All languages spoken in Continental Europe (See link for better quality)

30 comments
  1. This is a map of dialects, but in many places people don’t actually speak their regional dialect. e.g. Plattdüütsch proficiency (even on a basic “Hello, my name is […]. Where is the library?”-level) is very rare nowadays.

  2. This map is a nice departure from the typical repertoire of language maps posted here.
    I’m impressed with the attention paid to the distribution of the Sami languages. There still seem to be some problems with the way certain areas are colored and labeled, however. I somewhat prefer the other map posted in your source, which is more generalized, but extends eastward to show more of European Russia, the Caucasus, etc.

  3. For Lithuania this map is wrong. Dzūkija (southern Lithuania) is Lithuanian speaking. The same goes with Kaunas area. Also, North-east Poland has a big Lithuanian diaspora. There is some considerable presence in modern Kaliningrad as well.

  4. Its some kind of twisted, bulshit map. Like, you want to tell me Kaunas is Slavic and South in Lithuania where my second home is – speaks slavic ? No, not really.

  5. This map makes it seem that people in Jämtland/Härjedalen (mid part of sweden) speaks a language more closer to Norwegian than Swedish. That is not the case at all. There are some regional dialects here though (Jamska) that very few people speak, and pretty much everyone that does also speak “normal” swedish.

  6. Gutnish should have it own Norse colour nuance, though. It diverged from other Norse dialects before West and East Norse dialects diverged (though the last 500 years it’s been heavily influenced by Danish and, mainly, Swedish). Elfdalian has a similar story of being an independent branch, but it has its own colour nuance in the map (though the area where it’s spoken is significantly bigger than shown, basically where it now says “dalmål”).

  7. Very good map because it precises : priority is given to dialects and indigenous minority languages.

    It explains why some posters think this map is inacurate – it probably is in many ways I am not a specialist – but it’s not because it doesn’t reflect present use.

    Exemple : there is probably more people who speaks arabic in Britany than there is who speaks breton.

    Indigenous ? Before mass migration after WW2 ? Before Balkan war ? Before rural migration of XIXth century ? Etc..

  8. Wow, i was just in Çanakkale a week ago and I was at the exact location on that map yet no one was speaking greek 🤔 Its almost like this map is complete bullshit and an extreme over exaggeration of spoken languages.

  9. If people could stop painting the entire southern seaboard of Finland as “Swedish speaking” That would be great, It’s like at most 10% of the population there. A noticeable minority, YES. But to paint it like that is misleading.

  10. The Swedish distributions and divisions make absolutely no sense. There is a point in the south of Sweden identified as Finish speaking which is actually a lake (Lake Mien a crater lake – cool in its own right). That just tells you how wrong this map is.

  11. People in this thread calling the map wrong forget that sometimes multiple languages are spoken in a single location. Minority languages are shown disproportionately for the sake of interest. Yes we know that everyone speaks the offical majority language in your home country/region, but plotting that alone would make the map boring.

    Also the borders between languages/dialects are inaccurate, because of course no such clear divisions exist in the real world. This map is illustrative not definitive.

Leave a Reply