An "inverted" form of a name is not a different name, only a different way 
of displaying it. See

The ISO 639-3 download table Language Name Index also provides an inverted 


Christian Galinski <[log in to unmask]> 
Sent by: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>
2009-03-02 03:54 PM
Please respond to
ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>

[log in to unmask]

AW: Aramaic

I think that a user should have all options to look for any of the names 
any "accustomed" form (included inversion):

Under the assumption (assumed, not decided) that Official Aramaic is the
preferred name coming first and Imperial Aramaic also a preferred name
coming second and Aramaic the deprecated name:
The entry horizontally displayed would look like: Official Aramaic, 
Aramaic, Aramaic 

and in an index, or when searching:
Aramaic see Official Aramaic
Aramaic, Imperial see Official Aramaic
Aramaic, Official see Official Aramaic
Imperial Aramaic see Official Aramaic
Official Aramaic

In terminology management systems it is state-of-the-art to use layout
features and position for distinguishing between these (sometimes subtle)
differences, such as for example:
Official Aramaic (first position in the entry display, boldface, red) 
Imperial Aramaic (second position in the entry display, boldface, red) 
Aramaic (third position in the entry display, normal, black)

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Im Auftrag 
Rebecca S Guenther
Gesendet: Montag, 02. März 2009 21:47
An: [log in to unmask]
Betreff: Aramaic

In 2007 we changed the language  name for "arc" from "Aramaic" to 
Aramaic (700-300 BCE); Imperial Aramaic (700-300 BCE)" to clarify the time
period of the language that it was identifying.
However, we now have no listing for it under "Aramaic", which someone 
certainly look for (i.e. in the "A'" part of the alphabet).
When you click on "more" under ISO 639-3 it takes you to the Linguist list
which calls it "Imperial Aramaic" and lists alternative names "Biblical
Aramaic", "Standard Literary Aramaic" and "Aramaic".
It seems to me we need a listing either under "Aramaic" or "Aramaic,
Biblical" or "Aramaic (Official)". There are lots of possibilities.

Is anyone else concerned about this?