Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot).
Meta request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&w... at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012).
Translation of the most-used messages is complete (< http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot%3E). As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content. (By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful).
Best regards, MF-Warburg
+1 if we could get an expert in Votic to double-check the most-used messages at least
El 28/09/2013 07:37 p.m., MF-Warburg escribió:
Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot).
Meta request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&w... http://toolserver.org/%7Epathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&wiki=incubatorwiki_p#distribution_201309 (always at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012).
Translation of the most-used messages is complete (<http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot http://toolserver.org/%7Erobin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot>). As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content. (By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful).
Best regards, MF-Warburg
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Do you really mean checking the most-used messages (as we normally let the content on incubator be checked)? Am 28.09.2013 18:58 schrieb "Carlos Manuel Colina" <jewbask@wikimedia.org.ve
:
+1 if we could get an expert in Votic to double-check the most-used messages at least
El 28/09/2013 07:37 p.m., MF-Warburg escribió:
Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot).
Meta request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&w... at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012).
Translation of the most-used messages is complete (< http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot%3E). As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content. (By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful).
Best regards, MF-Warburg
Langcom mailing listLangcom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
-- "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain." Carlos Manuel Colina Vicepresidente A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela RIF J-40129321-2 +972-52-4869915 www.wikimedia.org.ve
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Yes, why not? It is spoken by a few dozens of people, so the chances that the messages have a lot of loans/imports from Russian (maybe also from Estonian, but they are very closely related)
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII Mini On Oct 6, 2013 7:57 PM, "MF-Warburg" mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
Do you really mean checking the most-used messages (as we normally let the content on incubator be checked)? Am 28.09.2013 18:58 schrieb "Carlos Manuel Colina" < jewbask@wikimedia.org.ve>:
+1 if we could get an expert in Votic to double-check the most-used messages at least
El 28/09/2013 07:37 p.m., MF-Warburg escribió:
Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot).
Meta request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&w... at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012).
Translation of the most-used messages is complete (< http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot%3E). As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content. (By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful).
Best regards, MF-Warburg
Langcom mailing listLangcom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
-- "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain." Carlos Manuel Colina Vicepresidente A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela RIF J-40129321-2 +972-52-4869915 www.wikimedia.org.ve
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
I can understand why you want it, I was only asking because afaik this would be the first time we do this.
However, do you fear that the interface translations might be made up in a way not understandable to other speakers? Wouldn't it be more important to check that the articles are well? Am 06.10.2013 20:03 schrieb "Carlos Colina" jewbask@wikimedia.org.ve:
Yes, why not? It is spoken by a few dozens of people, so the chances that the messages have a lot of loans/imports from Russian (maybe also from Estonian, but they are very closely related)
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII Mini On Oct 6, 2013 7:57 PM, "MF-Warburg" mfwarburg@googlemail.com wrote:
Do you really mean checking the most-used messages (as we normally let the content on incubator be checked)? Am 28.09.2013 18:58 schrieb "Carlos Manuel Colina" < jewbask@wikimedia.org.ve>:
+1 if we could get an expert in Votic to double-check the most-used messages at least
El 28/09/2013 07:37 p.m., MF-Warburg escribió:
Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot).
Meta request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&w... at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012).
Translation of the most-used messages is complete (< http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot%3E). As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content. (By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful).
Best regards, MF-Warburg
Langcom mailing listLangcom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
-- "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain." Carlos Manuel Colina Vicepresidente A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela RIF J-40129321-2 +972-52-4869915 www.wikimedia.org.ve
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Yes, that too, of course!
El 06/10/2013 09:58 p.m., MF-Warburg escribió:
I can understand why you want it, I was only asking because afaik this would be the first time we dho this.
However, do you fear that the interface translations might be made up in a way not understandable to other speakers? Wouldn't it be more important to check that the articles are well?
Am 06.10.2013 20:03 schrieb "Carlos Colina" <jewbask@wikimedia.org.ve mailto:jewbask@wikimedia.org.ve>:
Yes, why not? It is spoken by a few dozens of people, so the chances that the messages have a lot of loans/imports from Russian (maybe also from Estonian, but they are very closely related) Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII Mini On Oct 6, 2013 7:57 PM, "MF-Warburg" <mfwarburg@googlemail.com <mailto:mfwarburg@googlemail.com>> wrote: Do you really mean checking the most-used messages (as we normally let the content on incubator be checked)? Am 28.09.2013 18:58 schrieb "Carlos Manuel Colina" <jewbask@wikimedia.org.ve <mailto:jewbask@wikimedia.org.ve>>: +1 if we could get an expert in Votic to double-check the most-used messages at least El 28/09/2013 07:37 p.m., MF-Warburg escribió:Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot). Meta request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&wiki=incubatorwiki_p#distribution_201309 <http://toolserver.org/%7Epathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&wiki=incubatorwiki_p#distribution_201309> (always at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012). Translation of the most-used messages is complete (<http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot <http://toolserver.org/%7Erobin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot>>). As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content. (By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful). Best regards, MF-Warburg _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom-- "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain." Carlos Manuel Colina Vicepresidente A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela RIF J-40129321-2 +972-52-4869915 <tel:%2B972-52-4869915> www.wikimedia.org.ve <http://www.wikimedia.org.ve> _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Hi all,
I have just sent a request to a linguist contact of mine at Helsinki University in the hope that we might get an expert on Votic through her. Watch this space.
Otherwise, I'm fine with approving Votic.
Cheers,
Oliver
_____
From: MF-Warburg [mailto:mfwarburg@googlemail.com] Sent: 28 September 2013 19:37 To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee Subject: [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia
Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot).
Meta request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic
Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot
Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0 http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&wiki=inc ubatorwiki_p#distribution_201309 &title=Wp/vot&wiki=incubatorwiki_p#distribution_201309 (always at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012).
Translation of the most-used messages is complete (<http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot &code=vot>).
As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content.
(By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful).
Best regards, MF-Warburg
Hi all,
It looks like there is a problem with "Votic", cf. the reply which I received from the scholar who I was referred to via Helsinki University. The language used on incubator is based on a grammar written in 1948 which deviates considerably from the language as spoken nowadays by the last living speakers. Presumably, none of the contributors are really native speakers of Votic. In which case we may have to keep it in the incubator, right? What do you think?
Best,
Oliver
[.]
I looked through some articles of Votic Wikiperdia (in fact, I have already read it a year ago - I did not notice very much changes now).
What can I say? The problem is that there is a "classical" Votic, which is based on the grammar by Paul Ariste. This grammar was written in 1948 (translated into English in 1968) and mostly used the data from already extinct Votic dialect. People who wrote articles for Wikipedia used this Votic variety. Of course many contemporary notions does not (and cannot) exist in Ariste's grammar, so the Wiki authors invent their own words, and use lexical calques from Russian or Estonian.
The last speakers of Votic speak different dialect. This difference between dialects concerns lexicon and, what is more important from my point of view, the whole phonological system.
I do not know where the Wiki authors studied Votic but not from the native speakers (though there can be some exception). Thus, from my point of view the Votic Wikipedia is written in some artificial language: the previous speakers did not speak this way as they do not have such lexicon, the contemporary speakers use the dialect with different phonology and, sometimes, grammar.
I also noticed some evident grammatical calques from Russian, e.g. (city) ležib 'lies', instead of on 'is'.
Now all this looks like a game: Let us speak "Votic"!
However, I cannot propose something better for the current situation. Let it exist this way. It's better than nothing.
Concerning the menu translation the situation is the same. cülci for the 'page' looks especially weird, as it means '(body) side'.
If you have any other questions, please, feel free to contact me.
[.]
_____
From: Oliver Stegen [mailto:info@oliverstegen.net] Sent: 07 October 2013 08:12 To: 'Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee' Subject: Re: [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia
Hi all,
I have just sent a request to a linguist contact of mine at Helsinki University in the hope that we might get an expert on Votic through her. Watch this space.
Otherwise, I'm fine with approving Votic.
Cheers,
Oliver
_____
From: MF-Warburg [mailto:mfwarburg@googlemail.com] Sent: 28 September 2013 19:37 To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee Subject: [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia
Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot).
Meta request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic
Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot
Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0 http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&wiki=inc ubatorwiki_p#distribution_201309 &title=Wp/vot&wiki=incubatorwiki_p#distribution_201309 (always at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012).
Translation of the most-used messages is complete (<http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot &code=vot>).
As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content.
(By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful).
Best regards, MF-Warburg
HoI,
Sadly I have to agree with you ... Gerard
On 19 October 2013 17:50, Oliver Stegen info@oliverstegen.net wrote:
Hi all,****
It looks like there is a problem with “Votic”, cf. the reply which I received from the scholar who I was referred to via ****Helsinki** ** University****. The language used on incubator is based on a grammar written in 1948 which deviates considerably from the language as spoken nowadays by the last living speakers. Presumably, none of the contributors are really native speakers of Votic. In which case we may have to keep it in the incubator, right? What do you think?****
Best,****
Oliver****
[…]****
I looked through some articles of Votic Wikiperdia (in fact, I have already read it a year ago - I did not notice very much changes now).
What can I say? The problem is that there is a "classical" Votic, which is based on the grammar by Paul Ariste. This grammar was written in 1948 (translated into English in 1968) and mostly used the data from already extinct Votic dialect. People who wrote articles for Wikipedia used this Votic variety. Of course many contemporary notions does not (and cannot) exist in Ariste's grammar, so the Wiki authors invent their own words, and use lexical calques from Russian or Estonian.****
The last speakers of Votic speak different dialect. This difference between dialects concerns lexicon and, what is more important from my point of view, the whole phonological system.****
I do not know where the Wiki authors studied Votic but not from the native speakers (though there can be some exception). Thus, from my point of view the Votic Wikipedia is written in some artificial language: the previous speakers did not speak this way as they do not have such lexicon, the contemporary speakers use the dialect with different phonology and, sometimes, grammar. ****
I also noticed some evident grammatical calques from Russian, e.g. (city) *ležib* 'lies', instead of *on* 'is'.****
Now all this looks like a game: Let us speak "Votic"!****
However, I cannot propose something better for the current situation. Let it exist this way. It's better than nothing.****
Concerning the menu translation the situation is the same. *cülci* for the 'page' looks especially weird, as it means '(body) side'.****
If you have any other questions, please, feel free to contact me.****
[…]****
*From:* Oliver Stegen [mailto:info@oliverstegen.net] *Sent:* 07 October 2013 08:12
*To:* '**Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee**' *Subject:* Re: [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia****
Hi all,****
I have just sent a request to a linguist contact of mine at ****Helsinki** **University**** in the hope that we might get an expert on Votic through her. Watch this space.****
Otherwise, I’m fine with approving Votic.****
Cheers,****
Oliver****
*From:* MF-Warburg [mailto:**mfwarburg@googlemail.com**] *Sent:* 28 September 2013 19:37 *To:* **Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee** *Subject:* [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia****
Hi all, I propose to approve Votic Wikipedia (vot).
**Meta** request: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Votic
Test wiki: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/vot****
Activity: http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/catanalysis/?cat=0&title=Wp/vot&w... at least 3 users with >10 edits since 5 months, and also previous such activity in 2012).****
Translation of the most-used messages is complete (< http://toolserver.org/~robin/?tool=codelookup&code=vot%3E).****
As this would be the first project in Votic, we also would need an expert to verify the content.****
(By the way, verification for Livonian is still pending - my attempts to contact people were unsuccesful).****
Best regards, MF-Warburg****
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
On 19 Oct 2013, at 17:50, Oliver Stegen info@oliverstegen.net wrote:
It looks like there is a problem with “Votic”, cf. the reply which I received from the scholar who I was referred to via Helsinki University. The language used on incubator is based on a grammar written in 1948 which deviates considerably from the language as spoken nowadays by the last living speakers. Presumably, none of the contributors are really native speakers of Votic. In which case we may have to keep it in the incubator, right? What do you think?
Keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Hoi, Michael so what is it that you propose ? Thanks, Gerard
On 19 October 2013 19:07, Michael Everson everson@evertype.com wrote:
On 19 Oct 2013, at 17:50, Oliver Stegen info@oliverstegen.net wrote:
It looks like there is a problem with “Votic”, cf. the reply which I
received from the scholar who I was referred to via Helsinki University. The language used on incubator is based on a grammar written in 1948 which deviates considerably from the language as spoken nowadays by the last living speakers. Presumably, none of the contributors are really native speakers of Votic. In which case we may have to keep it in the incubator, right? What do you think?
Keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
On 19 Oct 2013, at 19:17, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Michael so what is it that you propose ?
Generosity in approval.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Michael,
I understand your suggestion to show "generosity in approval". Still, when you write "keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die", I wonder which language you are referring to. The speech variety of Votic which Ariste described in his 1948 grammar has died long ago. If some linguist enthusiasts are now "playing a game" with that grammar, they're flogging a dead horse (and they're certainly not helping to "keep Votic alive" given how twisted and far-removed from any real Votic their written Votic is. The only reason why I could possibly approve a Votic wikipedia as it stands now on incubator is if Votic mother tongue speakers (or their descendants) were involved, i.e. either the handful of Votic speakers still alive (but then, they'd be writing in a different dialect) or descendants of the extinct dialect. Do we know what connection to Votic those contributors to Votic on incubator have? They're obviously not mother tongue speakers (even though some pose as such). Without some reassurance that there is a real Votic community, I wouldn't feel happy to give approval.
Fwiw,
Oliver
_____
From: Gerard Meijssen [mailto:gerard.meijssen@gmail.com] Sent: 19 October 2013 20:17 To: Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee Subject: Re: [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia
Hoi,
Michael so what is it that you propose ?
Thanks,
Gerard
On 19 October 2013 19:07, Michael Everson everson@evertype.com wrote:
On 19 Oct 2013, at 17:50, Oliver Stegen info@oliverstegen.net wrote:
It looks like there is a problem with "Votic", cf. the reply which I
received from the scholar who I was referred to via Helsinki University. The language used on incubator is based on a grammar written in 1948 which deviates considerably from the language as spoken nowadays by the last living speakers. Presumably, none of the contributors are really native speakers of Votic. In which case we may have to keep it in the incubator, right? What do you think?
Keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
I will ask the contributors on Incubator about their relationship to the language.
2013/10/21 Oliver Stegen info@oliverstegen.net
Michael,****
I understand your suggestion to show “generosity in approval”. Still, when you write “keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die”, I wonder which language you are referring to. The speech variety of Votic which Ariste described in his 1948 grammar has died long ago. If some linguist enthusiasts are now “playing a game” with that grammar, they’re flogging a dead horse (and they’re certainly not helping to “keep Votic alive” given how twisted and far-removed from any real Votic their written Votic is. The only reason why I could possibly approve a Votic wikipedia as it stands now on incubator is if Votic mother tongue speakers (or their descendants) were involved, i.e. either the handful of Votic speakers still alive (but then, they’d be writing in a different dialect) or descendants of the extinct dialect. Do we know what connection to Votic those contributors to Votic on incubator have? They’re obviously not mother tongue speakers (even though some pose as such). Without some reassurance that there is a real Votic community, I wouldn’t feel happy to give approval.****
Fwiw,****
Oliver****
*From:* Gerard Meijssen [mailto:gerard.meijssen@gmail.com] *Sent:* 19 October 2013 20:17
*To:* **Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee** *Subject:* Re: [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia
Hoi,****
Michael so what is it that you propose ?****
Thanks,****
Gerard****
On 19 October 2013 19:07, Michael Everson everson@evertype.com wrote:***
On 19 Oct 2013, at 17:50, Oliver Stegen info@oliverstegen.net wrote:
It looks like there is a problem with “Votic”, cf. the reply which I
received from the scholar who I was referred to via ****Helsinki** ** University****. The language used on incubator is based on a grammar written in 1948 which deviates considerably from the language as spoken nowadays by the last living speakers. Presumably, none of the contributors are really native speakers of Votic. In which case we may have to keep it in the incubator, right? What do you think?****
Keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/****
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom****
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Here is one comment from a contributor: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Language_committee&cur...
I have read the discussion about the approval of Votic Wikipedia (I hope that's not secret data). Actually I'm even happy that Langcom found a good expert in the field of Uralic languages. Some notices about his/er response:
- "ležib" instead of "on" in sentences like "the object is in...". I've fixed this ([2]https://incubator.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wp/vot/Toksova&diff=prev&oldid=1525911). I'm not sure that real native speakers wouldn't understand the previous variant of wording (although, I agree, the variant with "ležib" ("lies") looks a bit strange). - Name of the main page. "Esicülci" literally means "the first [main] side". Word "cülci" means any side, not only body side. In any case, I renamed it from "Esicülci" to "Päälehto" (lit. "the main list", like in Vőro, Ingrian...). The new variant is entirely reasonable. - Absence of native speakers. Yes, we never had them, and I won't hide this fact. User Päivüdhttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:P%C3%A4iv%C3%BCd, as she(?) told in a request page, has Votic ancestors, but it's very doubtful that she is an actual native speaker. If this user really trying to learn and speak Votic in everyday life I'm sincerely happy for her. Be that as it may, she's inactive for more than year and didn't contribute much. The rest of our contributors are Russians (apart from FitzSaemParson, he's from Finland). - Some artificiality of "our" Votic, great number of calques, "very Russian" constructions of sentences etc.. I look at it with irony. We might find some real Votic grannies and suggest them to translate some words like e.g. "independence", "society", "service", "exact", and also some function words like "only", "but", "of course"... I would not be surprised, if they will use calques from Russian. (BTW I'm not sure they can use computer).
I think that members of Langcom are skeptical with respect to vot.wp, but (I know it sounds corny) we all wanted to take a chance and save the language. As for me, I think it turned out well. At least it's better than nothing.
Ask me if you have questions. --Tamara Ustinovahttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tamara_Ustinova( talk https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tamara_Ustinova) 19:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
<<
2013/10/21 Oliver Stegen info@oliverstegen.net
Michael,I understand your suggestion to show “generosity in approval”. Still, when you write “keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die”, I wonder which language you are referring to. The speech variety of Votic which Ariste described in his 1948 grammar has died long ago. If some linguist enthusiasts are now “playing a game” with that grammar, they’re flogging a dead horse (and they’re certainly not helping to “keep Votic alive” given how twisted and far-removed from any real Votic their written Votic is. The only reason why I could possibly approve a Votic wikipedia as it stands now on incubator is if Votic mother tongue speakers (or their descendants) were involved, i.e. either the handful of Votic speakers still alive (but then, they’d be writing in a different dialect) or descendants of the extinct dialect. Do we know what connection to Votic those contributors to Votic on incubator have? They’re obviously not mother tongue speakers (even though some pose as such). Without some reassurance that there is a real Votic community, I wouldn’t feel happy to give approval.
Fwiw,
Oliver
*From:* Gerard Meijssen [mailto:gerard.meijssen@gmail.com] *Sent:* 19 October 2013 20:17
*To:* Wikimedia Foundation Language Committee *Subject:* Re: [Langcom] Approval of Votic Wikipedia
Hoi,
Michael so what is it that you propose ?
Thanks,
GerardOn 19 October 2013 19:07, Michael Everson everson@evertype.com wrote:
On 19 Oct 2013, at 17:50, Oliver Stegen info@oliverstegen.net wrote:
It looks like there is a problem with “Votic”, cf. the reply which I
received from the scholar who I was referred to via Helsinki University. The language used on incubator is based on a grammar written in 1948 which deviates considerably from the language as spoken nowadays by the last living speakers. Presumably, none of the contributors are really native speakers of Votic. In which case we may have to keep it in the incubator, right? What do you think?
Keeping it on the incubator just helps the language die.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom