Even worse for Abö (or Turku its more widely used name) that you added here since only 5,2% actually speak Swedish...

I added those parts of finland because juq insisted, but I'm putting my foot down now. And as I've already pointed out (and as you admit to), most people in alsace don't speak alsatian.

official ethical/racial/linguistic surveys are actually forbidden in France, it is rather hard to get an actual number

In 1999, NISES did a big tongue poll of the whole country.

Quant aux langues régionales, leur pratique est moins répandue mais dépasse le niveau de la retransmission familiale. L’alsacien compte environ 548 000 locuteurs adultes, l’occitan 526000, le breton 304000, les langues d’oïl 204 000, le catalan 132 000, le corse 122 000, le platt lorrain 78 000 et le basque 44 000, autant de langues qui se pratiquent souvent entre adultes sans être retransmises aux enfants.

http://www.ined.fr/fichier/s_rubrique/18724/pop_et_soc_francais_376.fr.pdf (p. 4)

550k of total speakers is still less than half of 1700k million (pop. Alsace in 1999).

Abö (or Turku its more widely used name) that you added here since only 5,2% actually speak Swedish...

Åbo* is the Swedish (Germanic) name for it.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Languages_of_Finnish_municipalities_%282009%29.svg

Edited 5/11/2016 21:33:40

600.000 to 1.5M considering Alsace has 2M inhabitants, it isn't really correct hence to say "most people don't speak Alsatian". And if you just count with minorities then remove the territories of Finland where way less people speak Swedish. If you just want to listen to Juq, that's all right, but then your map will remain wrong and irrelevant particularly with the title you chose. And if an Alsatian was seeing your map he would be rather offended.

"Most" implies that there is a majority, so saying that "Most people in alsace don't speak alsatian" is perfectly accurate.

Åbo* is the Swedish (Germanic) name for it.

Whatever its name is, only 5,2% speak Swedish, it should not be in this map if Alsace which has a huge majority or minority (depending on the survey and poll) isn't there either.

600.000 to 1.5M considering Alsace has 2M inhabitants

I don't know where you're getting these numbers from, but I doubt that the number of Alsatian speakers has proportionally grown much since 1999 (actually, the same article said Alsatian was on the lowering), anyhow, this is all the sites where Germanic speakers are over 50%. Also, keep in mind that 550k is the total speaker amount - native speakers are even less.

If you just want to listen to Juq, that's all right, but then your map will remain wrong and irrelevant particularly with the title you chose.

Actually, he specifically told me he wanted his map to be "wrong and irrelevant", so your job is done'ere.

I already told you official statistics related with ethnicity/religion/languages/origin cannot be made in France, only polls selecting a restricted group of people (let's say 10.000) but they are rather irrelevant, it is why you can't have the exact figure in France, and it is why you have different figures depending on the survey made: 600,000; 900,000 or 1,5M. But anyway all the studies made about Alsatian concluded it was the most vivid regional language and the most spoken by far in France.

Hence the figures about regional languages are only estimations not actual and real statistics.

Edited 5/11/2016 21:44:43

Whatever its name is, only 5,2% speak Swedish, it should not be in this map if Alsace which has a huge majority or minority (depending on the survey and poll) isn't there either.

You should look back at the resources and things I said earlier, they would answer your frains.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Languages_of_Finnish_municipalities_%282009%29.svg

I already told you official statistics related with ethnicity/religion/languages/origin cannot be made in France, only polls selecting a restricted group of people (let's say 10.000)

How do you think surveys are done?

you have different figures depending on the survey made: 600,000; 900,000 or 1,5M.

I still have yet to see 1.5 million?

Alsatian concluded it was the most vivid regional language and the most spoken by far in France.

Yes, but that doesn't matter.

Edited 5/11/2016 21:51:54

You should look back at the resources and things I said earlier, they would answer your frains.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Languages_of_Finnish_municipalities_%282009%29.svg

You are joking right here? You are just showing a map (so no actual datas and figures) without any chart legend, Turku has only 5,2% of Swedish speakers and 88% of Finnish speakers (Finnish has nothing to do with Germanic languages, just in case you did not know it yet). So tell me how it is answering my "frains"?

I still have yet to see 1.5 million?

I already told you 1,5 million is the highest estimation ever made about Alsatian, but it is not only comprising people living in Alsace, but also outside, as you may know it, ironically, there is still a big community of Alsatian speakers... in America. It is actually the only Alemanic dialect still vivid in this continent thanks to... the Amish. They still use their ancestral language since they live secluded, it is known in America as "Pennsylvanian Dutch", but it is actually and basically the Alsatian dialect mainly, since the Amish came from Alsace. Quite ironical since an "endangered language" in Europe is the most thriving Germanic dialect in the US. Anyway to go back to the topic, these 1,5 million it is not very relevant about the Alsace region we can both agree on it.
I can provide some more relevant source showing Alsatian could be considered still as a dominant language (more than 50%), in a study made by Université de Laval (in Québec), they gathered datas of regional languages of France in 2014 thanks to Comité consultatif pour la promotion des langues régionales et de la pluralité interne, and about Alsatian they found 53% of the whole Alsatian population spoke Alsatian. Not only among elders since also 53% of young students follow courses of Alsatian in "classe de Langue Régionale", in comparison it is way more than Breton in Brittany with only 9% of children following LR classes...

Source: http://www.axl.cefan.ulaval.ca/europe/france-1demo.htm

Yes, but that doesn't matter.

It does matter as Alsatian is one of the least endangered regional languages in France, it is very vivid, you have yet to prove that Swedish in Finland, particularly in Turku is as vivid as Alsatian could be.

You are joking right here? You are just showing a map (so no actual datas and figures) without any chart legend, Turku has only 5,2% of Swedish speakers and 88% of Finnish speakers (Finnish has nothing to do with Germanic languages, just in case you did not know it yet). So tell me how it is answering my "frains"?

A map is a visual show of data, and again, if you had looked back at what I already said, I would have given the key. Middle blue and dark blue shades are Swedish majority (not light blue, though). You can check any of these yourself, for example, Jakobstad (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakobstad), and they will be Swedish majority. Turku may be a bad name for the land, but maybe you should suggest better, in that case.

A map is really not relevant here particularly if there is no data nor legends supporting it.
Frankly, you can say anything with it like: "look there is a majority of dark color in this territory so the language is dominant here!". But it is all wrong, Turku region (or Abo) has only IN TOTAL 5,2% of Swedish speakers, and as Imperator said he would add only territories where Germanic languages are dominant, it is far from being dominant if you huh just consider the total amount of speakers which represents 5,2% nothing else!

Now let me explain how your map is irrelevant, check this map:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Euskara_percent.png

This map shows where Euskara is dominant nowadays, you would be surprised to see a huge territorial part (almost 80%) of Iparralde (3 provinces in the French side) having 80-100% of Euskara speakers, mainly in Soule, Low Navarre and Inner Labourd (all of which are rural places). Does it make Euskara a dominant language just because most of Iparralde territories are populated by more than 80% of Basque speakers? The answer is No, surprisingly, there is only 20% of Euskara speakers IN TOTAL in Iparralde, because the great majority of non speakers live in the Basque coast where also most of the population live too: as far as I recall, there is something like 300,000 inhabitants in Iparralde, but 250,000 live in a tiny line of 20km near the coast, whereas the rest live (50,000) live in the remaining 90% of the territory.


I am also sure a very similar map could be made about Alsace (sadly I found none because I suppose the French ban of making statistics according to ethnicity/religion/languages prevents any attempt to make a relevant map like the one for Finland, or the other one for Basque regions that was actually made by Spanish institutions not French ones). Alsace has certainly a majority of its territory populated by a majority of Alsatian speakers (since most of Alsace is rural), with only "lighter colored" zones in cities, and bigger ones such as Strasbourg, where this language is certainly very endangered, because French from other regions and people from everywhere (since Strasbourg is a very important city, one of the 3 capitals of the EU)settled there and never learnt the local language sadly.

Edited 5/12/2016 11:54:51

The only map I found about Alsatian dialects is this one:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/Dialectes_Alsace.PNG

It illustrates zones where Germanic dialects were spoken in the 19th century, nothing contemporary though...

I think that chosing to represent different regions of countries is a mistake. The idea was so simple and beautiful in the beginning - now it can become a nightmare to find all the minorities in every country and places where they live. Belgium and Switzerland are not the hardest countries to split, but the more one thinks about it, the more countries will get split. There are still some slavic language minorities (almost dead) in eastern germany - should some land "traditionally" associated with slavic inhabitants be cut out of Germany? There are Sami languages in northern Sweden and Norway - should parts of these countries be excluded from this map? etc. etc. etc. I would vote to return to the initial idea of the map - to return to clear borders of countries, initially chosen by Imperator.

P.S. There could be a map of europe with overlapping bonuses representing languages and language groups. But this is entirely different and perhaps bigger project.

Edited 5/12/2016 18:50:18

A map is really not relevant here particularly if there is no data nor legends supporting it.

This map is data - it shows that the marked bits of the map are different from the others, at very least. As for legends, I gave you this a while ago and again.

But it is all wrong, Turku region (or Abo) has only IN TOTAL 5,2% of Swedish speakers, and as Imperator said he would add only territories where Germanic languages are dominant, it is far from being dominant if you huh just consider the total amount of speakers which represents 5,2% nothing else!

And so I did say Turku would not be a good name, and perhaps Jakobstad (56% Swedish) would be a better name. However, this is just a small naming mistake that you can actually fix yourself if it bothers you - and the land that is in the lands are mostly Swedish.

Now let me explain how your map is irrelevant, check this map:

You have not really explained anything - how does this map relate? If anything, you would be confirming my point, and asking for all Finland to be included since the shores are more populated, but this is not happening.

I think that chosing to represent different regions of countries is a mistake.

Majorities are not very hard to find. I disagree.

This map is data - it shows that the marked bits of the map are different from the others, at very least. As for legends, I gave you this a while ago and again.

"this map is data", but irrelevant datas, since we do not know exactly how many speakers are present in this region and the total number of speakers of Swedish compared to the rest.

And so I did say Turku would not be a good name, and perhaps Jakobstad (56% Swedish) would be a better name. However, this is just a small naming mistake that you can actually fix yourself if it bothers you - and the land that is in the lands are mostly Swedish.

Jakobstad is only one town, this map here shows an entire region, where the number of Swedish speakers compared to the rest is infinitesimal. You keep stuck in your views, even if it has been proven many time you were wrong, what a stubborn person.

You have not really explained anything - how does this map relate? If anything, you would be confirming my point, and asking for all Finland to be included since the shores are more populated, but this is not happening.

Well nor do you, that was the point, this map does not explain anything like yours. Only numbers count here. And the percentage of Swedish speakers in Abo is 5,2%.

Majorities are not very hard to find. I disagree.

Well the thing is that even territories without majorities have been added (see the Finnish ones), there is a total lack of consistency and uniformity. You have to choose to represent regions where Germanic languages are spoken in majority or not, not both. And it is even more irrelevant since it is omitting places like Alsace where a huge number speak a Germanic language, whereas Finnish regions where there is only 5% of Swedish speakers are added.
Again I am here to help not to denigrate your work Imperator.

Again I am here to help not to denigrate your work Imperator.

I do appreciate your help and opinion, and I am reading all this discussion :)

"this map is data", but irrelevant datas, since we do not know exactly how many speakers are present in this region and the total number of speakers of Swedish compared to the rest.

I told you twice already, the middle and dark blue shades are where Swedish speakers have a majority (not light blue, though), this is from the Finnish government statistic website.

Jakobstad is only one town, this map here shows an entire region, where the number of Swedish speakers compared to the rest is infinitesimal. You keep stuck in your views, even if it has been proven many time you were wrong, what a stubborn person.

You've some narrow-mindedness to call me "stuck in my views" - I argue my point, and sometimes I am convinced to the other side, but I've never seen you ever be convinced, so seems to me like you are "stuck" if anyone.

*Most lands on this map are named after one borough.
*As it seems, it has not proven that I am wrong, or maybe I have failed to see it (show me if I have).
*You're not even bringing up any actual figures ("infinitesmal") except Turku has 5.2% Swedish, which is why I said that the land should not be named Turku, but something like Jakobstad, while I have shown you.

Now I do understand now why you brought up this earlier beach exemple, but it's a very small change to do, landwise, but very tedious and hard, and you can say this of very many lands on this map.

Well the thing is that even territories without majorities have been added (see the Finnish ones), there is a total lack of consistency and uniformity.

Passing off a claim as axiom, and very much exaggeration...do you see one land that you disagree with its inclusion besides Finland?

And it is even more irrelevant since it is omitting places like Alsace where a huge number speak a Germanic language

First, irrelevant does not mean the same word as wrong, something wrong can be very relevant. You've yet to show anything for this. You did show some teaching slide with unknown source talking about total speakers of Alsatian in all France, which is obviously lower than mother speakers in Alsace, while I (right me if you think different) have a pretty safe. Another: http://www.insee.fr/fr/insee_regions/alsace/themes/cpar12_1.pdf

« L’alsacien est parlé en Alsace par 39 % des adultes, soit 500 000 personnes » (p. 1) (and evidently, the mother speakers will be lower than total speakers, which is already minority)

Again please add a separate Liechtenstein. rather than adding it to the Austrian bonus of Lech. Make a Tyrol or Innsbruck bonus then Liechtenstein.