On Jan 28, 2005, at 9:02 PM, Sheng Jiong wrote:
This is far
from the truth. There is a standard written language, yes,
but it is based on Mandarin. Colloquial writings in regional varieties
use different grammar, different vocabulary, and even different
characters. (The popular book "he zanhwa" had to be translated to
Mandarin before it could be read by non-Wu speakers)
You are discussing an extreme example. Look at all the broadsheets in
Hong Kong(where most people only know how to speak Cantonese, not
Mandarin), and their newspapers can still be understood by mainland
Chinese. Of course some tabloids would use distinctive "Cantonese
characters", but there are really not the standard.
And really what is the use of setting up a Wikipedia if only *one*
user is interested?
[[User:Formulax]]
I would again like to propose that a "notability" standard be applied
to language division - if asked to show that there is a movement to
create a literature in the dialect that is distinct from the main
language - including, but not limited to, the native production of
dictionaries, social and literary apparatus and so on, could we do it?
If a division does not meet this notability standard - separate from
the desires of our users, then it should be considered only if there
are other extenuating circumstances. This is an extension of the "no
original research" standard.
Wikipedia should support, but not lead, the efforts to create language
identity.