 |
v · d · eThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of standardized, informative and easy-to-use resources about languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
 Stub |
This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| ??? |
This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
 |
v · d · eThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Arctic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arctic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
| Stub |
This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| High |
This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
[edit] Genetic classification
Hi Ish, could you explain the change to the 'Genetic classification', copied from the previous verson and checked against the Ethnologue 2005 article? IceKarma 09:34, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC)
-
- Hi.
-
- Sure. Ethnologue's classification is a bit controversial. So, I replaced it with something a little less provocative.
-
- Why?
-
- Firstly, Ethnologue is considering Haida to be a part of Na-Dene. This is generally thought to be undemonstrated and is not supported by most specialists. The fact that Ethnologue does this and also has other undemonstrated genetic groupings of N. Amer. langs, e.g. the "Gulf" family (of Mary Haas), the Coahuiltecan family, the Hokan family, etc., makes me suspicious of Ethnologue in general. (I also note that in Southern Athabaskan (Apachean) subfamily Ethnologue groups Chiricahua-Mescalero with Lipan & Jicarilla: this is erroneous).
-
- Secondly, the situation of the Northern Athabaskan languages is rather complicated. The most recent work always states that classification is tentative. There is much borrowing and shared features, so the usual criteria of systematic phonetic correspondences and shared innovation does not give us very good subclassifications. There is here, the common issue of whether a tree diagram can represent language relationships. Some have called the Northern languages a "cohesive language complex".
-
- I think that a less controversial grouping is the one given in Mithun's (1999) survey, i.e. 3 Athabaskan subgroups: Northern, Pacific Coast, Southern. (but, some take issue of whether the Pacific Coast langs should be grouped together.) You can see what is mostly Mithun's outline in the Athabaskan article. (the various subgroupings there are still tentative and may be mostly areal, not genetic. I should probably add a note to that effect.)
-
- Anyway, this is why I find Ethnologue a less desirable classfication. peace — ishwar (SPEAK) 22:38, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC)
[edit] File:Map tlicho lands.png Nominated for speedy Deletion
 |
An image used in this article, File:Map tlicho lands.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
- What should I do?
|
|
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
|
