Hello, I am even more pessimistic. Of course, Wikipedia exits in many languages, but many Wikipedia language versions are still quite small and of low quality, typical encyclopedias-to-become, but still no really useful encyclopedias by now. Kind regards Ziko
2011/5/23 Milos Rancic <[email protected]>: > On 05/23/2011 03:04 PM, M. Williamson wrote: >> When words are from the same root, the same character is generally >> used regardless of modern pronunciation. In Traditional Chinese, >> phonetic elements are mostly based on older pronunciations which might >> not make sense in all modern Sinitic languages; sometimes in >> Simplified Chinese these are replaced by phonetic elements based on >> Mandarin pronunciation. >> >> However, Milos, I believe you have misinterpreted "logophonetic" here. >> Although the script has phonetic elements, this does not mean that the >> phonetic elements are based on modern pronunciations. So for example, >> 西瓜 is the word for watermelon in every Sinitic language (as far as I'm >> aware). In Mandarin it is pronounced "xi gua"; in Cantonese it is "sai >> gwaa", in Min Nan it is "sai koe", in Shanghainese Wu it is "si kwo" >> (I have not noted tones here due to different tone systems in these >> languages). In spite of differing words, since they are all from the >> same etymological root, they are all written exactly the same way with >> the same characters. This is probably not the best example since >> neither of these characters has a phonetic element, but that is >> irrelevant because even if they did the case would be the same. >> >> What DOES make Sinitic (Chinese) languages different when written is >> the following (*this is important*): Words that are not etymologically >> related to the equivalent in other Sinitic languages are often/usually >> written differently; grammar and syntax can be different (as an >> example, in Shanghai Wu you can say "We drink coffee" as "Ala kafi >> che" which is literally "We coffee drink"; in Mandarin it would be >> said as "Women he kafei", literally "We drink coffee", notice the >> different word order), including grammatical particles which have no >> direct equivalent. >> >> Imagine for a moment that English and Spanish used a similar writing >> system. "I want you to give me a piece of bread" and "Quiero que me >> des un pedacito de pan" would be written differently due to differing >> grammar: >> >> "I want you to give me a piece of bread" would be written as "[I] >> [WANT] [YOU] [TO] [GIVE] [ME] [A] [PIECE] [OF] [BREAD]" >> "Quiero que me des un pedacito de pan" would be written as >> "[WANT]-[FIRST PERSON SINGULAR] [THAT] [TO-ME] [GIVE]-[SECOND PERSON >> SINGULAR SUBJUNCTIVE] [A] [PIECE]-[DIMINUTIVE] [OF] [BREAD]". >> >> Also, "Cuando va a llegar Maria?" (accents missing) and "When is Maria >> going to arrive?" >> >> "Cuando va a llegar Maria?" would be written as "[WHEN] [GO]-[THIRD >> PERSON SINGULAR] [TO] [ARRIVE] [MARIA]" >> "When is Maria going to arrive?" would be written as "[WHEN] [IS] >> [MARIA] [GOING TO] [ARRIVE]" or something like that. Note here that >> the "arrive" comes after "Maria" in English, but before in Spanish. >> >> These are relatively simple examples, but although in many ways >> English and Spanish (and many other Western European languages) have >> relatively similar syntax (as compared to, say, Asian, African or >> American languages) and are related, due to these grammar differences >> it would be impossible to unify them in writing. >> >> It is essentially the same case with Sinitic languages. > > Mark, thank you very much for making things clear! > >> However, there is another issue at play here: the classification of >> Sinitic languages and dialects is a bit controversial, and it is >> possible that some of these "languages" identified by the Ethnologue >> would not want or need a separate version. Jin Chinese, for example, >> is often identified as a divergent dialect of Mandarin, and I'm >> doubtful that a Wikipedia written in Jin in Chinese characters would >> differ substantially from zh.wp, and almost certain (though I am >> willing to be proven wrong) that they would not differ enough in >> writing to merit separate Wikipedias. >> ... > > I would ask you personally (but, others, too) to give your opinions > toward as many as possible missing languages inside of "notes" sections > at [1] or inside newly created articles inside of the namespace of that > page (let's say, [[Missing Wikipedias/Spoken Arabic varieties]]). Such > additions would be very valuable: if there are people who don't need > Wikimedia projects editions, we can spend our resources on those who need. > > Macrolanguage editions of Wikimedia projects are not anymore taboo. If > it is more reasonable to use one project for a number of closely related > languages *and* communities want that, there is no reason why not to > allow that. > > [1] http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Missing_Wikipedias > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- Ziko van Dijk The Netherlands http://zikoblog.wordpress.com/ _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
