Talk:Aztlán

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Aztec, a WikiProject to improve coverage of Aztec-related topics. See also the parent WikiProject, WikiProject Mesoamerica. If you plan to work on this article for an extended period of time, please indicate what you are doing on the Project's talk page.
Some shared resources and guidelines for editing Mesoamerica-related articles: (click "show" to expand)
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritising and managing its workload.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the Project's importance scale.
Aztec- and Mesoamerica-related priority open tasks: (click "show" to expand)


Has anyone put forth the idea that the city beneath the Grand Canyon may have been Aztlan? Its prolly just a bunch of conspiracy theory-malarkey, but it's an interesting thought...check out the xternal link if you've never heard about it...Supposedly there was a big story in the phoenix gazette in 1909....

Grand Canyon Story

--Solacium Christiana 03:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Edit needed

I think this article needs some clean up. I won't put the tag on it, but maybe some of us could take a crack at it with a focus on grammar and spelling -- Joaquin Murietta 15:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aztec

The word Aztec, rarely used by the Mexica to describe themselves, derives from Aztecatl, meaning "from Aztlán."

I've read that the term Aztec was not rarely used, but never used, being a word made up well after the Spanish conquest. Can this be confirmed? --Bletch 23:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

See the article about aztecs. It´s a bit more complex. Aztec was used by those culture that claimed their ancestors came form Aztlan, like tepanecas, matlazintecas, xochimilcas, hexotzingas, tlatlelolcas, and of course, tenochcas or meshicas. Meshicas called themselves aztec the same way as an englishman or an american could call thenselve anglosaxons... because they may come from the same culture and speak the same language, but most of the time they would not use it. It was not unitl the XIX that Hudboldt suggest the name aztec to refer to the prehispanic "meshica or mexica" kingdom, to diferenciated them from modern mexicans. The name aztec was then used to refer to alos to those under the Meshica rule. Nanahuatzin 06:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
That makes sense. Thanks for the info. --Bletch 13:16, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Aztlán as Arctic

Brief note to the writers. It is generally accepted that the peoples of the Americas originally came from Asia over the Bering land bridge, and according to several models, either along the coast or through a ice-free zone down through what is now Canada.

If Aztlán has a connotation of whiteness, and it is mentioned as being in the far north, could this not have some weight: We came from the far north where it is white. The Arctic traverse.

I do not wish to disrespect the notion of Aztlán being in former Mexican territory, but it seems to me that the legend has a strong possibility of being connected with a very vivid memory of the experience of walking along glaciers, no?

Interesting thought. My major concern is that the crossing of the Bering Straight was at least 10,000 years earlier, an awfully long time to retain such an event. My 2¢, Madman 15:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


That would contradict the stories about the mexica (aztec) living there under the ruling of the Azteca Chicomostoca. Actaully most considered now just a mythical place, posible a reelaboration of the myth of Tamoanchan. Nanahuatzin 15:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aztlan

The article states that the term Aztlan was used by activists in the 60's to refer to the southwestern portion of the United States. This is an opinion. Aztlan as refered to in El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan - was written similar to a poetic verse. In fact the portions of El Plan mention that Aztlan is the people - the people are Aztlan. The idea of Aztlan as used by writers of El Plan were spiritual moreso than an actual reference. The search for Aztlan - was the search for the people - a search for identity in a world of confusion.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.192.48.79 (talk • contribs).

  • All the article says is "the name Aztlán was taken up by Chicano activists of the 1960s and 1970s to refer to the area of the Southwestern United States". Is this untrue?? Not in the least. It took me 5 minutes to find this, for example: THE ORIGINS AND HISTORY OF THE CHICANO MOVEMENT by Roberto Rodriguez. I have taken off the POV label and inserted the word "some" before "Chicano activists". Madman 04:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] American Patrol Promo: Aztlan

This link has a depiction of Aztlan in which it is taken out of the U.S., and THAT is what is ticking people off in the U.S. I'm in a extremely conservative area of the U.S. - Here, some preachers even consider Disney demonic, pro-liberal, because of "Environmentalist" movies such as Bambi and Finding Nemo, Political Correctness as Satanic, and purchasing lottery tickets as purchasing tickets for going to hell. One preacher I met considers BET and Disney AS Satanic and does not let his family see that filth, as he called it. Martial Law 07:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Your link is bad ML.--Rockero 18:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Go to www.americanpatrol.com and on the left side of each link Glenn posts is a little pix. Some depict a map of Aztlan, among other pixes, such as one depicting Prez. Bush AS Pinnocchio, the wooden boy with the nose that grows when he lies. Martial Law 20:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Some of the archived articles have the pix as well. Martial Law 20:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I have corrected the bad link. The 'correct link is Glenn Claims that Aztlan will be taken out of SW US. Martial Law 00:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC) In case this does'nt work, go to Glenn Spencer, then to External links. Martial Law 00:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Location of Aztlán

At the Aztec Exhibition at London's Royal Academy of Art, a couple of years ago, Aztlán was described as being 'an island to the east.'

[edit] Accent on Aztlan?

Surely it is pandering to imperialism to include the accent on Aztlan, which entirely reflects the pronunciation of the conquistadores?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.138.136.90 (talk • contribs) 24 October 2006.

We have had the discussion countless times with many words. The conclusion we normally reach is that unless the accented spelling is the most accepted English spelling the accent goes. (In my view however the spelling should reflect neither spanish nor english langauge but the nahuatl language and it should be written "aztlān")Maunus 21:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
You mean the Nahua wrote in Latin characters? User:Zoe|(talk) 21:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, and they still do.Maunus 21:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
And all this time I thought they used glyphs. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
There is a diffence between reflecting the pronunciation of a language and using the orthography/script of a language. The final a in aztlan is long in the nahuatl language, stress is on the first syllable. In the 16th century orthographies for nahuatl in latin characters were developed both by spanish missionaries and by n ativee nahuas who soon swapped their glyphic writing with roman characters. The only early orthography that distiguishes short and long vowels is that of Horacio Carochi and he used the macron (overlying bar) to show vowel length, and this is the reason that thee modern day latin script for nahuatl often shows vowel lentgh in this way. The reason spaniards write many nahuatl words it with an accent is that they don't have a distinction between long and short vowels and instead perceive the longer duration of the second syllable to be stress, which in spanish is marked by acute accent on the vowel. It seems that the policy on wikipedia is to not care about how words are actually pronounced in their original languages but that all languages should be written only with characters that exist in english, fair enough then we'll write it aztlan. I just personally think it's a bit lazy and disrespectful to the original languages, but consensus decides.Maunus 22:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Maunus, in principle I agree with you- where there exists a standardised orthography for some Mesoamerican indigenous language, and the term's currency in english prose is not otherwise very well established, then we should as far as possible observe the orthographic conventions of the original language (and not the conventions of the intermediary language, ie Spanish. Thus in the current scenario, the title would either be Aztlan or Aztlān, depending on whether or not this term is thought to be unambiguously well-enough established and recognised in english (and really, there'd only be a minority of Mesoamerican terms which are so widely-known and used in general english discourse to have taken on a standardised english spelling- I'm not sure aztlan is one of those). The current title (with accented vowel) reflects spanish orthography (ie neither english nor nahuatl), and so it would seem inconsistent to use it.--cjllw | TALK 01:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

  • So now that we've shared our points of view and conducted our original research, can anyone suggest the style guide or other best reference for preferring an Anglicized latinization to an Hispanicized one? Or better yet, a published discussion of various points of view if there are legitimately more than one? --Dystopos 03:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure where the original research (in the sense of some novel theory or claim introduced by a wikipedian) comes into it. Standard written english does not mark vowel length or stress with diacritics (other than poetically/archaically), standard spanish orthography does. "Aztlan" comes from Classical Nahuatl, not Spanish, and while I understand there's no universally-observed orthography for this, the one in which vowel length is indicated by a macron is a reasonably standard and widely-recognised one (see for eg SIL/Ethnologue on Nahuatl here. See also Nahuatl transcription and its attendant references.
Perhaps not quite the same thing, but a couple of guidelines from academic sources which explain general preferences for using Mayan orthographies in publications may be found in this note and this file (p.5 of the pdf doc). There are probably similar guideline statements for Nahuatl languages, perhaps Maunus is more familiar with these than I am.--cjllw | TALK 07:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Your reasoning makes perfect sense. I'm just trying to find a reference so that if the move is challenged we can point to something other than our own reasoning. The accented "Aztlán" appears (from my limited reading) to be the most common usage, so it is incumbent upon us to use a citation to claim that the common usage is not to be preferred. --Dystopos 15:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. In any case, I propose that this article be moved to Aztlan (w/out accent) for the moment, since the spanish orthography would seem to be unwarranted. I'll do so in the next few days if there are no further objections.--cjllw | TALK 05:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/z/t/Talk%7EAztl%C3%A1n_66a2.html"