Darko Bulatovic wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
With your blanket statement that "political
background of languages is
undiscussable" you indeed end the discussion. In this you are wrong.
The Mapuche people are going to court because the Chilean government and
the Microsoft company insist on a given orthography. The Mapuche live in
Chile and Argentina. This proves very much that the insistence of making
a language a people "owned" by a country is very much not universal. If
your POV was shared by the Wikimedia Foundation there would be a project
specific to US English. By having one English Wikipedia the quality is
much better and the POV of the project is very much more a NEUTRAL POV
than it would otherwise be.
Gerard you really make your position on this clear. If you check
requirements for ISO you will see that for language code it will need a
Government support. So language is political and ethnic question, but
you seems that don't have that wide understanding of history of
languages. I know the history of my language and that give me quite wide
understanding of political background. So please don't be that narrow in
understanding.
It's the global perspective that counts, not the one from the narrow
view of one language. Most languages do not have a one-to-one relation
with any country. If you recognize 3,000 languages and only 200
countries many would be left out. For the endangered languages a
country devoted solely to that language would not be viable.
Ec