-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Mark Williamson wrote:
I'd agree with you there, except that ISO is not always nessecarily correct.
For starters, ISO 639-2 excludes lots and lots of languages (cf Ethnologue).
The (provisional) ISO 639-3 solves this, but as of yet it is not final or officially official.
Now, the problem with that is that it follows Ethnologue's divisions of languages vs dialects for the most part. Thus, while Moroccan and Tunisian Arabic are considered separate languages (even people who advocate for separate languages within "Arabic" would consider them both part of Maghrebi Arabic), Yavapai and Havasupai or Lithuanian and Samogitian are not. Zlatiborian, of course, is not even mentioned. Give it time, perhaps.
Show me where "Upper New York on the west side" exists in the ethnologue, and I will show you Zlatiborian.
- -- Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales