This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pennsylvania Dutch article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Pennsylvania Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Ethnic groups Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{ Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks. Christianity: Baptist Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Baptist work group. United States History Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of the United States 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.United States HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject United States HistoryTemplate:WikiProject United States HistoryUnited States History articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject United States History To-do: history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : United States History articles needing attention Infobox : United States History articles needing infoboxes Stubs : Stub-Class United States History articles, Category:United States history stubs Other : Place either of the following WikiProject banners on United States History-related articles and assess: {{ WikiProject United States History|class=|importance=}} {{ WikiProject United States|class=|importance=|UShistory=Yes|UShistory-importance=}} United States: West Virginia Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject West Virginia (assessed as Low-importance). Germany Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Switzerland Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Switzerland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Switzerland 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.SwitzerlandWikipedia:WikiProject SwitzerlandTemplate:WikiProject SwitzerlandSwitzerland articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

/Archive 1

this page was to long so it has been archived -- gdaly7 ( talk) 13:30, 17 November 2008 (UTC) reply

While I am certainly in camp with the other religions mentions as being Pennsylvania Dutch I am not so certain "Roman Catholic" would fit the bill for the mainstream Anabaptists which are the predominant group associated with the culture. The Pennsylvania Dutch fled from the church as a matter of religious persecution, even from some more mainstream protestant denominations from europe into Quaker Pennsylvania, I suggest you begin by reading the Martyrs Mirror.

Surprise! I am of Pa Dutch ancestry and a Roman Catholic-not alone, I have quite a number of kinfolk that claim Pa Dutch ancestry-being German-and Roman Catholic.This includes Dormers and Kappens and Fryes. This is not a small number of people to be ignored and omitted from the article. When I have an exact number and cite, it will be added to the article. --Brattysoul — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.158.50 ( talk) 02:45, 9 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Maybe you guys could work together with the people of the "Pennsylvania German language"-page ? 81.207.97.6 ( talk) 11:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC) reply

I agree. As a Pennsylvania (German) Dutch, Roman Catholic individual, I have been offended by much of what's been written in the article and reviewed in the 'talk' section. There is a lively verbal history that has been handed down in my own family of those of German descent, and up to the 1960s, only married other Pa (German) Dutch folk. This being the case, I can say that what I have read here shows most 'educated' people forget that there is much, much more going on than what they have been taught in a classroom, or what some arrogant 'scholar' believes or claims about any ethnic group. It's sad how little is understood about any verbal history.

I know that many Pa. Dutch from the Second World War Era, and their children,(born prior to 1950) who claim Pa Dutch heritage, and are actually of German descent, are VEHEMENT in their denials of being German, that they are in fact, Pennsylvania Dutch, and they will tell you so, in no uncertain terms. It's about being ashamed of their heritage. However, that has changed since the 90s, with the inception of all ancestry in this country becoming "Insert Ancestry Here-American", for instance German-American Day celebrated on Oct 6th, in of all places, the Germantown Section of Philadelphia.

As to the entire etymology of the title "Pennsylvania Dutch", that also has a verbal history, and what has been taught in many elementary schools here, relates to how the immigrants spoke in their language--"sprechen Deutsch" for the German peoples and "sprechen niederländisch" for the Dutch peoples. Asking if anyone spoke the German language, not Dutch; though we see many similarities in words, they are not the same when related to their own languages: One being German and the other Dutch-from the Netherlands.

Then there is the individual who cited Quakers and Mennonites that founded Germantown in Philadelphia, while partly true, he/she did not include the ancestry. Yes they were of those Religions, but they were of German descent!! Hence the namesake of that town; Germantown! Anyone can reference the Wiki page and review it their self.

As soon as I have the time, I will collect all references that back up all that I have written here, and the changes shall be made in relation to how some things have come about and have been related throughout our own families for many generations. 76.124.158.50 ( talk) 03:34, 9 February 2014 (UTC) BrattySoul reply

The populations figures must be a massive undercount. It lists 200,000 as the largest figure, when the population figures for the Amish and the Pennsylvania German speakers both surpass that number. This number not only does not take into account the "Fancy Dutch" who assimilated and stopped speaking the language, the population of which was always larger than the "Plain People", it also appears to miss a large portion of the Plain Dutch as well.

In addition, over a quarter of the populations of Pennsylvania and Ohio and nearly a quarter of the population of Indiana claim German heritage as well. That's in addition to the many other people in other parts of the US and Canada who have Pennsylvania Dutch roots (Dwight Eisenhower is one of the most famous, and I have a friend in Kansas who does as well). I think it is likely the same case as the Americans of British Isles ancestry... People don't consider themselves part of it because they aren't aware or because they've abandoned the identity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.148.217 ( talk) 03:42, 4 September 2009 (UTC) reply

As the entry of "Massive Undercount" points out this article seems to make the classic mistake in positing that only the "quaint folk" such as the Amish and Mennonites are the PA Dutch which is not the case at all. My own family line is one of the families that immigrated to the Tulpehocken Valley in PA from New York in 1723 being my 6th. great-grandfather, Johan Nicholas Schäfer with his family consisting of his wife, Maria Suder and their five sons. Johan Nicholas is believed to have immigrated with two of his brothers and genealogists estimate that this family alone has over one million descendants in the US today. 70.20.121.68 ( talk) 23:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Mike Shafer reply

The Pennsylvania German movement is not to be confused with the Anabaptist movement during the 1600s to 1700s. The Pennsylvania German movement was a result of Napolean Bonaparte liberating d'Alcase and the French area of Switzerland from the late 1790s to 1815. It was enough that Napolean accomplished his conquests, but then a phenomenon in 1815 occurred called the "Year without a Summer" in Europe where the summer temperature never exceeded 50 degrees affecting crop production. As a result of this many Europeans in d'Alcase left for America. The Pennsylvania German movement essentially occurred between 1800-1820 and was comprised of three people groups: Germans, French and Jews, many of them entering through Philadelphia. These were the Pennsylvania Germans.

This comment appeared at the end of the page, but should be elsewhere. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 12:55, 24 March 2010 (UTC) reply

right now the article says "Germanic peoples who emigrated to the U.S. (primarily to Pennsylvania), from Germany, Switzerland and The Low Countries prior to 1800" Germany did not exist as a country in 1800, so shouldn't the article say where they actually came from? also "The Low Countries" is a completely ridiculous term to use. 96.224.36.234 ( talk) 21:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC) reply

The "Pennsylvania Dutch" are fundamentalist Mennonites from Switzerland. There are virtually NO Amish or Mennonites from what is now Germany. People like to make things up and find explanations where there are none, so every article I've ever read talks about the Pennsylvania Dutch having "German" roots. Keep in mind that German-speaking Mennonite people generally refer to themselves as "Deutsch," which is an ethno-liguistic group to them, not a "nationality" in the modern nation-state sense. Most of this article is speculation and other nonsense, and the entire article should be deleted in favor of a "stub." 97.125.42.15 ( talk) 16:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC) reply

they do include the Mennonites -- but most were Lutherans, as typified bhy Frederick Muhlenberg. See A. G. Roeber, Palatines, Liberty, and Property: German Lutherans in Colonial British America (1998) . Rjensen ( talk) 01:54, 7 September 2011 (UTC) reply

The Pennsylvania Dutch consist almost entirely of people who emigrated from the German Palatinate, along with some Hessian soldiers who spoke an almost identical dialect. Only a small minority of them were Anabaptists (such as Mennonites and Amish) and even those tended to have migrated from Switzerland to the Palatinate and then on to Pennsylvania. To say that the Pennsylvania Dutch were not German is just not accurate; they were almost all German and even the ones who were from Switzerland or Alsace would have spoken a Germanic language and considered themselves German. (Remember that Germany was in those days an assortment of principalities and such and therefore being German described one's ethnicity and not one's nationality. At the time, they would have had no way of knowing whose homeland would eventually be incorporated into present-day Germany and whose would not so they would not have drawn a distinction between Germans and German-speaking Swiss or Austrians or German speaking Alsatians from what is now a part of France.) Dave ( djkernen)| Talk to me| Please help! 18:51, 24 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Since the Holy Roman Empire (yeah I know neither holy nor roman nor an empire) renamed it self in the early 1500 into Holy Roman Emprie of the German Nation - one might argue that there was a Germany as some kind of a country 78.42.252.102 ( talk) 20:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC) reply

I am descended from Northern Indiana Pennsylvania Dutch. My family history indicates that while a large chunk of us came from Switzerland, there were also significant numbers from Alsace-Lorraine in what is now France. Dyscard ( talk) 17:27, 20 September 2016 (UTC) reply

I'm skeptical. I know this is the most common explanation, but.... Basically, in the USA, during the period that the people we're talking about "took root" as immigrants, "Dutch" was -- correct me if I'm wrong -- a common term for anyone haling from the various parts of Europe that would later become the Germany, the Netherlands, and probably a couple of other modern-day nation-states. I don't have any cites handy (consarnit), but I'm certain I've read, multiple times, that "Dutch" was a generic term, applied to any German-speaker, residingin the United States (or the Colonies, before the Revolution), circa...the late 18th century to German unification. I know there are countless sources claiming that "Pennsylvania Dutch" came about because "people heard 'Deutsch', and said, 'Oh, Dutch!'"...but presuming that my conjecture (that "Dutch" was, you know, per above, common), I don't think there's any reason to resort to a the "mishearing Deutsch" thing. The "group mishears another group, and it becomes the term" thing is extremely common in folk etymology (I can list a bunch of examples -- "kangaroo" means "I don't know", for one), and this also makes me skeptical. Anyone got any concrete evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Occlusian ( talk • contribs) 09:13, 9 June 2011 (UTC) reply

It seems somewhat naive to try to compare the modern English word Dutch (not used in Dutch) with the modern German word "deutsch". Historically, Dutch might have been used in the English language for all Germans, and it would be a very strange coincident that it is almost identical to the word Germans use for themselves, deutsch, especially as the German standard language and spelling was finally fixed in its current form in 1902. The country Germany was not formed before 1871 and it was clearly at the time not seen as unification of all but only of some German states. Now almost extinct northern German dialects are essentially the same than Dutch, so that it would seem strange that the people living in the Netherlands (=low lands; the low lands of what?) would have not considered themselves deutsch 300 years ago. I do not know how 'deutsch' was spelled and pronounced 300 years ago in various parts of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, of which the current territory of the Netherlands were clearly part, but an pretty sure it was not uniformly the current modern pronunciation and spelling. If the Dutch nowadays do not identify as being German is that more a result of the recent Nazi history of the country of Germany and is not indicative that they would not have considered themselves "deutsch" 300 years ago. I, consequently, must assume that the coining of the term German and the restriction of the term Dutch to the Netherlands is a recent development in the English language, likely not older than the creation of the Second Reich in 1871. ( Wbuchmaier ( talk) 22:33, 3 November 2011 (UTC)) reply

You can assume but you would be wrong. Or you could quickly read History of the Netherlands. Rmhermen ( talk) 19:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Actually the history of the Netherlands won't help with the etymology of the English word Dutch but you are right, it was used to refer to any Germanic person south of Scandinavia and gradually narrowed its meaning to just Netherlanders. But your timing is off because the meaning narrowed beginning in the 17th century. However the process was gradual and there are a number of place names in the USA that use the word "Dutch" in the Germanic sense. (It's likely that the meaning changed first in England but took longer to change in the USA.)

Dave ( djkernen)| Talk to me| Please help! 19:15, 24 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Wbuchmaier "the low lands of what?" - the "low lands" refers to the fact that much of Holland (the country where people are known as Dutch) is at or below sea level, with much of the land below sea level having been reclaimed from the sea by the use of dikes. You might be familiar with the popular story about the Dutch boy who plugged a hole in a dike with his finger, thereby saving Holland from being flooded. There is also an old saying that "God created the world, except for Holland" because so much of the country was in fact reclaimed from the sea using dikes. Finally, another name for Holland is "The Netherlands" ("Niederland" in German), "nether" coming from the same root as the word beneath, i.e. beneath sea level. Technically speaking not all of Holland is actually "The Netherlands" (or is it the other way around? I don't remember) but in popular usage, they are one and the same. Andrew S. ( talk) 02:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Yeah, this needs to be rectified. At the time the Pennsylvania Dutch arrived in America, the terms "German" and "High Dutch" were still interchangeable among English speakers. "Low Dutch" is what we now know as "Dutch", while "High Dutch" became known as German as those two languages drifted apart. In Benjamin Franklin's Pennsylvania Gazette, there are frequent mentions of "High Dutch" and "Low Dutch", though by the mid-1700s, "German" had supplanted the term "High Dutch" as the norm. There are many, many sources from the 1600s and 1700s that back this up, as well as more recent scholarship confirming this. Right now in this wiki article, all but one of the cited sources asserting that "Dutch" is a corruption of "Deutsch" are written in 2004 or later, and they all make the assertion without offering any evidence in their texts that it's true. The one earlier source cited is the 1872 book Pennsylvania Dutch: A Dialect of South German with an Infusion of English by Samuel Stehman Haldeman, which doesn't really go into any detail on the etymology. It asserts on page 4 of that book that Pennsylvania Dutch is "so called because Germans call themselves Deutsch" but that assertion is footnoted with the explanation: "The mistake has arisen from the popular confusion between the terms Dutch and German, which are synonymous with many. In Albany (New York) they speak of the Double Dutch Church, which seems to have been formed by the fusion of a German Reformed with a Dutch Reformed congregation." When I have time, I will try to update this section of this article with more authoritative sources on the matter, unless someone beats me to it. Mayor of awesometown ( talk) 18:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Menno Simons was born in what today is the Netherlands. Repkow ( talk) 20:16, 7 December 2018 (UTC) reply

I would like to place an "Etymology" heading above the second paragraph, thus moving it out of the lede and making it the first section after the lede. I would also like to then expand the lede to make it a summary of the article rather then a section on etymology. Is anyone against this? Dave ( djkernen)| Talk to me| Please help! 23:58, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply

yes: very good idea. Rjensen ( talk) 04:13, 20 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Okay, I made an initial pass at it. I am not entirely happy with the result but since I still prefer it to the old abbreviated lede I have moved it onto the live page. Please feel free to contribute to improving this section! Dave ( djkernen)| Talk to me| Please help! 20:22, 21 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Some of those who originally founded/settled Germantown were indeed largely of Dutch ancestry. Dutch authorities persecuted Mennonites in the 17th century, burning several at the stake in Amsterdam. Many Dutch Mennonites escaped Holland and traveled via Dollendorf to the area around Kriegsheim in the Palatinate,arriving there in the mid 17th century. John Ames, a Quaker missionary visited Kriegheim and converted several of the Dutch Mennonite families to Quakers. William Penn himself visited these Quakers in the late 1670's according to entries in his journal. The government already levied a special tax on Mennonites and Quakers because they were not of the "official" state religion. It also levied a tax on the people to pay the expenses of a war with Turkey. Many Mennonites and most Quakers refused to pay the tax or to serve their turn as a town guard. As a result, the local magistrate (Hochmal Schmal)was forced to begin taking property for past due taxes. The Dutch Quaker families became very unpopular with the locals and requested permission to leave for America. These families were Umstatt, Hendricks, Schumacher, Kolb and others. Two of Gerhart Hendrick's grandsons served as early Mayor's of Philadelphia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.238.249.239 ( talk) 19:34, 7 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Recently there has been a bit of an edit war over the 2nd paragraph of the Etymology section. After reverting the edits several times I've finally given in and decided to try to work with the changes. My main objections to the changes so far have been a) the original version represented the "mispronunciation of Dietsch" theory as the only viable theory even though the cited source lists five possible reasons why this groups uses "Dutch" as their English-language endonym (although many now do use "German" or "Pennsylvania Dutch" or "Pennsylvania German"). Also, the wording claimed that the name Dutch was onomatopoeic, which is clearly not the case and appears to represent a misunderstanding of the word onomatopoeic. Finally, the new wording claims that Pennsylvania German bears only a superficial resemblance to Dutch, which is nonsense because the language is a dialect of German and German and Dutch have a deep and fundamental relationship that renders the two languages very very similar (as are by extension their respective dialects and offshoot languages).

However, do we even need that 2nd paragraph at all? It seems to contradict the first to some extent and doesn't flow well from the 1st paragraph at all. Also, the etymology of the English word "Dutch" demonstrates a far more compelling explanation for the current label of the Pennsylvania Dutch people (who BTW still prefer to be called Dutch even though they are totally aware of their relationship to German and have historically used Standard German and not Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands in their church services).

Thanks for your input, Dusty| 💬| You can help! 16:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply

I remember in college US history class the assertion that many of those from the Palatinate were encouraged to come because of their metal-working skills. The article at present mentions only their excellent farming skills. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.150.151 ( talk) 03:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC) reply

I recall learning this also-from the building of the Bryn Athyn Cathedral-many of the various artesians,from several European countries, including many Germans-remained in this country-- Brattysoul — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.158.50 ( talk) 02:40, 9 February 2014 (UTC) reply

More and more photos, maps and other images have been added to this article over the last several months and years, giving it an increasingly cluttered look that makes it difficult to read and comprehend, particularly for people with visual impairments. At least several of these image additions appear to violate Wikipedia's Manual of Style/Accessibility standards which urge editors to "Avoid placing images on the left hand side as a consistent left hand margin makes reading easier" and "Avoid sandwiching text between two images or, unless absolutely necessary, using fixed image sizes." At this point, several images need to be removed in order to bring the article back into compliance with the MOS and make it more accessible for Wikipedia users with visual impairments. 47thPennVols ( talk) 04:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC) reply

In a recent reverted edit, 47thPennVols claimed that the word "Dutchman" is considered a slur by the modern Pennsylvania Dutch community. Is there any citation that Pennsylvania Dutch consider Dutchman to be a slur? Aearthrise ( talk) 17:02, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

From Dictionary.com: "USAGE NOTE FOR DUTCHMAN: As used to refer to a German, the term Dutchman was originally standard English. But around the time of World War I, it became a slang term of contempt for the enemy. Its use nowadays is still sometimes perceived as insulting." From the Dictionary of South African English: "slang. A derogatory and offensive name for an Afrikaner, used of both men and women." - 47thPennVols ( talk) 17:48, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I don't believe that Dictionary.com is referring to the Pennsylvania Dutch community, rather to the Germans from Germany and other German lands. Here are recent and historic quotes using the term "Pennsylvania Dutchman":

The Duke of Sunderland, on taking leave, remarked that now, having seen a real Pennsylvania-Dutchman, he was anxious to see a live New England Yankee, so he might make a comparison, intimating, however, that the Dutchman had probably outdone the Yankee. ^[1]

The Pennsylvania Dutchman and wherein he has excelled... If ever Pennsylvania shall receive due credit for her unequalled influence and achievement, it will be when her writers and talkers- historical, literary, and political- shall cease their efforts to belittle that accomplishment in which they think they and theirs have had no part... their antecedents may also disclose a nearer relation to events of importance in her history, due to the Pennsylvania Dutchman, than they at present recognize. ^[2]

"We, the Pennsylvania Dutch, were taught for generations to despise and disrespect our traditional culture. The task that we of The Pennsylvania Dutchman have set ourselves is to teach NOT hate, NOT disrespect, but UNDERSTANDING, APPRECIATION, and, most important of all, a LOVE FOR OUR HERITAGE." ^[3]

...Among them were the members of the Dutch Club. Formed in 1995, the club's purpose is to enjoy the speaking of Pennsylvania Dutch. The club meets every Tuesday to view Musser's "Pennsylvania Dutchman" and talk Dutch to each other. ^[4]

The Groundhog has become the principal symbol of the Pennsylvania Dutchman. The only competitor of the Groundhog may be the bearded Amishman, who has become a national figure growing out of Pennsylvania-centered twentieth-century tourism. ^[5]

Looking at literature published recently and historically, I can only conclude that the Pennsylvania Dutch community still embraces "Dutchman" with respect. Aearthrise ( talk) 18:38, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• I'm curious. What is your interest in Pennsylvania Dutch History? I ask because you seem to have an intense interest in Pennsylvania Dutch history, which is not something that has attracted a lot of interest over the years. (I was born, raised and educated in Pennsylvania and am descended from a long line of Pennsylvania Germans, but I see that you reside in New Orleans and that you're a French Louisianian and professional translator. So, Pennsylvania Dutch history seems like an unusual area of research interest for someone with your level of Latin translation experience.) - 47thPennVols ( talk) 22:40, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

My grandfather was Dutch, and unfortunately he passed away during the pandemic. I do miss speaking Dutch with him, and I wish I spent more time with him. Developing this article helps me connect with my German heritage. Aearthrise ( talk) 03:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• I'm so sorry to hear about your grandfather's passing. I just lost my sister in April. She and I shared a love of American and World History and had an epic adventure across Louisiana a number of years ago that her children still talk about. (She lived in Lake Charles with her family for roughly twenty-five years.) I think it's great that you're trying to learn more about Pennsylvania Dutch history. I would say, though, that I remain concerned about the use of the term "Dutchman" so frequently throughout the main Wikipedia article about Pennsylvania Dutch culture. Quite honestly, the term "Dutchman" was considered an offensive term and not one of respect by many people I knew growing up in Pennsylvania (family, friends, German-language teachers, colleagues) because of its history of derogatory use against Pennsylvania Germans during and after World War I and World War II. (My Dad was a World War II veteran who spoke often to my sisters and I about the discrimination he and his siblings and cousins faced as Pennsylvania Germans during both wars; one of his cousins was a World War I vet who spent the remainder of his life suffering from the effects of having been gassed in battle. My sisters and I knew him as "Uncle Pat." The anti-German/anti-Pennsylvania Dutch hatred and discrimination that they and many others experienced during and after those wars was so painful that they were very outspoken about not wanting to be referred to as Dutchmen under any circumstance. And this remains the case for many people today who define themselves as Pennsylvania German or Pennsylvania Dutch.) So, I'm wondering if there might be a better way to reduce the use of the term in the article since it will be viewed by some readers as hurtful? (And I honestly don't think you're intending to be hurtful.) Kind Regards. - 47thPennVols ( talk) 06:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  What is your citation that "Pennsylvania Dutchman" is a derogatory term for the PA Dutch people? Aearthrise ( talk) 06:17, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• There are several, but again, per my earlier post: From Dictionary.com: "USAGE NOTE FOR DUTCHMAN: As used to refer to a German, the term Dutchman was originally standard English. But around the time of World War I, it became a slang term of contempt for the enemy. Its use nowadays is still sometimes perceived as insulting." - 47thPennVols ( talk) 08:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  If "there are several" citations that the PA Dutch regard "Dutchman" as a derogatory term, then post them. Your Dictionary.com does not prove what you're claiming. Indeed, evidence shows the opposite, that the PA Dutch community embraces the term Dutchman. Aearthrise ( talk) 14:21, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• Also, I'm not sure if you're aware of this or not, but Stackpole Books has been the subject of discussion over the years on various wikiproject threads ( example here) with a number of longtime editors coming to the conclusion that Stackpole books should generally not be used as Sources/References because so many of the company's authors fall under the heading of "self-published" (and are therefore considered as potentially "unreliable sources" by Wikipedia standards). - 47thPennVols ( talk) 08:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  What does that have to do with your claim that PA Dutch community considers "Dutchman" to be derogatory? I added 5 citations where PA Dutch use the term Dutchman, but you still have not added a single citation beyond your own words and a Dictionary.com entry; these are inadequate to prove what your claiming. Aearthrise ( talk) 14:27, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• It shows that at least one of your five listed sources may be unreliable. - 47thPennVols ( talk) 18:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  You have claimed without a single source that Dutchman is a slur in the Pennsylvania Dutch community. I provided 5 different sources where Pennsylvania Dutch use Dutchman, not at all considering it a slur.

  So far, your only words towards Dutchman being a slur for the Pennsylvania Dutch community are anecdotal, i.e. original research. Do you have any citation to back up your claim? Aearthrise ( talk) 13:09, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• I've looked more closely at the sources you've been citing, and, quite frankly, I wish I had done so sooner. Of the five sources you have cited in your posts above (and upon which you've apparently based a great deal of the major changes you've made to this article), two may be unreliable and two appear to be irrelevant to our discussion. (Per my earlier post, Stackpole Books has been considered by a number of longtime Wikipedia editors of multiple wikiprojects to be potentially unreliable for several years because of its history of producing self-published books. Masthof books, which also has a history of producing self-published works, may also have similar reliability concerns.) Two of the other sources you've cited (Croll and Pennypacker), which have the most likely notability because they were published by major universities (the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Michigan), were actually published BEFORE World War I and World War II (meaning that they were published before the timeframe during which many members of the Pennsylvania German and Pennsylvania Dutch communities experienced hate and discrimination at home and abroad due to their German heritage, as I had previously mentioned to you). So, they would not be useful in supporting the theory you stated above, "I can only conclude that the Pennsylvania Dutch community still embraces "Dutchman" with respect." - 47thPennVols ( talk) 15:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  You are continually waffling and nitpicking, but you have not yet provided ONE source for your claim. I've alreadt provided 5 sources both historic and recent that demonstrate the usage of Dutchman in regards to the Pennsylvania Dutch community.

  If you're incapable of producing a source for your claim, then admit it, and we can wrap up this discussion. Aearthrise ( talk) 15:27, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

*EDIT CONFLICT (I was in the process of submitting this addendum to my 15:20 response to your posts.):

Furthermore, the fifth of your five sources, the Walbert book, while a much more recent publication, also appears to be problematic because it has had some concerning reviews, including from noted historian David L. Weaver-Zercher, Ph.D., assistant provost and professor of American religious history at Messiah College, who identified a number of factual errors in his 2003 review of the book: ^[6]

"....In addition to interpretive and rhetorical overstatements, the book contains numerous errors of fact. For instance, Old Order farmers who grow tobacco are not prohibited from smoking it, local color novelist Helen Reimensnyder Martin was not Pennsylvania German, and writer-publisher Ammon-Monroe Aurand (not Aumand) was born in Pennsylvania’s Snyder County, not Lancaster County (in fact, much of Aurand’s information about the Amish came not from Lancaster, but from settlements north). Unfortunately, this list of abbreviated factual errors and name misspellings is only representative, which means Walbert’s otherwise helpful book needs to be handled with care...."

I am going to suggest, at this juncture, that, rather than persisting in questioning me about my appropriate removal of a term that is and has been considered an ethnic slur by members of the Pennsylvania German and Pennsylvania Dutch communities, it would be more helpful for you and for Wikipedia's readers if you re-focus your attention on reviewing the article sections you've based on the potentially problematic sources you've been using and, if need be, revise those sections to remove any errors of fact or unsupported speculation they may contain. - 47thPennVols ( talk) 16:16, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

You have not proved your claim that Dutchman is a slur in Pennsylvania Dutch community; it is therefore not appropriate to remove the term- this is based on your original research, and not based in reality.

I suggest next time you make an unsubstantiated claim, you find the evidence to back it up. Your attempt to remove the term is completely unjustified. Aearthrise ( talk) 16:31, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm asking you, respectfully, to stop now. Despite your repeated claims to the contrary, I have, in fact, presented you with a source that confirms that the terminology you used in the article has been considered a slur. I have presented that source to you twice. I have also documented that, of the five sources you have used to back up your claim that the term you used was not a slur, two were completely irrelevant because they were published before the period when the slur began to be used against Pennsylvania Germans and the Pennsylvania Dutch community, one of your other three sources contains known factual errors, according to at least one prominent historian, and the other two are considered potentially unreliable as sources by multiple, experienced Wikipedia editors because those sources are produced by companies known for publishing the works of self-published authors that are not considered suitable for scholarly research. It is clear from your insistence on pursuing this dialogue, despite the evidence I have presented, that you are unwilling to consider my sincere perspective. Therefore, we must agree to disagree. And because of that, I am, again, asking you to stop, reflect and then move on to another matter deserving of your attention. I will not be continuing this dialogue with you any longer, but do sincerely wish you all the best with your future research. Kind Regards. - 47thPennVols ( talk) 17:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Your "perspective", i.e. original research, is invalid; the only citation you've provided is a weak Dictionary.com entry that is not at all related to the Pennsylvania Dutch.

There is nothing to "agree to disagree"- you have not provided sufficient proof for your claim, and your attempts to remove "Pennsylvania Dutchman" from this article are completely unjustified. I shall roll back your last edit. Aearthrise ( talk) 18:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

You undid my reversion of your post claiming "Ther term "Dutchman" is considered to be a slur by many in the Pennsylvania Dutch community"; either produce reasonable evidence of your claim now, or I shall revert it again.

You cannot make a claim and not back it up with evidence. Aearthrise ( talk) 13:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm concerned that the article might be conveying an impression that Anabaptist sects are inherently "Pennsylvania Dutch". The photograph of the Black Mennonites in the article features James and Rowena Lark, African-American converts to Mennonitism. Maybe I am mistaken, but in what way are they Pennsylvania Dutch? I removed their photo from the article on the non-Anabaptist Fancy Dutch because the Larks were Anabaptists who dressed plain. Bohemian Baltimore ( talk) 10:54, 30 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I've attempted to delete the lengthy quote of "Pennsylvania Dutch Prof. Miller" several times, and the revision has been reversed every time. In my mind, it is enough to say that the PA Dutch were the butt of jokes that they did not appreciate, no need for the polemic.

Professor Miller doesn't seem to have any trace or relevance outside two articles where his opinion is quoted, and the source for those quotes. There is no way to verify that his opinions were particularly relevant in 19th c. PA.

Regardless of the relevance of this source, though, I find the use of Fraktur for the quote particularly impractical and pointless. In articles on actually German topics, I have never seen an app-generated Fraktur being used to represent quotes. Likewise, in articles that quote letters written in cursive, the quote is almost never turned into an internet-generated cursive font. Medieval sources are not quoted in Carolingian Miniscule, etc.

It is important that the point of including quotes in articles, whether in their original language or translated into English, is so that they can be read. For users not acquainted with German archival sources (arguably the majority of Wikipedia users), the font makes it hard to read.

Thanks to the use of images in the article, users can see that PA Dutch wrote in Fraktur. There is no reason why this must be "drilled further home" by the use of illegible internet-generated font.

So, if nothing else, I implore the conversion of the quote into a normal font. Theodore Christopher ( talk) 21:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC) reply

You have already demonstrated your subjective opinion of Fraktur earlier writing by calling it "cartoonish" in a recent edit, insulting it for no other reason than your personal opinion, and you continue your subjective opinion here by stating that there is no reason why this language should be "drilled further home" and call its usage as just "illegible internet-generated font".

Your argument stems from a flawed supposition that the historic Palatine language in use between Europe and America should be treated the exact same as modern Standard German; to commit this error would be to invent an inaccurate rendering of the international Palatine language.

Examples of this international Palatine literature, are: Pälzer Humor, Lina Sommer, 1914; Wie's klingt am Rhei': mundartliche Gedichte aus der hessischen Pfalz, Elard Briegleb 1885, Die pälzisch Weltgeschicht, Paul Münch, 1910, Pennsylvania German: A collection of Pennsylvania German productions in poetry and prose, Band 1, Daniel Miller, 1903, Miller's Prose and Verse, Part English, Part Pennsylvania German: By Edwin C. Miller, Edwin Charles Miller, 1924, Pälzer Duwak: schnurrige Erzählungen in Pfälzer Mundart, Max Barack, 1886, Pennsylvania German: A Collection of Pennsylvania German Productions in Poetry and Prose, Volume 2, Daniel Miller, 1911

We can compare this exact case of preference to maintain the original language in other Wikipedia articles, such as using Coptic script for Coptic language, Egyptian Greek, and Nubian Creole Greek, as these were only written in Coptic script, e.g. "ⲇⲟⲝⲁ ⲡⲁⲧⲣⲓ ⲕⲉ ⲩⲓⲱ: ⲕⲉ ⲁ̀ⲅⲓⲱ ⲡⲛⲉⲩⲙⲁⲧⲓ: ⲕⲉ ⲛⲩⲛ ⲕⲉ ⲁ̀ⲓ̀ ⲕⲉ ⲓⲥ ⲧⲟⲩⲥ ⲉⲱⲛⲁⲥ ⲧⲱⲛ ⲉ̀ⲱ̀ⲛⲱⲛ ⲁ̀ⲙⲏⲛ", and are presented in this manner for the sake of accuracy, rather than rendering them in modern Greek script; another example is the accurate usage of Gothic script, e.g. 𐌸𐌹𐌿𐌳𐌹𐌽𐌰𐍃𐍃𐌿𐍃 𐌴𐌹𐍄𐌰𐌻𐌾𐌰𐌹 ( Ostrogothic Kingdom), instead of choosing to render it in the historically inaccurate modern transliteration Thiudinassus Eitaljai solely for the purpose of "better legibility".

In regards to your tangent about not using Medieval fonts such as Carolingian Miniscule, this case is not at all the same as rendering in Palatine language in Fraktur, as Medieval fonts such as Carolingian were almost exclusively used for standard Latin, which in modern convention we render in modern Roman script.

The spirit of this international Palatine language would be corrupted by presenting it in another format. This international language, which was shared between European Palatines and American Palatines, particularly the Pennsylvania Germans, was supplanted between World War 1 and 2, and is not in use today; nevertheless its literature should be presented as accurately as possible. Aearthrise ( talk) 01:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply

As a speaker of Franconian and reader of Fraktur, I am perfectly aware that Palatine German has defined differences with standard high German. I am also aware of the prominence that Fraktur held in printed German until the mid-20th c.-- This doesn't change my thoughts on the font. German in Germany, as I'm sure you know, wasn't standardized until the 19th c. Dialects, non-standard German, and so on are everywhere on Wikipedia. Nonetheless, though, the page for Middle High German does not convert MHG into any early German font that it might've been originally rendered in, miniscule or not. The pages for German-speaking rulers, such as Franz Joseph I of Austria, do not contain generated Fraktur, even though one can assume that titles, for instance, were originally written in calligraphic Fraktur. What makes this quote so unique? Theodore Christopher ( talk) 20:54, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply

None of the statements in your last reply address anything I said in my previous rebuttal. Nothing you constitutes an argument:

1. You say that German wasn't standardized until the 19th century- *Whether German was standardized or not in the 19th century is irrelevant to this discussion.

2. You talk about how we render Middle High German on Wikipedia, saying we don't write it in miniscule script- *Besides that miniscule script doesn't exist as unicode on computers, how we render Middle High German is irrelevant to this discussion.

3. You talk about how we write German royalty titles on Wikipedia- *How Wikipedia writes German royalty titles is irrelevant to this discussion.

As stated before, you are still committing the error of treating this form of Palatine language and its Pennsylvania German variant the same as German.

Your argument is the same as wanting to write Yiddish (a dialect of German) in a different script, solely because you think "it's more legible," when the only accurate rendering of Yiddish would be in its traditional Hebrew script, as is the practice on Wikipedia.

You stated "This doesn't change my thoughts on the font." I will tell you, based on the subjective comments you've made, and the irrelevant blathering and waffling, your thoughts are not worth very much.

To end, you ask a last question: "What makes this quote so unique?"

Although I already answered this question in an edit, which you choose to ignore now, I shall entertain it with this response:

Daniel Miller's quote provides an excellent snapshot into the prejudice and stereotypes the Pennsylvania Dutch faced, and paints the reality of their living situations, the sophistication of the Pennsylvania Dutch society in lieu of the stereotyes; further, it demonstrates a clear meaning of "Yankee" in Pennsylvania Dutch culture, and the rivalry between the cultures; to speak simply, Daniel Miller's quote ties the section together splendidly. Aearthrise ( talk) 22:27, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Palatine German is a dialect. Yiddish is a language.

Yiddish uses Hebrew script. Palatine German, as did most every other dialect of German written between the sixteenth and twentieth centuries, used Fraktur. The way that Palatine German was written is in the same way that Saxon German, Franconian German, etc. were written. So the inclusion of standard and non-standard German examples in this conversation are relevant. The only accurate (or sensitive, choose your word here) way to read Yiddish is in Hebrew letters, but Fraktur is not the only accurate way that Palatine German can be read-- it is still spoken (and written) within the Palatinate, and I seriously doubt that they're using Fraktur to write it.

Miller's lengthy quote is not necessarily a true-to-form representation of society at the time. He is alleging that PA Dutch lifestyles are superior to Yankee/English ones, it's only proof that PA Dutch and Yankee people thought each of their respective communities were better than the other... something that can be summarized in a shorter form. Theodore Christopher ( talk) 23:18, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Now your argument has devolved into what we call dialects and what we call languages; what constitutes a dialect or language is completely subjective to socialogists- your point is making an ad auctoritatem fallacy, and like I stated prior in my earlier rebuttals, you're committing the error of treating this language the same as standard German. For your information, we call this the Pennsylvania Dutch language.

Also, you are selectively ignoring previous points i've made in prior rebuttals, particularly where I explained the historic usage Fraktur orthography in this language, and how it was supplanted between World War 1 and 2. You, however, ignoring that, decided to talk about what people today are speaking or writing in the Palatinate. This is a completely irrelevant argument.

Only 70 years ago, Hebrew was an extinct language. Now it's spoken by 10 million people, and in Greece 50 years ago everybody learned and wrote literary Katharevousa Greek, but this form was abolished during the Greek civil war between the Communist and National government. Times change, and what people speak or write today is irrelevant in this discussion.

Furthermore, your whole argument comes from ignorance of Pennsylvania Dutch culture, and why this form was written in Fraktur; usage of Fraktur in this variety of Pennsylvania Dutch was a concious effort by writers as an antithesis to the "English rule" of the Pennsylvania Dutch at the time, which was to write the language in an English orthography, and contributed to its derision by making it not seem like a legitimate means of literary expresion.

Here is the example of the English rule from Rauch's Pennsylvania Dutch English rule manual, "Rauch's Pennsylvania Dutch hand-book. Rauch's Pennsylvania Deitsch hond-booch", E.H. Rauch, 1879:

De feela daussenda fun Pennsylvania boova un maid os in de Englisha shoola gane un doch sheer nix shwetza derhame un in der nochbershaft os Pennsylvania Deitsh... all de kinner in unserem shtate larna English laisa, un yusht 'n dale fun eena krega enniche sort fun Deitshe larnung. De Englisha rule, dawrum, is by weitam is de besht for des booch.

The many thousands of Pennyslvania boys and girls that go into English schools almost speak nothing other than Pennsylvania Dutch at home or in the neighborhood... all the children in our state learn to read English, and only some get any sort of German learning. The English rule, therefore, is by far the best for this book.

On the other hand, the usage of the Pennsylvania Dutch Fraktur orthography was a concious attempt 1.to uplift the Pennsylvania Dutch language for use in scientific and other high literature, 2.to connect with the international Palatine literary audience, and 3. to protect traditional German education in Pennsylvania.

Your last point is your subjective opinion of Daniel Miller's words about Yankees, and you attribute them to some sort of boastful superiority, and purport, without any evidence, that both communities thought they were better than the other. Your words are based in ignorance, coming and from an outsider to Pennsylvania Dutch culture, not even speaking the language nor knowing our cultural traits. Everything you say comes solely from "your thoughts."

You obviously don't understand what it meant to be Pennsylvania Dutch during this time in American history. This was at a time of high anti-foreigner hatred, racism, and a major push to Americanize the diverse peoples living in the USA. You think Daniel Miller's defense of his native culture, being a marginalized community, is just boasting talk of superiority? That's complete and utter nonsense, and as I said in my previous post: "your thoughts are not worth very much." Aearthrise ( talk) 11:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply

The pompous insults are really not necessary -- you're not a tut-tutting, cigar-smoking academic, you are on the internet. If you really thought my opinions were worthless, you wouldn't be writing up these responses.

I'm an outsider from PA Dutch Culture? Sure, but so are you, if your profile is to be believed. I've spent a lot of time in Amish country because part of my family lives there, but that doesn't matter: we are both approaching the subject from the same level of removal.

Wikipedia classifies Palatine German as a dialect. Since this is a Wikipedia article, we will go by Wikipedia classifications. And from the beginning of this conversation, you've explicitly referenced Palatine German, rather than PA Dutch. Regardless, PA Dutch is a variety of Palatine German. So other German dialects remain relevant to this conversation. Palatine German should be treated in the same way that historical examples Saxon, Franconian, Frisian, et c. are treated on Wikipedia, namely without Fraktur.

The usage of Hebrew and Modern Greek are utterly irrelevant to Palatine German, since this is a dialect that has been spoken for centuries and continues to be spoken. There has been no spectacular reorientation or revival of the dialect.

The usage of Fraktur was intentional, of course, not only in Pennsylvania, or in the Palatinate, but across the German-speaking world. Fraktur always distinguished German (whatever dialect it may be in) texts from those written in, say, French. Use of Fraktur as a distinguishing factor for German, or even as a protest, is not unique to Pennsylvania. And yet, you don't see other editors insist that archival sources be written in computer-generated Fraktur.

Lastly, yes, the Professor does claim superiority in this passage... allegedly, their farms are "... the model of the world", they have "the best and newest machines", and they possess some innate goodness not present in those "rascals", the "knavish, tricky (…) Yankees". I'm sure the PA Dutch are good, honest people, and that they had good farms, but neither of us are here to adjudicate 19th-c. ethnic squabbles between two groups of Northern European Germanic peoples. Theodore Christopher ( talk) 21:10, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply

You have chosen to ignore what I wrote, and continually create nonsense irrelevant arguments.

You speak on that the usage of Hebrew and Greek are irrelevant to Palatine German- this is another statement without a thought. The Hebrew, Modern Greek examples were a rebuttal to your flawed logic where you're wanted ask about how people write Palatinate today. Those examples were to show what people speak and write today doesn't have necessarily have a bearing on how people historically spoke or wrote. Your inablity to comprehend that is telling of your mindset; you ignore sound arguments and prefer to just waffle and blather.

Again, you commit the error of the treating this language the same as Standard German. We are talking about a specific variety of Pennsylvania Dutch and its accurate rendering. We're not talking about a Palatine German publication, and my earlier mentioning the international Palatine language was for you to understand the mindset of this form of Pennsylvania Dutch.

The usage of Fraktur was intentional, of course, not only in Pennsylvania, or in the Palatinate, but across the German-speaking world. Fraktur always distinguished German (whatever dialect it may be in) texts from those written in, say, French. Use of Fraktur as a distinguishing factor for German, or even as a protest, is not unique to Pennsylvania. And yet, you don't see other editors insist that archival sources be written in computer-generated Fraktur.

You wrote this paragraph after I had already explained why Fraktur in this form of Pennsylvania Dutch is unique, and which you're choosing to ignore now. I explained how this was a unique, conscious choice by the authors to render the Pennsylvania Dutch language in a way wholly distinct to the English rule, and I provided a sample text of English rule Dutch. This is similar to Yiddish authors making a conscious choice to write their dialect in Hebrew script.

Lastly, your invented idea of "superiority" in Daniel Miller's quote is completely incorrect, and it shows you lack knowledge of Pennsylvania Dutch culture or basic understanding of the message. Daniel is saying that the Pennsylvania Dutch are a modern people, and that they deserve respect, and that they shouldn't be ashamed of their Dutch language and culture; as for the Yankees, it is a common theme in Pennsylvania Dutch culture that Yankees are a tricky people, in the same way Yankees called the Dutch "Dumb Dutch". As already stated, Daniel Miller's quote is an excellent painting for the section dealing with the prejudice of the Pennsylvania Dutch, and the quote ties the section together.

Your arguments and words are all vapid nonsense, and you keep relying on your misinformed opinions and poor logic, rather than the facts of this culture or of its language.

P.s. I do indeed speak Pennsylvania Dutch, and half of my family is Dutch, so your comment about the two of us coming from the same level of removal is totally incorrect. Aearthrise ( talk) 22:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply