Phil Boswell wrote:
"Carlos Thompson" chlewey@cable.net.co wrote in message news:002901c62128$d3b9dea0$0601a8c0@thompson.local...
Sabine Cretella wrote:
On the Neapolitan wikipedia we have one particularity: it is a language without stadardised writing (up to now) and it has local varieties that sometimes vary really a lot. Besides that there are regions that are attributed to the Neapolitan language group that really "far away" from Neapolitan - this means that there are languages (that are not considered as such) that are not understandable for us when we hear those people talk.
Can these languages not use the same written forms? I could understand the problem if you were speaking to each other aloud, but what does this have to do with the written text?
If they do not use exactly the same written forms, can they easily be "translated"? (see below)
They could if there was a standardised form. Without such standardisation is it is not possible. Within the Neapolitan language GROUP there are variants that qualify as a /language /when you accept that a language is different from another when people speaking one do not understand the other.
A language is not only about how you write things, it is also vocabulary, grammar and stuff. They do not use the same written forms.
If I understand this correctly, this would also help for languages with different scripts like Judeo-Spanish (Ladino) which is written in either Roman or Hebrew script. With this we could have different namespaces for each script (orthography), interlink between scripts, etc.
There's a utility on the Chinese Wikipedia which converts back-and-forth between Traditional and Simplified.
I believe that steps are being taken to enable this to be used for some Eastern European languages which can use Latin or Cyrillic scripts.
This enables an article to be "written" in either script, and read back in either. This would presumably be more helpful than splitting articles.
HTH HAND
It is well known that this utility exists. However as I understand it, Chinese is a written language that is largely divorced from the spoken language. While some Eastern European languages are seen by some as being identical, it is denied by many of the people who live there. Having a tool for Chinese does not mean that you can use the same took for Judeo-Spanish, the number of people speaking Chinese or the "Eastern European" languages is vastly different.
When you allow for articles to be started in a namespace according to a script used, you can still do all the technical machinations when they are available. I think it was Danny who once said that there are multiple ways in which a Hebrew text can be written. I think it helps when you can identify text to how they were originally written. Using a namespace is one way of accomplishing it. Articles are not split this way any more than an English article is split from a Dutch or a French article.