine are dialects of a single language. Although there are indeed noticeable differences between these varieties, there is a very high degree of [[mutual intelligibility]] between them<ref>For traditional Romance philology see:
:*{{citation | last=Ronjat | first=Jules | year=1913 | title=Essai de syntaxe des parlers provençaux modernes | publisher=Protat | place=Macon | language=fr | page=12 | url=https://archive.org/stream/essaidesyntaxede00ronjuoft#page/12/mode/2up }}: {{lang|fr|Mais les différences de phonétique, de morphologie, de syntaxe et de vocabulaire ne sont pas telles qu'une personne connaissant pratiquement à fond un de nos dialectes ne puisse converser dans ce dialecte avec une autre personne parlant un autre dialecte qu'elle possède pratiquement à fond.}} (But phonetic, morphological, syntactical and lexical differences are not such that a person quite perfectly fluent in one of our dialects would not be able to have a conversation with another person speaking another dialect with an equally perfect fluency).
:*{{citation | last=Ronjat | first=Jules | year=1930 | title=Grammaire historique des parlers provençaux modernes | publisher=Société des langues romanes (Volume 1) | place=Montpellier | pages=1–32 | url=http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k58339580/f32.image | language=fr | access-date=22 February 2013 | archive-date=11 September 2016 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160911183011/http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k58339580/f32.image | url-status=live }}.
:For a discussion of the unity of the Occitan [[diasystem]] in structural linguistics see {{harvnb|Bec|1973|pp=24–25}}.</ref> partly because they share a common literary history; furthermore, academic and literary circles have identified them as a collective linguistic entity—the {{lang|oc|lenga d'òc}}—for centuries.{{Citation needed|date=June 2022}}

Some Provençal authors continue to support the view that Provençal is a separate language.<ref>Philippe Blanchet, Louis Bayle</ref> Nevertheless, the vast majority of Provençal authors and associations think that Provençal is a part of Occitan.<ref>The most emblematic and productive ones, [[Frédéric Mistral]], [[Robert Lafont]], and their followers ([[Théodore Aubanel]], [http://www.rene-merle.com/ René Merle] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070627091610/http://www.rene-merle.com/ |date=27 June 2007 }}, Claude Barsotti, Philippe Gardy, Florian Vernet, Bernard Giély, Pierre Pessemesse...), and also the most important and historic Provençal cultural associations as [https://web.archive.org/web/20230818174610/http://c-oc.org/oc/provenca/article.php3?id_article=10 CREO Provença], [http://www.felibrige.org/spip.php?article3 Felibrige] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071015112912/http://www.felibrige.org/spip.php?article3 |date=15 October 2007 }} and [http://www.prouvenco-aro.com/archieu/outobre.htm Parlaren (Assiso de la Lengo Nostro en Prouvènço, 2003)] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040228224426/http://www.prouvenco-aro.com/archieu/outobre.htm |date=28 February 2004 }}</ref>

This debate about the status of Provençal should not be confused with the debate concerning the spelling of Provençal.
* The '''classical orthography''' is [[phonemic orthography|phonemic]] and [[diasystem]]ic, and thus more pan-Occitan. It can be used for (and adapted to) all Occitan dialects and regions, including Provençal. Its supporters think that Provençal is a part of Occitan.
* The '''Mistralian orthography''' of Provençal is more or less phonemic but not diasystemic and is closer to the [[French language|French]] spelling and therefore more specific to Provençal; its users are divided between the ones who think that Provençal is a part of Occitan and the ones who think that Provençal is a separate language.

For example, the classical system writes ''Polonha'', whereas the Mistralian spelling system has ''Poulougno'', for {{IPA|[puˈluɲo]}}, 'Poland'.

The question of [[Gascon language|Gascon]] is similar. Gascon presents a number of significant differences from the rest of the language; but, despite these differences, Gascon and other Occitan dialects have very important common lexical and grammatical features, so authors such as Pierre Bec argue that they could never be considered as different as, for example, Spanish and Italian.<ref>{{harvnb|Bec|1963|p=46}}: The close ties between Gascon and others Occitan dialects have been demonstrated through a common diasystem.</ref> In addition, Gascon's being included in Occitan despite its particular differences can be justified because there is a common elaboration (''[[Ausbau language|Ausbau]]'') process between Gascon and the rest of Occitan.{{sfn|Kremnitz|2002|pp=109–111}} The vast majority of the Gascon cultural movement considers itself as a part of the Occitan cultural movement.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pernoste.com/|title=Per Noste edicions|website=www.pernoste.com|access-date=12 June 2007|archive-date=7 December 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231207014340/https://www.pernoste.com/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>[http://perso.orange.fr/anaram/ Perso.orange.fr] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070712234051/http://perso.orange.fr/anaram/ |date=12 July 2007 }}, Aranaram Au Patac</ref> And the official status of [[Val d'Aran]] ([[Catalonia]], Spain), adopted in 1990, says that [[Aranese]] is a part of [[Gascon language|Gascon]] and Occitan. A grammar of Aranese by Aitor Carrera, published in 2007 in [[Lleida]], presents the same view.{{sfn|Carrera|2007}}

The exclusion of [[Catalan language|Catalan]] from the Occitan sphere, even though Catalan is closely related, is justified because there has been a consciousness of its being different from Occitan since the later Middle Ages and because the elaboration (''Ausbau'') processes of Catalan and Occitan (including Gascon) have been quite distinct since the 20th century. Nevertheless, other scholars point out that the process that led to the affirmation of Catalan as a distinct language from Occitan started during the period when the pressure to include Catalan-speaking areas in a mainstream Spanish culture was at its greatest.<ref>Lluis Fornés, see his thesis. {{Cite thesis |last=Fornés |first=Lluis |title=El pensament panoccitanista (1904–2004) en les revistes Occitania, Oc, L'Amic de les Ats, Taula de Lletres Valencianes, Revista Occitana i Paraula d'Oc |date=2004 |publisher=University of Valencia |url=http://www.oc-valencia.org/files/autors/El_Pensament_Ultima.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081003112058/http://www.oc-valencia.org/files/autors/El_Pensament_Ultima.pdf |language=ca-valencia |trans-title=The pan-occitanista thought (1904–2004) in the magazines Occitania, Oc, L'Amic de les Ats, Taula de Lletres Valencianes, Revista Occitana and Paraula d'Oc |via=www.oc-valencia.org |archive-date=3 October 2008 |accessdate=19 September 2008 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

The answer to the question of whether [[Gascon language|Gascon]] or [[Catalan language|Catalan]] should be considered dialects of Occitan or separate languages has long been a matter of opinion or convention, rather than based on scientific ground. However, two recent studies support Gascon's being considered a distinct language. For the first time, a quantifiable, statistics-based approach was applied by Stephan Koppelberg in attempt to solve this issue.<ref>Stephan Koppelberg, El lèxic hereditari caracteristic de l'occità i del gascó i la seva relació amb el del català (conclusions d'un analisi estadística), Actes del vuitè Col·loqui Internacional de Llengua i Literatura Catalana, Volume 1 (1988). Antoni M. Badia Margarit & Michel Camprubi ed. (in Catalan)</ref> Based on the results he obtained, he concludes that Catalan, Occitan, and Gascon should all be considered three distinct languages. More recently, Y. Greub and J.P. Chambon (Sorbonne University, Paris) demonstrated that the formation of Proto-Gascon was already complete at the eve of the 7th century, whereas Proto-Occitan was not yet formed at that time.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Chambon |first1=Jean-Pierre  |last2=Greub |first2=Yan  |year=2002 |title=Note sur l'âge du (proto)gascon |journal=Revue de Linguistique Romane |language=fr |volume=66 |pages=473–495}}</ref> These results induced linguists to do away with the conventional classification of Gascon, favoring the "distinct language" alternative.{{citation needed|date=October 2016}} Both studies supported the early intuition of the late [[Kurt Baldinger]], a specialist of both medieval Occitan and medieval Gascon, who recommended that Occitan and Gascon be classified as separate languages.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Baldinger |first=Kurt |year=1962 |title=La langue des documents en ancien gascon |journal=Revue de Linguistique Romane |language=fr |volume=26 |pages=331–347}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Baldinger |first=Kurt |year=1962 |title=Textes anciens gascons |journal=Revue de Linguistique Romane |language=fr |volume=26 |pages=348–362}}</ref>