Talk:Partimen
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This article is ratedStub-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
I have no expertise in the matter butjeu-parti andpartimen seem to be basically about the same topic. Would it make sense to merge them to one title or the other? Currently, on Wikidata, the articlefr:jeu parti is linked toen:partimen.Pichpich (talk)19:04, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:eeleachEeleach (talk) 09:44, 23 June 2020 (UTC) replies:I have a lot of expertise on this and I would say that the idea they are the same would be like putting French 'roman' and English novels into a single entry because they are both the same. They are in different languages, practiced by different poets; the sources and secondary literature are entirely separate too; there are many more melodies for the French jeu parti; the jeu-parti is more tightly defined formally (dilemma for 2 partners and often 6 stanzas rather than a more open debate). The jeu-parti has a relation to the demandes d'amours that the partimen and tenso don't really have and once someone does a proper page on the jeu-parti (with more details). Also, if these entries were to be merged, I would argue STRONGLY for the jeu-parti to be the main page, because it is better attested. The only reason Occitan poetry genres get seen as original and French ones as derivative ('basically the same') is to do with 19thC scholarship and the legacy of Dante's elevation of troubadours. Actually, jeux-partis date from nearly as early as the partimen and the tradition extends longer; if we think the demandes d'amours pre-dated jeux-partis, then they are even earlier. I could go on, but I would strongly support keeping these pages separate. I think the redirect to Partimen is what has put off anyone actually putting any jeu-parti information up.— Precedingunsigned comment added byEeleach (talk •contribs)08:27, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the jeu-parti deserves its own page, both because of its geographical and generic independence from the partimen historically and the completely different scholarly traditions accompanying the two genres. I think the link to the partimen at the opening of the article works well.Mpcquinlan (talk)17:09, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
