On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 03:00:00 +0100 (BST), Andrew Dunbar hippietrail@yahoo.com wrote:
Wikimedia does use two letter ISO 639 codes and when they do not exist they do use the three letter codes. There are missing ISO codes. There are also the SIL codes but personally I think mixing these three codes makes a mess. Preferably ISO adds missing codes for languages.
There are omissions, mergers, splits, and other differences between ISO and SIL. ISO is more likely to include artificial languages. SIL is more likely to include very rare and obscure human languages. Neither includes Klingon yet.
[snip other stuff, with which I agree]
Klingon is tlh in ISO 639. http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html
Constructed and ancient languages are out of scope for the Ethnologue but there is an effort to extend the Ethnologue list and produce standardized codes for them ("LINGUIST codes"); in that list Klingon is apparently CKLN (though at least one page refers to it as CKLI). http://www.language-archives.org/wg/language-codes/linguist-20020219.html http://cf.linguistlist.org/cfdocs/new-website/LL-WorkingDirs/forms/langs/Get... http://cf.linguistlist.org/cfdocs/new-website/LL-WorkingDirs/forms/langs/Get...
*Muke!