Hi,
And claiming the Klingon should be supported by Wikimedia without giving any information about numbers of speakers, is not rethoric??? I think we don't have the same definition of this word.
Regards,
Yann
Muke Tever wrote:
Yann Forget yann@forget-me.net wrote:
Dmcdevit wrote: (...)
Your notion that Klingon, the language of a fictional alien race on a popular American television show, has some kind of existence separate from its origins is absurd. It only needs to be rejected for its present: which is as a linguistically unimportant, functionally nonexistent, and educationally useless language to write a dictionary in.
I agree with the closing of this Wiktionary, and this argument says it all.
It is not an argument, it is rhetoric. And very weak, at that. It can be used with equal force by the other side, e.g. >> Our language is considered linguistically unimportant, functionally >> nonexistent, and educationally useless. It is thus all the more imperative >> that we produce a dictionary in it.
Prejudice like that against a natural language (which is very often expressed in the world) would, I hope, never stand here against the opening of a wiki. The only remaining part of the agreed-with argument is that it is a constructed language, and we have not been deleting wikis merely because they belong to constructed languages.
*Muke!