Talk:Languages of Europe
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Languages of Europe article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Which organisation do we follow?[edit]
Take the Germanic languages here. According to linguists including Robert Hinderling, Danish, Norwegian and Swedish (also Slovak and Czech) are more closely related than Bavarian and Alemannic are to "Standardgerman". But only 4 languages are listed.
If we follow ISO-639-3, we must at least split off Bairisch and Alemannic, or even "Platt" in northern Germany.
"German" today refers to "Standard German" in Germany, of which Bairisch is NOT a part.
You can call Bavarian and Alemannic Germanic, but not "Deutsch".
Or do we simply follow Politics and assign Language to one but not the other?
It could be a improvement when we differ between Low and Uppergerman. 320luca (talk) 18:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- ISO-639-3 is politics. Or rather sociolinguistics unhealthily mixed with comparative linguistics. E.g. every split from ISO-639-2 "de" was primarily made for lects with are spoken in areas where Standard German is not the Dachsprache, e.g. Colonia Tovar German, Hutterite German, Hunsrik, Cimbrian etc. With this split, the most closely related lects in German/Austria/Swiss were also given their own code, e.g. since the distance between e.g. Swabian and Colonia Tovar German is smaller than the one between Swabian and Standard German. High German varieties that don't have the privilege of being closely related to a diaspora variety didn't get their own code, even if they are (at least in their traditional form) unintelligible to speakers of Standard German (e.g. Central Hessian or Erzgebirgisch). –Austronesier (talk) 20:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian in the Languages of Europe § Slavic[edit]
Two IP editors (possibly one) keep separating Serbo-Croatian into Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin in the above mentioned section of the article, refusing to gather consensus for their disputed edits here on the talk page beforehand. I kindly request the latest such edit is self-reverted to the status quo version of the article. I'm not in the least touched by their edit summary, it only displays what kind of an editor we're dealing with here. –Vipz (talk) 21:27, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- This map is incorect
- See Ethnologue 78.1.207.220 (talk) 20:47, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Corect languages is on ethnologue : https://www.ethnologue.com/[edit]
Corect languages is on ethnologue : https://www.ethnologue.com/ 78.1.207.220 (talk) 20:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- It is true that we cite Ethnologue here in this article, but only as a default source for speaker numbers. But we don't necessarily adopt their treatment of Serbo-Croatian standard varieties in the listing of language family members. I'll revert to the previous version that lists Serbo-Croatian as a single language. –Austronesier (talk) 20:47, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Serbian and Croatian are two different languages[edit]
https://www.ethnologue.com/ 78.1.207.220 (talk) 20:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Institute for Croatian language 78.1.207.220 (talk) 21:06, 9 March 2024 (UTC)