Hoi,
You are correct :)
Thanks,
GerardM
On 24 February 2011 00:50, Casey Brown <lists(a)caseybrown.org> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Milos Rancic
<millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 06:55, Bishakha Datta
<bishakhadatta(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> One thought occurred to me: there is no
representation of Asian
languages in
> the committee (and I don't mean only
Indian languages). Would the
committee
> want to consider an expansion in membership
to include someone who is
fluent
in one or
more Asian languages?
In principle yes, but... [1]
Linguistic qualifications for becoming a LangCom member are not so
simple. After a couple of years in LangCom, I may say that many
professors of linguistics don't fit. And the main reason is not their
knowledge, but attitude toward languages. Or, to be more precise,
their boldness. For example, LangCom tasks require from one
Indo-Europeanist to give expertize on any Indo-European language, but
many of them would say that the classification of, let's say, Kurdish
languages is not the part of their job, but the part of the job of an
expert in Iranian languages. Such expert in LangCom is basically
useless.
Doesn't the language committee also actively seek out experts in
different languages when they need to? I seem to recall you guys
having all test wikis checked by a linguist/expert who speaks the
language before they are created.
So it's not like people who speak Asian (or other similar) languages
aren't being actively involved, it's just that none of them are in the
"administrative committee" at this time. At least that's how I
remember it being explained many threads ago. :-)
--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l