LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ISOJAC Archives


ISOJAC Archives

ISOJAC Archives


ISOJAC@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ISOJAC Home

ISOJAC Home

ISOJAC  April 2000

ISOJAC April 2000

Subject:

Dialects

From:

Hedberg Sten <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 25 Apr 2000 17:22:09 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (61 lines)

Colleagues,

It was very nice of Rebecca to take up the point of the dialects in my
former message, and Millie's criteria are very well taken. Spontaneously, I
can see a difficulty in criterion (2) and another one in (4) through (6).

Several of these terms for dialects have the format <geography><basic
language>. "SchwŁzerdŁtch" (or how you spell it, the German of Switzerland),
"Tornedalsfinska" (the Finnish of the TorneŚ valley area, the border between
Sweden and Finland) are just two examples where the geographical part is
united with the language name. Is criterion (2) meant to be applied also on
this kind of names or only on those where the geographical part is a
separate word?

(4)-(6) tend to receive the same grades in such cases that have been brought
forward in this Plattdeutsch discussion, namely those instances where an
ethnic group has migrated into a foreign area but brought with it its
original language, that afterwards has kept a number of the characteristics
of the original tongue but developped on its own or in contact with the
other language(s) in the new environment. It has thus as a rule developped
in another direction than the mainstream. This is the acknowledged theory
behind the formation of the different Indo-european languages from a
supposed common tongue, as well as of the other families of languages, but
on a smaller and more recent scale it also is why you find those varieties
of low German under various names in other countries. Since these groups
tend to preserve their ethnic origin, they often strive to keep the oral
tradition alive, giving them YES for most of Millie's criteria (but,
admittedly, maybe not for (1)!).

I wonder if you could have a criterion distinguishing dialects occurring
within the dominating area of the main language from dialects found in
isolated communities. Of course, you would have to define "isolated
community" ...but the outcome could be that a high percentage of the
isolated ones are recognized as worthy of individual codes (if they are
enough well documented), while dialects within a central, dominating area
are kept under the main code. It does not help us all the way out, but I
think it could give us a neutral and realistic additional criterion that
goes well with the genesis of languages in general.     

This does not cover the issue of Rebecca's second message that just arrived.
It seems that some extension mechanism may save the already existing data
while giving better possibilities in the future, but from where does the
"val" of the example stem? I'd have no difficulties in adding an ISO3166
geographical code to an ISO639 code, as RFC1766 does, but the twin language
codes used in the "sgn-" case are, to me, justified only by the fact that
"sgn" does not mean a language in glyphs or sounds. Making that method
general is still to me a major change that seems to be hard to get accepted
as an amendment.

Regards,

Sten

*********************************
Sten Hedberg
Expert on cataloguing and standardisation
Uppsala University Library
POBox 510, S-751 20 UPPSALA Sweden
Voice +46-(0)18 471 3970
Fax  +46-(0)18 471 3941

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2021
January 2021
November 2020
June 2020
May 2019
February 2019
September 2018
April 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
May 2016
April 2016
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
May 2013
April 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager