Mailing List Archive

Jimmy Wales wrote:
> David Gerard wrote:
>
>> On 02/12/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Dont put words in my mouth, it is rude thing to do. As this is not key
>>> it is just one fact in the history of Balkan. And Balkan is not UK. And
>>> this comparison just shows that you don't have a clue what you talk about.
>>>
>> I don't know if you've noticed, but you've so far managed to convince
>> absolutely no-one here.
>>
>
> I am not at all convinced that we should have even the 3 wikipedias we
> have right now. In general, it is quite reasonable to say that there is
> in fact one language here, not 3, not 4, not 10.
>
> The problem of two writing systems is a difficult one, yes. But the
> fact remains that if you sit down over a beer with people from all these
> dialects, they can laugh and joke and have fun together just as well as
> people with different dialects of English.
>
> --Jimbo
>
>
Yes you are right Jimbo, but those people have problem to write same.
And it will look very silly if you combine it. So it is not exactly
"dialect" it is variations that have different rules.
One caricature :
Kud si aknula, dite na izvan, bona bre, sakam te, ce ge vidimo mori da
gi ne pometesh.
I ne brini sakam te, i odistina ce te fukam do zorata, te dua, moja
djevojko."


Darko Bulatovic

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

geni wrote:
> On 12/2/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:
>
>> Because it those not exist any more.
>>
>
> Lanaguages take more than a handfull of years to die.
>
>
>> According to the constitution (your source ) Montenegro is part of SR
>> Yugoslavia. Do you claim that also? Please read draft for new constitution.
>>
>
> Is it written in english?
>
No but in last draft it was stated:

C(lan 15(Jezik i pismo)- U Crnoj Gori u slu`benoj upotrebi je
crnogorski jezik.
15. Language - In montenegro in official usage is Montenegrin language.
>
>> You could consider to stop telling me that language in which I talk
>> don't exist.
>>
>
> I'm not trying to claim that. I'm putting forward a position that you
> are useing the wrong name for it.
>
>
And I am putting forward the position that I have right to call my
language as I think, and that you have same right for yours. And if I
say that you don't have right to tell me that I call it with wrong name
and that you are using the wrong name.... To where this leads? To
separation? Divorce? No love? No happiness? No kids(any good)?

At least please respect right of people to call their language as they
think it is appropriate. If you have some evidence that show different
please share with me, and if it is just based on your impression, ok I
will not comment it again.

>
>> But not his politic which is sad.
>>
>
> Last I cheacked his part wasn't doing to well in elections.
>
But radicals are very busty this days.... try to read some about them...
I don't wish to talk anymore about politic I am not here because of
that. Let talk about Montenegrin language.
>
>> So you admit that Montenegrin language exist? I don't follow you here?
>>
>
> You claim half a million speakers. If we were to accept that
> Montenegrin does exist as a seperate language then at most it has
> little more than 150K speajkers. There is nowehere for half a million
> speakers to come from.
>
I sad that this matter affect half of million. In that number are
included speakers and listeners. And when new constitution comes this
number will be greatly different in both speakers and listeners. One
point here that last few decades showed very strange variations in data
about Montenegro.


Darko Bulatovic

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 12/3/06, Darko Bulatovic <mail@itam.ws> wrote:
> No but in last draft it was stated:
>
> C(lan 15(Jezik i pismo)- U Crnoj Gori u slu`benoj upotrebi je
> crnogorski jezik.
> 15. Language - In montenegro in official usage is Montenegrin language.

And yet the country is able to function without that. It would be very
hard for the UK to function with german as the official langauge,

> And I am putting forward the position that I have right to call my
> language as I think,

But no one else has to accept that name

> and that you have same right for yours.

If I tried to rename my language to yorkshirese I think you would ignore that.

>And if I
> say that you don't have right to tell me that I call it with wrong name
> and that you are using the wrong name.... To where this leads? To
> separation? Divorce? No love? No happiness? No kids(any good)?
>
> At least please respect right of people to call their language as they
> think it is appropriate.

English has a somwhat limited history of careing about what the locals
call their language ( just ask the germans)



> I sad that this matter affect half of million. In that number are
> included speakers and listeners.

Considering the demographics on montenegro that is somewhat unlikely.
If Montenegrin does exist as a seperate language most likely it is
only spoken in that form in the centre of Montenegro

> And when new constitution comes this
> number will be greatly different in both speakers and listeners.

That would only be posible if does not exist other than as a renameing
of a form of Serbo-Croatian. Addopting a new constitution is unlikely
to result in much of a linguistic shift in the population


--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

SJ Klein wrote:
> Can we please have a separate list for language discussions, something
> like language-l@wikimedia.org ?
>

I think it got merged into wikipedia-l...

Mindspillage's law: As the length of an argument on wikipedia-l or
foundation-l approaches infinity, the probability of it turning into a
language debate approaches 1.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

Hi!
I am an outsider in this dispute, but I would like to give my opinion on the
state of these four languages as I see them, after learning for some time
Croatian, and having spoken with a friend who is more knowledgable than me.

What I see is that Montenegrin uses the ijekavica dialect of the so-called
Serbo-Croatian language (which I think is THE artificial one from the 5
mentioned), while the Serbians use the ekavica dialect. This makes every
second word different. Even though either is acceptable, you wouldn't wanna
mix them in an article (as mixing British or American spelling: no one would
really notice), it would stop your "train of thought" to decode each woord
and decide which dialect it was written in. Requiring the use of either one
would be unfair, and would violate the free speech rights of either of them,
also it would lead to some more unnecessary tension.

Croatian uses latin script, and ijekavica (at least the official dialect),
so Montenegrins could integrate there? Wrong. Montenegrin has many words
borrowed from Turkish that Croatians might not understand, or would
constantly replace with their Croatian counterparts, or just remove from
articles.

The difference of words and dialect is a main difference between Serbian in
Croatian. Apart from the dialet problem mentioned with the Montenegrins,
Serbian language tends to use Western words by transliterating it
phonetically into Serbian language, while Croatian tends to invent their own
words. Compromise on this ground would either ignite tension, or be a factor
in "deteriorating" Croatian language by introducing foreign words, for which
there is already a Croatian version in use.

Bosnian: I'm no expert here, why this is a separate language :), if not for
political reasons. I guess they have many Turkish words too. Anyway, if
there is a Bosnian wiki, a Montenegrin one could also be.

Also, if I'm correct Montenegro had its state television in the Serbia and
Montenegro era, that was broadcast it Montenegrin (language/dialect).

In conclusion, Serbo-Croatian was an invented language, without machine
translation between the ijekavica/ekavica/ikavica dialects choosing either
that is not the official in any a part of the region would lead to tensions,
and the difference in words might also lead to misunderstandings, or at
least heart national feelings if a "dialect version of a word" is changed to
an other "for better understanding".

Anyway, I hope I didn't upset any one, and that I wasn't factually wrong, or
misleading.

Regards, Bence Damokos

ps. OFF. why are there so many wikis in Italy?
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

--- Bence Damokos <bdamokos@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi!
> I am an outsider in this dispute, but I would like
> to give my opinion on the
> state of these four languages as I see them, after
> learning for some time
> Croatian, and having spoken with a friend who is
> more knowledgable than me.
>
> What I see is that Montenegrin uses the ijekavica
> dialect of the so-called
> Serbo-Croatian language (which I think is THE
> artificial one from the 5
> mentioned), while the Serbians use the ekavica
> dialect. This makes every
> second word different. Even though either is
> acceptable, you wouldn't wanna
> mix them in an article (as mixing British or
> American spelling: no one would
> really notice), it would stop your "train of
> thought" to decode each woord
> and decide which dialect it was written in.
> Requiring the use of either one
> would be unfair, and would violate the free speech
> rights of either of them,
> also it would lead to some more unnecessary tension.
>
> Croatian uses latin script, and ijekavica (at least
> the official dialect),
> so Montenegrins could integrate there? Wrong.
> Montenegrin has many words
> borrowed from Turkish that Croatians might not
> understand, or would
> constantly replace with their Croatian counterparts,
> or just remove from
> articles.
>
> The difference of words and dialect is a main
> difference between Serbian in
> Croatian. Apart from the dialet problem mentioned
> with the Montenegrins,
> Serbian language tends to use Western words by
> transliterating it
> phonetically into Serbian language, while Croatian
> tends to invent their own
> words. Compromise on this ground would either ignite
> tension, or be a factor
> in "deteriorating" Croatian language by introducing
> foreign words, for which
> there is already a Croatian version in use.
>
> Bosnian: I'm no expert here, why this is a separate
> language :), if not for
> political reasons. I guess they have many Turkish
> words too. Anyway, if
> there is a Bosnian wiki, a Montenegrin one could
> also be.
>
> Also, if I'm correct Montenegro had its state
> television in the Serbia and
> Montenegro era, that was broadcast it Montenegrin
> (language/dialect).
>
> In conclusion, Serbo-Croatian was an invented
> language, without machine
> translation between the ijekavica/ekavica/ikavica
> dialects choosing either
> that is not the official in any a part of the region
> would lead to tensions,
> and the difference in words might also lead to
> misunderstandings, or at
> least heart national feelings if a "dialect version
> of a word" is changed to
> an other "for better understanding".
>
> Anyway, I hope I didn't upset any one, and that I
> wasn't factually wrong, or
> misleading.
>
> Regards, Bence Damokos
>
> ps. OFF. why are there so many wikis in Italy?
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

I believe there is misunderstang over how the
variations of English are handled on en.WP. There is
no mixing of the variations (which are more than just
spelling), and people would definately notice if there
was. The way it works is that in an article on
England, British conventions are used. In an article
on America, the American conventions are used. In an
article on Canada, Canadian conventions are used.
Whenever there is a general article common to all
areas (such as Dog) the original editor who started
the article chooses which conventions to use. No one
is allowed to go around changing the grammer and
spelling to their prefered standards on general
articles. In article where the title would be
different (i.e. Petrol/Gasoline) a redirect is made to
the original title. Of course people have not always
liked this method and have tried to go around changing
standards, but they are stopped and everyone moves on.
I don't know these languages myself and I could be
wrong here, but I do not see any significant
differences from the situation in English.

BirgitteSB



____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Hi!
I might have been a bit off with the English example.

I'm no expert so I can't tell how big a difference there is between the
English variations, and is any difficulty in understanding of an article is
caused by that.

Also I can't tell, would the peoples of the Balkan region really understand
each other if they all chose to speak their own language consistently
choosing "dialect" words over commons ones.

Anyway, its for the Serbs and Montenegrins to know if a similar system would
be okay for them. Also I can't tell if the two people can work together in
the same wiki. (From some of the messages posted here it seems the Serbian
isn't that open a community, but I can't tell how widespread the
anti-Montenegrin sentiment is in the community)

Also I don't think it would be fair to allow 3 dialects but deny a 4 , if a
mistake was made, why should the 4th "suffer" from it...

Of course there might be a dilemma, that whats a wiki worth if it will start
by importing all articles from the Croatian or Serbian wiki (thats what I
would do...), this makes creating a fork not a so good idea.

The solution could be purely technical, make it possible with advanced regex
dictionaries and user input to have all the dialect versions of an article.
Also improve the switching from Cyrillic script to Latin as there are many
places (especially talk pages), where parts of the text don't get
translated...

Bence Damokos
On 12/3/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> --- Bence Damokos <bdamokos@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> > I am an outsider in this dispute, but I would like
> > to give my opinion on the
> > state of these four languages as I see them, after
> > learning for some time
> > Croatian, and having spoken with a friend who is
> > more knowledgable than me.
> >
> > What I see is that Montenegrin uses the ijekavica
> > dialect of the so-called
> > Serbo-Croatian language (which I think is THE
> > artificial one from the 5
> > mentioned), while the Serbians use the ekavica
> > dialect. This makes every
> > second word different. Even though either is
> > acceptable, you wouldn't wanna
> > mix them in an article (as mixing British or
> > American spelling: no one would
> > really notice), it would stop your "train of
> > thought" to decode each woord
> > and decide which dialect it was written in.
> > Requiring the use of either one
> > would be unfair, and would violate the free speech
> > rights of either of them,
> > also it would lead to some more unnecessary tension.
> >
> > Croatian uses latin script, and ijekavica (at least
> > the official dialect),
> > so Montenegrins could integrate there? Wrong.
> > Montenegrin has many words
> > borrowed from Turkish that Croatians might not
> > understand, or would
> > constantly replace with their Croatian counterparts,
> > or just remove from
> > articles.
> >
> > The difference of words and dialect is a main
> > difference between Serbian in
> > Croatian. Apart from the dialet problem mentioned
> > with the Montenegrins,
> > Serbian language tends to use Western words by
> > transliterating it
> > phonetically into Serbian language, while Croatian
> > tends to invent their own
> > words. Compromise on this ground would either ignite
> > tension, or be a factor
> > in "deteriorating" Croatian language by introducing
> > foreign words, for which
> > there is already a Croatian version in use.
> >
> > Bosnian: I'm no expert here, why this is a separate
> > language :), if not for
> > political reasons. I guess they have many Turkish
> > words too. Anyway, if
> > there is a Bosnian wiki, a Montenegrin one could
> > also be.
> >
> > Also, if I'm correct Montenegro had its state
> > television in the Serbia and
> > Montenegro era, that was broadcast it Montenegrin
> > (language/dialect).
> >
> > In conclusion, Serbo-Croatian was an invented
> > language, without machine
> > translation between the ijekavica/ekavica/ikavica
> > dialects choosing either
> > that is not the official in any a part of the region
> > would lead to tensions,
> > and the difference in words might also lead to
> > misunderstandings, or at
> > least heart national feelings if a "dialect version
> > of a word" is changed to
> > an other "for better understanding".
> >
> > Anyway, I hope I didn't upset any one, and that I
> > wasn't factually wrong, or
> > misleading.
> >
> > Regards, Bence Damokos
> >
> > ps. OFF. why are there so many wikis in Italy?
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> I believe there is misunderstang over how the
> variations of English are handled on en.WP. There is
> no mixing of the variations (which are more than just
> spelling), and people would definately notice if there
> was. The way it works is that in an article on
> England, British conventions are used. In an article
> on America, the American conventions are used. In an
> article on Canada, Canadian conventions are used.
> Whenever there is a general article common to all
> areas (such as Dog) the original editor who started
> the article chooses which conventions to use. No one
> is allowed to go around changing the grammer and
> spelling to their prefered standards on general
> articles. In article where the title would be
> different (i.e. Petrol/Gasoline) a redirect is made to
> the original title. Of course people have not always
> liked this method and have tried to go around changing
> standards, but they are stopped and everyone moves on.
> I don't know these languages myself and I could be
> wrong here, but I do not see any significant
> differences from the situation in English.
>
> BirgitteSB
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l