Forwarded to Wikipedia-l as requested by the author, who mistakenly sent it only to me...
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wouter Steenbeek musiqolog@hotmail.com Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:00:13 +0100 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Saterlandic Frisian Wikipedia To: stephen.forrest@gmail.com
I believe you mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saterland_Frisian_language.
For the purposes of ISO 639 codes, Saterland Frisian is regarded as a dialect of Frisian. Can you provide a rationale for why working within the Frisian Wikipedia is not tenable?
I seem to recall reading that there were different spelling conventions for the Frisian spoken in Germany and that spoken in the Netherlands. I have no idea how significant these differences are.
Steve _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
You were right: I used the wrong link. Just a matter of mental absence ;).
What is a dialect? There is a seperate Wiki for Aromanian, though it can easily be classified as a Romanian dialect. There are Limburgish, Low Saxon and Alemannic Wikis, though German and Dutch would do well for all three of them. Some tend to classify Czech, Slowakian and even Polish as one language, but no-one question the legitimity of the seperate wikis. According to many scolars, West Lauwer Frisian and Saterland Frisian are dialects of the Frisian language, along with North Frisian. Some do, however, consider it a separate language. Let me point out the differences and similarities.
Westlauwer Frisian has, like Hollandic Dutch, only two genders: gendered and neuter (de man, de frou, it ding). Saterlandic has three (di Mon, ju Fauene, dät Diert). Westlauwer Frisian lost, again along with Dutch, its cases, while Saterlandic preserved its dative and accusative cases. Westlauwer Frisian has a complex system of diphthong which are the consequences of an elaborate breaking process during the early Modern Age; this process has left Saterlandic totally untouched; instead it developed other mutation(ljibbe - lieuwje; swiet - swäit; leaf - ljoof). As a result, Westlauwer Frisians and Saterland Frisians cannot understand each other, unless they studied the other language. Another important difference is in the vocabulary: Westlauwer Frisian draws on Dutch, Saterland Frisian on German. Finally, Standard Westlauwer Frisian has no official or prescriptive status in the Saterland: If Frisian is used at all officially (which happens increasingly), Saterfrisian is used.
Maybe I will point this out with some comparative samples in the article on Saterlandic.
Wouter
_________________________________________________________________ Altijd in contact met de kleinkinderen: MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/
Hi Wouter,
I don't think there can be much practical opposition to your request because in practical terms, East Frisian / Saterlandic Frisian and West Frisian / Westerlauwers Frisian are different languages.
I think you should create a mainpage at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/test-wp/Friisk and you could also perhaps create some sample content pages.
Mark
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 23:35:39 -0500, Stephen Forrest stephen.forrest@gmail.com wrote:
Forwarded to Wikipedia-l as requested by the author, who mistakenly sent it only to me...
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wouter Steenbeek musiqolog@hotmail.com Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:00:13 +0100 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Saterlandic Frisian Wikipedia To: stephen.forrest@gmail.com
I believe you mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saterland_Frisian_language.
For the purposes of ISO 639 codes, Saterland Frisian is regarded as a dialect of Frisian. Can you provide a rationale for why working within the Frisian Wikipedia is not tenable?
I seem to recall reading that there were different spelling conventions for the Frisian spoken in Germany and that spoken in the Netherlands. I have no idea how significant these differences are.
Steve _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
You were right: I used the wrong link. Just a matter of mental absence ;).
What is a dialect? There is a seperate Wiki for Aromanian, though it can easily be classified as a Romanian dialect. There are Limburgish, Low Saxon and Alemannic Wikis, though German and Dutch would do well for all three of them. Some tend to classify Czech, Slowakian and even Polish as one language, but no-one question the legitimity of the seperate wikis. According to many scolars, West Lauwer Frisian and Saterland Frisian are dialects of the Frisian language, along with North Frisian. Some do, however, consider it a separate language. Let me point out the differences and similarities.
Westlauwer Frisian has, like Hollandic Dutch, only two genders: gendered and neuter (de man, de frou, it ding). Saterlandic has three (di Mon, ju Fauene, dät Diert). Westlauwer Frisian lost, again along with Dutch, its cases, while Saterlandic preserved its dative and accusative cases. Westlauwer Frisian has a complex system of diphthong which are the consequences of an elaborate breaking process during the early Modern Age; this process has left Saterlandic totally untouched; instead it developed other mutation(ljibbe - lieuwje; swiet - swäit; leaf - ljoof). As a result, Westlauwer Frisians and Saterland Frisians cannot understand each other, unless they studied the other language. Another important difference is in the vocabulary: Westlauwer Frisian draws on Dutch, Saterland Frisian on German. Finally, Standard Westlauwer Frisian has no official or prescriptive status in the Saterland: If Frisian is used at all officially (which happens increasingly), Saterfrisian is used.
Maybe I will point this out with some comparative samples in the article on Saterlandic.
Wouter
Altijd in contact met de kleinkinderen: MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/ _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hi,
I don't have enough information about the Frisian languages, but I must react to what was said about Slovak, Czech and Polish language. These are (Slovakia, Czech republic and Poland) three different and independent countries. They have one common ancestor the Slavic language but that is the same as for English and German language (Germanic languages). So to wrap it up these languages are different languages (with diff. grammar, etc.) and not dialects or even one language.
Example: PL - Każdy może się do nas przyłączyć - również Ty, bez żadnych formalności, możesz dodawać i modyfikować artykuły. CZ - Každý se k nám může přihlásit - taktéž i Ty, bez nějakých formalit, můžeš přidávat a upravovat články. SK - Každý sa k nám môže prihlásiť - aj Ty, bez nejakých formalít, môžeš pridávať a upravovať články.
Thank you and good luck with the Frisian languages
[[:sk:User:Palica]]
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 22:55:42 -0700, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wouter,
I don't think there can be much practical opposition to your request because in practical terms, East Frisian / Saterlandic Frisian and West Frisian / Westerlauwers Frisian are different languages.
I think you should create a mainpage at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/test-wp/Friisk and you could also perhaps create some sample content pages.
Mark
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 23:35:39 -0500, Stephen Forrest stephen.forrest@gmail.com wrote:
Forwarded to Wikipedia-l as requested by the author, who mistakenly sent it only to me...
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wouter Steenbeek musiqolog@hotmail.com Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:00:13 +0100 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Saterlandic Frisian Wikipedia To: stephen.forrest@gmail.com
I believe you mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saterland_Frisian_language.
For the purposes of ISO 639 codes, Saterland Frisian is regarded as a dialect of Frisian. Can you provide a rationale for why working within the Frisian Wikipedia is not tenable?
I seem to recall reading that there were different spelling conventions for the Frisian spoken in Germany and that spoken in the Netherlands. I have no idea how significant these differences are.
Steve _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
You were right: I used the wrong link. Just a matter of mental absence ;).
What is a dialect? There is a seperate Wiki for Aromanian, though it can easily be classified as a Romanian dialect. There are Limburgish, Low Saxon and Alemannic Wikis, though German and Dutch would do well for all three of them. Some tend to classify Czech, Slowakian and even Polish as one language, but no-one question the legitimity of the seperate wikis. According to many scolars, West Lauwer Frisian and Saterland Frisian are dialects of the Frisian language, along with North Frisian. Some do, however, consider it a separate language. Let me point out the differences and similarities.
Westlauwer Frisian has, like Hollandic Dutch, only two genders: gendered and neuter (de man, de frou, it ding). Saterlandic has three (di Mon, ju Fauene, dät Diert). Westlauwer Frisian lost, again along with Dutch, its cases, while Saterlandic preserved its dative and accusative cases. Westlauwer Frisian has a complex system of diphthong which are the consequences of an elaborate breaking process during the early Modern Age; this process has left Saterlandic totally untouched; instead it developed other mutation(ljibbe - lieuwje; swiet - swäit; leaf - ljoof). As a result, Westlauwer Frisians and Saterland Frisians cannot understand each other, unless they studied the other language. Another important difference is in the vocabulary: Westlauwer Frisian draws on Dutch, Saterland Frisian on German. Finally, Standard Westlauwer Frisian has no official or prescriptive status in the Saterland: If Frisian is used at all officially (which happens increasingly), Saterfrisian is used.
Maybe I will point this out with some comparative samples in the article on Saterlandic.
Wouter
Altijd in contact met de kleinkinderen: MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/ _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hi Pavol,
I agree with you mostly, but we must admit: even in your example sentences, Czech and Slovak share many many cognates: the only words which aren't obviously related or even identical are "taktéž i" vs "aj". If you substitute Czech "ů" for Slovak "ô", Czech "ř" for Slovak "r", Czech "t" for Slovak "t", and Czech "i" for Slovak "í", the ONLY differences in those two sentences is as I noted "taktéž i" vs "aj", and "se k nám" vs "sa k nám".
Polish, on the other hand, is obviously more different.
This does not mean they cannot be independent lnguages, I just want to point out that your example isn't much effective to prove the point.
I think that you could take an article from the Czech Wikipedia, go through and change some minor things, and have a perfectly valid Slovak article. It amazes me to no end that these sorts of close Wikipedias do not engage in wider content-sharing programs: Indonesian and Malaysian Wikipedias are in a similar situation.
However, even the Czechoslovakian government considered them as two different languages. The case of the FYRs' (former yugoslav republics) languages, with the exception of Macedonian and Albanian, is perhaps more compelling, as until relatively recently there were no such languages as Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, and Montenegrin.
In fact, Serbian nationalists such as Nikola Smolenski try to assert that Montenegrin is not a separate language from Serbian, and even that Bosnian is just "Serbian as spoken in Bosnia". Why not calling Serbian, "Montenegrin as spoken in Serbia"?
Although these sorts of nationalist politics have no place in Wikipedia articles, they already appear on [[Montenegrin language]] and [[Moldovan language]], both of which are not exactly NPOV and play down the possibility of them being separate languages (neither page notes that there is no definitive, universally agreed-upon boundary between language and dialect, but rather paints a picture of nationalist freaks trying to get what is "obviously" a dialect considered a separate language). If you think they are not NPOV, you should see the article on Montenegrin language at the Serbian wikipedia, and the article on Moldovan language at the Romanian Wikipedia (thankfully, the Moldovan Wikipedia has a much more neutral version, noting that it is the official language of Moldova, but that not everybody recognises it as separate from Romanian).
Generally, languages are considered separate by experts if they meet one of three criteria: 1. They have less than 80% lexical similarity in spoken form, 2. A significant portion of the speaker population of one variety considers them separate, or 3. They are official languages of different nations, with different official names or the script usage varies.
The first one catches languages whose speakers do not nessecarily consider them separate (although experts might), such as various Quechua varieties. The second one catches languages that are borderline (ie, 81% lexical similarity) but that the population considers separate, or cases where (in the words of the ethnologue) "separate literature [is] nessecary". The third catches languages that may be widely considered to be the same, but who use different writing systems (Dungan vs Sichuan Mandarin, Greenlandic vs Inuktitut, etc) and languages whose governments declare them separate with no significant speaker support (no current examples, although it is concievable that in a violent separation between two linguistically similar portions of a single country, they would declare their languages separate without support from the people)
Mark
On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 08:08:02 +0100, Pavol Cupka pavol.cupka@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I don't have enough information about the Frisian languages, but I must react to what was said about Slovak, Czech and Polish language. These are (Slovakia, Czech republic and Poland) three different and independent countries. They have one common ancestor the Slavic language but that is the same as for English and German language (Germanic languages). So to wrap it up these languages are different languages (with diff. grammar, etc.) and not dialects or even one language.
Example: PL - Każdy może się do nas przyłączyć - również Ty, bez żadnych formalności, możesz dodawać i modyfikować artykuły. CZ - Každý se k nám může přihlásit - taktéž i Ty, bez nějakých formalit, můžeš přidávat a upravovat články. SK - Každý sa k nám môže prihlásiť - aj Ty, bez nejakých formalít, môžeš pridávať a upravovať články.
Thank you and good luck with the Frisian languages
[[:sk:User:Palica]]
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 22:55:42 -0700, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wouter,
I don't think there can be much practical opposition to your request because in practical terms, East Frisian / Saterlandic Frisian and West Frisian / Westerlauwers Frisian are different languages.
I think you should create a mainpage at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/test-wp/Friisk and you could also perhaps create some sample content pages.
Mark
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 23:35:39 -0500, Stephen Forrest stephen.forrest@gmail.com wrote:
Forwarded to Wikipedia-l as requested by the author, who mistakenly sent it only to me...
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wouter Steenbeek musiqolog@hotmail.com Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:00:13 +0100 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Saterlandic Frisian Wikipedia To: stephen.forrest@gmail.com
I believe you mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saterland_Frisian_language.
For the purposes of ISO 639 codes, Saterland Frisian is regarded as a dialect of Frisian. Can you provide a rationale for why working within the Frisian Wikipedia is not tenable?
I seem to recall reading that there were different spelling conventions for the Frisian spoken in Germany and that spoken in the Netherlands. I have no idea how significant these differences are.
Steve _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
You were right: I used the wrong link. Just a matter of mental absence ;).
What is a dialect? There is a seperate Wiki for Aromanian, though it can easily be classified as a Romanian dialect. There are Limburgish, Low Saxon and Alemannic Wikis, though German and Dutch would do well for all three of them. Some tend to classify Czech, Slowakian and even Polish as one language, but no-one question the legitimity of the seperate wikis. According to many scolars, West Lauwer Frisian and Saterland Frisian are dialects of the Frisian language, along with North Frisian. Some do, however, consider it a separate language. Let me point out the differences and similarities.
Westlauwer Frisian has, like Hollandic Dutch, only two genders: gendered and neuter (de man, de frou, it ding). Saterlandic has three (di Mon, ju Fauene, dät Diert). Westlauwer Frisian lost, again along with Dutch, its cases, while Saterlandic preserved its dative and accusative cases. Westlauwer Frisian has a complex system of diphthong which are the consequences of an elaborate breaking process during the early Modern Age; this process has left Saterlandic totally untouched; instead it developed other mutation(ljibbe - lieuwje; swiet - swäit; leaf - ljoof). As a result, Westlauwer Frisians and Saterland Frisians cannot understand each other, unless they studied the other language. Another important difference is in the vocabulary: Westlauwer Frisian draws on Dutch, Saterland Frisian on German. Finally, Standard Westlauwer Frisian has no official or prescriptive status in the Saterland: If Frisian is used at all officially (which happens increasingly), Saterfrisian is used.
Maybe I will point this out with some comparative samples in the article on Saterlandic.
Wouter
Altijd in contact met de kleinkinderen: MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/ _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hi Mark,
I agree that the example wasn't very good as far as to show the difference between Slovak and Czech language.
This rule would apply: 3. They are official languages of different nations, with different official names or the script usage varies.
There are many different words between Slovak and Czech language and although it might seem to be similar they are not so much. The grammar of these two lang. is different with different rules and although they are similar as you pointed out now days after 12 years of separate republics most of the Czech people have problems understanding the Slovak language (no more Slovak cartoons or News editions).
I'll try to give you some more distinct examples: EN - to listen CZ - poslouchat SK - počúvať EN - to write CZ - psát SK - písať EN - to look CZ - dívat se SK - pozerať sa EN - donkey CZ - osel SK - somár EN - camel CZ - velbloud SK - ťava EN - chicken CZ - slepice SK - sliepka EN - nice CZ - hezký SK - pekný
and many others.
Hope this makes for a better example.
Take it easy :) Pavol
On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 00:50:23 -0700, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Pavol,
I agree with you mostly, but we must admit: even in your example sentences, Czech and Slovak share many many cognates: the only words which aren't obviously related or even identical are "taktéž i" vs "aj". If you substitute Czech "ů" for Slovak "ô", Czech "ř" for Slovak "r", Czech "t" for Slovak "t", and Czech "i" for Slovak "í", the ONLY differences in those two sentences is as I noted "taktéž i" vs "aj", and "se k nám" vs "sa k nám".
Polish, on the other hand, is obviously more different.
This does not mean they cannot be independent lnguages, I just want to point out that your example isn't much effective to prove the point.
I think that you could take an article from the Czech Wikipedia, go through and change some minor things, and have a perfectly valid Slovak article. It amazes me to no end that these sorts of close Wikipedias do not engage in wider content-sharing programs: Indonesian and Malaysian Wikipedias are in a similar situation.
However, even the Czechoslovakian government considered them as two different languages. The case of the FYRs' (former yugoslav republics) languages, with the exception of Macedonian and Albanian, is perhaps more compelling, as until relatively recently there were no such languages as Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian, and Montenegrin.
In fact, Serbian nationalists such as Nikola Smolenski try to assert that Montenegrin is not a separate language from Serbian, and even that Bosnian is just "Serbian as spoken in Bosnia". Why not calling Serbian, "Montenegrin as spoken in Serbia"?
Although these sorts of nationalist politics have no place in Wikipedia articles, they already appear on [[Montenegrin language]] and [[Moldovan language]], both of which are not exactly NPOV and play down the possibility of them being separate languages (neither page notes that there is no definitive, universally agreed-upon boundary between language and dialect, but rather paints a picture of nationalist freaks trying to get what is "obviously" a dialect considered a separate language). If you think they are not NPOV, you should see the article on Montenegrin language at the Serbian wikipedia, and the article on Moldovan language at the Romanian Wikipedia (thankfully, the Moldovan Wikipedia has a much more neutral version, noting that it is the official language of Moldova, but that not everybody recognises it as separate from Romanian).
Generally, languages are considered separate by experts if they meet one of three criteria: 1. They have less than 80% lexical similarity in spoken form, 2. A significant portion of the speaker population of one variety considers them separate, or 3. They are official languages of different nations, with different official names or the script usage varies.
The first one catches languages whose speakers do not nessecarily consider them separate (although experts might), such as various Quechua varieties. The second one catches languages that are borderline (ie, 81% lexical similarity) but that the population considers separate, or cases where (in the words of the ethnologue) "separate literature [is] nessecary". The third catches languages that may be widely considered to be the same, but who use different writing systems (Dungan vs Sichuan Mandarin, Greenlandic vs Inuktitut, etc) and languages whose governments declare them separate with no significant speaker support (no current examples, although it is concievable that in a violent separation between two linguistically similar portions of a single country, they would declare their languages separate without support from the people)
Mark
On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 08:08:02 +0100, Pavol Cupka pavol.cupka@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I don't have enough information about the Frisian languages, but I must react to what was said about Slovak, Czech and Polish language. These are (Slovakia, Czech republic and Poland) three different and independent countries. They have one common ancestor the Slavic language but that is the same as for English and German language (Germanic languages). So to wrap it up these languages are different languages (with diff. grammar, etc.) and not dialects or even one language.
Example: PL - Każdy może się do nas przyłączyć - również Ty, bez żadnych formalności, możesz dodawać i modyfikować artykuły. CZ - Každý se k nám může přihlásit - taktéž i Ty, bez nějakých formalit, můžeš přidávat a upravovat články. SK - Každý sa k nám môže prihlásiť - aj Ty, bez nejakých formalít, môžeš pridávať a upravovať články.
Thank you and good luck with the Frisian languages
[[:sk:User:Palica]]
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 22:55:42 -0700, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wouter,
I don't think there can be much practical opposition to your request because in practical terms, East Frisian / Saterlandic Frisian and West Frisian / Westerlauwers Frisian are different languages.
I think you should create a mainpage at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/test-wp/Friisk and you could also perhaps create some sample content pages.
Mark
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 23:35:39 -0500, Stephen Forrest stephen.forrest@gmail.com wrote:
Forwarded to Wikipedia-l as requested by the author, who mistakenly sent it only to me...
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wouter Steenbeek musiqolog@hotmail.com Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:00:13 +0100 Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Saterlandic Frisian Wikipedia To: stephen.forrest@gmail.com
I believe you mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saterland_Frisian_language.
For the purposes of ISO 639 codes, Saterland Frisian is regarded as a dialect of Frisian. Can you provide a rationale for why working within the Frisian Wikipedia is not tenable?
I seem to recall reading that there were different spelling conventions for the Frisian spoken in Germany and that spoken in the Netherlands. I have no idea how significant these differences are.
Steve _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
You were right: I used the wrong link. Just a matter of mental absence ;).
What is a dialect? There is a seperate Wiki for Aromanian, though it can easily be classified as a Romanian dialect. There are Limburgish, Low Saxon and Alemannic Wikis, though German and Dutch would do well for all three of them. Some tend to classify Czech, Slowakian and even Polish as one language, but no-one question the legitimity of the seperate wikis. According to many scolars, West Lauwer Frisian and Saterland Frisian are dialects of the Frisian language, along with North Frisian. Some do, however, consider it a separate language. Let me point out the differences and similarities.
Westlauwer Frisian has, like Hollandic Dutch, only two genders: gendered and neuter (de man, de frou, it ding). Saterlandic has three (di Mon, ju Fauene, dät Diert). Westlauwer Frisian lost, again along with Dutch, its cases, while Saterlandic preserved its dative and accusative cases. Westlauwer Frisian has a complex system of diphthong which are the consequences of an elaborate breaking process during the early Modern Age; this process has left Saterlandic totally untouched; instead it developed other mutation(ljibbe - lieuwje; swiet - swäit; leaf - ljoof). As a result, Westlauwer Frisians and Saterland Frisians cannot understand each other, unless they studied the other language. Another important difference is in the vocabulary: Westlauwer Frisian draws on Dutch, Saterland Frisian on German. Finally, Standard Westlauwer Frisian has no official or prescriptive status in the Saterland: If Frisian is used at all officially (which happens increasingly), Saterfrisian is used.
Maybe I will point this out with some comparative samples in the article on Saterlandic.
Wouter
Altijd in contact met de kleinkinderen: MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/ _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Thank you for your support, Mark, and for your suggestion. I will use the test page meta/...../Fräisk rather than Friisk, however: "Friisk" refers to Insular North Frisian, which actually has so many dialects for so few speakers that it would be a hell of a job to start a wiki in ;-). Anyway, I am unfamiliar on the area of creating new wikis, so thanks again!
Concerning the West Slavonic languages, I don't support the view that they form one language; I see them as seperate languages and I (try to) learn them as seperate languages. I intentionally avoid the perhaps more convenient example of Serbo-Croatian (Serbian, Croatian, Bosniak, Macedonian) because I wouldn't venture on such thin ice and risk an e-mail war.
Wouter
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Webmessenger doet het altijd en overal http://webmessenger.msn.com/
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org