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 :)
On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 00:50:23 -0700, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
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
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)
On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 08:08:02 +0100, Pavol Cupka <pavol.cupka(a)gmail.com> wrote:
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
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
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 22:55:42 -0700, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
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
and you could also
perhaps create some sample content pages.
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 23:35:39 -0500, Stephen Forrest
Forwarded to Wikipedia-l as requested by the
author, who mistakenly
sent it only to me...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wouter Steenbeek <musiqolog(a)hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:00:13 +0100
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Saterlandic Frisian Wikipedia
>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.
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
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
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
Altijd in contact met de kleinkinderen: MSN Messenger
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l mailing list