Thank you MF-Warburg

What I ndid was to try to understahnd nthe concerns and objections of those 
opposed to allowing ancient languages, and to write a proposal that would 
exclude problematic languages, eg those without modern formations, without 
sufficient competent writers, or those without a significant audience.

The “compromise proposal” includes several suggestions from people who objected 
to ancient languages being considered on principlel, so I believe ithe RFC is 
complete and sable. While there is still some discussion it is tagential to the 
proposal draft itself.

Thus it is in a position for LangCom to take a look at the text of the proposal 
and as a Committe either accept or reject it, in part or whole, and either 
modify the language policy, or not.

Then the RFC can be closed.

> On 7 Sep 2021, at 11:43, MF-Warburg <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> News from this RFC. The ultra-long discussion was archived by this user in 
> favour of his new proposal, which already generated much text again.
> 
> Am Di., 7. Sept. 2021 um 12:41 Uhr schrieb Jim Killock <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
> Dear LangCom,
> 
> I am a sometime contributor to Latin Wikipedia, Latin Wikisource, and Latin 
> Wikibooks. I feel that my time is well spent doing this, and belong to a 
> community of people who write and use spoken Latin, although my own Latin is 
> still intermediate at this point. However, I can appreciate that Latin takes 
> up a large part of many people’s lives, and thus I suspect this is true for 
> some other ancient languages, which are, in the end, still employed and 
> varifiably so. Thus I am sympathetic to the claims made that some other 
> ancient languages may also have communities in a similar position.
> 
> You may have seen that some users have asked for the policy that makes an 
> auto0matic refusal for ‘ancient and historic languages’ to be revisited 
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Start_allowing_ancient_languages#Discussion>.
> 
> After checking through the rules and procedures, it seems this is something 
> you as a committee need to decide, rather than being a matter of general 
> debate, so I am emailing you to ask you to consider revising the policy, in a 
> manner which allows a little more flexibility for languages which are 
> historic, learnt, but in use.
> 
> I think there is some need to do this, as can be seen from your archives, 
> which show that it is hard to achi9eve a consistent approach while 
> constructed alnguages with a body of current usage are allowed, but an 
> ancient language with similar levels of fluent usage, is not allowed. This I 
> note has been a matter of discussion relating to Ancient Greek, for which a 
> discussion is still open.
> 
> I drafted a proposal that would try to create consistency between the 
> constructed and ancient language situation, while recognising that most 
> historic languages should not normally qualify for inclusion. Nevertheless, 
> in some important exceptions, where there is a credibly large enough number 
> of language users, with sufficient skill, and attestable external usage of 
> that language,, these languages could be allowed without opening the 
> floodgates, with a well-crated policy.
> 
> I would also like the committee to note that I would be happy to help frame 
> this policy in a sensible way, if that is of interest.
> 
> Thank you for your time,
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> Definition of ancient or historic language[edit 
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_comment/Start_allowing_ancient_languages&action=edit&section=12>]
> For Wikimedia projects' purposes, an ancient or historic language is one which
> Was used historically and has an extant corpus of works;
> Is typically acquired by formal learning;
> Is typically fixed in form, eg by grammar rules developed and documented 
> while the language was in common usage;
> May or may not not be used in modern linguistic domains, such as: trade; 
> education; academic discourse; music; poetry; religious discourse; etc.
> Qualification of an ancient or historic language for a Wiki project[edit 
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_comment/Start_allowing_ancient_languages&action=edit&section=13>]
> The same basic eligibility criteria should apply in a similar but somewhat 
> stricter manner than artificial languages, recognising that acquisition is 
> likely to be harder than is typical for constructed languages, but also that 
> acquisition may be more common and resources more developed; and also that 
> practical usage is likely to be lower than for many contemporary 
> natively-acquired languages.
> Therefore I propose that:
> Wikis are allowed in ancient or historical languages despite having no native 
> speakers; although these should be on a wiki for the most widely used form of 
> the language, when possible;
> There must be evidence of a significant potential readership and evidence of 
> a significant body of competent potential contributors; for instance at least 
> thousands of people trained in writing the language;
> There should be a significant historical corpus and usage for modern authors 
> to draw upon, for instance, a large volume of extant texts or a large volume 
> of recordings, sufficient to understand the idiom as well as the grammar of 
> the language; whether generated as an auxiliary language, domain specific 
> language or a native language;
> The language must have a reasonable degree of contemporary usage as 
> determined by discussion. (Some recognition criteria include, but are not 
> limited to: independently proved number of speakers or writers, use as an 
> auxiliary or domain-specific language outside of online communities created 
> solely for the purpose, usage outside of Wikimedia, publication of works in 
> the language for general sale, publication of academic papers in the 
> language, availability of courses or training which aim at fluent 
> compositional or oral usage.)
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> _______________________________________________
> Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to