Skip to main content

Test site

How mutually intelligible is the Spanish spoken in Spain with that spoken in Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Colombia, etc.?

Item

issuer

Quora

Language

English

Date Accepted

11/30/19

Title

How mutually intelligible is the Spanish spoken in Spain with that spoken in Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Colombia, etc.?

list of contributors

Sean Young

content

I. For educated Hispanics, written Spanish is very mutually comprehensible everywhere; the difficulties are minor and are more for spoken Spanish dialects and regional terminology. All educated Hispanics can “code switch” to speak a fairly neutral Spanish when they meet either in international organizations or when traveling. Imagine an Glaswegian Scot meeting a Jamaican; if both speak in local dialect, they would be fairly mutually unintelligible, but both can “code switch” to a standard English that they learn in school for writing and can understand since they have both watched general media productions using RP or Standard American.

All Hispanics who are educated use a standard Castilian written form of language, regulated by linguistic authorities, the most senior of which is the Real Academia Espanola (Royal Spanish Academy).

II. However, the everyday “street” dialects may not be understood fully by those who are not local. The versions of Castillan spoken in various countries and in various zones in any country are very variable, given that there are about 450 million Hispanics today, divided up into countries of comparable populations. There are 5 major “families” of Spanish dialects: Iberian, Meso-American/Mexican, Caribbean Basin, Andean and Plate Estuary.

Within each of those “families” are a variety of component dialects/accents. For example, in Spain


All the varieties of Castillan (Spanish of Castile/Leon) have:

a. regional vocabulary sets that often is at variance with standard Castillan, or, includes terms for things not found in Spain. Mexico has a lot of words for foodstuffs that are not readily available in Spain, and often has different designations for naming objects or animals. (e.g. búho Sp. vs tecolote Mx. for “owl”)

b. regional slang that is often influenced by local culture, indigenous or neighboring languages or history

c. (almost identical) regional grammar conventions. This isn’t very much variance between national linguistic standards for Castillan:

- One notable “outlier” is the Plate Estuarian used in Argentina (but maybe not in Uruguay - in the north estuary bank) which has a parallel 2nd person familiar singular of “tú”, the “vos”, and its accompanying verb conjugate form i.e. “tú” and “vos” can each have different associated verb forms depending upon tense.
- Spain also has an “outlier” in persistance of the 2nd person familiar plural, “vosotros” that is now extinct in Latin America, that has replaced it with the same form as the formal “Ustedes” + 3rd person plural verb conjugate

d. (easily understood) local pronunciation customs that vary. (In reality, there is identical vowel pronunciation and very few variant consonant pronunciation between versions of Castillan with the most variance observed with
Rioplatense (Plate Estuary in lowland Argentina and Uruguay) dialects
Coastal Caribbean street dialects (Cuba, PR, DR + Caribbean zones of Colombia, Venezuela & Panama).

e. local intonation and cadence. Iberian Castillan is spoken at a higher cadence than many Latin American variants, and in a tone of delivery that is relatively flat. Mexican Spanish is spoken more slowly and, often, in a “sing song” manner.

f. local non-verbal contextual meaning, perhaps accompanied by visual indicators or the surroundings. Sometimes, meaning is not conveyed by words’ content but by their delivery and non-verbal cues.