The fact that the Coptic church may or may not issue their documents
in Coptic is not enough alone to state that this is a "dead language".
We must look at all facets of modern use (and lack thereof), rather
than just the issuance of new documents by a particular church in a
specific language.
Mark
On 01/04/2008, Aphaia <aphaia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:04 AM, Pharos
<pharosofalexandria(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Mark Williamson
<node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
For Latin, it is obvious. The latest Roman Missal was published in
2002. If you can argue it is not so much different from the second
latest one, it had been published in 1962. Reflecting the so-called
2nd Vatican Counsil and its reformation, 1962 version, or Novus Ordo
is very known of its differences from the earlier versions. Or we can
refer to CCC or several motu proprios which the Vatican has issued.
On the other hand, Coptic Church doesn't seem to be enthusiastic to
issue their documents in Coptic. As for the Orthodox, I don't know any
church in the Slavic tradition using Church Slavic as their document
language, while still today it is the language of liturgy and the
Scrupture and many prayers, and Churches in Greek tradition don't use
Attic dialect as far as I know.
There is a good reason Latin learners can be allowed to entertain
their linguistic ability on this project, I think. Anyway, even in a
narrow region, it is still used and viable to carry ideas.
Yes, I think the exact rule we should propose
is: Does this language
have a contemporary literature? Are new articles or books still be
written in it?
And is the contemporary literature respected by -scholars- of the
"historical" language (i.e. not something merely pursued by Sumerian
hobbyists)?
Because if there is a contemporary literature, then the language is
not truly extinct in the written form.
When we "provide the sum of human knowledge to every human being", we
must recognize the diversity of human expression, and that a -full-
accounting of the vehicles of intellectual discourse must include all
languages that have contemporary literatures, whether they havve
native speakers or not.
Pharos
On 29/03/2008, Jesse Martin (Pathoschild)
<pathoschild(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
The language subcommittee only allows languages that have a living
native community (except Wikisource, due to its archivist nature).
This is based on an interpretation of the Wikimedia Foundation mission
to "provide the sum of human knowledge to every human being". Thus,
the overriding purpose of allowing a wiki in a new language is to make
it accessible to more human beings. If a language has no native users,
allowing a wiki in that language does not fit our mission because it
does not make that project accessible to more human beings. Instead, a
wiki in their native languages should be requested if it doesn't
already exist.
Typically, the users requesting a wiki in an extinct language don't
want to provide educational material to more people at all, but only
want to promote or revive the language. While these are noble goals,
they are not those of the Wikimedia Foundation, so that a wiki should
not be created simply to fulfill them.
But that is my opinion. What do you think; should wikis be allowed in
every extinct language?
--
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
KIZU Naoko
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese)
Quote of the Day (English):
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l