[Langcom] Re: Moroccan Tamazight (Wp/zgh)

[Anass Sedrati]

Hello Sotiale and thank you for your answer,

Sorry for my late reply as I was travelling back from Singapore and had
also other engagements.

So regarding your argumentation, if you consider zgh not a distinct
language "because it is just a standard representation of Berber
languages", then we have also to consider standard Arabic (ISO 639:ara) not
a distinct language because it is not spoken in any country/region and is
"a standard representation of Arabic languages". Of course, there are many
more sources and books in standard Arabic due to religious and historical
reasons, but it is still a standardized language, and only a written one.
This said, it will of course never be considered to close the Arabic
Wikipedia because of it. Therefore, it can be really tricky to base the
decisions on this argument, although it is understandable that some
languages are "bigger" or more established than others. What do you think?

Best regards,

Anass

On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 3:08 PM MF-Warburg  wrote:

> NB: there has also been a discussion at <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Moroccan_Amazigh#Clerking_note>.
> I believe there are several requests open for related languages. It would
> be good to have some clarity to avoid the community being split into
> multiple incubator test-wikis.
>
> Am Fr., 18. Aug. 2023 um 14:38 Uhr schrieb Sotiale Wiki <
> sotiale...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Thank you for your kind explanation.
>>
>> If this can be understood as the relationship between Standard Arabic
>> (ISO 639:arb) and Arabic (ISO 639:ara), then zgh is not a distinct language
>> because it is just a standard representation of Berber languages. This is
>> true even in light of the current LPP, which excludes different written
>> forms of any language.
>>
>> Therefore, it seems that eligibility for this language cannot be
>> recognized.
>>
>> Sotiale
>>
>> 2023년 8월 16일 (수) 오후 10:48, Anass Sedrati 님이 작성:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I am very familiar with this case as I come myself from Morocco and
>>> speak Berber. The standard Tamazight (
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Moroccan_Amazigh) is not a
>>> spoken language, but only a written one. It was created by the official
>>> Academy of Berber languages in Morocco (
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Institute_of_Amazigh_Culture) in an
>>> attempt to standardize the Berber languages, as there are many of them
>>> spoken in Morocco (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_languages).
>>>
>>> So to answer you, standard Tamazight is exactly like modern standard
>>> Arabic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Standard_Arabic). It is a
>>> standardized language with rules, but not a spoken one (nobody speaks
>>> standard Arabic as a mother tongue, every Arab country has its own dialect).
>>>
>>> This is to explain that even if it not native, Zgh can be treated as
>>> modern standard Arabic in terms of linguistics. I hope that this gives a
>>> bit of context, but I am happy to expand on any aspect if you have
>>> additional questions!
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Anass
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 3:00 PM Sotiale Wiki 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi all.

 I'm not familiar with the Moroccan languages, so I'd love to hear from
 other colleagues.

 I'm considering this language project as a potential candidate for
 approval, but I'm wondering if this is a standardization of other
 languages, or a distinct language from others?

 Since this site[1] states that there are no native speakers, I wondered
 if this was just standardization of other languages(the case that native
 speakers have a standardized language while using their own languages).

 [1] https://www.ethnologue.com/language/zgh/

 Sotiale


 
  바이러스가
 없습니다.www.avast.com
 
 <#m_5983961874573513948_m_-52777032840040729_m_-1496450384923849562_m_5794971244151197459_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
 ___
 Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
 To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -
>>> *Anass SEDRATI*
>>> *(+46) 70 508 51 07*
>>> ___
>>> Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
>> ___
>> Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to langcom-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>
> ___
> Langcom mailing list -- langcom@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to 

[Langcom] Re: Moroccan Tamazight (Wp/zgh)

[Sotiale Wiki]

Hi.

Standard Arabic is arb (Arabic: ara) and still if someone posts a new
language request for Wp/arb, it won't be eligible. Unless the speakers of
Arabic Wikipedia are unable to communicate in Standard Arabic. But I don't
think there's any reason a native speaker of Arabic can't speak Standard
Arabic. So there is no reason for existing Arabic Wikipedia to be
disqualified for this reason, but even so, the Arabic Wikipedia was created
prior to the LPP and is therefore unaffected.

The requirement to be a distinct language is to ensure that there are no
multiple Wikipedias for a language that is sufficiently communicative at
the dialect level equivalent(If this were incomprehensible to native
speakers, it would have been recognized as a separate language). In
general, these branches are likely for political reasons, which may be
on-wiki as well as off-wiki reasons. This permission of Wikipedia
jeopardizes NPOV by creating Wikipedia with different views of the same
language for that purpose. Even if it has no such purpose, it is likely to
be abused as such.

Sotiale


바이러스가
없습니다.www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

2023년 8월 26일 (토) 오전 3:32, Anass Sedrati 님이 작성:

> Hello Sotiale and thank you for your answer,
>
> Sorry for my late reply as I was travelling back from Singapore and had
> also other engagements.
>
> So regarding your argumentation, if you consider zgh not a distinct
> language "because it is just a standard representation of Berber
> languages", then we have also to consider standard Arabic (ISO 639:ara)
> not a distinct language because it is not spoken in any country/region and
> is "a standard representation of Arabic languages". Of course, there are
> many more sources and books in standard Arabic due to religious and
> historical reasons, but it is still a standardized language, and only a
> written one. This said, it will of course never be considered to close the
> Arabic Wikipedia because of it. Therefore, it can be really tricky to base
> the decisions on this argument, although it is understandable that some
> languages are "bigger" or more established than others. What do you think?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Anass
>
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 3:08 PM MF-Warburg 
> wrote:
>
>> NB: there has also been a discussion at <
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Moroccan_Amazigh#Clerking_note>.
>> I believe there are several requests open for related languages. It would
>> be good to have some clarity to avoid the community being split into
>> multiple incubator test-wikis.
>>
>> Am Fr., 18. Aug. 2023 um 14:38 Uhr schrieb Sotiale Wiki <
>> sotiale...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Thank you for your kind explanation.
>>>
>>> If this can be understood as the relationship between Standard Arabic
>>> (ISO 639:arb) and Arabic (ISO 639:ara), then zgh is not a distinct language
>>> because it is just a standard representation of Berber languages. This is
>>> true even in light of the current LPP, which excludes different written
>>> forms of any language.
>>>
>>> Therefore, it seems that eligibility for this language cannot be
>>> recognized.
>>>
>>> Sotiale
>>>
>>> 2023년 8월 16일 (수) 오후 10:48, Anass Sedrati 님이 작성:
>>>
 Hello,

 I am very familiar with this case as I come myself from Morocco and
 speak Berber. The standard Tamazight (
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Moroccan_Amazigh) is not a
 spoken language, but only a written one. It was created by the official
 Academy of Berber languages in Morocco (
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Institute_of_Amazigh_Culture) in
 an attempt to standardize the Berber languages, as there are many of them
 spoken in Morocco (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_languages).

 So to answer you, standard Tamazight is exactly like modern standard
 Arabic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Standard_Arabic). It is a
 standardized language with rules, but not a spoken one (nobody speaks
 standard Arabic as a mother tongue, every Arab country has its own 
 dialect).

 This is to explain that even if it not native, Zgh can be treated as
 modern standard Arabic in terms of linguistics. I hope that this gives a
 bit of context, but I am happy to expand on any aspect if you have
 additional questions!

 Best regards,

 Anass

 On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 3:00 PM Sotiale Wiki 
 wrote:

> Hi all.
>
> I'm not familiar with the Moroccan languages, so I'd love to hear from
> other colleagues.
>
> I'm considering this language project as a potential candidate for
> approval, but I'm wondering if this is a standardization of other
> languages, or a distinct language from others?
>
> Since