A common perception, among those who are not linguists, is that there is some difference in kind between a ‘language’ and a ‘dialect’. The question is often posed in the following form: ‘Is x a language or a dialect?’, where x is some such label as ‘Valencian’, or ‘Asturian’. And it is a question which the linguist, as linguist, cannot answer, first because of the insuperable difficulty of defining the concepts language and dialect (see 2.1 and 2.2), but secondly because any difference between these concepts resides not in the subject matter of linguistic description, but in the social appreciation accorded to particular codes of communication. The historical linguist will make it clear that every code to which the label ‘language’ is attached (e.g., ‘the Spanish language’, ‘the English language’, ‘the French language’, ‘the Latin language’) has its origins in what would usually be called a ‘dialect’, loosely defined in terms of geography (as the speech of a particular locality or area) and in terms of social class (as the speech of a particular social group, usually the dominant, educated, classes). Thus, the French language has its origins in the speech of upper-class Paris, specifically of the Court. If ‘dialects’ can gradually become ‘languages’, it follows that there cannot be any difference of kind between these concepts, but only differences of degree.