Sassarese and Sardinian

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
34 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Sassarese and Sardinian

Gerard Meijssen-3
There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became srd in the
ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
.

The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian language or
the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language as it
tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the effects
has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the four
languages on the sc.wikpedia.

The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to approve
a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO code sdc.

There are two problems to deal with:

   - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
   - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
sc.wikipediafor their language

This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you go to
the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is the
notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it would be
instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the Sardinian
languages <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif> is
clear, the island is divided in four.

Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that political
arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we should make.

   1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
   2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for the
   recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.

I have had a chat with Debbie
Garside<http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside>about
all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be approved. At
least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be required.
Thanks,
     GerardM
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Ilario Valdelli
Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.

The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got a
grammar and a dictionary.

The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
what is dialect.

Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
influences).

The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
understandable each other.

Ilario

On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:

> There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became srd in the
> ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> .
>
> The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian language or
> the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language as it
> tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the effects
> has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the four
> languages on the sc.wikpedia.
>
> The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to approve
> a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO code sdc.
>
> There are two problems to deal with:
>
>    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
>    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> sc.wikipediafor their language
>
> This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you go to
> the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is the
> notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it would be
> instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the Sardinian
> languages <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif> is
> clear, the island is divided in four.
>
> Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that political
> arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we should make.
>
>    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
>    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for the
>    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
>
> I have had a chat with Debbie
> Garside<http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside>about
> all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be approved. At
> least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be required.
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian and
Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee is
concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is the Limba
Sarda Comune.

We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such. There are
many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most relevant
part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many experts. It
takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best to get
it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not specific
to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a "unified"
language is not unique to Sardinia either.

Thanks,
    GerardM

On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
>
> The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
> different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
> that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got a
> grammar and a dictionary.
>
> The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
> what is dialect.
>
> Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
> differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
> the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
> influences).
>
> The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
> dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
> different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
> understandable each other.
>
> Ilario
>
> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> > language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> > It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became srd in
> the
> > ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> > macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> > practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> > languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> > .
> >
> > The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian language
> or
> > the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language as
> it
> > tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the
> effects
> > has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the four
> > languages on the sc.wikpedia.
> >
> > The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to
> approve
> > a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO code
> sdc.
> >
> > There are two problems to deal with:
> >
> >    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
> >    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> > sc.wikipediafor their language
> >
> > This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you go
> to
> > the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is the
> > notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it would
> be
> > instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the
> Sardinian
> > languages <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
> is
> > clear, the island is divided in four.
> >
> > Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that political
> > arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we should
> make.
> >
> >    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
> >    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for the
> >    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
> >
> > I have had a chat with Debbie
> > Garside<
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside>about
> > all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> > ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be approved. At
> > least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be required.
> > Thanks,
> >      GerardM
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Ilario Valdelli
I agree, but I have said that in Italy this situation is "normal". The
"Limba Sarda Comune" (translation is "Sardinian common language") is
not a spoken language.

Some "collections" of languages has invented a superlanguage to write
official documents. The "Limba Sarda Comune" is similar to the Romansh
as "status". It has been invented (as Romansh) as official language of
a Region:

"Recentemente (2006), La Regione Autonoma della Sardegna ha
individuato una varietà scritta mediana del sardo, denominata Limba
Sarda Comuna (LSC) da usare nei suoi documenti ufficiali in uscita,
con carattere quindi di coufficialità. La LSC si propone come varietà
intermedia tra le due varietà di sardo letterario già esistenti
(Campidanese e Logudorese)."

The Limba Sarda is a superlanguage, created by the "Regione Autonoma
of Sardinia" combining Campidanese and Logudorese (two of for
sardinian dialects, but the more diffused) and it is used in official
documents. This is the first step to create a language: from dialect
to enrichment of registries.

See here:

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immagine:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif

the orange parts cover Campidanese and Logudorese.

The Gallurese is the third sardinian dialect closest to Corse
Language, the Sassarese (spoken in a small part of Sardinia) is the
fourth dialect in middle of Limba Sarda and Corse Language.

You understand that is crazy to have a wikipedia in a dialect that has
not a grammar and not a dictionary well defined (Wikipedia is written
and not spoken). Probably the Sardinia Region has had the some problem
and for this reason has invented a "written" language.

Ilario

On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hoi,
> What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian and
> Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee is
> concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is the Limba
> Sarda Comune.
>
> We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such. There are
> many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most relevant
> part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many experts. It
> takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best to get
> it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not specific
> to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a "unified"
> language is not unique to Sardinia either.
>
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>
> On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
> >
> > The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
> > different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
> > that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got a
> > grammar and a dictionary.
> >
> > The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
> > what is dialect.
> >
> > Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
> > differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
> > the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
> > influences).
> >
> > The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
> > dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
> > different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
> > understandable each other.
> >
> > Ilario
> >
> > On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> > > language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> > > It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became srd in
> > the
> > > ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> > > macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> > > practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> > > languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> > > .
> > >
> > > The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian language
> > or
> > > the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language as
> > it
> > > tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the
> > effects
> > > has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the four
> > > languages on the sc.wikpedia.
> > >
> > > The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to
> > approve
> > > a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO code
> > sdc.
> > >
> > > There are two problems to deal with:
> > >
> > >    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
> > >    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> > > sc.wikipediafor their language
> > >
> > > This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you go
> > to
> > > the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is the
> > > notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it would
> > be
> > > instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the
> > Sardinian
> > > languages <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
> > is
> > > clear, the island is divided in four.
> > >
> > > Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that political
> > > arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we should
> > make.
> > >
> > >    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
> > >    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for the
> > >    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
> > >
> > > I have had a chat with Debbie
> > > Garside<
> > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside>about
> > > all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> > > ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be approved. At
> > > least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be required.
> > > Thanks,
> > >      GerardM
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Marco Chiesa
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
So you go and tell people that an organisation they probably have never
heard of (ISO) has decided that what they used to think of as four
dialects of the same language are actually four distinct languages, and
to other people that their dialects that are mutually incomprehensible
that they speak the same language. Apart from the jokes, last time I had
a look on sc.wikipedia there was someone advocating the use of  the
unified language, which was basically spoken by an academic who invented
it alone; this resulted in no one else contributing to that wiki.

Cruccone

GerardM wrote:

>Hoi,
>What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian and
>Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee is
>concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is the Limba
>Sarda Comune.
>
>We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such. There are
>many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most relevant
>part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many experts. It
>takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best to get
>it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not specific
>to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a "unified"
>language is not unique to Sardinia either.
>
>Thanks,
>    GerardM
>
>On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
>>Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
>>
>>The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
>>different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
>>that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got a
>>grammar and a dictionary.
>>
>>The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
>>what is dialect.
>>
>>Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
>>differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
>>the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
>>influences).
>>
>>The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
>>dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
>>different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
>>understandable each other.
>>
>>Ilario
>>
>>    
>>


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

KIZU Naoko
In reply to this post by Ilario Valdelli
It sounds like a relation between Indonesian language (artificial, but
official language of Indonesia) and native languages spoken in that
state (Javanese, Sundanese etc etc). So it can be "official" and
written language but not spoken. At least now.

Since it is highly political, and not genuinely linguistics, I think
we need to establish a general consensus toward the issue: if a
certain local community or even limited to the government tries to
standardize their language in an official but artificial manner, and
they have no real speaker yet, we accept such language as part of our
project. I am not sure if there is a general consensus to support such
experimental activities on Wikimedia community, though, being aware we
know some successful cases in the history.

On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I agree, but I have said that in Italy this situation is "normal". The
> "Limba Sarda Comune" (translation is "Sardinian common language") is
> not a spoken language.
>
> Some "collections" of languages has invented a superlanguage to write
> official documents. The "Limba Sarda Comune" is similar to the Romansh
> as "status". It has been invented (as Romansh) as official language of
> a Region:
>
> "Recentemente (2006), La Regione Autonoma della Sardegna ha
> individuato una varietà scritta mediana del sardo, denominata Limba
> Sarda Comuna (LSC) da usare nei suoi documenti ufficiali in uscita,
> con carattere quindi di coufficialità. La LSC si propone come varietà
> intermedia tra le due varietà di sardo letterario già esistenti
> (Campidanese e Logudorese)."
>
> The Limba Sarda is a superlanguage, created by the "Regione Autonoma
> of Sardinia" combining Campidanese and Logudorese (two of for
> sardinian dialects, but the more diffused) and it is used in official
> documents. This is the first step to create a language: from dialect
> to enrichment of registries.
>
> See here:
>
> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immagine:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif
>
> the orange parts cover Campidanese and Logudorese.
>
> The Gallurese is the third sardinian dialect closest to Corse
> Language, the Sassarese (spoken in a small part of Sardinia) is the
> fourth dialect in middle of Limba Sarda and Corse Language.
>
> You understand that is crazy to have a wikipedia in a dialect that has
> not a grammar and not a dictionary well defined (Wikipedia is written
> and not spoken). Probably the Sardinia Region has had the some problem
> and for this reason has invented a "written" language.
>
> Ilario
>
> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian and
> > Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee is
> > concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is the Limba
> > Sarda Comune.
> >
> > We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such. There are
> > many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most relevant
> > part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many experts. It
> > takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best to get
> > it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not specific
> > to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a "unified"
> > language is not unique to Sardinia either.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >     GerardM
> >
> > On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
> > >
> > > The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
> > > different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
> > > that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got a
> > > grammar and a dictionary.
> > >
> > > The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
> > > what is dialect.
> > >
> > > Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
> > > differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
> > > the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
> > > influences).
> > >
> > > The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
> > > dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
> > > different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
> > > understandable each other.
> > >
> > > Ilario
> > >
> > > On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> > > > language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> > > > It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became srd in
> > > the
> > > > ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> > > > macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> > > > practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> > > > languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian language
> > > or
> > > > the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language as
> > > it
> > > > tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the
> > > effects
> > > > has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the four
> > > > languages on the sc.wikpedia.
> > > >
> > > > The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to
> > > approve
> > > > a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO code
> > > sdc.
> > > >
> > > > There are two problems to deal with:
> > > >
> > > >    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
> > > >    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> > > > sc.wikipediafor their language
> > > >
> > > > This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you go
> > > to
> > > > the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is the
> > > > notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it would
> > > be
> > > > instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the
> > > Sardinian
> > > > languages <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
> > > is
> > > > clear, the island is divided in four.
> > > >
> > > > Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that political
> > > > arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we should
> > > make.
> > > >
> > > >    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
> > > >    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for the
> > > >    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
> > > >
> > > > I have had a chat with Debbie
> > > > Garside<
> > > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside>about
> > > > all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> > > > ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be approved. At
> > > > least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be required.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >      GerardM
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


--
KIZU Naoko
  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Gianluigi Gamba
2007/9/10, Aphaia <[hidden email]>:
> ...Since it is highly political, and not genuinely linguistics, I think
> we need to establish a general consensus toward the issue: if a
> certain local community or even limited to the government tries to
> standardize their language in an official but artificial manner, and
> they have no real speaker yet, we accept such language as part of our
> project. I am not sure if there is a general consensus to support such
> experimental activities on Wikimedia community, though, being aware we
> know some successful cases in the history.

Often local-language projects do not reach that critical mass of
active users that makes a project self-sustained. This happens because
the community is too small, or it hasn't sufficient access to the
internet, or because a common written language is not defined.

My personal attitude is that we should grant every community a chance
to open a wikipedia in their own language, but once that wikipedia
exists, the community must be committed to make that wikipedia alive
and growing.

I'd allow the local wikipedias to "conquer on the battlefield" their
right to exist, by giving them a term (one year? two years?) after
which deciding whether the experiment turned out successful enough to
avoid a closure. Such success should be measured by the number of the
articles, the databse size, the topics covered and the average depth
of the articles, the number of active users and sysops and their
trend.

G.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by KIZU Naoko
Correct, you analysis is closest to the reality.

The problem is that Sardinian is the "polished" language. Sassarese,
Campidanese, Logudorese and Campidanese are dialects or spoken languages
or "vulgari eloquentiae" as Dante Alighieri could say.

Dante Alighieri in XIII century understood the difference and he said
that a "vulgari eloquentia" to become a "literary" language must be:
noble, aulic, courtier and distinguished. It not sufficient to have a
spoken language or a literature (in this case we ares closer to the
dialect than a language), but a dialect must be used in politic, courts
of justice, litterature and so on (the difference of registries) to be a
language.

For many centuries in Italy (for example) it has been discussed if the
Italian language would be a super-language or a "polished" dialect.
After discussions and discussions and discussions poetries and literary
men has chosen a "polished" dialect because there was not a politic
unity to impose a super-language.

This is what happened in the past or what happens in present days: or a
dialect is stronger than other and it becomes a "polished" dialect with
difference of registries and it is used in politic, justice, literature
and media or a country impose a super-language mixing different dialects.

Sardinia is following the second one, it is a mix of Logudorese and
Campidanese because they have got a literature and they are more
widespread than other two.

Ilario
====================
Wikimedia CH board member
Wikimedia Italy member

Aphaia wrote:

> It sounds like a relation between Indonesian language (artificial, but
> official language of Indonesia) and native languages spoken in that
> state (Javanese, Sundanese etc etc). So it can be "official" and
> written language but not spoken. At least now.
>
> Since it is highly political, and not genuinely linguistics, I think
> we need to establish a general consensus toward the issue: if a
> certain local community or even limited to the government tries to
> standardize their language in an official but artificial manner, and
> they have no real speaker yet, we accept such language as part of our
> project. I am not sure if there is a general consensus to support such
> experimental activities on Wikimedia community, though, being aware we
> know some successful cases in the history.
>
> On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> I agree, but I have said that in Italy this situation is "normal". The
>> "Limba Sarda Comune" (translation is "Sardinian common language") is
>> not a spoken language.
>>
>> Some "collections" of languages has invented a superlanguage to write
>> official documents. The "Limba Sarda Comune" is similar to the Romansh
>> as "status". It has been invented (as Romansh) as official language of
>> a Region:
>>
>> "Recentemente (2006), La Regione Autonoma della Sardegna ha
>> individuato una varietà scritta mediana del sardo, denominata Limba
>> Sarda Comuna (LSC) da usare nei suoi documenti ufficiali in uscita,
>> con carattere quindi di coufficialità. La LSC si propone come varietà
>> intermedia tra le due varietà di sardo letterario già esistenti
>> (Campidanese e Logudorese)."
>>
>> The Limba Sarda is a superlanguage, created by the "Regione Autonoma
>> of Sardinia" combining Campidanese and Logudorese (two of for
>> sardinian dialects, but the more diffused) and it is used in official
>> documents. This is the first step to create a language: from dialect
>> to enrichment of registries.
>>
>> See here:
>>
>> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immagine:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif
>>
>> the orange parts cover Campidanese and Logudorese.
>>
>> The Gallurese is the third sardinian dialect closest to Corse
>> Language, the Sassarese (spoken in a small part of Sardinia) is the
>> fourth dialect in middle of Limba Sarda and Corse Language.
>>
>> You understand that is crazy to have a wikipedia in a dialect that has
>> not a grammar and not a dictionary well defined (Wikipedia is written
>> and not spoken). Probably the Sardinia Region has had the some problem
>> and for this reason has invented a "written" language.
>>
>> Ilario
>>
>> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>    
>>> Hoi,
>>> What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian and
>>> Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee is
>>> concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is the Limba
>>> Sarda Comune.
>>>
>>> We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such. There are
>>> many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most relevant
>>> part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many experts. It
>>> takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best to get
>>> it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not specific
>>> to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a "unified"
>>> language is not unique to Sardinia either.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>     GerardM
>>>
>>> On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>      
>>>> Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
>>>>
>>>> The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
>>>> different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
>>>> that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got a
>>>> grammar and a dictionary.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
>>>> what is dialect.
>>>>
>>>> Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
>>>> differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
>>>> the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
>>>> influences).
>>>>
>>>> The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
>>>> dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
>>>> different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
>>>> understandable each other.
>>>>
>>>> Ilario
>>>>
>>>> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>        
>>>>> There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
>>>>> language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
>>>>> It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became srd in
>>>>>          
>>>> the
>>>>        
>>>>> ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
>>>>> macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
>>>>> practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
>>>>> languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>> The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian language
>>>>>          
>>>> or
>>>>        
>>>>> the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language as
>>>>>          
>>>> it
>>>>        
>>>>> tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the
>>>>>          
>>>> effects
>>>>        
>>>>> has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the four
>>>>> languages on the sc.wikpedia.
>>>>>
>>>>> The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to
>>>>>          
>>>> approve
>>>>        
>>>>> a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO code
>>>>>          
>>>> sdc.
>>>>        
>>>>> There are two problems to deal with:
>>>>>
>>>>>    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
>>>>>    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
>>>>> sc.wikipediafor their language
>>>>>
>>>>> This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you go
>>>>>          
>>>> to
>>>>        
>>>>> the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is the
>>>>> notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it would
>>>>>          
>>>> be
>>>>        
>>>>> instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the
>>>>>          
>>>> Sardinian
>>>>        
>>>>> languages <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
>>>>>          
>>>> is
>>>>        
>>>>> clear, the island is divided in four.
>>>>>
>>>>> Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that political
>>>>> arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we should
>>>>>          
>>>> make.
>>>>        
>>>>>    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
>>>>>    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for the
>>>>>    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have had a chat with Debbie
>>>>> Garside<
>>>>>          
>>>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside>about
>>>>        
>>>>> all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
>>>>> ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be approved. At
>>>>> least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be required.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>      GerardM
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>>      
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>    
>
>
>  

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Bugzilla from nick1915@gmail.com
The Sardinian idiom is indeed recognized as a language; please see any of
the references below.

    * ML Wagner, Sardinian Language, Bern, Francke, 1951
    * A. Sanna, Introduzione agli studi di linguistica sarda, Cagliari,
Regione Autonoma Sardegna, 1957
    * M. Cortellazzo, Profilo dei dialetti italiani, Pisa, Pacini-CNR, 1982
(n.20 "Sardegna")
    * E. Blasco Ferrer, Storia linguistica della Sardegna (Beihefte zur
Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie ; vol. 202), Tübingen, Niemeyer, 1984
    * E. Blasco Ferrer, Il sardo (in Lexikon der Romanistischen Linguistik,
cit. II/2 pp. 239-271)
    * E. Blasco Ferrer, Handbuch der italienischen Sprachwissenschaft,
Berlin : E. Schmidt, 1994
    * Lenguas minoritarias en la romania. El sardo. Estado de la cuestión,
special rewiev of "Revista de filología románica", 17 (2000)
    * I. Nichita, Complexul insulei. Fizionomia lexicului sard, Bucureşti,
Lumina Lex, 1998

Sassarese and gallurese are ''variants'' of '''corso''' ([
http://www.italica.rai.it/principali/lingua/bruni/mappe/flash/regionalok.htm],
[[:Image:Dialetti corsi.gif]]) and the others (logudorese, nuorese, aborense
etc.) are variants of Sardinian lang. The UNESCO report (
http://www.helsinki.fi/%7Etasalmin/europe_report.html#GSardinian) is a very
good source when dealing with the preservation of endangered languages, but
it's hardly authoritative aboutphilological-linguistical issues....
The fact that a language's distinctive trait should not be traced
exclusively to a specific heritage of literary works is one of the founding
tenets of linguistics; on the contrary, these distinctive traits are
developed through the comparison of syntax and morphology, and especially by
studying phonological transformations.

The philologists (whose works I have quoted in the references) have picked
up such common "distinctive traits", identifying one big language group
called "Sardo" (Sardinian). These results are not some individual's original
research; they are a respected linguistics thesis with a proven track
record, accepted by most experts in the field.

It is true that the issues on languages spoken in Italy are among most
complex to be found in this field; it is somewhat understandable that the
Lancom is faced with great difficulties in handling them.

Nick

2007/9/10, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>:

>
> Correct, you analysis is closest to the reality.
>
> The problem is that Sardinian is the "polished" language. Sassarese,
> Campidanese, Logudorese and Campidanese are dialects or spoken languages
> or "vulgari eloquentiae" as Dante Alighieri could say.
>
> Dante Alighieri in XIII century understood the difference and he said
> that a "vulgari eloquentia" to become a "literary" language must be:
> noble, aulic, courtier and distinguished. It not sufficient to have a
> spoken language or a literature (in this case we ares closer to the
> dialect than a language), but a dialect must be used in politic, courts
> of justice, litterature and so on (the difference of registries) to be a
> language.
>
> For many centuries in Italy (for example) it has been discussed if the
> Italian language would be a super-language or a "polished" dialect.
> After discussions and discussions and discussions poetries and literary
> men has chosen a "polished" dialect because there was not a politic
> unity to impose a super-language.
>
> This is what happened in the past or what happens in present days: or a
> dialect is stronger than other and it becomes a "polished" dialect with
> difference of registries and it is used in politic, justice, literature
> and media or a country impose a super-language mixing different dialects.
>
> Sardinia is following the second one, it is a mix of Logudorese and
> Campidanese because they have got a literature and they are more
> widespread than other two.
>
> Ilario
> ====================
> Wikimedia CH board member
> Wikimedia Italy member
>
> Aphaia wrote:
> > It sounds like a relation between Indonesian language (artificial, but
> > official language of Indonesia) and native languages spoken in that
> > state (Javanese, Sundanese etc etc). So it can be "official" and
> > written language but not spoken. At least now.
> >
> > Since it is highly political, and not genuinely linguistics, I think
> > we need to establish a general consensus toward the issue: if a
> > certain local community or even limited to the government tries to
> > standardize their language in an official but artificial manner, and
> > they have no real speaker yet, we accept such language as part of our
> > project. I am not sure if there is a general consensus to support such
> > experimental activities on Wikimedia community, though, being aware we
> > know some successful cases in the history.
> >
> > On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> I agree, but I have said that in Italy this situation is "normal". The
> >> "Limba Sarda Comune" (translation is "Sardinian common language") is
> >> not a spoken language.
> >>
> >> Some "collections" of languages has invented a superlanguage to write
> >> official documents. The "Limba Sarda Comune" is similar to the Romansh
> >> as "status". It has been invented (as Romansh) as official language of
> >> a Region:
> >>
> >> "Recentemente (2006), La Regione Autonoma della Sardegna ha
> >> individuato una varietà scritta mediana del sardo, denominata Limba
> >> Sarda Comuna (LSC) da usare nei suoi documenti ufficiali in uscita,
> >> con carattere quindi di coufficialità. La LSC si propone come varietà
> >> intermedia tra le due varietà di sardo letterario già esistenti
> >> (Campidanese e Logudorese)."
> >>
> >> The Limba Sarda is a superlanguage, created by the "Regione Autonoma
> >> of Sardinia" combining Campidanese and Logudorese (two of for
> >> sardinian dialects, but the more diffused) and it is used in official
> >> documents. This is the first step to create a language: from dialect
> >> to enrichment of registries.
> >>
> >> See here:
> >>
> >> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immagine:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif
> >>
> >> the orange parts cover Campidanese and Logudorese.
> >>
> >> The Gallurese is the third sardinian dialect closest to Corse
> >> Language, the Sassarese (spoken in a small part of Sardinia) is the
> >> fourth dialect in middle of Limba Sarda and Corse Language.
> >>
> >> You understand that is crazy to have a wikipedia in a dialect that has
> >> not a grammar and not a dictionary well defined (Wikipedia is written
> >> and not spoken). Probably the Sardinia Region has had the some problem
> >> and for this reason has invented a "written" language.
> >>
> >> Ilario
> >>
> >> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hoi,
> >>> What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian
> and
> >>> Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee is
> >>> concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is the
> Limba
> >>> Sarda Comune.
> >>>
> >>> We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such. There
> are
> >>> many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most
> relevant
> >>> part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many
> experts. It
> >>> takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best to
> get
> >>> it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not
> specific
> >>> to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a
> "unified"
> >>> language is not unique to Sardinia either.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>     GerardM
> >>>
> >>> On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
> >>>>
> >>>> The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
> >>>> different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
> >>>> that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got
> a
> >>>> grammar and a dictionary.
> >>>>
> >>>> The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
> >>>> what is dialect.
> >>>>
> >>>> Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
> >>>> differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
> >>>> the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
> >>>> influences).
> >>>>
> >>>> The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
> >>>> dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
> >>>> different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
> >>>> understandable each other.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ilario
> >>>>
> >>>> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> >>>>> language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> >>>>> It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became
> srd in
> >>>>>
> >>>> the
> >>>>
> >>>>> ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> >>>>> macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> >>>>> practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> >>>>> languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> >>>>> .
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian
> language
> >>>>>
> >>>> or
> >>>>
> >>>>> the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language
> as
> >>>>>
> >>>> it
> >>>>
> >>>>> tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the
> >>>>>
> >>>> effects
> >>>>
> >>>>> has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the
> four
> >>>>> languages on the sc.wikpedia.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to
> >>>>>
> >>>> approve
> >>>>
> >>>>> a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO
> code
> >>>>>
> >>>> sdc.
> >>>>
> >>>>> There are two problems to deal with:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
> >>>>>    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> >>>>> sc.wikipediafor their language
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you
> go
> >>>>>
> >>>> to
> >>>>
> >>>>> the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is
> the
> >>>>> notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it
> would
> >>>>>
> >>>> be
> >>>>
> >>>>> instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the
> >>>>>
> >>>> Sardinian
> >>>>
> >>>>> languages <
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
> >>>>>
> >>>> is
> >>>>
> >>>>> clear, the island is divided in four.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that
> political
> >>>>> arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we
> should
> >>>>>
> >>>> make.
> >>>>
> >>>>>    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
> >>>>>    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for
> the
> >>>>>    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have had a chat with Debbie
> >>>>> Garside<
> >>>>>
> >>>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside
> >about
> >>>>
> >>>>> all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> >>>>> ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be
> approved. At
> >>>>> least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be
> required.
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>      GerardM
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>>>> [hidden email]
> >>>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>>> [hidden email]
> >>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>> [hidden email]
> >>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

M. Williamson
The problem is that we use international standards of language content
codes to classify Wikipedias by language.

Occasionally, there is a language variety which spans several of them,
has none at all, or there may be several very distinct varieties
within one code which require separate Wikipedias.

Unfortunately, the current procedure of the Langcom seems to be to
require anyone whose Wiki does not fit neatly into one of the holes
carved by the IANA to request a new code from the IANA itself. I do
not disagree with that 100%, after all if we are making up our own
codes avante-gard, then our content cannot be processed by external
sources according to language (search engines, for example). I also
have objections to it however, but I am sure that by now these are
obvious if you do not already know what they are (it limits legitimate
varieties from getting their own Wiki in a relatively timely fashion,
and discriminates against non-European languages although that is
unintentional, they are just less well-documented in general).

Thankfully, I think, the Langcom does not seek to or does not have the
power (?) to close or rename existing Wikis, so "wrong" codes like sc
and the like which are actually "macrolanguage codes" will not be
closed in the interim.

Unfortunately the current international standards are very flawed.
However, we cannot expect them to be perfect in a world where we have
thousands of languages and many people disagree on what should be
considered a language.

It is an imperfect standard, but it is the best that is currently
available, so if you discover a problem in it (a language is missing,
or a language is divided into too many parts), it is probably best, as
Gerard suggested, to submit a correction, but be prepared to back it
up with lots of documentation... to get a new code (I believe), there
must be at least 50 books existing in a language, which could be a lot
to ask for some languages, and obviously was not used as a requirement
for when codes were "imported" from Ethnologue.

However, as far as Sardinian goes, rather than combining Logudorese
and Campidanese into a single entity and merging Gallurese and
Sassarese into Corsican, I think it is best to add a code for
something written in one of the several unified varieties of
Sardinian, if not specifically LSC (for example its predecessor LSU,
or the amateur creation Limba de Messania), because it may still
sometimes be necessary to maintain parallel translations of a document
in each variety, and also because Gallurese and _especially_ Sassarese
are not usually accepted by Corsicans as pure "Corsican" and would
probably not be allowed on the Corsican Wikipedia.

Mark

On 10/09/2007, Nicolò Zamperini <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The Sardinian idiom is indeed recognized as a language; please see any of
> the references below.
>
>     * ML Wagner, Sardinian Language, Bern, Francke, 1951
>     * A. Sanna, Introduzione agli studi di linguistica sarda, Cagliari,
> Regione Autonoma Sardegna, 1957
>     * M. Cortellazzo, Profilo dei dialetti italiani, Pisa, Pacini-CNR, 1982
> (n.20 "Sardegna")
>     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Storia linguistica della Sardegna (Beihefte zur
> Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie ; vol. 202), Tübingen, Niemeyer, 1984
>     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Il sardo (in Lexikon der Romanistischen Linguistik,
> cit. II/2 pp. 239-271)
>     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Handbuch der italienischen Sprachwissenschaft,
> Berlin : E. Schmidt, 1994
>     * Lenguas minoritarias en la romania. El sardo. Estado de la cuestión,
> special rewiev of "Revista de filología románica", 17 (2000)
>     * I. Nichita, Complexul insulei. Fizionomia lexicului sard, Bucureşti,
> Lumina Lex, 1998
>
> Sassarese and gallurese are ''variants'' of '''corso''' ([
> http://www.italica.rai.it/principali/lingua/bruni/mappe/flash/regionalok.htm],
> [[:Image:Dialetti corsi.gif]]) and the others (logudorese, nuorese, aborense
> etc.) are variants of Sardinian lang. The UNESCO report (
> http://www.helsinki.fi/%7Etasalmin/europe_report.html#GSardinian) is a very
> good source when dealing with the preservation of endangered languages, but
> it's hardly authoritative aboutphilological-linguistical issues....
> The fact that a language's distinctive trait should not be traced
> exclusively to a specific heritage of literary works is one of the founding
> tenets of linguistics; on the contrary, these distinctive traits are
> developed through the comparison of syntax and morphology, and especially by
> studying phonological transformations.
>
> The philologists (whose works I have quoted in the references) have picked
> up such common "distinctive traits", identifying one big language group
> called "Sardo" (Sardinian). These results are not some individual's original
> research; they are a respected linguistics thesis with a proven track
> record, accepted by most experts in the field.
>
> It is true that the issues on languages spoken in Italy are among most
> complex to be found in this field; it is somewhat understandable that the
> Lancom is faced with great difficulties in handling them.
>
> Nick
>
> 2007/9/10, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > Correct, you analysis is closest to the reality.
> >
> > The problem is that Sardinian is the "polished" language. Sassarese,
> > Campidanese, Logudorese and Campidanese are dialects or spoken languages
> > or "vulgari eloquentiae" as Dante Alighieri could say.
> >
> > Dante Alighieri in XIII century understood the difference and he said
> > that a "vulgari eloquentia" to become a "literary" language must be:
> > noble, aulic, courtier and distinguished. It not sufficient to have a
> > spoken language or a literature (in this case we ares closer to the
> > dialect than a language), but a dialect must be used in politic, courts
> > of justice, litterature and so on (the difference of registries) to be a
> > language.
> >
> > For many centuries in Italy (for example) it has been discussed if the
> > Italian language would be a super-language or a "polished" dialect.
> > After discussions and discussions and discussions poetries and literary
> > men has chosen a "polished" dialect because there was not a politic
> > unity to impose a super-language.
> >
> > This is what happened in the past or what happens in present days: or a
> > dialect is stronger than other and it becomes a "polished" dialect with
> > difference of registries and it is used in politic, justice, literature
> > and media or a country impose a super-language mixing different dialects.
> >
> > Sardinia is following the second one, it is a mix of Logudorese and
> > Campidanese because they have got a literature and they are more
> > widespread than other two.
> >
> > Ilario
> > ====================
> > Wikimedia CH board member
> > Wikimedia Italy member
> >
> > Aphaia wrote:
> > > It sounds like a relation between Indonesian language (artificial, but
> > > official language of Indonesia) and native languages spoken in that
> > > state (Javanese, Sundanese etc etc). So it can be "official" and
> > > written language but not spoken. At least now.
> > >
> > > Since it is highly political, and not genuinely linguistics, I think
> > > we need to establish a general consensus toward the issue: if a
> > > certain local community or even limited to the government tries to
> > > standardize their language in an official but artificial manner, and
> > > they have no real speaker yet, we accept such language as part of our
> > > project. I am not sure if there is a general consensus to support such
> > > experimental activities on Wikimedia community, though, being aware we
> > > know some successful cases in the history.
> > >
> > > On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree, but I have said that in Italy this situation is "normal". The
> > >> "Limba Sarda Comune" (translation is "Sardinian common language") is
> > >> not a spoken language.
> > >>
> > >> Some "collections" of languages has invented a superlanguage to write
> > >> official documents. The "Limba Sarda Comune" is similar to the Romansh
> > >> as "status". It has been invented (as Romansh) as official language of
> > >> a Region:
> > >>
> > >> "Recentemente (2006), La Regione Autonoma della Sardegna ha
> > >> individuato una varietà scritta mediana del sardo, denominata Limba
> > >> Sarda Comuna (LSC) da usare nei suoi documenti ufficiali in uscita,
> > >> con carattere quindi di coufficialità. La LSC si propone come varietà
> > >> intermedia tra le due varietà di sardo letterario già esistenti
> > >> (Campidanese e Logudorese)."
> > >>
> > >> The Limba Sarda is a superlanguage, created by the "Regione Autonoma
> > >> of Sardinia" combining Campidanese and Logudorese (two of for
> > >> sardinian dialects, but the more diffused) and it is used in official
> > >> documents. This is the first step to create a language: from dialect
> > >> to enrichment of registries.
> > >>
> > >> See here:
> > >>
> > >> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immagine:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif
> > >>
> > >> the orange parts cover Campidanese and Logudorese.
> > >>
> > >> The Gallurese is the third sardinian dialect closest to Corse
> > >> Language, the Sassarese (spoken in a small part of Sardinia) is the
> > >> fourth dialect in middle of Limba Sarda and Corse Language.
> > >>
> > >> You understand that is crazy to have a wikipedia in a dialect that has
> > >> not a grammar and not a dictionary well defined (Wikipedia is written
> > >> and not spoken). Probably the Sardinia Region has had the some problem
> > >> and for this reason has invented a "written" language.
> > >>
> > >> Ilario
> > >>
> > >> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hoi,
> > >>> What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian
> > and
> > >>> Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee is
> > >>> concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is the
> > Limba
> > >>> Sarda Comune.
> > >>>
> > >>> We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such. There
> > are
> > >>> many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most
> > relevant
> > >>> part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many
> > experts. It
> > >>> takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best to
> > get
> > >>> it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not
> > specific
> > >>> to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a
> > "unified"
> > >>> language is not unique to Sardinia either.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>>     GerardM
> > >>>
> > >>> On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
> > >>>> different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
> > >>>> that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got
> > a
> > >>>> grammar and a dictionary.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
> > >>>> what is dialect.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
> > >>>> differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
> > >>>> the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
> > >>>> influences).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
> > >>>> dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
> > >>>> different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
> > >>>> understandable each other.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Ilario
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> > >>>>> language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> > >>>>> It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became
> > srd in
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> the
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> > >>>>> macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> > >>>>> practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> > >>>>> languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> > >>>>> .
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian
> > language
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> or
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language
> > as
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> it
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> effects
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the
> > four
> > >>>>> languages on the sc.wikpedia.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> approve
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO
> > code
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> sdc.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> There are two problems to deal with:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
> > >>>>>    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> > >>>>> sc.wikipediafor their language
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you
> > go
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> to
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is
> > the
> > >>>>> notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it
> > would
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> be
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Sardinian
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> languages <
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> is
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> clear, the island is divided in four.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that
> > political
> > >>>>> arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we
> > should
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> make.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
> > >>>>>    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for
> > the
> > >>>>>    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I have had a chat with Debbie
> > >>>>> Garside<
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside
> > >about
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> > >>>>> ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be
> > approved. At
> > >>>>> least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be
> > required.
> > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>      GerardM
> > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>> foundation-l mailing list
> > >>>>> [hidden email]
> > >>>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> foundation-l mailing list
> > >>>> [hidden email]
> > >>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> foundation-l mailing list
> > >>> [hidden email]
> > >>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> foundation-l mailing list
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


--
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
A language code will not be issued by IANA unless a request for an ISO 639
code has been granted. The Limba Sarda Comune is as indicated before a
written language that has just been created. We do not make up codes any
more even though we did so in the past. The problems that we create for
ourselves are just not worth it.

I do also think that you do not know your facts that well. All recognised
sign languages do not comply with the requirement that there are fifty books
in that language. It is just one group of languages that does not fit in
your idea of how recognition for languages may be had, there are others.

As the Limba Sarda Comune is a recently constructed language, it will once
recognised get a code that will sit on the same level as the four languages
that are recognised already. Your notion that we should allow for the
combining of languages is flatly wrong, it will lead to the most awful
politicking. It is therefore that the language committee does disapprove of
any such moves.

Thanks,
       GerardM

On 9/11/07, Mark Williamson <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> The problem is that we use international standards of language content
> codes to classify Wikipedias by language.
>
> Occasionally, there is a language variety which spans several of them,
> has none at all, or there may be several very distinct varieties
> within one code which require separate Wikipedias.
>
> Unfortunately, the current procedure of the Langcom seems to be to
> require anyone whose Wiki does not fit neatly into one of the holes
> carved by the IANA to request a new code from the IANA itself. I do
> not disagree with that 100%, after all if we are making up our own
> codes avante-gard, then our content cannot be processed by external
> sources according to language (search engines, for example). I also
> have objections to it however, but I am sure that by now these are
> obvious if you do not already know what they are (it limits legitimate
> varieties from getting their own Wiki in a relatively timely fashion,
> and discriminates against non-European languages although that is
> unintentional, they are just less well-documented in general).
>
> Thankfully, I think, the Langcom does not seek to or does not have the
> power (?) to close or rename existing Wikis, so "wrong" codes like sc
> and the like which are actually "macrolanguage codes" will not be
> closed in the interim.
>
> Unfortunately the current international standards are very flawed.
> However, we cannot expect them to be perfect in a world where we have
> thousands of languages and many people disagree on what should be
> considered a language.
>
> It is an imperfect standard, but it is the best that is currently
> available, so if you discover a problem in it (a language is missing,
> or a language is divided into too many parts), it is probably best, as
> Gerard suggested, to submit a correction, but be prepared to back it
> up with lots of documentation... to get a new code (I believe), there
> must be at least 50 books existing in a language, which could be a lot
> to ask for some languages, and obviously was not used as a requirement
> for when codes were "imported" from Ethnologue.
>
> However, as far as Sardinian goes, rather than combining Logudorese
> and Campidanese into a single entity and merging Gallurese and
> Sassarese into Corsican, I think it is best to add a code for
> something written in one of the several unified varieties of
> Sardinian, if not specifically LSC (for example its predecessor LSU,
> or the amateur creation Limba de Messania), because it may still
> sometimes be necessary to maintain parallel translations of a document
> in each variety, and also because Gallurese and _especially_ Sassarese
> are not usually accepted by Corsicans as pure "Corsican" and would
> probably not be allowed on the Corsican Wikipedia.
>
> Mark
>
> On 10/09/2007, Nicolò Zamperini <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > The Sardinian idiom is indeed recognized as a language; please see any
> of
> > the references below.
> >
> >     * ML Wagner, Sardinian Language, Bern, Francke, 1951
> >     * A. Sanna, Introduzione agli studi di linguistica sarda, Cagliari,
> > Regione Autonoma Sardegna, 1957
> >     * M. Cortellazzo, Profilo dei dialetti italiani, Pisa, Pacini-CNR,
> 1982
> > (n.20 "Sardegna")
> >     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Storia linguistica della Sardegna (Beihefte zur
> > Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie ; vol. 202), Tübingen, Niemeyer,
> 1984
> >     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Il sardo (in Lexikon der Romanistischen
> Linguistik,
> > cit. II/2 pp. 239-271)
> >     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Handbuch der italienischen Sprachwissenschaft,
> > Berlin : E. Schmidt, 1994
> >     * Lenguas minoritarias en la romania. El sardo. Estado de la
> cuestión,
> > special rewiev of "Revista de filología románica", 17 (2000)
> >     * I. Nichita, Complexul insulei. Fizionomia lexicului sard,
> Bucureşti,
> > Lumina Lex, 1998
> >
> > Sassarese and gallurese are ''variants'' of '''corso''' ([
> >
> http://www.italica.rai.it/principali/lingua/bruni/mappe/flash/regionalok.htm
> ],
> > [[:Image:Dialetti corsi.gif]]) and the others (logudorese, nuorese,
> aborense
> > etc.) are variants of Sardinian lang. The UNESCO report (
> > http://www.helsinki.fi/%7Etasalmin/europe_report.html#GSardinian) is a
> very
> > good source when dealing with the preservation of endangered languages,
> but
> > it's hardly authoritative aboutphilological-linguistical issues....
> > The fact that a language's distinctive trait should not be traced
> > exclusively to a specific heritage of literary works is one of the
> founding
> > tenets of linguistics; on the contrary, these distinctive traits are
> > developed through the comparison of syntax and morphology, and
> especially by
> > studying phonological transformations.
> >
> > The philologists (whose works I have quoted in the references) have
> picked
> > up such common "distinctive traits", identifying one big language group
> > called "Sardo" (Sardinian). These results are not some individual's
> original
> > research; they are a respected linguistics thesis with a proven track
> > record, accepted by most experts in the field.
> >
> > It is true that the issues on languages spoken in Italy are among most
> > complex to be found in this field; it is somewhat understandable that
> the
> > Lancom is faced with great difficulties in handling them.
> >
> > Nick
> >
> > 2007/9/10, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > Correct, you analysis is closest to the reality.
> > >
> > > The problem is that Sardinian is the "polished" language. Sassarese,
> > > Campidanese, Logudorese and Campidanese are dialects or spoken
> languages
> > > or "vulgari eloquentiae" as Dante Alighieri could say.
> > >
> > > Dante Alighieri in XIII century understood the difference and he said
> > > that a "vulgari eloquentia" to become a "literary" language must be:
> > > noble, aulic, courtier and distinguished. It not sufficient to have a
> > > spoken language or a literature (in this case we ares closer to the
> > > dialect than a language), but a dialect must be used in politic,
> courts
> > > of justice, litterature and so on (the difference of registries) to be
> a
> > > language.
> > >
> > > For many centuries in Italy (for example) it has been discussed if the
> > > Italian language would be a super-language or a "polished" dialect.
> > > After discussions and discussions and discussions poetries and
> literary
> > > men has chosen a "polished" dialect because there was not a politic
> > > unity to impose a super-language.
> > >
> > > This is what happened in the past or what happens in present days: or
> a
> > > dialect is stronger than other and it becomes a "polished" dialect
> with
> > > difference of registries and it is used in politic, justice,
> literature
> > > and media or a country impose a super-language mixing different
> dialects.
> > >
> > > Sardinia is following the second one, it is a mix of Logudorese and
> > > Campidanese because they have got a literature and they are more
> > > widespread than other two.
> > >
> > > Ilario
> > > ====================
> > > Wikimedia CH board member
> > > Wikimedia Italy member
> > >
> > > Aphaia wrote:
> > > > It sounds like a relation between Indonesian language (artificial,
> but
> > > > official language of Indonesia) and native languages spoken in that
> > > > state (Javanese, Sundanese etc etc). So it can be "official" and
> > > > written language but not spoken. At least now.
> > > >
> > > > Since it is highly political, and not genuinely linguistics, I think
> > > > we need to establish a general consensus toward the issue: if a
> > > > certain local community or even limited to the government tries to
> > > > standardize their language in an official but artificial manner, and
> > > > they have no real speaker yet, we accept such language as part of
> our
> > > > project. I am not sure if there is a general consensus to support
> such
> > > > experimental activities on Wikimedia community, though, being aware
> we
> > > > know some successful cases in the history.
> > > >
> > > > On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I agree, but I have said that in Italy this situation is "normal".
> The
> > > >> "Limba Sarda Comune" (translation is "Sardinian common language")
> is
> > > >> not a spoken language.
> > > >>
> > > >> Some "collections" of languages has invented a superlanguage to
> write
> > > >> official documents. The "Limba Sarda Comune" is similar to the
> Romansh
> > > >> as "status". It has been invented (as Romansh) as official language
> of
> > > >> a Region:
> > > >>
> > > >> "Recentemente (2006), La Regione Autonoma della Sardegna ha
> > > >> individuato una varietà scritta mediana del sardo, denominata Limba
> > > >> Sarda Comuna (LSC) da usare nei suoi documenti ufficiali in uscita,
> > > >> con carattere quindi di coufficialità. La LSC si propone come
> varietà
> > > >> intermedia tra le due varietà di sardo letterario già esistenti
> > > >> (Campidanese e Logudorese)."
> > > >>
> > > >> The Limba Sarda is a superlanguage, created by the "Regione
> Autonoma
> > > >> of Sardinia" combining Campidanese and Logudorese (two of for
> > > >> sardinian dialects, but the more diffused) and it is used in
> official
> > > >> documents. This is the first step to create a language: from
> dialect
> > > >> to enrichment of registries.
> > > >>
> > > >> See here:
> > > >>
> > > >> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immagine:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif
> > > >>
> > > >> the orange parts cover Campidanese and Logudorese.
> > > >>
> > > >> The Gallurese is the third sardinian dialect closest to Corse
> > > >> Language, the Sassarese (spoken in a small part of Sardinia) is the
> > > >> fourth dialect in middle of Limba Sarda and Corse Language.
> > > >>
> > > >> You understand that is crazy to have a wikipedia in a dialect that
> has
> > > >> not a grammar and not a dictionary well defined (Wikipedia is
> written
> > > >> and not spoken). Probably the Sardinia Region has had the some
> problem
> > > >> and for this reason has invented a "written" language.
> > > >>
> > > >> Ilario
> > > >>
> > > >> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hoi,
> > > >>> What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is
> Sardinian
> > > and
> > > >>> Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee
> is
> > > >>> concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is
> the
> > > Limba
> > > >>> Sarda Comune.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such.
> There
> > > are
> > > >>> many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most
> > > relevant
> > > >>> part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many
> > > experts. It
> > > >>> takes so much time because the standard organisations do their
> best to
> > > get
> > > >>> it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is
> not
> > > specific
> > > >>> to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a
> > > "unified"
> > > >>> language is not unique to Sardinia either.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>>     GerardM
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in
> Sardinia.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
> > > >>>> different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the
> difference
> > > >>>> that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has
> got
> > > a
> > > >>>> grammar and a dictionary.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language
> and
> > > >>>> what is dialect.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
> > > >>>> differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong
> and
> > > >>>> the language is not stable (there differences during the years
> and
> > > >>>> influences).
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred
> different
> > > >>>> dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
> > > >>>> different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
> > > >>>> understandable each other.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Ilario
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> > > >>>>> language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> > > >>>>> It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian
> became
> > > srd in
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> the
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> > > >>>>> macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> > > >>>>> practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> > > >>>>> languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> > > >>>>> .
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian
> > > language
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> or
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed
> language
> > > as
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> it
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of
> the
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> effects
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of
> the
> > > four
> > > >>>>> languages on the sc.wikpedia.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request
> to
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> approve
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with
> ISO
> > > code
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> sdc.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> There are two problems to deal with:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
> > > >>>>>    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> > > >>>>> sc.wikipediafor their language
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when
> you
> > > go
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> to
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/>
> is
> > > the
> > > >>>>> notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity
> it
> > > would
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> be
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of
> the
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> Sardinian
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> languages <
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> is
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> clear, the island is divided in four.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that
> > > political
> > > >>>>> arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we
> > > should
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> make.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
> > > >>>>>    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask
> for
> > > the
> > > >>>>>    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I have had a chat with Debbie
> > > >>>>> Garside<
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside
> > > >about
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> > > >>>>> ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be
> > > approved. At
> > > >>>>> least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be
> > > required.
> > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>      GerardM
> > > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>>>> foundation-l mailing list
> > > >>>>> [hidden email]
> > > >>>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>>> foundation-l mailing list
> > > >>>> [hidden email]
> > > >>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>> foundation-l mailing list
> > > >>> [hidden email]
> > > >>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> foundation-l mailing list
> > > >> [hidden email]
> > > >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Ilario Valdelli
Hoi,
Dante Alighieri did not speak Italian. The medieval notion of "noble aulic,
courtier and distinguished" are not the same notions as we have today. They
are also not the notions that are used to get recognition from such bodies
as ISO and thank <insert your favourite deity> for that. It would for
instance not allow for sign languages to be recognised as such.

It is not that relevant what politicians call a language. The recognition
that is valid for the Wikimedia Foundation is not decided by any particular
political entity. There is literature in the Sardinian languages. It is
however not possible for a constructed language to usurp the existing
literature and claim it their own in order to get ISO recognition.
Thanks,
     GerardM

On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Correct, you analysis is closest to the reality.
>
> The problem is that Sardinian is the "polished" language. Sassarese,
> Campidanese, Logudorese and Campidanese are dialects or spoken languages
> or "vulgari eloquentiae" as Dante Alighieri could say.
>
> Dante Alighieri in XIII century understood the difference and he said
> that a "vulgari eloquentia" to become a "literary" language must be:
> noble, aulic, courtier and distinguished. It not sufficient to have a
> spoken language or a literature (in this case we ares closer to the
> dialect than a language), but a dialect must be used in politic, courts
> of justice, litterature and so on (the difference of registries) to be a
> language.
>
> For many centuries in Italy (for example) it has been discussed if the
> Italian language would be a super-language or a "polished" dialect.
> After discussions and discussions and discussions poetries and literary
> men has chosen a "polished" dialect because there was not a politic
> unity to impose a super-language.
>
> This is what happened in the past or what happens in present days: or a
> dialect is stronger than other and it becomes a "polished" dialect with
> difference of registries and it is used in politic, justice, literature
> and media or a country impose a super-language mixing different dialects.
>
> Sardinia is following the second one, it is a mix of Logudorese and
> Campidanese because they have got a literature and they are more
> widespread than other two.
>
> Ilario
> ====================
> Wikimedia CH board member
> Wikimedia Italy member
>
> Aphaia wrote:
> > It sounds like a relation between Indonesian language (artificial, but
> > official language of Indonesia) and native languages spoken in that
> > state (Javanese, Sundanese etc etc). So it can be "official" and
> > written language but not spoken. At least now.
> >
> > Since it is highly political, and not genuinely linguistics, I think
> > we need to establish a general consensus toward the issue: if a
> > certain local community or even limited to the government tries to
> > standardize their language in an official but artificial manner, and
> > they have no real speaker yet, we accept such language as part of our
> > project. I am not sure if there is a general consensus to support such
> > experimental activities on Wikimedia community, though, being aware we
> > know some successful cases in the history.
> >
> > On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> I agree, but I have said that in Italy this situation is "normal". The
> >> "Limba Sarda Comune" (translation is "Sardinian common language") is
> >> not a spoken language.
> >>
> >> Some "collections" of languages has invented a superlanguage to write
> >> official documents. The "Limba Sarda Comune" is similar to the Romansh
> >> as "status". It has been invented (as Romansh) as official language of
> >> a Region:
> >>
> >> "Recentemente (2006), La Regione Autonoma della Sardegna ha
> >> individuato una varietà scritta mediana del sardo, denominata Limba
> >> Sarda Comuna (LSC) da usare nei suoi documenti ufficiali in uscita,
> >> con carattere quindi di coufficialità. La LSC si propone come varietà
> >> intermedia tra le due varietà di sardo letterario già esistenti
> >> (Campidanese e Logudorese)."
> >>
> >> The Limba Sarda is a superlanguage, created by the "Regione Autonoma
> >> of Sardinia" combining Campidanese and Logudorese (two of for
> >> sardinian dialects, but the more diffused) and it is used in official
> >> documents. This is the first step to create a language: from dialect
> >> to enrichment of registries.
> >>
> >> See here:
> >>
> >> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immagine:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif
> >>
> >> the orange parts cover Campidanese and Logudorese.
> >>
> >> The Gallurese is the third sardinian dialect closest to Corse
> >> Language, the Sassarese (spoken in a small part of Sardinia) is the
> >> fourth dialect in middle of Limba Sarda and Corse Language.
> >>
> >> You understand that is crazy to have a wikipedia in a dialect that has
> >> not a grammar and not a dictionary well defined (Wikipedia is written
> >> and not spoken). Probably the Sardinia Region has had the some problem
> >> and for this reason has invented a "written" language.
> >>
> >> Ilario
> >>
> >> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hoi,
> >>> What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian
> and
> >>> Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee is
> >>> concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is the
> Limba
> >>> Sarda Comune.
> >>>
> >>> We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such. There
> are
> >>> many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most
> relevant
> >>> part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many
> experts. It
> >>> takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best to
> get
> >>> it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not
> specific
> >>> to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a
> "unified"
> >>> language is not unique to Sardinia either.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>     GerardM
> >>>
> >>> On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
> >>>>
> >>>> The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
> >>>> different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the difference
> >>>> that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has got
> a
> >>>> grammar and a dictionary.
> >>>>
> >>>> The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language and
> >>>> what is dialect.
> >>>>
> >>>> Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
> >>>> differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong and
> >>>> the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
> >>>> influences).
> >>>>
> >>>> The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred different
> >>>> dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
> >>>> different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
> >>>> understandable each other.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ilario
> >>>>
> >>>> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> >>>>> language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> >>>>> It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became
> srd in
> >>>>>
> >>>> the
> >>>>
> >>>>> ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> >>>>> macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> >>>>> practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> >>>>> languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> >>>>> .
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian
> language
> >>>>>
> >>>> or
> >>>>
> >>>>> the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed language
> as
> >>>>>
> >>>> it
> >>>>
> >>>>> tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the
> >>>>>
> >>>> effects
> >>>>
> >>>>> has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of the
> four
> >>>>> languages on the sc.wikpedia.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request to
> >>>>>
> >>>> approve
> >>>>
> >>>>> a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO
> code
> >>>>>
> >>>> sdc.
> >>>>
> >>>>> There are two problems to deal with:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
> >>>>>    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> >>>>> sc.wikipediafor their language
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when you
> go
> >>>>>
> >>>> to
> >>>>
> >>>>> the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/> is
> the
> >>>>> notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it
> would
> >>>>>
> >>>> be
> >>>>
> >>>>> instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the
> >>>>>
> >>>> Sardinian
> >>>>
> >>>>> languages <
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
> >>>>>
> >>>> is
> >>>>
> >>>>> clear, the island is divided in four.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that
> political
> >>>>> arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we
> should
> >>>>>
> >>>> make.
> >>>>
> >>>>>    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
> >>>>>    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for
> the
> >>>>>    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have had a chat with Debbie
> >>>>> Garside<
> >>>>>
> >>>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside
> >about
> >>>>
> >>>>> all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> >>>>> ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be
> approved. At
> >>>>> least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be
> required.
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>      GerardM
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>>>> [hidden email]
> >>>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>>> [hidden email]
> >>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>> [hidden email]
> >>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from nick1915@gmail.com
Hoi Nick,
On Meta you dazzled with this same list only to get it refuted for its
relevance. On Meta you went as far as stating that Sassarese is not a
language only to be debunked.
Thanks,
    GerardM

On 9/11/07, Nicolò Zamperini <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> The Sardinian idiom is indeed recognized as a language; please see any of
> the references below.
>
>     * ML Wagner, Sardinian Language, Bern, Francke, 1951
>     * A. Sanna, Introduzione agli studi di linguistica sarda, Cagliari,
> Regione Autonoma Sardegna, 1957
>     * M. Cortellazzo, Profilo dei dialetti italiani, Pisa, Pacini-CNR,
> 1982
> (n.20 "Sardegna")
>     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Storia linguistica della Sardegna (Beihefte zur
> Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie ; vol. 202), Tübingen, Niemeyer,
> 1984
>     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Il sardo (in Lexikon der Romanistischen
> Linguistik,
> cit. II/2 pp. 239-271)
>     * E. Blasco Ferrer, Handbuch der italienischen Sprachwissenschaft,
> Berlin : E. Schmidt, 1994
>     * Lenguas minoritarias en la romania. El sardo. Estado de la cuestión,
> special rewiev of "Revista de filología románica", 17 (2000)
>     * I. Nichita, Complexul insulei. Fizionomia lexicului sard, Bucureşti,
> Lumina Lex, 1998
>
> Sassarese and gallurese are ''variants'' of '''corso''' ([
>
> http://www.italica.rai.it/principali/lingua/bruni/mappe/flash/regionalok.htm
> ],
> [[:Image:Dialetti corsi.gif]]) and the others (logudorese, nuorese,
> aborense
> etc.) are variants of Sardinian lang. The UNESCO report (
> http://www.helsinki.fi/%7Etasalmin/europe_report.html#GSardinian) is a
> very
> good source when dealing with the preservation of endangered languages,
> but
> it's hardly authoritative aboutphilological-linguistical issues....
> The fact that a language's distinctive trait should not be traced
> exclusively to a specific heritage of literary works is one of the
> founding
> tenets of linguistics; on the contrary, these distinctive traits are
> developed through the comparison of syntax and morphology, and especially
> by
> studying phonological transformations.
>
> The philologists (whose works I have quoted in the references) have picked
> up such common "distinctive traits", identifying one big language group
> called "Sardo" (Sardinian). These results are not some individual's
> original
> research; they are a respected linguistics thesis with a proven track
> record, accepted by most experts in the field.
>
> It is true that the issues on languages spoken in Italy are among most
> complex to be found in this field; it is somewhat understandable that the
> Lancom is faced with great difficulties in handling them.
>
> Nick
>
> 2007/9/10, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > Correct, you analysis is closest to the reality.
> >
> > The problem is that Sardinian is the "polished" language. Sassarese,
> > Campidanese, Logudorese and Campidanese are dialects or spoken languages
> > or "vulgari eloquentiae" as Dante Alighieri could say.
> >
> > Dante Alighieri in XIII century understood the difference and he said
> > that a "vulgari eloquentia" to become a "literary" language must be:
> > noble, aulic, courtier and distinguished. It not sufficient to have a
> > spoken language or a literature (in this case we ares closer to the
> > dialect than a language), but a dialect must be used in politic, courts
> > of justice, litterature and so on (the difference of registries) to be a
> > language.
> >
> > For many centuries in Italy (for example) it has been discussed if the
> > Italian language would be a super-language or a "polished" dialect.
> > After discussions and discussions and discussions poetries and literary
> > men has chosen a "polished" dialect because there was not a politic
> > unity to impose a super-language.
> >
> > This is what happened in the past or what happens in present days: or a
> > dialect is stronger than other and it becomes a "polished" dialect with
> > difference of registries and it is used in politic, justice, literature
> > and media or a country impose a super-language mixing different
> dialects.
> >
> > Sardinia is following the second one, it is a mix of Logudorese and
> > Campidanese because they have got a literature and they are more
> > widespread than other two.
> >
> > Ilario
> > ====================
> > Wikimedia CH board member
> > Wikimedia Italy member
> >
> > Aphaia wrote:
> > > It sounds like a relation between Indonesian language (artificial, but
> > > official language of Indonesia) and native languages spoken in that
> > > state (Javanese, Sundanese etc etc). So it can be "official" and
> > > written language but not spoken. At least now.
> > >
> > > Since it is highly political, and not genuinely linguistics, I think
> > > we need to establish a general consensus toward the issue: if a
> > > certain local community or even limited to the government tries to
> > > standardize their language in an official but artificial manner, and
> > > they have no real speaker yet, we accept such language as part of our
> > > project. I am not sure if there is a general consensus to support such
> > > experimental activities on Wikimedia community, though, being aware we
> > > know some successful cases in the history.
> > >
> > > On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree, but I have said that in Italy this situation is "normal".
> The
> > >> "Limba Sarda Comune" (translation is "Sardinian common language") is
> > >> not a spoken language.
> > >>
> > >> Some "collections" of languages has invented a superlanguage to write
> > >> official documents. The "Limba Sarda Comune" is similar to the
> Romansh
> > >> as "status". It has been invented (as Romansh) as official language
> of
> > >> a Region:
> > >>
> > >> "Recentemente (2006), La Regione Autonoma della Sardegna ha
> > >> individuato una varietà scritta mediana del sardo, denominata Limba
> > >> Sarda Comuna (LSC) da usare nei suoi documenti ufficiali in uscita,
> > >> con carattere quindi di coufficialità. La LSC si propone come varietà
> > >> intermedia tra le due varietà di sardo letterario già esistenti
> > >> (Campidanese e Logudorese)."
> > >>
> > >> The Limba Sarda is a superlanguage, created by the "Regione Autonoma
> > >> of Sardinia" combining Campidanese and Logudorese (two of for
> > >> sardinian dialects, but the more diffused) and it is used in official
> > >> documents. This is the first step to create a language: from dialect
> > >> to enrichment of registries.
> > >>
> > >> See here:
> > >>
> > >> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immagine:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif
> > >>
> > >> the orange parts cover Campidanese and Logudorese.
> > >>
> > >> The Gallurese is the third sardinian dialect closest to Corse
> > >> Language, the Sassarese (spoken in a small part of Sardinia) is the
> > >> fourth dialect in middle of Limba Sarda and Corse Language.
> > >>
> > >> You understand that is crazy to have a wikipedia in a dialect that
> has
> > >> not a grammar and not a dictionary well defined (Wikipedia is written
> > >> and not spoken). Probably the Sardinia Region has had the some
> problem
> > >> and for this reason has invented a "written" language.
> > >>
> > >> Ilario
> > >>
> > >> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hoi,
> > >>> What you write is completely beside the point. At issue is Sardinian
> > and
> > >>> Sassarese not Romansh or Lombard. As far as the language committee
> is
> > >>> concerned, there are four Sardinian languages and none of them is
> the
> > Limba
> > >>> Sarda Comune.
> > >>>
> > >>> We are quite adamant that a language needs recognition as such.
> There
> > are
> > >>> many issues with regard to this kind of recognition but the most
> > relevant
> > >>> part is that it is a process that takes time and involves many
> > experts. It
> > >>> takes so much time because the standard organisations do their best
> to
> > get
> > >>> it right. Where you describe dialects within a languages, it is not
> > specific
> > >>> to Italian languages. The issue of some people trying to come to a
> > "unified"
> > >>> language is not unique to Sardinia either.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>>     GerardM
> > >>>
> > >>> On 9/10/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Sardinian is a collection of different dialects spoken in Sardinia.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The environment is similar to Romansh (which is a collection of
> > >>>> different languages as Surmiran, Sursilvan etc.) with the
> difference
> > >>>> that the super-language Romansh is officially recognized and has
> got
> > a
> > >>>> grammar and a dictionary.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The problem is generated because it's not clear what is language
> and
> > >>>> what is dialect.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Using dialect in some environment like Europa you could have
> > >>>> differences between two closest town. The nuances are very strong
> and
> > >>>> the language is not stable (there differences during the years and
> > >>>> influences).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The Lumbard (lmo.wikipedia.org) for example has got hundred
> different
> > >>>> dialects and not a superlanguage officially recognized, and two
> > >>>> different speakers of two lumbard dialect are not completely
> > >>>> understandable each other.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Ilario
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 9/10/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> There is a Wikipedia in the Sardinian
> > >>>>> language<http://sc.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0gina_printzipale>.
> > >>>>> It uses the sc ISO-639-1 code. What was known as Sardinian became
> > srd in
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> the
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> ISO-639-2. In the ISO-639-3 it was recognised as a
> > >>>>> macrolanguage<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#M>;
> > >>>>> practically what was called Sardinian was split into four
> > >>>>> languages<http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=srd>
> > >>>>> .
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The Italian government has officially recognised the Sardinian
> > language
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> or
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> the "Limba Sarda Comune". This is in essence a constructed
> language
> > as
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> it
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> tries to make one language out of the four "dialects". One of the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> effects
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> has been that some people prevent others from writing in one of
> the
> > four
> > >>>>> languages on the sc.wikpedia.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The language committee of the Wikimedia Foundation has a request
> to
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> approve
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> a new language; one of the Sardinian languages, Sassarese with ISO
> > code
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> sdc.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> There are two problems to deal with:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>    - The "Limba Sarda Comune" is not recognised as a language
> > >>>>>    - The proponents of the "Limba Sarda Comune" reserve the
> > >>>>> sc.wikipediafor their language
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This issue is political. The first thing that I understand when
> you
> > go
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> to
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> the official website <http://www.sardegnacultura.it/linguasarda/>
> is
> > the
> > >>>>> notion of identity and indeed, to create one Sardinian identity it
> > would
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> be
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> instrumental to have a unifying language. However, the map of the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Sardinian
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> languages <
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lingue_di_Sardegna_mod.gif>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> is
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> clear, the island is divided in four.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Given that the language committee has as one of its rules that
> > political
> > >>>>> arguments are not accepted, there are a few conclusions that we
> > should
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> make.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>    1. Sassarese can have a conditional approval
> > >>>>>    2. We urge the proponents of the Limba Sarda Comune to ask for
> > the
> > >>>>>    recognition of this newly constructed language from ISO.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I have had a chat with Debbie
> > >>>>> Garside<
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_board#Debbie_Garside
> > >about
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> all this, and I understand that it is necessary to apply for an
> > >>>>> ISO-639-3 code before an IANA language code is likely to be
> > approved. At
> > >>>>> least fifty published works in the Limba Sarda Comune will be
> > required.
> > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>      GerardM
> > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>> foundation-l mailing list
> > >>>>> [hidden email]
> > >>>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> foundation-l mailing list
> > >>>> [hidden email]
> > >>>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> foundation-l mailing list
> > >>> [hidden email]
> > >>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> foundation-l mailing list
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Senpai-2
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
Dante Alighieri spoke Toskanian Vulgar (volgare toscano) that has becamed
the italian language after the 1300.

Senpai

----- Original Message -----
From: "GerardM" <[hidden email]>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Sassarese and Sardinian

> Hoi,
> Dante Alighieri did not speak Italian. The medieval notion of "noble
> aulic,
> courtier and distinguished" are not the same notions as we have today.
> They
> are also not the notions that are used to get recognition from such bodies
> as ISO and thank <insert your favourite deity> for that. It would for
> instance not allow for sign languages to be recognised as such.
>
> It is not that relevant what politicians call a language. The recognition
> that is valid for the Wikimedia Foundation is not decided by any
> particular
> political entity. There is literature in the Sardinian languages. It is
> however not possible for a constructed language to usurp the existing
> literature and claim it their own in order to get ISO recognition.
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>
 


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
FYI "Standard Italian, adopted by the state after the unification of Italy,
is based on Tuscan dialect and is somewhat intermediate between
Italo-Dalmatian languages of the South and Northern Italian dialects of the
North." This is what the English wikipedia has to say about it. This
indicates clearly that Italian was constructed at the time.
Thanks,
    GerardM

On 9/11/07, senpai <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Dante Alighieri spoke Toskanian Vulgar (volgare toscano) that has becamed
> the italian language after the 1300.
>
> Senpai
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "GerardM" <[hidden email]>
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 8:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Sassarese and Sardinian
>
> > Hoi,
> > Dante Alighieri did not speak Italian. The medieval notion of "noble
> > aulic,
> > courtier and distinguished" are not the same notions as we have today.
> > They
> > are also not the notions that are used to get recognition from such
> bodies
> > as ISO and thank <insert your favourite deity> for that. It would for
> > instance not allow for sign languages to be recognised as such.
> >
> > It is not that relevant what politicians call a language. The
> recognition
> > that is valid for the Wikimedia Foundation is not decided by any
> > particular
> > political entity. There is literature in the Sardinian languages. It is
> > however not possible for a constructed language to usurp the existing
> > literature and claim it their own in order to get ISO recognition.
> > Thanks,
> >     GerardM
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Gatto Nero
2007/9/11, GerardM <[hidden email]>:
> Hoi,
> FYI "Standard Italian, adopted by the state after the unification of Italy,
> is based on Tuscan dialect and is somewhat intermediate between
> Italo-Dalmatian languages of the South and Northern Italian dialects of the
> North." This is what the English wikipedia has to say about it. This
> indicates clearly that Italian was constructed at the time.
> Thanks,
>     GerardM

Hoi GerardM,
your opinions about Italy are always clear.
But could you think that maybe some italians may know about their
language MORE than en.wiki? Maybe, uh.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
??? I love Italy, some of my best friends are Italian. I even lived in Italy
for a while. !!!!

It does however not change the facts about the Italian language. The notion
that someone knows more a language or a country because he lives there or
speaks the language is wrong. When I lived and worked in Great Britain, my
spelling was better then the spelling of my colleagues and I have proof read
their texts on many occasions.. Yes, I make mistakes but everything is
relative.
Thanks,
    GerardM

On 9/11/07, Gatto Nero <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> 2007/9/11, GerardM <[hidden email]>:
> > Hoi,
> > FYI "Standard Italian, adopted by the state after the unification of
> Italy,
> > is based on Tuscan dialect and is somewhat intermediate between
> > Italo-Dalmatian languages of the South and Northern Italian dialects of
> the
> > North." This is what the English wikipedia has to say about it. This
> > indicates clearly that Italian was constructed at the time.
> > Thanks,
> >     GerardM
>
> Hoi GerardM,
> your opinions about Italy are always clear.
> But could you think that maybe some italians may know about their
> language MORE than en.wiki? Maybe, uh.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Bugzilla from nick1915@gmail.com
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
2007/9/11, GerardM <[hidden email]>:
>
> Hoi Nick,
> On Meta you dazzled with this same list only to get it refuted for its
> relevance. On Meta you went as far as stating that Sassarese is not a
> language only to be debunked.
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>
>
Dear Gerard, I gave you a "list" of five romance philologist's studies...
your list contains only ISO standard codes, Ethnologue (controversial
references) and en.wp (...). Debunked? Where?

Nick
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

Bugzilla from nick1915@gmail.com
In reply to this post by M. Williamson
2007/9/11, Mark Williamson <[hidden email]>:

>
> The problem is that we use international standards of language content
> codes to classify Wikipedias by language.
>
> Occasionally, there is a language variety which spans several of them,
> has none at all, or there may be several very distinct varieties
> within one code which require separate Wikipedias.
>
> Unfortunately, the current procedure of the Langcom seems to be to
> require anyone whose Wiki does not fit neatly into one of the holes
> carved by the IANA to request a new code from the IANA itself. I do
> not disagree with that 100%, after all if we are making up our own
> codes avante-gard, then our content cannot be processed by external
> sources according to language (search engines, for example). I also
> have objections to it however, but I am sure that by now these are
> obvious if you do not already know what they are (it limits legitimate
> varieties from getting their own Wiki in a relatively timely fashion,
> and discriminates against non-European languages although that is
> unintentional, they are just less well-documented in general).
>
> Thankfully, I think, the Langcom does not seek to or does not have the
> power (?) to close or rename existing Wikis, so "wrong" codes like sc
> and the like which are actually "macrolanguage codes" will not be
> closed in the interim.


It'a a problem of Langcom, but Langom could change his  "actions"

Unfortunately the current international standards are very flawed.

> However, we cannot expect them to be perfect in a world where we have
> thousands of languages and many people disagree on what should be
> considered a language.
>
> It is an imperfect standard, but it is the best that is currently
> available, so if you discover a problem in it (a language is missing,
> or a language is divided into too many parts), it is probably best, as
> Gerard suggested, to submit a correction, but be prepared to back it
> up with lots of documentation... to get a new code (I believe), there
> must be at least 50 books existing in a language, which could be a lot
> to ask for some languages, and obviously was not used as a requirement
> for when codes were "imported" from Ethnologue.
>
> However, as far as Sardinian goes, rather than combining Logudorese
> and Campidanese into a single entity and merging Gallurese and
> Sassarese into Corsican, I think it is best to add a code for
> something written in one of the several unified varieties of
> Sardinian, if not specifically LSC (for example its predecessor LSU,
> or the amateur creation Limba de Messania), because it may still
> sometimes be necessary to maintain parallel translations of a document
> in each variety, and also because Gallurese and _especially_ Sassarese
> are not usually accepted by Corsicans as pure "Corsican" and would
> probably not be allowed on the Corsican Wikipedia.
>
> Mark
>
>
We're talking about linguistics relevance of a language, not politics
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sassarese and Sardinian

M. Williamson
On 11/09/2007, Nicolò Zamperini <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We're talking about linguistics relevance of a language, not politics

Then why don't we have a Romanesco WP? And why _do_ we have a
Croatian, Bosnian, Serbian WP, and separate Indonesian and Malay WPs?

--
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
12