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  November 2008

ISOJAC November 2008

Subject:

Re: I hope we didn't make a mistake

From:

Gerhard Budin <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:37:23 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (102 lines)

dear Rebecca,
thank you for this interesting report.
I think the committee must respond in an official way to this person, if 
possible in the same circles and communities where he spreads this 
horrible lies, but of course in plain language and fact oriented, not in 
any polemic way.
regards
Gerhard


Rebecca S Guenther schrieb:
> I wish we had done numeric identifiers, but obviously it is too late now!
>
> Actually my conversation with the man was very pleasant and he was very deferential and didn't ask us to reinstate "mol" or change the decision in any way. He was mainly gathering information. The problem is that the person who submitted the request (Bogdan Stancescu), who apparently is the editor of the Romanian Wikipedia, wrote an article in a Romanian newspaper basically saying that there will no longer be anything called the Moldovan language anymore. He bragged about being the one to initiate this and get it through the ISO 639 JAC and said that he was included in the JAC's deliberations and privy to its inner workings. He seems to think that he alone has made this happen and that it was very easy to get it through (almost encouraging others to put in requests). That was a big problem for the Moldovans, of course, seeing an article that said they no longer had a language called Moldovan. Needless to say this was a misinterpretation and I don't know where he got this idea that he was in on the committee discussions. It is probably because both Joan and I received emails from him and we answered him. He was very insistent and demanding in several messages to me. So the very pleasant young man from the Moldovan embassy wanted to gather information about our process, how the language codes are used, what the meaning of the change is, and whether we really did wipe out the Moldovan language. He seemed perfectly satisfied with my answers that it was based on linguistic evidence (with which he didn't argue) and we remain outside any political situations. He did tell me about what is going on there now, that there are elections coming up, and some movements for the country to join Romania to be part of the EU. So it is an inflammatory time there for this sort of decision to have been made.  He was debating whether to respond to the article and thought that perhaps it would only inflame the situation. But he did ask if I was willing to make a statement if they decide to respond stating that this was a linguistic, not political decision and that Moldovan was still an accepted name for the language.
>
> The most disturbing part is how the requester claimed that he was so powerful to force us to make this change, that he gained special access to our deliberations, and then totally misrepresented the situation in the press. I am not sure if I should respond to him (privately) or not (or whether we as a committee should). Any advice would be appreciated.
>
> Rebecca
>
>   
>>>> Joan Spanne <[log in to unmask]> 11/19/08 5:30 PM >>>
>>>>         
> I wonder if the identifier were [xyz] instead of [rum] or [ron] would 
> there be less objection? (The same would be true for Catalan and 
> Valencian, and others.) I am as aware as all of you that the identifier is 
> not intended to be an abbreviation, and I am not suggesting changing the 
> identifier, so please don't jump on that. I am looking for a way to 
> communicate to the Moldovan community that "Moldovan" is not a secondary 
> or lesser name or variety of the language.
>
> -Joan
>
>
>
> Rebecca S Guenther <[log in to unmask]> 
> Sent by: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>
> 2008-11-18 10:24 AM
> Please respond to
> ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> To
> [log in to unmask] 
> cc
>
> Subject
> I hope we didn't make a mistake
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear ISO 639 JAC:
>
> I have someone coming to meet with me tomorrow from the Moldovan embassy. 
> He mentioned that the issue has been in the press (and Michael forwarded 
> something from the Romanian newspaper which I couldn't read-- it has also 
> been in the Moldovan newspaper). Of course the whole thing was taken out 
> of context and apparently the article in the Moldovan paper said that 
> because we made this change that the US government supports combining 
> Romanian and Moldovan-- and maybe even in their dispute over whether they 
> should be one country (that was the implication-- I'm not sure exactly 
> what was said). This of course is silly, but shows how important these 
> people consider their languages having separate identities.
>
> I will report after my meeting with him, but I did go back and look at 
> some old messages (which I wish I had looked at before we made this 
> decision a few weeks ago) and found these:
>
> http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0507&L=ISOJAC&D=0&I=-3&X=2D31756EB75127516D&P=265 
>
> http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0507&L=ISOJAC&D=0&I=-3&X=63517500CB774164C0&P=1117 
>
> The whole conversation took place in July 2005; you can see in the 
> archives at:
> http://listserv.loc.gov/listarch/isojac.html 
> I am sort of sorry we didn't consult more widely, but I guess it is too 
> late now.
>
> I will point out to him that retired code elements do not mean that they 
> are not in records. However, we have now removed "mo/mol" from our 
> documentation.
> Are there any other options as to how to document this?
> Of course, we have always taken currently unused codes out, so this would 
> be a change in our process and I am not sure how it would work with our 
> MARC language code list-- it lists the deprecated codes in a separate 
> section and not in the main part.
>
> Rebecca
>
>   


-- 
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Gerhard Budin
Center for Translation Studies
University of Vienna
Gymnasiumstra▀e 50, 1190 Vienna
Tel: +43 1 4277 58020
Fax: +43 1 4277 9580

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