Talk:Brazilian Portuguese

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brazilian Portuguese article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 6 months

Brazil Top‑importance

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Languages

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Section sizes

More information Section name, Byte count ...

Section size for Brazilian Portuguese (57 sections)
Section name	Byte count		Prose size (words)
Section name	Header	Total	Header	Total
(Top)	7,217	7,217	360	360
History	1,023	23,973	67	2,051
Portuguese language in Brazil	3,309	3,309	421	421
Loanwords	17,721	17,721	1,366	1,366
Other influences	1,920	1,920	197	197
Written and spoken languages	2,272	2,272	316	316
Orthography	1,214	4,087	154	578
Spelling differences	2,873	2,873	424	424
Language register – formal vs. informal	962	6,894	141	242
Characteristics of informal Brazilian Portuguese	5,932	5,932	101	101
Grammar	850	9,771	90	1,312
Syntactic and morphological features	44	7,833	0	1,131
Topic-prominent language	2,935	2,935	395	395
Progressive	1,108	1,108	167	167
Personal pronouns	66	3,746	0	569
Syntax	2,571	2,571	403	403
Contracted forms	454	454	67	67
Mesoclisis	655	655	99	99
Preferences	224	1,088	31	91
Simple versus compound tenses	864	864	60	60
Phonology and differences in formal spoken language	2,174	26,746	140	1,713
Vowels	8,183	8,183	520	520
Consonants	4,378	16,389	0	1,053
Palatalization of /di/ and /ti/	1,303	1,303	152	152
Palatalization of /li/ and /ni/	1,294	1,294	36	36
Epenthetic glide before final /s/	801	801	111	111
Epenthesis in consonant clusters	1,234	1,234	143	143
L-vocalization and suppression of final r	1,619	1,619	175	175
Nasalization	1,451	1,451	129	129
Palatalization of the syllable-final sibilants	964	964	126	126
Brazilian rhotics	2,689	2,689	100	100
Other phonetic changes	656	656	81	81
Differences in the informal spoken language	1,368	17,788	179	1,969
Grammar	308	16,420	41	1,790
Affirmation and negation	1,841	1,841	207	207
Imperative	2,010	2,010	243	243
Deictics	906	906	121	121
Personal pronouns and possessives	86	10,481	0	1,083
Tu and você	4,013	4,013	599	599
2nd person singular conjugation in Brazilian Portuguese	2,703	2,703	13	13
Third-person direct object pronouns	382	382	55	55
Seu and dele	720	720	103	103
Definite article before possessive	1,261	1,261	194	194
Syntax	1,316	1,316	119	119
Use of prepositions	302	874	43	95
Chamar de	204	204	19	19
Em with verbs of movement	368	368	33	33
Dialects	21,008	21,008	66	66
Diglossia	1,820	10,492	194	989
Usage	1,889	1,889	269	269
Prestige	6,783	6,783	526	526
Impact	1,028	1,028	119	119
Language codes	601	601	63	63
See also	515	515	0	0
Notes	24	24	0	0
References	28	28	0	0
Bibliography	8,955	8,955	18	18
Total	141,399	141,399	9,796	9,796

Infobox

I took out the language infobox from the article because i thought i was only for languages, but i read the documentation of that template, and i saw it is for dialects also. My action was reC)

Duplication in the lead

There is gross duplication of information in the lead between paragraphs two and three. With all the edits and reverts over the last couple of months, I am not going to try and disentangle this. (I would probably just revert the lead back to May 27, if nobody fixes this.)

More information Comparison of the rendered text of two lead paragraphs, paragraph two ...

Comparison of the rendered text of two lead paragraphs

Duplication in the lead: comparison of two rendered paragraphs (sans refs) from rev. 1300051823 of 01:28, 12 July 2025
paragraph two	paragraph three
Brazilian Portuguese differs from European Portuguese and varieties spoken in Portuguese-speaking African countries in phonology, vocabulary, and grammar, influenced by the integration of indigenous and African languages following the end of Portuguese colonial rule in 1822. This variation between formal written and informal spoken forms was shaped by historical policies, including the Marquis of Pombal's 1757 decree, which suppressed indigenous languages while mandating Portuguese in official contexts, and Getúlio Vargas's Estado Novo (1937–1945), which imposed Portuguese as the sole national language through repressive measures like imprisonment, banning foreign, indigenous, and immigrant languages. Sociolinguistic studies indicate that these varieties exhibit complex variations influenced by regional and social factors, aligning with patterns seen in other pluricentric languages such as English or Spanish. Some scholars, including Mario A. Perini, have proposed that these differences might suggest characteristics of diglossia, though this view remains debated among linguists. Despite these variations, Brazilian and European Portuguese remain mutually intelligible in formal contexts.	Brazilian Portuguese differs, particularly in phonology and prosody, from varieties spoken in Portugal and Portuguese-speaking African countries. In these latter countries, the language tends to have a closer connection to contemporary European Portuguese, influenced by the more recent end of Portuguese colonial rule and a relatively lower impact of indigenous languages compared to Brazil, where significant indigenous and African influences have shaped its development following the end of colonial rule in 1822. This has contributed to a notable difference in the relationship between written, formal language and spoken forms in Brazilian Portuguese. The differences between formal written Portuguese and informal spoken varieties in Brazilian Portuguese have been documented in sociolinguistic studies. Some scholars, including Mario A. Perini, have suggested that these differences might exhibit characteristics of diglossia, though this interpretation remains a subject of debate among linguists. Other researchers argue that such variation aligns with patterns observed in other pluricentric languages and is best understood in the context of Brazil’s educational, political, and linguistic history, including post-independence standardization efforts. Despite this pronounced difference between the spoken varieties, Brazilian and European Portuguese barely differ in formal writing and remain mutually intelligible.

There are plenty of other problems to deal with in the article, but at least this should be able to be handled without too much strife (I hope). Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:51, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

I am open to other alternatives, but if there is no resolution or substantive discussion to the contrary within a week or so, I will keep paragraph two because it is shorter and drop paragraph three which says approximately the same thing. Mathglot (talk) 19:10, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

I would suggest cutting one of those two as well, but paragraph 4 also contains parts described in paragraph 2 as well. Returning to May 27 doesn't sound like a bad idea to me. Likebr 20 (talk) 21:39, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Use of the term 'vandalism'

@Likebr 20 and Like56d:, together, the two of you are responsible for a couple dozen claims of WP:VANDALISM against the other in edit summaries at the article. The term vandalism has a very specific meaning at Wikipedia (follow the link), and afaict, *none* of the edits here were vandalism, regardless of how good or bad or inaccurate or dead wrong they might have been. Please stop using that word in edit summaries simply to indicate your disagreement with someone else's edit.

Continued inappropriate use of the term will result in warnings on your Talk pages, so both of you just knock it off. Same goes for here on the Talk page; find another way to neutrally and constructively describe your disagreement with content or with someone else's opinion, or face possible sanctions for WP:INCIVILITY or worse. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 02:07, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Consolidating duplicate refs

I have consolidated various duplicate references using WP:NAMEDREFS, including Perini (2004), and Schneider (2010). There are various other duplicates that need consolidation, including:

Azevedo (2005) (3 occurrences)
Bagno (1999) (2)
Crystal (2003) (3)
Ferreira (2015) (2)
Maia (2012) (2)
Salomão (2018) (2)
Schwartz (1994) (2)

Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 02:18, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Incorrect unsourced information being corrected and sourced

@BufaBt, if you disagree with the content in the article, just change it with WP:RS then, instead of just forgetting WP:BOLD exists! ~2026-16955-5 (talk) 05:07, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I made a recent sourced edit regarding the situation of the /ɐ/ vowel. If there's any problem or if you find any information unaccurate, we can continue talking to reach a consensus.BufaBt (talk) 07:17, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles