Tinto Maps #12 Germany Feedback

[Pbhuh]

So if Sebastian Helber's Teutsches Syllabierbüchlein, published in 1593, isn't linguistics, then what is it?

In his book, he lists the following branches of German:

• Ripuarian (he calls it Colognian)
• Low German (he calls it Saxon)
• Dutch (he calls it Flemish/Brabantian)
• Upper German

He then further splits "Upper German" into Middle German, Danube German and Upper Rhenish German.

Now obviously we would call his Upper German High German, and add Ripuarian to Middle German, but it shows that this basic categorization already existed in the 16th century.

So the simple question remains: why should these "languages" not be grouped as German in the game?
I've provided an example for the time period of what I would call a linguist who considers all of them to be German. I've previously provided examples of other texts from the time period which call them all German.
If there isn't any counterexample of people in the time period that considered Low German speakers to speak a separate language from High German, then I don't think there's any justification for splitting them in the game.

Im not saying that there weren't people starting to figure out that languages were related, that isn't surprising, the bible even mentions it.

But historical linguistics starts around the late 18th century, anything before that splitting up a language wouldnt be purely based on science, but on opinion, unless he can definitively point out objective criteria as to why he would put ripuarian distinct from upper and middle german, when we know, that they would be the same, based on modern historical linguistics.

Similarly, why isn't Frisian included, i bring this up again, because it's a continuum, frisian is closer to saxon than upper german is, at least based on it's geneology, but also it's morphology and basically any criteria you want to use.

This is why i personally think Paradox decision on splitting it up is arbritrary. They may have a basis for it, but it's nothing more than their opinion to put the groups as they are, which is the whole thing that started this discussion in the first place.

Im not stating to know for certain that this isn't how it should be grouped, but on all the definitive evidence of this entire dialect continuum, it seems rather odd to single out frisian, which is what paradox did. Not me.

Its no mystery why english isn't included, because it's not part of the dialect continuum and has been distorted beyond recognition. Thats pretty obvious.

Regarding gameplay this has impact on markets. Historically Low German was the lingua franca of the hanseatic league, which will impact what the market language is.

So the simple question remains: why should these "languages" not be grouped as German in the game?

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with just using German (except excluding frisian, but i feel like im hammering this point home by now),

but by that logic why not just group all latin languages as latin. Paradox has distinctly seperated out multiple roman languages as seperate, but german remains together as one. Occitan which the french would have probably considered french is seperate, even Cisalpine gets split out from main italian, when modern day we could call venetian, piedmontese and lombard italian dialects. No way that people in that time would think these weren't italian dialects. Meanwhile Sardinian is not split?


At the end of the day it's all about degrees of seperation. I personally think the degrees of seperation should be consistant, I don't know about you, but thats my take. At least you seem to agree that the entire West-germanic Dialect continuum should be together, just as the Scandinavian one is.
(Reposting the most recent take on dialects, as it might be handy instead of the first dev diary about language)

 

[Mef]

but by that logic why not just group all latin languages as latin.

Because the historical situation isn't the same across all the different languages?
I can't comment on French or Italian, if there's something wrong then that should be posted in the respective threads. All I'm saying is that it's perfectly fine for Low German and Dutch to be part of German.

 

[Pbhuh]

Because the historical situation isn't the same across all the different languages?
I can't comment on French or Italian, if there's something wrong then that should be posted in the respective threads. All I'm saying is that it's perfectly fine for Low German and Dutch to be part of German.

Historical situation is always difficult, just look at modern brazilian portuguese vs mainland portuguese or latin american spanish vs iberian spanish.
From what I personally have noticed and understand from others, mind you, this is merely my opinion, the distinction between most western romance language, (apart from french) is about as much as all west germanic varieties today. Make of that what you will, especially going back in time another 200-300 years it will be hard to say, but to me that says something about the degrees of seperation that should be in use.

Now there is another element of course which is political reality, Germany is united today, so German is unified as such, with the Dutch seperating off earlier and forming their own variety. Meanwhile the Romance world split up much earlier into distinct countries, with only some overlaps still existing (Catalan being grouped with Occitan and Galician with Portuguese)

All I want is consistancy and a clear demarkation of where the border is.

 

[Chieron]

All I want is consistancy and a clear demarkation of where the border is.

There is no such thing in linguistics, especially considering the long time period it is supposed to apply to.

Do also consider that split/no-split has some gameplay consequences which may or may not be desired in the system. If the hierarchical classification system produces better results with one setup in a region, then use that one, even if you decide the other way in another region.

 

[Lord_Telchar]

Historical situation is always difficult, just look at modern brazilian portuguese vs mainland portuguese or latin american spanish vs iberian spanish.
From what I personally have noticed and understand from others, mind you, this is merely my opinion, the distinction between most western romance language, (apart from french) is about as much as all west germanic varieties today. Make of that what you will, especially going back in time another 200-300 years it will be hard to say, but to me that says something about the degrees of seperation that should be in use.

Now there is another element of course which is political reality, Germany is united today, so German is unified as such, with the Dutch seperating off earlier and forming their own variety. Meanwhile the Romance world split up much earlier into distinct countries, with only some overlaps still existing (Catalan being grouped with Occitan and Galician with Portuguese)

All I want is consistancy and a clear demarkation of where the border is.

What matters most I think is the historical perception, and that is partly coloured by the political situation at the time - for example English back then (and in fact up until quite recently) was still part of the west-germanic dialect continuum, but was still perceived differently from "deutsch/dutch". There was a dialect continuum of the romance languages back then as well, but the Aragonese complained when at the court in Madrid only "Castilian" was spoken, they clearly thought of their language as not being the same. In contrast to that, the Hansa traders thought of their language as the same language the emperor in Vienna spoke, even though the geographic distance was much greater than between Zaragoca and Toledo.
German very easily could have developed into multiple modern languages like the Romance did, we could have Austrian, Swiss, Prussian and Dutch, but due to historical coincidences the people in Bern think of their language the same as the one in Berlin - well maybe except for the odd Chuchichästli

 

[Salix]

I commented on the last one and this one went besides me.

First of all the most important:

I didn't find videos, if changes were made.

Two comments were absolutely correct and will be reapeatd.

The province Heilighafen, should have polabian minority(It was the main settlement area after the wendish crusade)
And Heilighafen doesn't make sense. in 1350 there are 5 towns with Stadtrecht. Oldenburg in Holstein (Starigard), Neustadt in Holstein, Fehmarn, Lütjenburg and Heilighafen. The least important ones are Lütjenburg und Heilighafen.
In the middle ages Oldenburg in Holstein would be the most important one. Afterwards it would be Neustadt in Holstein.

Due to other reason, it would split this anyway. Like drawn. One part Oldenburg and one part Neustadt.

The next thing what did this region produce:

In the South Neustadt exported mostly salted Hering, like Lübeck. (Lübeck did raid it some times) It did though not produce salt in quantities, but has the oldest Fischerei Innung (Fishing Guild) in Germany. Also most other costal town were big in fishing. Most other things were agriculture, because this region is very Fertile!!!!

And later it made Danish Warships, a reason it was raided three time by the swedish.

A reason the region should be wooded.

Oldenburg and Fehmarn, also produced Fish and agriculture goods, but more important was wheat. As Lübeck even bought a lease for the Wheat from Fehmarn and was quite important in this regard. This region was also quite wooded and still is. (also make it wooded)

So Neustadt would be fish and OIdenburg would be wheat. (Though wooded might not be important, Grasland can be okay I don't know the cut off and features)

I took my time and read all comments. I also spent 3 hours researching, so my information is factual. One of them was a 1 hour video about medieval agriculture in that region...

I saw a claim in the comments, that utter bullshit. Schleswig-Holstein has low fertility. It's one of the most productice agricultural state in current Germany, but was also since the Stoneage well populated, though with massive regional difference.

Schleswig-Holstein has three(four if you divided the Geest) distinct soils/regions)
On the west coast, we have marshes. High fertility, labour intensive to make farmeable. Similar to the Netherlands. As not many people lived there, it took the HOI 4 time period and bunch of force labour to make it all farmable. So look at the Dutch and other North Sea German regions to how to handle it.

In the middle we have the Geest. That were there is not much fertile soil.

Then we have the east with a Jungmoränenlandschaft or also called östliche Hügelland (Eastern Hilllands) which is also fertile and where always the most population has and had been.

Dark Green Fertile(like Dutch) lighter browns not fertile regions. Dark brown very fertile regions.

Population wise it still recivied settlers in the East. It was less settled than West Germany, but more than most of former slavic regions.

 

[KingLouie]

I stumbled upon the map below of the Swiss Federal Statistical Office and thought it could be useful for adding some smaller bits of impassable terrain in the Pre-Alps. The map shows the population of each canton in 2000, but the white areas are more interesting: they show unproductive areas which, with exceptions like some Alpine passes, aren't suitable for passage either.

Source of the map:

Bevölkerungsdichte 2000 [Kantone]

Die Karten zeigen die Entwicklung der Bevölkerungsdichte, um einen analytischen Vergleich über einen langen historischen Zeitraum aus heutiger Sicht zu ermöglichen.Es ist zu beachten, dass sich innert dieses Zeitraums die zugrundeliegenden Methoden und Definitionen (Bevölkerungskonzepte) zum...

www.atlas.bfs.admin.ch

 

[Mef]

I saw a claim in the comments, that utter bullshit. Schleswig-Holstein has low fertility. It's one of the most productice agricultural state in current Germany, but was also since the Stoneage well populated, though with massive regional difference.

You can't use modern agricultural productivity, because agriculture has changed a lot. Schleswig-Holstein and Lower Saxony are two of the most agriculturally productive states today, but they have significant areas with Geest and not much soil that's naturally very productive (Lower Saxony does have the Börden in the South of course). Modern fertilizers and irrigation can help with making average soil very productive, but people in the time period didn't have access to that.

Schleswig-Holstein has three(four if you divided the Geest) distinct soils/regions)
On the west coast, we have marshes. High fertility, labour intensive to make farmeable. Similar to the Netherlands. As not many people lived there, it took the HOI 4 time period and bunch of force labour to make it all farmable. So look at the Dutch and other North Sea German regions to how to handle it.
In the middle we have the Geest. That were there is not much fertile soil.

Exactly, so both the western marshes and the Geest (around half to two thirds of the state) were not good farmland in this time period.

 

[Rudolf Nechvile II]

I hope that it's not too late for map feedback to still be taken into account, but I realised the location distribution in Upper Austria still bothers me, especially the placement of Linz in relation to Wels. Linz actually lies north of Steyr and east of Wels (not north-west). Also, considering that Sankt Georgen is also an extremely small location, I'd rather it be combined into what is currently the "Gmunden" location so that the rest of the space can be better redistributed. Thus I propose the following:

Key:
1. Linz
2. Wels
3. Gmunden
4. Vöcklabruck
5. Grieskirchen

My proposal would keep the number of locations the same, where St. Georgen is removed to create space for Grieskirchen, and Linz is placed more accurately in relation to Wels and Steyr. Even if you don't agree with redistributing and renaming the locations, I'd at the very least like to see Linz and Wels placed correctly. It wouldn't be ideal, but even a name swap would be better than the current setup...

I used the modern districts of Upper Austria as reference, but even so, the exact shape of the districts isn't as important, per se, as the placement of the locations in relation to one another:

 

[SzalonyNiemiec]

I don't know how I feel about "German" being one language at this point. Because even nowadays the various german dialects are truly distinct. It's not like the difference between British english and texas english and australian english. Not even like the difference between cockney and scottish english, which sound very differently from each other but for me as a non-native are still quite understandable. It's more like English and Scots and only marginally closer than standard german is to other germanic languages. I'm german and I grew up in western germany learning standard german in school, and at home. I can vaguely understand saxon or kölsch (cologne dialect) but öcher platt (aachen dialect), luxemburgish, dutch or the kind of bavarian a villager would speak are more or less indecipherable to me in spoken form (when it's written you can usually guess what it means). And I can only imagine these differences (especially the inner german ones) to be more striking a few hundred years ago, before the printing press and later political efforts led to a slow standardisation of german. Maybe at least make the dialects more granular, saxon being in the same dialect as kölsch, being in the same dialect as luxemburgisch is low key crazy...

 

[Chieron]

And I can only imagine these differences (especially the inner german ones) to be more striking a few hundred years ago, before the printing press and later political efforts led to a slow standardisation of german. Maybe at least make the dialects more granular, saxon being in the same dialect as kölsch, being in the same dialect as luxemburgisch is low key crazy...

Don't forget that the dialect level in EU5 seems to be used mostly for things like name localizations and naming lists. Adding additional dialects probably doesn't do much.
Also, the standardized language might've had less influence on the dialects than you expect, while time allowed dialects to diverge further (even though there is a common influencing factor in the standard language e.g. as a source for new words).

 

[Viva.St.Pauli]

I don't know how I feel about "German" being one language at this point. Because even nowadays the various german dialects are truly distinct. It's not like the difference between British english and texas english and australian english. Not even like the difference between cockney and scottish english, which sound very differently from each other but for me as a non-native are still quite understandable. It's more like English and Scots and only marginally closer than standard german is to other germanic languages. I'm german and I grew up in western germany learning standard german in school, and at home. I can vaguely understand saxon or kölsch (cologne dialect) but öcher platt (aachen dialect), luxemburgish, dutch or the kind of bavarian a villager would speak are more or less indecipherable to me in spoken form (when it's written you can usually guess what it means). And I can only imagine these differences (especially the inner german ones) to be more striking a few hundred years ago, before the printing press and later political efforts led to a slow standardisation of german. Maybe at least make the dialects more granular, saxon being in the same dialect as kölsch, being in the same dialect as luxemburgisch is low key crazy...

Technically we already have the dialect distinction in the game with the 3 groups (Low German, Middle German, High German), the question remains if the devs really want to truly seperate the 3 into distinct groups, and what to do with Frisian and Dutch.

 

[Inzano]

I stumbled upon the map below of the Swiss Federal Statistical Office and thought it could be useful for adding some smaller bits of impassable terrain in the Pre-Alps. The map shows the population of each canton in 2000, but the white areas are more interesting: they show unproductive areas which, with exceptions like some Alpine passes, aren't suitable for passage either.

View attachment 1299054

Source of the map:

Bevölkerungsdichte 2000 [Kantone]

Die Karten zeigen die Entwicklung der Bevölkerungsdichte, um einen analytischen Vergleich über einen langen historischen Zeitraum aus heutiger Sicht zu ermöglichen.Es ist zu beachten, dass sich innert dieses Zeitraums die zugrundeliegenden Methoden und Definitionen (Bevölkerungskonzepte) zum...

www.atlas.bfs.admin.ch

I don't agree with this, because if we look at the Gotthardpass example, Disentis (red) fought with Urseren and Uri (green) for this mountain pass. And this in 1331/1333, just before the starting date. So they were already in use or were becoming useful during the game.

Source:https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursern, https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthardpass