On Sat, 26 Aug 2023 at 02:56, Sotiale Wiki <sotiale.wm@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi.Standard Arabic is arb (Arabic: ara) and still if someone posts a new language request for Wp/arb, it won't be eligible. Unless the speakers of Arabic Wikipedia are unable to communicate in Standard Arabic. But I don't think there's any reason a native speaker of Arabic can't speak Standard Arabic. So there is no reason for existing Arabic Wikipedia to be disqualified for this reason, but even so, the Arabic Wikipedia was created prior to the LPP and is therefore unaffected.The requirement to be a distinct language is to ensure that there are no multiple Wikipedias for a language that is sufficiently communicative at the dialect level equivalent(If this were incomprehensible to native speakers, it would have been recognized as a separate language). In general, these branches are likely for political reasons, which may be on-wiki as well as off-wiki reasons. This permission of Wikipedia jeopardizes NPOV by creating Wikipedia with different views of the same language for that purpose. Even if it has no such purpose, it is likely to be abused as such.Sotiale_______________________________________________2023년 8월 26일 (토) 오전 3:32, Anass Sedrati <sedranas@gmail.com>님이 작성:Hello Sotiale and thank you for your answer,Sorry for my late reply as I was travelling back from Singapore and had also other engagements.So regarding your argumentation, if you consider zgh not a distinct language "because it is just a standard representation of Berber languages", then we have also to consider standard Arabic (ISO 639:ara) not a distinct language because it is not spoken in any country/region and is "a standard representation of Arabic languages". Of course, there are many more sources and books in standard Arabic due to religious and historical reasons, but it is still a standardized language, and only a written one. This said, it will of course never be considered to close the Arabic Wikipedia because of it. Therefore, it can be really tricky to base the decisions on this argument, although it is understandable that some languages are "bigger" or more established than others. What do you think?Best regards,AnassOn Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 3:08 PM MF-Warburg <mfwarburg@googlemail.com> wrote:_______________________________________________NB: there has also been a discussion at <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Moroccan_Amazigh#Clerking_note>. I believe there are several requests open for related languages. It would be good to have some clarity to avoid the community being split into multiple incubator test-wikis.Am Fr., 18. Aug. 2023 um 14:38 Uhr schrieb Sotiale Wiki <sotiale.wm@gmail.com>:_______________________________________________Thank you for your kind explanation.
If this can be understood as the relationship between Standard Arabic (ISO 639:arb) and Arabic (ISO 639:ara), then zgh is not a distinct language because it is just a standard representation of Berber languages. This is true even in light of the current LPP, which excludes different written forms of any language.Therefore, it seems that eligibility for this language cannot be recognized.Sotiale2023년 8월 16일 (수) 오후 10:48, Anass Sedrati <sedranas@gmail.com>님이 작성:Hello,I am very familiar with this case as I come myself from Morocco and speak Berber. The standard Tamazight (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Moroccan_Amazigh) is not a spoken language, but only a written one. It was created by the official Academy of Berber languages in Morocco (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Institute_of_Amazigh_Culture) in an attempt to standardize the Berber languages, as there are many of them spoken in Morocco (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_languages).So to answer you, standard Tamazight is exactly like modern standard Arabic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Standard_Arabic). It is a standardized language with rules, but not a spoken one (nobody speaks standard Arabic as a mother tongue, every Arab country has its own dialect).This is to explain that even if it not native, Zgh can be treated as modern standard Arabic in terms of linguistics. I hope that this gives a bit of context, but I am happy to expand on any aspect if you have additional questions!Best regards,AnassOn Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 3:00 PM Sotiale Wiki <sotiale.wm@gmail.com> wrote:Hi all._______________________________________________I'm not familiar with the Moroccan languages, so I'd love to hear from other colleagues.I'm considering this language project as a potential candidate for approval, but I'm wondering if this is a standardization of other languages, or a distinct language from others?Since this site[1] states that there are no native speakers, I wondered if this was just standardization of other languages(the case that native speakers have a standardized language while using their own languages).Sotiale
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
--_______________________________________________-----------------------------------------------------Anass SEDRATI(+46) 70 508 51 07
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
--_______________________________________________-----------------------------------------------------Anass SEDRATI(+46) 70 508 51 07
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
