[Wikipedia-l] Re: Re: Wikipedia English English
Craig Franklin
craig at halo-17.net
Mon Sep 19 11:57:22 UTC 2005
Scríobh Jack & Naree:
> Have you seen the "Scot's English" one? Do you not call that
Balkanisation?
If you're talking about sco.wikipedia - they don't even claim to be an
English dialect. And to be honest, the language on sco is about as similar
to the language on en, that ga is to gd.
I write all my articles in Australian English, but I think that your
proposal is just daft. Honestly ;-). Reading the odd Americanised word
doesn't fill me with seething rage, just like reading the odd Australianised
word hopefully doesn't fill my American brothers with murderous hatred.
Sláinte,
- Craig [[en:Lankiveil]]
-------------------
Craig Franklin
PO Box 764
Ashgrove, Q, 4060
Australia
http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite Source of Indie Music, Art,
and Culture.
----- Original Message -----
From: <wikipedia-l-request at Wikimedia.org>
To: <wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org>
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 8:44 PM
Subject: [work] Wikipedia-l Digest, Vol 26, Issue 32
> Send Wikipedia-l mailing list submissions to
> wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> wikipedia-l-request at Wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> wikipedia-l-owner at Wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikipedia-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Wikipedia English English (Jack & Naree)
> 2. Re: Wikipedia English English (Alphax)
> 3. Re: Wikipedia English English (Jack & Naree)
> 4. Re: Wikipedia English English (Alphax)
> 5. Re: Wikipedia English English (Jack & Naree)
> 6. Re: Wikipedia English English (Jack & Naree)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 11:23:07 +0100
> From: Jack & Naree <jack.macdaddy at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
> To: andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk, wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <c822ae8d050919032327091418 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Yes, it was me, I did rant, I do apologise, but I'm just pissed off with
> proper English being treated like this.
> You have Wikipedia in Klingon, in tiny tribal languages, and now in Scots
> (and I'm Scottish btw) - which is basically as similar to correct English
as
> American-English is - at least I think most native English-speakers can
> probably read it.
> "- I think we can safely consider this as not providing a great deal of
> useful insight into our language policy :-)"
> Why not? Ok, I ranted, but this not an illegitimate point, why should we
> (and I say that because you have a ".uk" address) be forced to accept
> Americanisms?
> If you're British, do think we should start changing our spellings to
> American ones? Start changing our grammar too?
> someone at Wikipedia ages ago wrote to me that he thought it was fine for
> articles in the English section to remain in the dialect relevent to their
> subject matter - he basically said, if it's about the UK it can be in
> English, but everything else is to be in American-English, but called
> English - and he said he was British!
> I mean there are several issues here: cultural imperialism, ambiguation
> (because of the many differences in American-English and English usage),
and
> English learners learning to spell incorrectly and talk like Americans -
why
> is it wrong to resist that?
> On 19/09/05, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 19/09/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Does your e-mail have a point?
> >
> > I would guess this is the same person who ranted at the en: Help Desk
> > yesterday about the issue.
> >
> > As this rant included (edited highlights) -
> >
> > "It's bad enough that the British invention of HTML won't let you type
> > colour correctly in tags, without having the world's largest free
> > online dictionary purporting to display information in English, but in
> > fact displaying it in a dialect of English - we've got Wikipedia in
> > Scots, Wikipedia in Middle English, but when you click on Wikipedia
> > English, you get spelling errors, sloppy grammar and garbled syntax;
> > in short the American dialect of English, trying to hijack the term
> > English. ... I want Wikipedia "English" to be partitioned in to
> > "English" and "American". We can copy and paste and run spellcheck to
> > iron out the mangled American illiteracy, no worries. ... It is a
> > scandal to actively promote the butchering of English..."
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Andrew Gray
> > andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 19:53:55 +0930
> From: Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
> To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <432E91BB.5080301 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> (note: I've split this into paragraphs for readability)
>
> Jack wrote:
> > I want American English to have a separate Wikipedia from English
> > English - this would mean copying
> >
> > I typed it in a hurry at the end of my shift with a view to
> > responding to any response, later.
> >
> > I've placed a more detailed post on the helpdesk page. I think,
> > however, that it's apt that I should go into even more depth here.
> >
> > I've asked about English on Wikipedia before and been told that they
> > think it's acceptable for English articles to be in a mish-mash of
> > dialects and spellings; but having seen the range of ludicrous
> > languages available - including variant forms of English: Scots
> > English and Middle English etc... I've now decided I must make a
> > request and campaign properly for American English to be given a
> > seperate Wikipedia language from (English) English.
> >
>
> I must remind viewers who are still with us that Balkanisation Is Evil.
>
> > It's simply infuriating and offensive for the misspellings of a
> > dialect of English to take precedence over the standard language -
> > I'm sure Spanish, French and Portuguese speakers would feel
> > similarly; it's cultural imperialism.
> >
> > If you have different forms of Chinese Wikipedia (I'm a graduate of
> > Jap & Chi so I'm aware of xyz); if you have Wikipedias for dialects
> > and older forms of English; if you Wikipedias for countries and
> > languages with far smaller populations, economic/political importance
> > and internet presences; then the English of the British Isles and
> > Commonwealth - the standard and original form of English - simply
> > *has* to be the only form of English that can use the term "English"
> > on Wikipedia.
> >
> > Some might say that it is "British English", this term is fallacious
> > (even if you can find it in a dictionary) no English, British,
> > British Isles or even Commonwealth native understands or recognises
> > the term - it is both meaningless and fallacious: there are no
> > "British English" speakers in the world - there are English
> > (nationality) English (language) speakers, Welsh English speakers,
> > Scottish English speakers, Irish English speakers, Cornish English
> > speakers and so on...
> >
> > Whereas the term "American English" is not.
> >
> > When I go to Wikipedia English, and type a search for "colour" I
> > should not expect to be redirected to "color" which is a recent
> > spelling of a dialect of English that has arisen over the last couple
> > of centuries perhaps - it is simply *not* *English* it is
> > *American-English*. I'm more than happy for American-English speakers
> > to have an American-English wikipedia and have all their weird and
> > wonderful spellings and vocabulary - and it may well turn out to be
> > the biggest wiki; but I don't want to select Wikipedia English and
> > type in "Aubergine" and get "Eggplant"; "Nappy" and get "Diaper"; or
> > "Tap" and get "Faucet", it's simply unacceptable, and against the
> > spirit of multilingualism and accuracy that wikipedia is supposed to
> > strive for. Hence I want to campaign in all seriousness that The
> > English Wikipedia is duplicated, and one is called American-English,
> > the other remaining English, and the task of correcting spelling,
> > vocab and grammar can begin.
> >
>
> I agree completely. Furthurmore, I feel that we shall need an Australian
> English Wikipedia to handle the many words in Australian English which
> differ from English English (and possibly Queensland English, New South
> Wales English, et. al), a South African English Wikipedia to accomodate
> the heavy use of Afrikaans, a New Zealand English Wikipedia to account
> for the lack of vowels, a Canadian English Wikipedia to account for the
> number of French words, a Canadian French Wikipedia to complement it,
> and a Singlish Wikipedia because it has a funny name.
>
> Here's a far better idea: Let's go back to Proto-Indo-European. Imagine
> the amount of server space we could save!
>
> Conversely, imagine a Beowulf cluster of English Wikipedias!
>
> > The Campaign for an English Wikipedia is not about Britain (the
> > fourth largest economy in the world, a population of about 60m, 55%
> > of whom are online), it's also about a whole host of other countries
> > and regions (over a billion people) that do not use American-English,
> > but use English instead as a lingua franca (many with complete
> > fluency):
> >
> <snip overly long list>
> > The term Commonwealth English is therefore also apt, but
American-English
> > has no right to usurp the title English, from English! Wikipedia should
> > reflect this.
> >
>
> I find your theories interesting/intriguing and wish to subscribe to
> your newsletter/journal.
>
> --
> Alphax | /"\
> Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards
> http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 11:28:49 +0100
> From: Jack & Naree <jack.macdaddy at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
> To: palnatoke at gmail.com, wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <c822ae8d05091903286779959 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 19/09/05, Ole Andersen <palnatoke at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 19/09/05, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I would guess this is the same person who ranted at the en: Help Desk
> > > yesterday about the issue.
> > >
> > > As this rant included (edited highlights) -
> > >
> > ...
> > > I want Wikipedia "English" to be partitioned in to
> > > "English" and "American".
> >
> > It could be done, of course. We could also have Australian, Indian and
> > South African English. If we wanted to do so, that is.
>
> I don't think there is significant difference - I think it's really a
split
> between "Commonwealth English" and "American English".
> The cultural ties - even down to soap operas on telly mean that Aussies
and
> Pommes and South Africans have much more affinity and familiarity with
each
> other, and this also extends to language.
> When it comes to Americans, however, there really is a gulf of
> (mis)understanding (and misspelling).
> But I think you miss the point in that - I'm not talking about making a
> "British English" wikipedia (In fact I don't believe the £British English£
> article should exist, becuase the term does not make any sense outside
> America) - I want the English Wikipedia to be reclaimed by English or
> Commonwealth English speakers, and the Americans given their own "/am-en"
> American-English wikipedia.
>
> --
> > http://palnatoke.org * Ole Andersen, Copenhagen, DK
> > CV: http://palnatoke.org/CV.doc
> > ICQ: 86989486 phone: +45 22 34 72 92
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 19:59:12 +0930
> From: Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
> To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <432E92F8.2060609 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Jack & Naree wrote:
> > Yes, it was me, I did rant, I do apologise, but I'm just pissed off with
> > proper English being treated like this.
> >
> > You have Wikipedia in Klingon, in tiny tribal languages, and now in
Scots
> > (and I'm Scottish btw) - which is basically as similar to correct
English as
> > American-English is - at least I think most native English-speakers can
> > probably read it.
> >
>
> Actually, we don't have a Wikipedia in Klingon. It's a Wikicity, which
> is hosted by Wikia, *not* the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
> BTW, have you considered contributing to sco.wikipedia?
>
> > "- I think we can safely consider this as not providing a great deal of
> > useful insight into our language policy :-)"
> > Why not? Ok, I ranted, but this not an illegitimate point, why should
we
> > (and I say that because you have a ".uk" address) be forced to accept
> > Americanisms?
>
> Really? I thought it was en.wikipedia.org...
>
> > If you're British, do think we should start changing our spellings to
> > American ones? Start changing our grammar too?
> > someone at Wikipedia ages ago wrote to me that he thought it was fine
for
> > articles in the English section to remain in the dialect relevent to
their
> > subject matter - he basically said, if it's about the UK it can be in
> > English, but everything else is to be in American-English, but called
> > English - and he said he was British!
>
> Actually, the policy is (or at least was):
>
> * If subject of article is British (or other Commonwealth
> English)-related, use Commonwealth English.
> * If subject of article is USian, use US English
> * If neither applies, majority style (in case both are used) of original
> author is preferred.
>
> > I mean there are several issues here: cultural imperialism, ambiguation
> > (because of the many differences in American-English and English usage),
and
> > English learners learning to spell incorrectly and talk like Americans -
why
> > is it wrong to resist that?
> >
>
> You are welcome to create your own fork of the site in Commonwealth
> English, provided you comply with the GFDL.
>
> --
> Alphax | /"\
> Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards
> http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 11:39:13 +0100
> From: Jack & Naree <jack.macdaddy at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
> To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <c822ae8d05091903397112343 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Cool, mockery is for trolls.
> This is not about Balkanisation, it's about separating American-English
> from English.
> But come to think of it - yes, have one for every variation you like, and
> let natural selection take care of the rest. Just as long as English is
> English, and not American.
> Have you seen the "Scot's English" one? Do you not call that
Balkanisation?
> If you want to have a legitimate criteria for a language, a different
> orthography has got to be a clear one.
> In English there are two - American and non-American.
> Orthography is the main issue, meaning is another.
> If you want to go academic - which is surely the best way to back this
> whole argument up, you should scan this (ironically american) leading
> insitute of linguistic research:
> http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=eng
> On 19/09/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > (note: I've split this into paragraphs for readability)
> >
> > Jack wrote:
> > > I want American English to have a separate Wikipedia from English
> > > English - this would mean copying
> > >
> > > I typed it in a hurry at the end of my shift with a view to
> > > responding to any response, later.
> > >
> > > I've placed a more detailed post on the helpdesk page. I think,
> > > however, that it's apt that I should go into even more depth here.
> > >
> > > I've asked about English on Wikipedia before and been told that they
> > > think it's acceptable for English articles to be in a mish-mash of
> > > dialects and spellings; but having seen the range of ludicrous
> > > languages available - including variant forms of English: Scots
> > > English and Middle English etc... I've now decided I must make a
> > > request and campaign properly for American English to be given a
> > > seperate Wikipedia language from (English) English.
> > >
> >
> > I must remind viewers who are still with us that Balkanisation Is Evil.
> >
> > > It's simply infuriating and offensive for the misspellings of a
> > > dialect of English to take precedence over the standard language -
> > > I'm sure Spanish, French and Portuguese speakers would feel
> > > similarly; it's cultural imperialism.
> > >
> > > If you have different forms of Chinese Wikipedia (I'm a graduate of
> > > Jap & Chi so I'm aware of xyz); if you have Wikipedias for dialects
> > > and older forms of English; if you Wikipedias for countries and
> > > languages with far smaller populations, economic/political importance
> > > and internet presences; then the English of the British Isles and
> > > Commonwealth - the standard and original form of English - simply
> > > *has* to be the only form of English that can use the term "English"
> > > on Wikipedia.
> > >
> > > Some might say that it is "British English", this term is fallacious
> > > (even if you can find it in a dictionary) no English, British,
> > > British Isles or even Commonwealth native understands or recognises
> > > the term - it is both meaningless and fallacious: there are no
> > > "British English" speakers in the world - there are English
> > > (nationality) English (language) speakers, Welsh English speakers,
> > > Scottish English speakers, Irish English speakers, Cornish English
> > > speakers and so on...
> > >
> > > Whereas the term "American English" is not.
> > >
> > > When I go to Wikipedia English, and type a search for "colour" I
> > > should not expect to be redirected to "color" which is a recent
> > > spelling of a dialect of English that has arisen over the last couple
> > > of centuries perhaps - it is simply *not* *English* it is
> > > *American-English*. I'm more than happy for American-English speakers
> > > to have an American-English wikipedia and have all their weird and
> > > wonderful spellings and vocabulary - and it may well turn out to be
> > > the biggest wiki; but I don't want to select Wikipedia English and
> > > type in "Aubergine" and get "Eggplant"; "Nappy" and get "Diaper"; or
> > > "Tap" and get "Faucet", it's simply unacceptable, and against the
> > > spirit of multilingualism and accuracy that wikipedia is supposed to
> > > strive for. Hence I want to campaign in all seriousness that The
> > > English Wikipedia is duplicated, and one is called American-English,
> > > the other remaining English, and the task of correcting spelling,
> > > vocab and grammar can begin.
> > >
> >
> > I agree completely. Furthurmore, I feel that we shall need an Australian
> > English Wikipedia to handle the many words in Australian English which
> > differ from English English (and possibly Queensland English, New South
> > Wales English, et. al), a South African English Wikipedia to accomodate
> > the heavy use of Afrikaans, a New Zealand English Wikipedia to account
> > for the lack of vowels, a Canadian English Wikipedia to account for the
> > number of French words, a Canadian French Wikipedia to complement it,
> > and a Singlish Wikipedia because it has a funny name.
> >
> > Here's a far better idea: Let's go back to Proto-Indo-European. Imagine
> > the amount of server space we could save!
> >
> > Conversely, imagine a Beowulf cluster of English Wikipedias!
> >
> > > The Campaign for an English Wikipedia is not about Britain (the
> > > fourth largest economy in the world, a population of about 60m, 55%
> > > of whom are online), it's also about a whole host of other countries
> > > and regions (over a billion people) that do not use American-English,
> > > but use English instead as a lingua franca (many with complete
> > > fluency):
> > >
> > <snip overly long list>
> > > The term Commonwealth English is therefore also apt, but
> > American-English
> > > has no right to usurp the title English, from English! Wikipedia
should
> > > reflect this.
> > >
> >
> > I find your theories interesting/intriguing and wish to subscribe to
> > your newsletter/journal.
> >
> > --
> > Alphax | /"\
> > Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> > OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards
> > http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 11:44:11 +0100
> From: Jack & Naree <jack.macdaddy at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
> To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <c822ae8d0509190344505522cf at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> >
> > Actually, we don't have a Wikipedia in Klingon.
>
> that's a surprise
>
> BTW, have you considered contributing to sco.wikipedia?
>
> no
>
> >
> > Really? I thought it was en.wikipedia.org...
>
> - I think we can safely consider this as not providing a great deal of
> useful insight into our language policy :-)
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
> andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
> - Show quoted text -
> my turn to do a "..."
>
>
> >
> > Actually, the policy is (or at least was):
> >
> > * If subject of article is British (or other Commonwealth
> > English)-related, use Commonwealth English.
> > * If subject of article is USian, use US English
> > * If neither applies, majority style (in case both are used) of original
> > author is preferred.
>
> And what of "Aubergines" and "Eggplants"? "Colour" and "Color"
>
> > I mean there are several issues here: cultural imperialism, ambiguation
> > > (because of the many differences in American-English and English
usage),
> > and
> > > English learners learning to spell incorrectly and talk like
Americans -
> > why
> > > is it wrong to resist that?
> > >
> >
> > You are welcome to create your own fork of the site in Commonwealth
> > English, provided you comply with the GFDL.
>
> Happy to do so, but what I really want is a fork called
"American-English".
>
> --
> > Alphax | /"\
> > Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> > OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards
> > http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> End of Wikipedia-l Digest, Vol 26, Issue 32
> *******************************************
>
>
More information about the Wikipedia-l
mailing list