[Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English

Mon Sep 19 16:47:36 UTC 2005

But the issue is (to me, at least), that I can understand you, even if you
spell funny (honour, colour, etc.) and have funny words (lift, pavement
instead of elevator and sidewalk).  And do understand that I'm being
slightly sarcastic here, please don't rant-reply.  Americans have some
spellings, English have some spellings, but we can understand each other,
except when we use our dialect-specific words.  I don't really think it
appropriate to dialectualize the wikipedia unless there's mutual
unintelligibility (as in the Frisian case, I think it was).

James

-----Original Message-----
From: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Jack & Naree
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 6:39 AM
To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English

Cool, mockery is for trolls.
 This is not about Balkanisation, it's about separating American-English 
from English.
 But come to think of it - yes, have one for every variation you like, and 
let natural selection take care of the rest. Just as long as English is 
English, and not American.
 Have you seen the "Scot's English" one? Do you not call that Balkanisation?
 If you want to have a legitimate criteria for a language, a different 
orthography has got to be a clear one.
In English there are two - American and non-American.
Orthography is the main issue, meaning is another.
 If you want to go academic - which is surely the best way to back this 
whole argument up, you should scan this (ironically american) leading 
insitute of linguistic research:
 http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=eng
 On 19/09/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote: 
> 
> (note: I've split this into paragraphs for readability)
> 
> Jack wrote:
> > I want American English to have a separate Wikipedia from English
> > English - this would mean copying
> >
> > I typed it in a hurry at the end of my shift with a view to
> > responding to any response, later.
> >
> > I've placed a more detailed post on the helpdesk page. I think,
> > however, that it's apt that I should go into even more depth here.
> >
> > I've asked about English on Wikipedia before and been told that they
> > think it's acceptable for English articles to be in a mish-mash of
> > dialects and spellings; but having seen the range of ludicrous
> > languages available - including variant forms of English: Scots
> > English and Middle English etc... I've now decided I must make a
> > request and campaign properly for American English to be given a
> > seperate Wikipedia language from (English) English.
> >
> 
> I must remind viewers who are still with us that Balkanisation Is Evil.
> 
> > It's simply infuriating and offensive for the misspellings of a
> > dialect of English to take precedence over the standard language -
> > I'm sure Spanish, French and Portuguese speakers would feel
> > similarly; it's cultural imperialism.
> >
> > If you have different forms of Chinese Wikipedia (I'm a graduate of
> > Jap & Chi so I'm aware of xyz); if you have Wikipedias for dialects
> > and older forms of English; if you Wikipedias for countries and
> > languages with far smaller populations, economic/political importance
> > and internet presences; then the English of the British Isles and
> > Commonwealth - the standard and original form of English - simply
> > *has* to be the only form of English that can use the term "English"
> > on Wikipedia.
> >
> > Some might say that it is "British English", this term is fallacious
> > (even if you can find it in a dictionary) no English, British,
> > British Isles or even Commonwealth native understands or recognises
> > the term - it is both meaningless and fallacious: there are no
> > "British English" speakers in the world - there are English
> > (nationality) English (language) speakers, Welsh English speakers,
> > Scottish English speakers, Irish English speakers, Cornish English
> > speakers and so on...
> >
> > Whereas the term "American English" is not.
> >
> > When I go to Wikipedia English, and type a search for "colour" I
> > should not expect to be redirected to "color" which is a recent
> > spelling of a dialect of English that has arisen over the last couple
> > of centuries perhaps - it is simply *not* *English* it is
> > *American-English*. I'm more than happy for American-English speakers
> > to have an American-English wikipedia and have all their weird and
> > wonderful spellings and vocabulary - and it may well turn out to be
> > the biggest wiki; but I don't want to select Wikipedia English and
> > type in "Aubergine" and get "Eggplant"; "Nappy" and get "Diaper"; or
> > "Tap" and get "Faucet", it's simply unacceptable, and against the
> > spirit of multilingualism and accuracy that wikipedia is supposed to
> > strive for. Hence I want to campaign in all seriousness that The
> > English Wikipedia is duplicated, and one is called American-English,
> > the other remaining English, and the task of correcting spelling,
> > vocab and grammar can begin.
> >
> 
> I agree completely. Furthurmore, I feel that we shall need an Australian
> English Wikipedia to handle the many words in Australian English which
> differ from English English (and possibly Queensland English, New South
> Wales English, et. al), a South African English Wikipedia to accomodate
> the heavy use of Afrikaans, a New Zealand English Wikipedia to account
> for the lack of vowels, a Canadian English Wikipedia to account for the
> number of French words, a Canadian French Wikipedia to complement it,
> and a Singlish Wikipedia because it has a funny name.
> 
> Here's a far better idea: Let's go back to Proto-Indo-European. Imagine
> the amount of server space we could save!
> 
> Conversely, imagine a Beowulf cluster of English Wikipedias!
> 
> > The Campaign for an English Wikipedia is not about Britain (the
> > fourth largest economy in the world, a population of about 60m, 55%
> > of whom are online), it's also about a whole host of other countries
> > and regions (over a billion people) that do not use American-English,
> > but use English instead as a lingua franca (many with complete
> > fluency):
> >
> <snip overly long list>
> > The term Commonwealth English is therefore also apt, but 
> American-English
> > has no right to usurp the title English, from English! Wikipedia should
> > reflect this.
> >
> 
> I find your theories interesting/intriguing and wish to subscribe to
> your newsletter/journal.
> 
> --
> Alphax | /"\
> Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards
> http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l