On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Ting Chen wing.philopp@gmx.de wrote:
Well, I remember I read some very interesting articles, mainly from ethnologists in Scientific American about language conservation. Personally I think that language conservation is something that is meaningful and should be done. But I have doubt if WikiMedia can or should host projects for this purpose.
In most cases these languages don't have their own writing system. And as you said, most people that are still speaking these language are old people and most likely less educated. They don't have the expertise to write down these languages and to systematically catalog and conserve these languages. So this work is mostly done by ethmologists that work on these projects. Personally I don't think that amateurs can really help here. Most likely would amateurs do more harm (just like the amateur archaeologists of the 19th centory, who indeed destroyed a lot). This is for the first thing.
As the word language conservation already implies. It is a matter of conserve. These languages can most likely be used to describe the near places and peoples where the languages are used, maybe folklores and myths and such things. You cannot use it to describe high energy physics or construction of microwavers or Taiwan conflict. So, I don't think that Wikipedia is a right place for such projects, nor any other projects we currently have.
If there are scientific institutions that want to talk with the Foundation about collaborations of language conservation projects I think it is worthwhile a consideration. But if it is only some amateurs who want to do it. I don't see any reason to treat such projects with another set of standards as we are now using.
There are a number of levels how one amateur may help in this case. Unlike in archeology, amateur is not able to damage an artifact. Actually, methods for gathering materials for language preservation are quite simple -- [more or less:] just record it. There are some more complex methods, but they are more related to preserving a dialect variation than to preserving a language. (If language varieties of preserver and speaker are close enough, speaker will try to adapt their speech to preserver's speech. However, if it is about distant or same language systems, it is much easier.)
If it is about non-written languages, amateurs may record speech, put it at Commons with description and, probably, link it to Wikisource. If it is about moribund languages with established written tradition (Lower Sorbian case), amateurs may even write oral literature (at Wikisource).
I agree that Wikipedia is not the right place for that task in the most of the cases. However, Wikisource and Wiktionary are (along with auxiliary projects like Commons and Incubator are in this sense). But, again, languages with written tradition may make Wikipedia, too (again, Lower Sorbian case) with the primary goal of encyclopedic description of their culture.
I tried to explain that we need to make a set of [generic] suggestions for languages which are at different levels in the extinction process. Out of technical suggestions and similar, suggestions may look like:
1. A non-written language with around 100 old speakers or less is almost dead. The main goal here is preservation of that language. So, anyone who is willing to help should record speech. In this case it would be preferable to connect that person with some language preservation institution, but, we shouldn't stop such person in doing the job. It is better to have something than to have nothing. Those records should be uploaded to Commons and linked from Wikisource. If such language has written tradition, it is possible to transcribe records, too.
2. A moribund language with cultural background (Lower Sorbian case). The goals are here language preservation and help in a language revival if speakers are interested in that. So, besides preservation goals, in this case we are able to put a variety of linguistic materials at Wikisource, Commons and Wiktionary. Also, it is possible to make a Wikipedia. We may suggest them to try to write more [encyclopedic] articles about their culture than about natural sciences.
3. A language with ~1-10M speakers from Sub-Saharan Africa. Such language probably has a written form made by some missionaries during the past centuries (or a very similar language has a written form which may be used). However, the most of the population probably don't know to read and write. This is a kind of task where WMF should be connected with other global, regional or local educational initiatives. Such language should get all projects, but at the time when they are able to handle that. Preservation tasks may be useful, too.
4. A non-moribund Amazon or Papua New Guinea language. Such language probably doesn't have a written form. So, besides tasks from the previous case, such language needs a description and written form. (It should be noted that a very large specter of languages are in that kind of situation: from languages of Nepal to Swiss German.) If speakers are interested in making Wikimedia projects in their languages, we should find a way how to help them. In some cases it is much more about their will (Swiss German), but in the most of the cases it is much more about resources. And WMF should work on that in cooperation with relevant global, regional or local initiatives and institutions.
Note about language preservation and revival: While it is not a strictly educational goal, it is an educational goal in the wider sense because it deals with knowledge preservation.
Those suggestions/tasks assume a variety of actions. Some of them are medium or long term goals, but some of them may be done immediately. For example:
* If we realize that one of the goals is a language preservation, we may give a manual to the persons interested in the Wikimedia project creation: how to deal with that. * If a language is in the second category, we may suggest them to concentrate on issues related to their culture and help them in achieving that task. * If it is about some other issue, connected not just to our online projects, we may tell them what are we able to do for them, as well as we may express our will to help them in other issues.