I understand. However, is there any movement currently that tries to get an ISO code? Otherwise, I think it would be clearer to mark it as rejected and say that people are welcome to open a new request when they have an ISO code (as we also did in similar cases).
2017-03-02 12:26 GMT+01:00 Milos Rancic <[email protected]>: > I would leave "on hold" status. > > Unlike the most of Slavic languages, Slovenian varieties are very > distant between themselves. Speaker of standard Slovenian is not able > to understand a person speaking a Styrian variety in Maribor and > Prekmurian is even further to the east, belonging to the group of > Pannonian varieties > > Not surprisingly, the issue of calling something a language or not is > a political issue and, at the best, such initiatives are just not > getting official support. > > There are many of such cases, some of them are bizarre, while the most > of them are simply neglected. > > In the case of varieties of Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and > Montenegrin, the situation is bizarre on multiple levels. > > The whole area has four main varieties: > * Shtokavian > ** Neo-Sthokavian > ** Older Shtokavian > * Kaykavian > * Chakavian > * Shop / Torlakian (recognizes as "Prizren-Timok dialect", categorized > locally as "Old Shtokavian) > > All of the ISO 639-3 recognized standards belong to the Neo-Shtokavian > group. Montenegrin, not recognized by ISO 639-3 is a mix of > Neo-Shtokavian and Older Shtokavian varieties (and, unlike three > recognized varieties, has two more distinctive letters/phonemes). > > Not long ago, JAC has recognized Kaykavian. But the way it's been > recognized is bizarre. It is categorized as "historical" language, > although it's a living language. I even heard reasoning of one > Croatian linguist that Chakavian is not recognized because it doesn't > have "historical background", although it's a plain lie, as Chakavian > was written in it's own, specific Glagolitic script up to the > beginning of 20th century and is, as Kaykavian is, a living language. > > Shop / Torlakian -- although both living and mutually non-intelligible > with the surrounding varieties of Serbian and Bulgarian -- doesn't > have ISO 639-3 code because of both being neglected (by both, Serbian > and Bulgarian side) as a kind of settled political issue related to > the border area ethnicity. > > Having in mind that Montenegrin, the most distinctive variety of > Shtokavian standards, recognized as a native language by ~200,000 > people, haven't passed JAC, while other three have been recognized, > that nobody cares about few hundred thousands speakers of Shop / > Torlakian, I have no doubt that one interested person (and I see that > his knowledge of English is not on particularly high level) can't push > recognition of his native variety to become an "officially recognized > language". > > That's the reason for my suggestion to give them unlimited time to do > so. This is the case of completely valid language, which requires > inclusion into ISO 639-3 to be added into Wikimedia. As, according to > the present rules, we are not able to create "sla-prk" (as we did with > "bas-smg", which has been eventually recognized as "sgs"), I think > that we should simply leave it "on hold" and wait. > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Oliver Stegen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > +1 > > > > As noted in Ethnologue, Prekmurian remains mentioned under Slovenian > > (https://www.ethnologue.com/language/slv), especially as the Slovenian > > dialect as spoken in Hungary. The historical literature written in > > Prekmurian, as argued about in the request discussion, is already > included > > in sl:wp (cf. > > https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategorija:Prekmurske_tiskane_knjige). > > > > > > On 02-Mar-17 03:55, MF-Warburg wrote: > > > > I propose to reject > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_ > languages/Wikipedia_Prekmurian>. > > As noted on the page, there was a request to obtain an ISO code, but that > > was rejected in 2012. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Langcom mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Langcom mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom > > > > _______________________________________________ > Langcom mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom >
_______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
