Message: 9 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 12:36:26 -0700 From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Languages To: wikipedia-l@Wikipedia.org Message-ID: 3F4D083A.4050302@telus.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
In Canada a genocidal policy that forced more than a generation of first nations children into residential schools where they were forbidden to use their own language has put many of these languages in desparate situations. There may not be a critical mass of population for keeping some of these languages and cultures alive. We can provide space for a Kootenayan language Wikipedia, but what good is that if there is no-one around with the ability to write
in >that language? The elders may be
the only ones with a functional knowlege of the language, but these elders are no different from the elders of other societies who are overwhelmed by anything having to do with computers.
Every little bit can help perhaps. What else would you suggest we can do ?
We did the same with our languages, breton, basque, corse... The french unity is not so much relying on political unity, than cultural, linguistic and religious (less and less now of course, but the principles running the society are christian based even if we are a laic state). To achieve that unity, in the past time, kids also were hit at school if they talk their "home-language" (patois).
There are now a wikipedia is occitan and one in breton.
PS: the English for "decennie" is "decade"
<font size=-2>Merci</font>
The Encyclopedia is not translated and will not be translated in other languages. Each language is free '''in''' its own creativity. Articles from one
language can
influence another language. But they are not copies.
I changed "of" to "in" in your comment, Anthere.
"Of" >would suggest
that a language is somehow liberated from its own creativity.
:-((((
Your message contains a very important subtlety. If
I >could translate
this text into Cree the result would not be in Cree; it would be in English with Cree words. There exists a pervasively naïve and simplistic view about translations that it is just a matter of changing words that have a one to one correspondence. Some topics, notably technical ones, can survive that transition very
well, >but topics that
are closely linked to culture fare rather badly.
So true. Some topics, I cannot even translate from english to french because I do not know the french words for these.
By the Ec... the definition for "sect" seems to be notably different from our "secte".
Someone changed the international link and now our "secte" is linked with your "cult".
What do you think ?
Translations are important, and words leading to others as well.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Anthere wrote:
Every little bit can help perhaps. What else would you suggest we can do ?
For the most part we are limited to encouragement and letting them know that the medium is there for them.
We did the same with our languages, breton, basque, corse... The french unity is not so much relying on political unity, than cultural, linguistic and religious (less and less now of course, but the principles running the society are christian based even if we are a laic state). To achieve that unity, in the past time, kids also were hit at school if they talk their "home-language" (patois).
I'm familiar with that, but the Corsicans have never been content to be a part of France. Of course one has to distinguish between what Christians say and what they do.
The Encyclopedia is not translated and will not be translated in other languages. Each language is free '''in''' its own creativity. Articles from one
language can
influence another language. But they are not copies.
Some topics, I cannot even translate from english to french because I do not know the french words for these.
If it's '''just''' a matter of words, a good dictionary can deal with it. Cultural context is more difficult.
By the Ec... the definition for "sect" seems to be notably different from our "secte".
Someone changed the international link and now our "secte" is linked with your "cult".
What do you think ?
That's tricky, because I know that the words are used differently. In English "sect" is often used to distinguish different religious sub-groups. Among Protestants Lutherens, Calvinists, Presbyterians, etc. are all protestant sects. There is some affinity with schismatics whose separation from the church was more often for reasons relating to the governance of the church than to theology. Any of these groups tends to still be socialy acceptable.
"Cult" is more often used to refer to deviant religious groups, heretics with significant doctrinal differences. Outsiders sometimes tend to believe, without a stitch of evidence that the cultists do weird things like drinking blood or engaging in orgies.
I haven't researched the matter, but my impression is that in French "culte" is far more socially acceptable.
Ec
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org