The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and "wi" is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
How amusing!
For a language like Cherokee then (agglutinative), it seems appropriate to not use transliteration.
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and "wi" is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Oldak Quill wrote:
How amusing!
For a language like Cherokee then (agglutinative), it seems appropriate to not use transliteration.
You can use transliteraton, but there are rules to avoid using conjugators and verb stem modifiers in trasliterations since these create meanings in the word and may create something unintended.
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
Not a clue.
Jeff
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and "wi" is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
But is there a way to transliterate it without using any conjugators or verb stem modifiers?
ja.wikipedia (ウィキペディア) transliterates as U-I-KI-PE-DI-A! So they transliterated too.
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
How amusing!
For a language like Cherokee then (agglutinative), it seems appropriate to not use transliteration.
You can use transliteraton, but there are rules to avoid using conjugators and verb stem modifiers in trasliterations since these create meanings in the word and may create something unintended.
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
Not a clue.
Jeff
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and "wi" is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Oldak Quill wrote:
But is there a way to transliterate it without using any conjugators or verb stem modifiers?
Yes, there is, but it isn't going to produce a "wiki" sound. Native languages (ours included) have evolved to incorporate expression of the physical world in spiritual terms. Because of this, misuse of the language is perceived by most native speakers as an extreme form of disrespect. For example:
"di" means plural of nonliving objects and
"u" or "una" means plural of a living sentient being
using "di" to make a human word plural is a form of insult. diyvwi would mean (its not a real word but could be used) to call a person or group of people "subhuman". You have to be careful with native languages in doing transliteration. Every Cherokee I have shown wi-gi-que-di-ya to has rolled their eyes (oh brother roll your eyes) or laughed because of the name. The fact is, I dount if we named the main Wikipedia site "The bad place put together in the past we should keep our hands off of because its part of an animal and has a lot of people dwelling there" would not serve to attract people to edit there.
aniyvwiya is a very respectful way of saying cherokee people becaue the word yvwi means "it has a spirit". Another example is Hello in Cherokee. Modenr speakers in Okalhoma use two forms. osiyo and just siyo. siyo is not respecful and is an impersonal "what do the h_ll do you want" form of hellow because it drops the "o" sound. "o" in front of the word means "I treat you as an equal and greet you" instead of just "I greet you". One example.
Here's some other suggestions which are broad and will attract Cherokee editors to the site:
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Aniyvwiya gadugi" - The human people of the creator working together
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ
"Aniyvwiya" - The human people of the creator.
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯᏱ
"Aniyvwiyayi" - The place of the human people of the creator
ᏣᎳᎩ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Tsalagi gadugi" - Cherokee people working together
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
"tsalagi digoweli gatsanula" - Cherokee fast books
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ
"tsalagi digoweli" - Cherokee books
Jeff
ja.wikipedia (ウィキペディア) transliterates as U-I-KI-PE-DI-A! So they transliterated too.
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
How amusing!
For a language like Cherokee then (agglutinative), it seems appropriate to not use transliteration.
You can use transliteraton, but there are rules to avoid using conjugators and verb stem modifiers in trasliterations since these create meanings in the word and may create something unintended.
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
Not a clue.
Jeff
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and "wi" is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I don't know if we want the Cherokee name of Wikipedia to feature words like "books", since there might be a Cherokee Wikibooks someday.
On 7/12/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
But is there a way to transliterate it without using any conjugators or verb stem modifiers?
Yes, there is, but it isn't going to produce a "wiki" sound. Native languages (ours included) have evolved to incorporate expression of the physical world in spiritual terms. Because of this, misuse of the language is perceived by most native speakers as an extreme form of disrespect. For example:
"di" means plural of nonliving objects and
"u" or "una" means plural of a living sentient being
using "di" to make a human word plural is a form of insult. diyvwi would mean (its not a real word but could be used) to call a person or group of people "subhuman". You have to be careful with native languages in doing transliteration. Every Cherokee I have shown wi-gi-que-di-ya to has rolled their eyes (oh brother roll your eyes) or laughed because of the name. The fact is, I dount if we named the main Wikipedia site "The bad place put together in the past we should keep our hands off of because its part of an animal and has a lot of people dwelling there" would not serve to attract people to edit there.
aniyvwiya is a very respectful way of saying cherokee people becaue the word yvwi means "it has a spirit". Another example is Hello in Cherokee. Modenr speakers in Okalhoma use two forms. osiyo and just siyo. siyo is not respecful and is an impersonal "what do the h_ll do you want" form of hellow because it drops the "o" sound. "o" in front of the word means "I treat you as an equal and greet you" instead of just "I greet you". One example.
Here's some other suggestions which are broad and will attract Cherokee editors to the site:
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Aniyvwiya gadugi" - The human people of the creator working together
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ
"Aniyvwiya" - The human people of the creator.
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯᏱ
"Aniyvwiyayi" - The place of the human people of the creator
ᏣᎳᎩ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Tsalagi gadugi" - Cherokee people working together
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
"tsalagi digoweli gatsanula" - Cherokee fast books
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ
"tsalagi digoweli" - Cherokee books
Jeff
ja.wikipedia (ウィキペディア) transliterates as U-I-KI-PE-DI-A! So they transliterated too.
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
How amusing!
For a language like Cherokee then (agglutinative), it seems appropriate to not use transliteration.
You can use transliteraton, but there are rules to avoid using conjugators and verb stem modifiers in trasliterations since these create meanings in the word and may create something unintended.
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
Not a clue.
Jeff
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary",
and
"Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration
system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
>The name should be: > >ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ > >(digoweli gatsanula) >"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " > >to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia". > >The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the >language, and was synthesized. > >Just a suggestion... > >Jeff >_______________________________________________ >foundation-l mailing list >foundation-l@wikimedia.org >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > > > > >
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area
or
topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and
"wi"
is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
James Hare wrote:
I don't know if we want the Cherokee name of Wikipedia to feature words like "books", since there might be a Cherokee Wikibooks someday.
Give me a list of concepts and I will translate them for you. If you have other suggestions, please post them here and lets get all the options out on the table.
Jeff
On 7/12/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
But is there a way to transliterate it without using any conjugators or verb stem modifiers?
Yes, there is, but it isn't going to produce a "wiki" sound. Native languages (ours included) have evolved to incorporate expression of the physical world in spiritual terms. Because of this, misuse of the language is perceived by most native speakers as an extreme form of disrespect. For example:
"di" means plural of nonliving objects and
"u" or "una" means plural of a living sentient being
using "di" to make a human word plural is a form of insult. diyvwi would mean (its not a real word but could be used) to call a person or group of people "subhuman". You have to be careful with native languages in doing transliteration. Every Cherokee I have shown wi-gi-que-di-ya to has rolled their eyes (oh brother roll your eyes) or laughed because of the name. The fact is, I dount if we named the main Wikipedia site "The bad place put together in the past we should keep our hands off of because its part of an animal and has a lot of people dwelling there" would not serve to attract people to edit there.
aniyvwiya is a very respectful way of saying cherokee people becaue the word yvwi means "it has a spirit". Another example is Hello in Cherokee. Modenr speakers in Okalhoma use two forms. osiyo and just siyo. siyo is not respecful and is an impersonal "what do the h_ll do you want" form of hellow because it drops the "o" sound. "o" in front of the word means "I treat you as an equal and greet you" instead of just "I greet you". One example.
Here's some other suggestions which are broad and will attract Cherokee editors to the site:
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Aniyvwiya gadugi" - The human people of the creator working together
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ
"Aniyvwiya" - The human people of the creator.
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯᏱ
"Aniyvwiyayi" - The place of the human people of the creator
ᏣᎳᎩ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Tsalagi gadugi" - Cherokee people working together
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
"tsalagi digoweli gatsanula" - Cherokee fast books
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ
"tsalagi digoweli" - Cherokee books
Jeff
ja.wikipedia (ウィキペディア) transliterates as U-I-KI-PE-DI-A! So they transliterated too.
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
How amusing!
For a language like Cherokee then (agglutinative), it seems appropriate to not use transliteration.
You can use transliteraton, but there are rules to avoid using conjugators and verb stem modifiers in trasliterations since these create meanings in the word and may create something unintended.
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
Not a clue.
Jeff
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
>Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", > >
and
>"Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do >this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as >Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at >least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration > >
system?
>On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>The name should be: >> >>ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ >> >>(digoweli gatsanula) >>"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " >> >>to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia". >> >>The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the >>language, and was synthesized. >> >>Just a suggestion... >> >>Jeff >>_______________________________________________ >>foundation-l mailing list >>foundation-l@wikimedia.org >>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area
or
topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and
"wi"
is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/12/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
James Hare wrote:
I don't know if we want the Cherokee name of Wikipedia to feature words like "books", since there might be a Cherokee Wikibooks someday.
Give me a list of concepts and I will translate them for you. If you have other suggestions, please post them here and lets get all the options out on the table.
Jeff
Well wiki is suposed to come from fast. Pedia probably comes from the greek for something like "general education". So the direct translation into english would be something like "fast general education"
A short defintion of wiki in english would be hard but soemthing like:
Editable general education /changeable general education
might be one aproach
collaborative general education
might be another
Other than that just tranliterate an accept that there may be other reasons people don't want to work on it (after all our welsh language wikipedia only has 4,563 articles)
geni wrote:
On 7/12/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
James Hare wrote:
I don't know if we want the Cherokee name of Wikipedia to feature words like "books", since there might be a Cherokee Wikibooks someday.
Give me a list of concepts and I will translate them for you. If you have other suggestions, please post them here and lets get all the options out on the table.
Jeff
Well wiki is suposed to come from fast. Pedia probably comes from the greek for something like "general education". So the direct translation into english would be something like "fast general education"
A short defintion of wiki in english would be hard but soemthing like:
Editable general education /changeable general education
??????? ??????
anedeloquasgv digaleyvsgv
"editing of the teachings"
????? ??????
vgatahvi digaleyvsgv
"editing of the knowledge"
might be one aproach
collaborative general education
????? ????? ?? ???
vgatahvi anotlvsgv ale gadugi
"making knowledge and working together"
(Note "ale" is often meant and used as "or" and not "and" in modern times, however, the 1800 dialects and Cherokee new testament use "ale" instead of appending "tanv" to the end of words. Otali uses "tanv" at the end of words, but its more proper to use "ale" in context -- point of order -- ale can be dropped and infered as follows).
????? ????? ???
vgatahvi anotlvsgv gadugi
"making knowledge and working together"
might be another
Other than that just tranliterate an accept that there may be other reasons people don't want to work on it (after all our welsh language wikipedia only has 4,563 articles)
I personally am embarassed by the name -- its dorky, wrong, and offensive to some folks.
Jeff
On 7/12/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
vgatahvi anotlvsgv gadugi
"making knowledge and working together"
Is there a way of switching that to something like recording knowledge/teachings while working together? "Making" conflicts with no original research,
I personally am embarassed by the name -- its dorky, wrong, and offensive to some folks.
Jeff
It is a proper noun though. It isn't as if the compound parts of it are really English words (wiki probably is these days but pedia is Greek if it is anything). Just avoid refernces to a creator (risks anoying athiests) and Cherokee people (since non Cherokee people who speak the langauge are of course welcome).
geni wrote:
On 7/12/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
vgatahvi anotlvsgv gadugi
"making knowledge and working together"
Is there a way of switching that to something like recording knowledge/teachings while working together? "Making" conflicts with no original research,
Sure. "giving", "writing/recording" and "making" are verb roots in Cherokee here are some exmaples to give you an idea (I give to you something (person) (tsi-ne-ha), I give something flexible and non-living (tsi-nv-ne-ha), I give something liquid (tsi-ne-ne-ha), I give something linear and nonliving (tsi-de-ha))
vgatahvi anowelisgv gadugi
"I am writing/recording knowlege and working together"
vgatahvi anadanehv gadugi
"I am giving knowlege and working together"
I personally am embarassed by the name -- its dorky, wrong, and offensive to some folks.
Jeff
It is a proper noun though.
Not in Cherokee its not.
It isn't as if the compound parts of it are really English words
Wiki is Hawiian for "fast"
(wiki probably is these days but pedia is Greek if it is anything).
Just avoid refernces to a creator (risks anoying athiests)
The language is what it is. The word for "person" is "yvwi" -- "it has a spirit" or "it is a sentient being".
nigo disgesdi (that's just the way it is)
and Cherokee people (since non Cherokee people who speak the langauge are of course welcome).
They are welcome, but they had better be prepared to learn Cherokee. :-)
Jeff
For some reason the syllabary did not transmit, resending:
Editable general education /changeable general education:
??????? ??????
anedeloquasgv digaleyvsgv
"editing of the teachings"
????? ??????
vgatahvi digaleyvsgv
"editing of the knowledge"
collaborative general education :
????? ????? ?? ???
vgatahvi anotlvsgv ale gadugi
"making knowledge and working together"
(Note "ale" is often meant and used as "or" and not "and" in modern times, however, the 1800 dialects and Cherokee new testament use "ale" instead of appending "tanv" to the end of words. Otali uses "tanv" at the end of words, but its more proper to use "ale" in context -- point of order -- ale can be dropped and infered as follows).
????? ????? ???
vgatahvi anotlvsgv gadugi
"making knowledge and working together"
Jeff
geni wrote:
Well wiki is suposed to come from fast. Pedia probably comes from the greek for something like "general education". So the direct translation into english would be something like "fast general education"
The intellectual equivalent of fast food?
And the chr2syl extension needs to be added as well since at present, editing in syllabary on the site is difficult.
Jeff
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
But is there a way to transliterate it without using any conjugators or verb stem modifiers?
Yes, there is, but it isn't going to produce a "wiki" sound. Native languages (ours included) have evolved to incorporate expression of the physical world in spiritual terms. Because of this, misuse of the language is perceived by most native speakers as an extreme form of disrespect. For example:
"di" means plural of nonliving objects and
"u" or "una" means plural of a living sentient being
using "di" to make a human word plural is a form of insult. diyvwi would mean (its not a real word but could be used) to call a person or group of people "subhuman". You have to be careful with native languages in doing transliteration. Every Cherokee I have shown wi-gi-que-di-ya to has rolled their eyes (oh brother roll your eyes) or laughed because of the name. The fact is, I dount if we named the main Wikipedia site "The bad place put together in the past we should keep our hands off of because its part of an animal and has a lot of people dwelling there" would not serve to attract people to edit there.
aniyvwiya is a very respectful way of saying cherokee people becaue the word yvwi means "it has a spirit". Another example is Hello in Cherokee. Modenr speakers in Okalhoma use two forms. osiyo and just siyo. siyo is not respecful and is an impersonal "what do the h_ll do you want" form of hellow because it drops the "o" sound. "o" in front of the word means "I treat you as an equal and greet you" instead of just "I greet you". One example.
Here's some other suggestions which are broad and will attract Cherokee editors to the site:
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Aniyvwiya gadugi" - The human people of the creator working together
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ
"Aniyvwiya" - The human people of the creator.
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯᏱ
"Aniyvwiyayi" - The place of the human people of the creator
ᏣᎳᎩ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Tsalagi gadugi" - Cherokee people working together
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
"tsalagi digoweli gatsanula" - Cherokee fast books
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ
"tsalagi digoweli" - Cherokee books
Jeff
ja.wikipedia (ウィキペディア) transliterates as U-I-KI-PE-DI-A! So they transliterated too.
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
How amusing!
For a language like Cherokee then (agglutinative), it seems appropriate to not use transliteration.
You can use transliteraton, but there are rules to avoid using conjugators and verb stem modifiers in trasliterations since these create meanings in the word and may create something unintended.
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
Not a clue.
Jeff
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
>The name should be: > >ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ > >(digoweli gatsanula) >"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " > >to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia". > >The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the >language, and was synthesized. > >Just a suggestion... > >Jeff >_______________________________________________ >foundation-l mailing list >foundation-l@wikimedia.org >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > > > > > > >
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and "wi" is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
But is there a way to transliterate it without using any conjugators or verb stem modifiers?
Yes, there is, but it isn't going to produce a "wiki" sound. Native languages (ours included) have evolved to incorporate expression of the physical world in spiritual terms. Because of this, misuse of the language is perceived by most native speakers as an extreme form of disrespect. For example:
"di" means plural of nonliving objects and
"u" or "una" means plural of a living sentient being
And in some dialects, Tsu, du, and duna are also used to make human words plural or singular, expansion here.
:-)
Jeff
using "di" to make a human word plural is a form of insult. diyvwi would mean (its not a real word but could be used) to call a person or group of people "subhuman". You have to be careful with native languages in doing transliteration. Every Cherokee I have shown wi-gi-que-di-ya to has rolled their eyes (oh brother roll your eyes) or laughed because of the name. The fact is, I dount if we named the main Wikipedia site "The bad place put together in the past we should keep our hands off of because its part of an animal and has a lot of people dwelling there" would not serve to attract people to edit there.
aniyvwiya is a very respectful way of saying cherokee people becaue the word yvwi means "it has a spirit". Another example is Hello in Cherokee. Modenr speakers in Okalhoma use two forms. osiyo and just siyo. siyo is not respecful and is an impersonal "what do the h_ll do you want" form of hellow because it drops the "o" sound. "o" in front of the word means "I treat you as an equal and greet you" instead of just "I greet you". One example.
Here's some other suggestions which are broad and will attract Cherokee editors to the site:
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Aniyvwiya gadugi" - The human people of the creator working together
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ
"Aniyvwiya" - The human people of the creator.
ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯᏱ
"Aniyvwiyayi" - The place of the human people of the creator
ᏣᎳᎩ ᎦᏚᎩ
"Tsalagi gadugi" - Cherokee people working together
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
"tsalagi digoweli gatsanula" - Cherokee fast books
ᏣᎳᎩ ᏗᎪᏪᎵ
"tsalagi digoweli" - Cherokee books
Jeff
ja.wikipedia (ウィキペディア) transliterates as U-I-KI-PE-DI-A! So they transliterated too.
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
How amusing!
For a language like Cherokee then (agglutinative), it seems appropriate to not use transliteration.
You can use transliteraton, but there are rules to avoid using conjugators and verb stem modifiers in trasliterations since these create meanings in the word and may create something unintended.
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
Not a clue.
Jeff
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
>The name should be: > >ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ > >(digoweli gatsanula) >"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " > >to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia". > >The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the >language, and was synthesized. > >Just a suggestion... > >Jeff >_______________________________________________ >foundation-l mailing list >foundation-l@wikimedia.org >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > > > > > > >
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
Not to mention "di" is always at the start of a pural word, "gi" is a modifier always at the end of a word, que isn't a word at all, and "wi" is a tense modifer always at the end of word.
Translation:
"Something very negative in the past was put together for (??? - something that resembles a contraction of the word nesgi which means keep your hands off of it) , and there were a bunch of them (di) that dwell in a large area.
In other words, its current name implies "negative place to keep your hands off of and there's a whole bunch of us here".
Based on the edit history of the site, seems to have been the course followed. Perhaps we should change its name?
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
Thinking about agglutinative languages, do you know what the Japanese Wikipedia is called (I would imagine that it too avoids transliteration).
The Japanese language readily accepts foreign words because of their extensive use of their simple method of transliteration. The Japanese Wikipedia is called ウィキペディア, or Uikipedia in romanji.
The Chinese Wikipedia however, did not transliterate the name directly, because for every sound there're multiple Chinese characters that fit the sound. Therefore the Chinese Wikipedians instead tried to find a name that is similar to the "wiki" sound and actually have some meaning to it. You can read more on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Wikipedia#Naming .
For the Cherokee Wikipedia, I would suggest that they follow their convention on transliteration. It would be nice to have a sound similar to "Wikipedia", for it would give a sense of unity and would be consistent with other language Wikipedia. But I think the more important thing to consider is that the name would be comfortable for the users and speakers of the language.
Cheers
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
While it is interesting some of the points and counter points about this issue, isn't this something better left to be discussed on project pages by participants and made as a local decision? At least I would feel more comfortable with people who are involved with the development of the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content developers) instead of getting European or Austrialian attitudes from people who may never even add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something very similar to when the name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all of the other major sister projects and their names.
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
While it is interesting some of the points and counter points about this issue, isn't this something better left to be discussed on project pages by participants and made as a local decision? At least I would feel more comfortable with people who are involved with the development of the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content developers) instead of getting European or Austrialian attitudes from people who may never even add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something very similar to when the name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all of the other major sister projects and their names.
There are no participants on the site. The site has been dead for months. Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK CHEROKEE. Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely and I'll just manage the fork off Wikipedia.
Jeff
Jeff
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active in seeking members?
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
While it is interesting some of the points and counter points about this issue, isn't this something better left to be discussed on project pages by participants and made as a local decision? At least I would feel more comfortable with people who are involved with the development of the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content developers) instead of getting European or Austrialian attitudes from people who may never even add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something very similar to when the name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all of the other major sister projects and their names.
There are no participants on the site. The site has been dead for months. Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK CHEROKEE. Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely and I'll just manage the fork off Wikipedia.
Jeff
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Jul 13, 2006, at 5:41 AM, Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active in seeking members?
That is the bottom line here. You are the one who knows Cherokees, not us. The common ground is that everyone would like to see a project that succeeds, whether yours or ours, if such a distinction can be made.
Fred
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave. We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most native cultures. The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow their langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
Jeff
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
The name should be:
ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ
(digoweli gatsanula) "the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the language, and was synthesized.
Just a suggestion...
Jeff
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
While it is interesting some of the points and counter points about this issue, isn't this something better left to be discussed on project pages by participants and made as a local decision? At least I would feel more comfortable with people who are involved with the development of the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content developers) instead of getting European or Austrialian attitudes from people who may never even add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something very similar to when the name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all of the other major sister projects and their names.
There are no participants on the site. The site has been dead for months. Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK CHEROKEE. Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely and I'll just manage the fork off Wikipedia.
Jeff
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave.
(NOTE: This comment pertains to people who were raised in the Cherokee Culture and speak the language, not Cherokee folks who were raised in American Culture and may have Cherokee ancestry but do not know their culture or the language -- there are a lot of folks in this category on WP today and they seem to be fine, but their contributions are nil to nothing in this area becuase they do not know the culture and for all intents and purposes, they are not immersed in our culture or grew up in it -- I did).
We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most native cultures. The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow their langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
Jeff
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and "Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
>The name should be: > >ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ > >(digoweli gatsanula) >"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " > >to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia". > >The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the >language, and was synthesized. > >Just a suggestion... > >Jeff > > > > > > >
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
While it is interesting some of the points and counter points about this issue, isn't this something better left to be discussed on project pages by participants and made as a local decision? At least I would feel more comfortable with people who are involved with the development of the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content developers) instead of getting European or Austrialian attitudes from people who may never even add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something very similar to when the name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all of the other major sister projects and their names.
There are no participants on the site. The site has been dead for months. Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK CHEROKEE. Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely and I'll just manage the fork off Wikipedia.
Jeff
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I think it is false to say that a particular language can never be presented in a secular, NPOV fashion. Of course, it can be the case that most of the speakers are unwilling to present their langauge in this fashion (this is not a criticism). Wikipedia will forever be incompatable with systematic POV, but we would certainly like something worked out. Are there no Cherokeeans who are willing to work with the existing Wikipedia model to raise the profile of their langauge/culture?
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave.
(NOTE: This comment pertains to people who were raised in the Cherokee Culture and speak the language, not Cherokee folks who were raised in American Culture and may have Cherokee ancestry but do not know their culture or the language -- there are a lot of folks in this category on WP today and they seem to be fine, but their contributions are nil to nothing in this area becuase they do not know the culture and for all intents and purposes, they are not immersed in our culture or grew up in it -- I did).
We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most native cultures. The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow their langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
Jeff
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
>Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and >"Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do >this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as >Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at >least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system? > >On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>The name should be: >> >>ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ >> >>(digoweli gatsanula) >>"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " >> >>to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia". >> >>The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the >>language, and was synthesized. >> >>Just a suggestion... >> >>Jeff >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or topic)
While it is interesting some of the points and counter points about this issue, isn't this something better left to be discussed on project pages by participants and made as a local decision? At least I would feel more comfortable with people who are involved with the development of the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content developers) instead of getting European or Austrialian attitudes from people who may never even add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something very similar to when the name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all of the other major sister projects and their names.
There are no participants on the site. The site has been dead for months. Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK CHEROKEE. Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely and I'll just manage the fork off Wikipedia.
Jeff
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Oldak Quill wrote:
I think it is false to say that a particular language can never be presented in a secular, NPOV fashion.
I would tend to agree with you here, but in the case of the Ute groups, its not our language and not our place to make such an assessement based upon their beliefs. We should never take a stance on the validity of any person or groups beliefs as to whether they are right or wrong, just accept that these are their sincere beliefs and go from there.
Of course, it can be the case that most of the speakers are unwilling to present their langauge in this fashion (this is not a criticism). Wikipedia will forever be incompatable with systematic POV, but we would certainly like something worked out.
The issue is that the culture and language of native peoples are virtually inseparable from one another. The culture IS the language. Most native peoples (us included) believe the language contains words of power that express and spiritual and physical as one, since in our belief systems, we make no distincition between the sacred and the secular -- we view both as a interwoven tapestry. See http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherokee_Clans for a good explanation of this. These basic beliefs permeate Native American Culture and create artificial hurdles to efforts like this one. I am making progress because they trust me due to the fact I understand why they feel this way and they know my word is written on the wind (they know I wont disrespect their wishes).
Are there no Cherokeeans who are willing to work with the existing Wikipedia model to raise the profile of their langauge/culture?
I am willing but the Anikutani are not willing to do so nor are the Religious folks in Oklahoma. One of our linguists recentl quit the project (I could care less she wasn't helping much anyway) because the leaders at the Stokes Stomp Dance grounds slyly told her she would not lead the dances if she participated in this project and allowed our language to be made part of a machine translator. Most of our leaders do not share this view and are behind the project, including the Tribal Council, Dr. Durbin Feeling, Dr, Delso, and a lot of our educators, however, the more radical religious elements have been raising a lot of issues about it. Tough, the light moves forward ...
Jeff
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave.
(NOTE: This comment pertains to people who were raised in the Cherokee Culture and speak the language, not Cherokee folks who were raised in American Culture and may have Cherokee ancestry but do not know their culture or the language -- there are a lot of folks in this category on WP today and they seem to be fine, but their contributions are nil to nothing in this area becuase they do not know the culture and for all intents and purposes, they are not immersed in our culture or grew up in it -- I did).
We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most native cultures. The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow their langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
Jeff
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
>Oldak Quill wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and >>"Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do >>this: Russian Wikipedia is called "Википедию" which transliterates as >>Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at >>least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system? >> >>On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>The name should be: >>> >>>ᏗᎪᏪᎵ ᎦᏣᏄᎳ >>> >>>(digoweli gatsanula) >>>"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " >>> >>>to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia". >>> >>>The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the >>>language, and was synthesized. >>> >>>Just a suggestion... >>> >>>Jeff >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the >name can create something you do not intend. > >Let's look at it: > >Wi-gi-que-di-ya > >wi - (negative imperfect past tense) >gi - to combine >que - incomplete verb root about an animal >di - plural for a non living object >ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or >topic) > > > > > > > > > > While it is interesting some of the points and counter points about this issue, isn't this something better left to be discussed on project pages by participants and made as a local decision? At least I would feel more comfortable with people who are involved with the development of the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content developers) instead of getting European or Austrialian attitudes from people who may never even add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something very similar to when the name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all of the other major sister projects and their names.
There are no participants on the site. The site has been dead for months. Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK CHEROKEE. Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely and I'll just manage the fork off Wikipedia.
Jeff
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is false to say that a particular language can never be presented in a secular, NPOV fashion.
There are languages out there that aparently don't include the concept of counting.
There are indeed limits on what languages can express
You may want to be sure and explain exactly what the GFDL entails in this case. There is no guarantee that any work that is done under this license will be treated in a sacred manner by downstream users. Non-speakers would be within full rights to take the fork made in the Ute's language and put it up on a new website or even on Wikipedia where any "16 year old with a computer" will be able to edit it.
Wikipedia is alien to most cultures I imagine. It is alien to capitalist culture and academic culture to name two. However many people accostomed to those cultures learn to adapt to and even appreciate WP culture. I think you are focusing too much on the negative at WP and overlooking the positives of inter-culture collaboration. I hope your endeavor succeeds in any event.
Birgitte SB
--- "Jeff V. Merkey" jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would
be to work with
other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are
you being active
in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave. We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most native cultures. The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow their langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
Jeff
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey
jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Most Wikimedia projects don't translate
"Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and
"Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even
non-Latin alphabets do
this: Russian Wikipedia is called
"ÐикипедиÑ" which transliterates as
Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of
the letters, at
least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal
transliteration system?
On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey
jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
>The name should be: > >ááªáªáµ á¦á£áá³ > >(digoweli gatsanula) >"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " > >to match the actual meanings of the words
"wiki" and "pedia".
> >The current name of the site, while catchy, is
not accurate for the
>language, and was synthesized. > >Just a suggestion... > >Jeff > > > > >
Yes. it does have one for words like this, but
taking potshots at the
name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to
or covers a broad area or
topic)
While it is interesting some of the points and
counter points about this
issue, isn't this something better left to be
discussed on project pages
by participants and made as a local decision? At
least I would feel
more comfortable with people who are involved
with the development of
the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content
developers) instead of
getting European or Austrialian attitudes from
people who may never even
add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something
very similar to when the
name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all
of the other major
sister projects and their names.
There are no participants on the site. The site
has been dead for
months. Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK
CHEROKEE.
Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely
and I'll just manage
the fork off Wikipedia.
Jeff
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
On Jul 13, 2006, at 12:20 PM, Birgitte SB wrote:
You may want to be sure and explain exactly what the GFDL entails in this case. There is no guarantee that any work that is done under this license will be treated in a sacred manner by downstream users. Non-speakers would be within full rights to take the fork made in the Ute's language and put it up on a new website or even on Wikipedia where any "16 year old with a computer" will be able to edit it.
Wikipedia is alien to most cultures I imagine. It is alien to capitalist culture and academic culture to name two. However many people accostomed to those cultures learn to adapt to and even appreciate WP culture. I think you are focusing too much on the negative at WP and overlooking the positives of inter-culture collaboration. I hope your endeavor succeeds in any event.
Birgitte SB
The Cherokee, particularly, have historically been willing to share their wisdom.
Fred
Fred Bauder wrote:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 12:20 PM, Birgitte SB wrote:
You may want to be sure and explain exactly what the GFDL entails in this case. There is no guarantee that any work that is done under this license will be treated in a sacred manner by downstream users. Non-speakers would be within full rights to take the fork made in the Ute's language and put it up on a new website or even on Wikipedia where any "16 year old with a computer" will be able to edit it.
Wikipedia is alien to most cultures I imagine. It is alien to capitalist culture and academic culture to name two. However many people accostomed to those cultures learn to adapt to and even appreciate WP culture. I think you are focusing too much on the negative at WP and overlooking the positives of inter-culture collaboration. I hope your endeavor succeeds in any event.
Birgitte SB
The Cherokee, particularly, have historically been willing to share their wisdom.
Fred
Correct, Not true of most other tribes however ....
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Birgitte SB wrote:
You may want to be sure and explain exactly what the GFDL entails in this case. There is no guarantee that any work that is done under this license will be treated in a sacred manner by downstream users. Non-speakers would be within full rights to take the fork made in the Ute's language and put it up on a new website or even on Wikipedia where any "16 year old with a computer" will be able to edit it.
Which is why the translations will be intertribal only and not accessible to the general public in the case of the Uto-Aztecan translations -- at their request. The Foundation will have access to it, contingent on the concessions the Ute's are willing to make.
There are those involved who want it accessible to everyone, but their leaders make the final call. They have agreed that all Ute Indians will have access to the site. It doesn't violate the GFDL, its their language and they are providing me all four dialects, which this is the firs time in their history they have done so
Ute, Unite Ute, Uncompaghre Ute, and the the ancient Deep Ute Language. And unknown to the general public, the Ute's, like most tribes have a written language using syllabaric lithographs for their language. Some examples of it can be viewed as pictographs in nine-mile canyon in Utah -- they have never shared it before.
So as near as I can tell, I have made some very good progress very quickly. The Foundation is sensitive and respectful fo these types of projects.
Wikipedia is alien to most cultures I imagine. It is alien to capitalist culture and academic culture to name two. However many people accostomed to those cultures learn to adapt to and even appreciate WP culture.
I think you are focusing too much on the negative at WP and overlooking the positives of inter-culture collaboration.
No, I am a WP advocate, so don't misconstrue what I say. I am just coldly and directly stating the reality. Also, There is little to no benefit to interculture collaboration if you don't speak the language of what's presented, so the consumers of the content will invariably be the tribes themselves, and not the general community, so I think it's a moot point.
I hope your endeavor succeeds in any event.
Birgitte SB
--- "Jeff V. Merkey" jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would
be to work with
other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are
you being active
in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave. We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most native cultures. The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow their langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
Jeff
On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey
jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
>Most Wikimedia projects don't translate > >
"Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and
>"Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even > >
non-Latin alphabets do
>this: Russian Wikipedia is called > >
"Ð'икипедиÑZ(" which transliterates as
>Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of > >
the letters, at
>least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal > >
transliteration system?
>On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey > >
jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
> > > > > > >>The name should be: >> >>á?--áZ(ªá?ªáZ(µ áZ(¦á?£á?"áZ(³ >> >>(digoweli gatsanula) >>"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki " >> >>to match the actual meanings of the words >> >>
"wiki" and "pedia".
>>The current name of the site, while catchy, is >> >>
not accurate for the
>>language, and was synthesized. >> >>Just a suggestion... >> >>Jeff >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes. it does have one for words like this, but
taking potshots at the
name can create something you do not intend.
Let's look at it:
Wi-gi-que-di-ya
wi - (negative imperfect past tense) gi - to combine que - incomplete verb root about an animal di - plural for a non living object ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to
or covers a broad area or
topic)
While it is interesting some of the points and
counter points about this
issue, isn't this something better left to be
discussed on project pages
by participants and made as a local decision? At
least I would feel
more comfortable with people who are involved
with the development of
the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content
developers) instead of
getting European or Austrialian attitudes from
people who may never even
add a single word to that project.
This whole discussion strikes me as something
very similar to when the
name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all
of the other major
sister projects and their names.
There are no participants on the site. The site
has been dead for
months. Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK
CHEROKEE.
Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely
and I'll just manage
the fork off Wikipedia.
Jeff
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--- "Jeff V. Merkey" jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Birgitte SB wrote:
You may want to be sure and explain exactly what
the
GFDL entails in this case. There is no guarantee
that
any work that is done under this license will be treated in a sacred manner by downstream users. Non-speakers would be within full rights to take
the
fork made in the Ute's language and put it up on a
new
website or even on Wikipedia where any "16 year old with a computer" will be able to edit it.
Which is why the translations will be intertribal only and not accessible to the general public in the case of the Uto-Aztecan translations -- at their request. The Foundation will have access to it, contingent on the concessions the Ute's are willing to make.
There are those involved who want it accessible to everyone, but their leaders make the final call. They have agreed that all Ute Indians will have access to the site. It doesn't violate the GFDL, its their language and they are providing me all four dialects, which this is the firs time in their history they have done so
Ute, Unite Ute, Uncompaghre Ute, and the the ancient Deep Ute Language. And unknown to the general public, the Ute's, like most tribes have a written language using syllabaric lithographs for their language. Some examples of it can be viewed as pictographs in nine-mile canyon in Utah -- they have never shared it before.
So as near as I can tell, I have made some very good progress very quickly. The Foundation is sensitive and respectful fo these types of projects.
You certainly may do your best to restrict "access" to the end product as you are planning. This is what many libraries do regarding rare PD texts. However if *one* person who is given access decides for any reason to make a copy public, the cat is out of the bag. For example a library may have strong restrictions on access. They do not allow their material scanned or photocopied you are only allowed to read it within one room. However I could type a transcription on a laptop over the course of several weeks and put it on Wikisource. Assuming this material is in the public domain, the library can do nothing in such in event as they only own the particular book not the copyright.
This could one day happen to the Ute's works. Once it is made public in part or whole, it can be treated in any way allowed under the GFDL. The foundation has no control over it, however respectful they wish to be. I am not trying to encourage action of this sort. But everyone involved needs to be aware of the ramifications of using copyleft material. This may seem an unlikely possibilty at the moment, but over time it more likely than not this material will become public. Although it may be a hundred years till that happens. I respect what you are trying to do and the Ute as well. I would hate for something like this to happen and the Ute to feel blindsided by such a turn of events.
Wikipedia is alien to most cultures I imagine. It
is
alien to capitalist culture and academic culture to name two. However many people accostomed to those cultures learn to adapt to and even appreciate WP culture.
I think you are focusing too much on the negative at WP and overlooking the positives of inter-culture collaboration.
No, I am a WP advocate, so don't misconstrue what I say. I am just coldly and directly stating the reality. Also, There is little to no benefit to interculture collaboration if you don't speak the language of what's presented, so the consumers of the content will invariably be the tribes themselves, and not the general community, so I think it's a moot point.
I am not trying to miscontrue your comments, please correct me where I have. I believe it is too easy to say "the Wikipedia way is alien to the culture of X and they will not be able to work under it's policies." Because X can be filled with many things which *have* adapted to WP culture. As I said above WP is very contrary to capitalist and academic cultures. Although there are always individuals who cannot adapt, I do not like to see this generalized to an entire culture. However, I always found it easy to work within the policies here, so it I may be completely wrong in this.
I hope your endeavor succeeds in any event.
Birgitte SB
--- "Jeff V. Merkey"
wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site
would
be to work with
other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia.
Are
you being active
in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave. We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on
mutual
respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the
content
-- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
You wont get many native people editing here due
to
the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia,
so
I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most
native
cultures. The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a
prevalent
attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow
their
langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's
due
to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
Jeff
<snip>
Birgitte SB
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Birgitte SB wrote:
You certainly may do your best to restrict "access" to the end product as you are planning. This is what many libraries do regarding rare PD texts. However if *one* person who is given access decides for any reason to make a copy public, the cat is out of the bag. For example a library may have strong restrictions on access. They do not allow their material scanned or photocopied you are only allowed to read it within one room. However I could type a transcription on a laptop over the course of several weeks and put it on Wikisource. Assuming this material is in the public domain, the library can do nothing in such in event as they only own the particular book not the copyright.
This could one day happen to the Ute's works. Once it is made public in part or whole, it can be treated in any way allowed under the GFDL. The foundation has no control over it, however respectful they wish to be. I am not trying to encourage action of this sort. But everyone involved needs to be aware of the ramifications of using copyleft material. This may seem an unlikely possibilty at the moment, but over time it more likely than not this material will become public. Although it may be a hundred years till that happens. I respect what you are trying to do and the Ute as well. I would hate for something like this to happen and the Ute to feel blindsided by such a turn of events.
That's the Ute's issue to manage, not mine or the Foundations. I am here to promote the pervasiveness of WP content and bring to the Native Peoples. What thye do with it is their own affair. I expect it will become public at some point, but that's not my call.
I am not trying to miscontrue your comments, please correct me where I have. I believe it is too easy to say "the Wikipedia way is alien to the culture of X and they will not be able to work under it's policies." Because X can be filled with many things which *have* adapted to WP culture. As I said above WP is very contrary to capitalist and academic cultures. Although there are always individuals who cannot adapt, I do not like to see this generalized to an entire culture. However, I always found it easy to work within the policies here, so it I may be completely wrong in this.
Wikipedia has been around for 6 years, Native Cultures have been around for about 12,000 years. I expect we will still be here 1,000 years from now. Hopefully so will WP, but I expect it will evolve over time and little resemble what we have today in 1,000 years. Our people (and most tribes) have a very long term view of things, and those views are not easily influenced by next years internet fad. :-)
That being said, the fact that several Native Tribes is willing to support such a projects with WP content is a huge endorsement of the project and the site. The Foundation should be very proud of itself.
Jeff
By the way,
Since this thread originally asked for a name change of the Cherokee Wikipedia, do we have conencus yet? I have been positing translated articles to the site and I have noticed editors are beginning to join the site and I am seeing more activity. I need the following if you want me to start uploaidng hundreds of articles in Cherokee.
1. A final decision on the name change (I would like to see "Aniyvwiya Gadugi" as the new name since this name will create the impression the site is endowed with the spiritual energy of our people and serve to attract Cherokee to the site, just a suggestion, BTW. It's a cultural thing and the disclaimer ("We are not endoring the Cherokee Belief System in making this the name for the site, we did so to make the site more familiar and comfortable for Native Cherokee authors, etc." -- end quote). The name for "Cherokee Books" "Tsalagi digoweli" should be reserved for a Cherokee Wikibooks site when the time comes.
2. Integration of the chr2syl program so people can actually USE the site from a regular PC keyboard. Most Cherokee edit in text in any event and we convert to syllabary with custom tools and fonts, but the average joe Schmoe Cherokee wil only have a text based computer.
I think Fred Bauder would like to see the site come to life, and I know Danny and Brad also have such a view. Can we move forward please. Time for a Vote.
Thanks for the consideration.
Jeff
On Jul 13, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
- A final decision on the name change (I would like to see "Aniyvwiya
Gadugi" as the new name since this name will create the impression the site is endowed with the spiritual energy of our people and serve to attract Cherokee to the site, just a suggestion, BTW. It's a cultural thing and the disclaimer ("We are not endoring the Cherokee Belief System in making this the name for the site, we did so to make the site more familiar and comfortable for Native Cherokee authors, etc." -- end quote). The name for "Cherokee Books" "Tsalagi digoweli" should be reserved for a Cherokee Wikibooks site when the time comes.
- Integration of the chr2syl program so people can actually USE the
site from a regular PC keyboard. Most Cherokee edit in text in any event and we convert to syllabary with custom tools and fonts, but the average joe Schmoe Cherokee wil only have a text based computer.
I think Fred Bauder would like to see the site come to life, and I know Danny and Brad also have such a view. Can we move forward please. Time for a Vote.
Thanks for the consideration.
Jeff
I'd like to try it out.
Fred
Fred Bauder wrote:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
- A final decision on the name change (I would like to see "Aniyvwiya
Gadugi" as the new name since this name will create the impression the site is endowed with the spiritual energy of our people and serve to attract Cherokee to the site, just a suggestion, BTW. It's a cultural thing and the disclaimer ("We are not endoring the Cherokee Belief System in making this the name for the site, we did so to make the site more familiar and comfortable for Native Cherokee authors, etc." -- end quote). The name for "Cherokee Books" "Tsalagi digoweli" should be reserved for a Cherokee Wikibooks site when the time comes.
- Integration of the chr2syl program so people can actually USE the
site from a regular PC keyboard. Most Cherokee edit in text in any event and we convert to syllabary with custom tools and fonts, but the average joe Schmoe Cherokee wil only have a text based computer.
I think Fred Bauder would like to see the site come to life, and I know Danny and Brad also have such a view. Can we move forward please. Time for a Vote.
Thanks for the consideration.
Jeff
I'd like to try it out.
Fred
Thanks Fred,
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave. We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
I guess this is a question of what you mean by Wikipedia culture. The concept of respect is a big part of it. The English Wikipedia just has a lot of ravens running around trying to impose it.
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
Mutual respect is not a function of an editor's age. There can just as easily be wise youth as there can be foolish elders.
You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I'm sure it's not the only reason they stay away. But the reason that you cite for the absence of first nations people can just as easily apply to people from other cultures, including ones whose only language is English.
I am meeting with the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most native cultures.
I guess this depends on what you mean by "how the site works". I would certainly not encourage machine translations; the results are often something that makes native speakers laugh. Although technical material about how the site works is probably best translated, beyond that each language Wikipedia (or other project) develops its own culture.
The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow their langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
I have no basis for making comments specific to the Utes, but the linkage between language and culture is a well known one. This kind of connection where language was a part of the introduction to a culture's mysteries is even a common theme in European cultures. If it's meant to be the Ute material will come in its own time.
Ec
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Oldak Quill wrote:
Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active in seeking members?
Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and there are going to be issues with the way the site operates. So far every Cherokee who has edited on WP has gotten banned or scrutinized to the point they leave. We have a concept of respecting the space of a person who is working on something.
I guess this is a question of what you mean by Wikipedia culture. The concept of respect is a big part of it. The English Wikipedia just has a lot of ravens running around trying to impose it.
More like swift birds of prey, not intellectual ravens, I've got several sets of talon marks on my keyboard from WP experiences to show. :-)
WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and disrupt someone else's work and this doesn;t work for us. Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I believe WP and Wales operate on the premise people on WP should be the same way. This has not been the course followed. I think WP should continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where our cultural issues can coexist peacefully.
Mutual respect is not a function of an editor's age. There can just as easily be wise youth as there can be foolish elders.
The whole power admin thing is out of hand on the site. I think the energy of peoples karma can come home to roost, good and bad. WP is a lot like the trading floor of the New York Stock Exchange when folks get going. Sound like someone we all know and love? :-)
You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is organized -- respect for others is lacking in the way articles are edited. It's ok though, we can still both be successful if we figure out a way to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
I'm sure it's not the only reason they stay away. But the reason that you cite for the absence of first nations people can just as easily apply to people from other cultures, including ones whose only language is English.
One main reason is a lot of them are disinterested and don't have the resources. There are also political and religous issues as well for a lot of our folks.
I am meeting with the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making excellent progress. They also expressed a desire to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues with how the site works -- its alien to most native cultures.
I guess this depends on what you mean by "how the site works". I would certainly not encourage machine translations; the results are often something that makes native speakers laugh. Although technical material about how the site works is probably best translated, beyond that each language Wikipedia (or other project) develops its own culture.
Well, this machine translation and the software is being done by a Native speaker, and since the template is my brain for how the translations are done in software, one could say I translated them with a machine assist due to volume, so I guess one could say they were done by a Native Speaker and member of the culture. Once they have a large volume of content to edit, I think we are ok.
There have been a few words I've had to adapt to. I use a link parser for english decomposition then take the decomposed strings of morphemes and remap and tense them into Cherokee. Cherokee has a rigid structure so this makes it a lot easier to do. I do proofread and the latest run is now at 98% completeness and accuracy. I am shooting for 100% by the end of the summer.
The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't want non speakers working on it for religious reasons. You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among Native Peoples. The ute's did not even allow their langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
I have no basis for making comments specific to the Utes, but the linkage between language and culture is a well known one. This kind of connection where language was a part of the introduction to a culture's mysteries is even a common theme in European cultures. If it's meant to be the Ute material will come in its own time.
Correct. Not my call. I expect some of their own ambitious folks will drive that to happen. We just need to give them the space to come to that conclusion on their own.
Jeff
Ec
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org