Talk:Okinawan language

Vocabulary

I was wondering wether or not a list of Uchinaaguchi words should be put up.

Conjugation

I have created a conjugation table at /Conjugation. Any ideas for how it can be simplified/presented? - 刘 (劉) 振霖 04:03, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Mingo

"Mingo" is a Japanese term. The Okinawan word for the Okinawa language is "uchinaguchi." "Uchina" is the Okinawan word for Okinawa and "guchi" is literally mouth.

---

Removed mention of "mingo" because it does not appear in Jim Breen's Dictionary or in Daijirin Dictionary. It should not be used because it is most likely not a word, or it is not common enough. Tongpoo 02:08, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)

• Mingo = min-go, ie, the language of the people. Just because you can't find it in a dictionary doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Okinawan writing

What do we know about how Okinawan was (or is) written? Does it use Kanji, Hiragana, Katakana in the same way as modern Japanese? Does the sound system differ at all? I'm very interested. — Hippietrail 02:25, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Information about Okinawan orthography is almost impossible to find on the internet. If someone has access to a book or has expertise, please provide!

The way the name uchinaguchi is presented in hiragana but with a katakana lengthening mark, and then romanized with a really weird-looking colon-like lengthening mark, is just strange. (Both the hiragana and the romanized versions look strange, and in both cases it's because of something anomalous about the vowel-lengthener. In (standard Japanese) hiragana one expects an "a" for an -a-lengthener, thus: うちなあぐち and in IPA I think a normal colon (Ucina:guci)would look less irregular than the symbol in Ucinaːguci (which in both IE and Firefox looks to me like it has a space on each side, as well as looking handwritten). May just be my fonts, though, but since it's that way in both browsers I have my doubts. --Haruo 11:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but Okinawan isn't standard Japanese, is it? As for the IPA symbol, it's your fonts. It looks fine in my browser. --Node 08:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

This page needs more explanation

There is a chart contrasing with Japanese, but it doesn't explain the nature of the contrast. I'm assuming that this is a differnce in pronunciation. However, how does this difference in pronunciation constitute a different language? Also, the chart of examples makes no sense. 1)The column heading "Tokyo". Does this mean that the list below illustrates how the word is pronounced in Tokyo? If Shuri is a different language from Japanese, shouldn't that column head read "Japanese". 2) Many of the examples show no difference between the two columns. What does it tell me about Okinawan language that they call hot water "ju", just like they do in Tokyo.

It says "Tokyo" because pronunciations and lexical items vary 'drastically' in languages and dialects generally all lumped together when you use the word "Japanese." A dialect must be used as a frame of reference, but just because Tokyo Japanese is considered standard doesn't mean that it's the "proper" Japanese. We're descriptive, not prescriptive. 97.81.65.138 (talk) 10:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

It's just a specific list of correspondences between Tokyo pronunciation and Shuri pronunciation, intended to illustrate the earlier table of sound correspondences. (This is just being specific. The Ryukyuan languages further subdivide into Amami, Okinawa, Miyako, Yaeyama and Yonaguni - each of which has a slightly different set of correspondences with standard Japanese. For instance, in the case of vowels, Amami has /ï/ for Tokyo /e/, whereas Shuri has /i/ and on the other hand, Miyako and Yaeyama have /ï/ for Tokyo /i/ and /i/ for Tokyo /e/; and let's not start talking about the extra vowels Miyako, Kikaijima, Ishigakijima and Hateruma have, let alone some of the mainland ones with eight or nine vowels, such as Nagoya.)

Of course, this is not the only thing that justifies Okinawan being considered a different language. Most linguists posit that Okinawan split from Japanese around the first century AD - in contrast, the Romance languages probably did not split until the sixth century AD; yet the opposite is also seen with the Chinese spoken language (most modern "dialects" split during or after the Middle Chinese period, which was 7th - 11th century AD).

But ultimately, once it is proven that two languages are related, whether to call them languages or dialects becomes a moot point.

Of course, there are more than just pronunciation differences between Tokyo and Shuri, just like there are between Mandarin and Cantonese - there are lexical and grammatical differences as well. What is on this article is just the tip of the iceberg, based on what few materials I have access to. - 刘 (劉) 振霖 10:58, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

From what i was told Ryukyuan language was written in Hiragana introduced in the 13th century from Japan. Within the Shuri court, written Chinese was used. Yonaguni is beleived to have developed a seperate written language but there is contreversy over it. Arn't Cantonese and mandarin seperate languages? I guess they can be compared to the Ryukyuan Languages/Japanese situation since the big arguement on the Ryukyuan Languages being dialects of Japanese is that the Ryukyuan languages have many words from ancient Japanese in it. Cantonese pronounciation and vocabulary is much closer to that of ancient Chinese than that of Mandarin. Would it be a good idea to put up some words and phrases in the Ryukyuan languages? --Carlos Tamanaha 08:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Merger Tag Removal

This merger hasn't been discussed seriously either here or at Ryukyuan languages. I think everyone agrees that Okinawan language is a language categorized as Ryukyuan language. I am removing the merger proposal. Turly-burly 01:53, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Why is the title of the page "Okinawan language"?

Why is the title of the page "Okinawan language" when "Okinawa" is in Japanese, not in Uchināguchi language? Why not "Uchināguchi"? Lily1104 (talk) 11:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Because "Okinawa" is the standard name for the island and related topics in English. This is the same reason that the French language, Spanish language, and Japanese language articles are not called Français, Español, and Nihongo. LordAmeth (talk) 02:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

How do we pronounce "c"?

The Grammar section of the article makes extensive use of the letter "c" in the romanization of Okinawan roots and words. For example, kacuru is said to derive from kaci-uru. However, since "c" is not used in any standard form of Japanese romanization (except in a "ch" sound), and since the letter "c" has no single consistent pronunciation in English, it is unclear as to what pronunciation this is trying to reproduce.

Is kaci-uru the same as kaki-uru (かきうる)？ Is it the same as kashi-uru (かしうる) or kasiuru (かすぃうる), that is to say, the same as the pronunciation of the English words "see" or "sea"？ Or is it another sound entirely? LordAmeth (talk) 17:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The romanized <c> in the Shuri dialect should represent /tʃ/, or /tɕ/ in the Standard language (unlike Standard Japanese however, <c> consists of an entirely separate phoneme rather than just being an allophonic variation of /t/ before /i/. I don't know enough about the dialect or its historical linguistics, but it seems likely that it arised via palatalization of /k/). Thus, kacuru should be rendered /katʃuru/ (カチュル). It's also mentioned in the syllable chart provided right above the Grammar section. - Io Katai (talk) 03:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Well, after looking over the WP:IPA page, and googling several of these technical linguistics jargon words, I think I understand what you're saying. I still believe that the "c" is extremely unclear, and should be replaced either with IPA symbols (which plenty of people, including myself, will not understand one bit) or with something that falls within the realms of standard Japanese romanization practice, which is what is used primarily, as far as I know, in all contexts outside of professional, technical, linguistics circles. For example, I have read quite a few books on Okinawan history and culture in both English and Japanese, and none of them have ever used a "c" by itself to spell, for example, uchinaa or uchinaaguchi. LordAmeth (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I made it sound complicated, but basically <c> roughly represents the <ch> sound. I don't think it really makes any difference if you use either spelling, since it's just a romanization convention; actual Okinawans don't use the Latin alphabet, but rather the Japanese syllabary. If you based yourself on the fact that it's historically palatalized (i.e. kya -> cha, or kaki+uru -> kakⁱuru -> kachuru), you could even romanize it as <ky> (but this is less helpful since modern Okinawan distinguishes kya from cha). The thing about using <ch> is that it's easier for most speakers of European languages to understand, but otherwise it's not always helpful in underlying the actual phonetics (e.g. how Japanese <chi> is actually just /ti/). Although it might make a difference whether you use <si> or <shi>, for <ch> it doesn't.

This article seems to have originally used ʔucināguci to write out the language name, but seeing how it's been replaced by uchinā-guchi over time, it might be best to conform the spelling throughout the article (i.e. change c to ch). - Io Katai (talk) 15:57, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok so I brought the change, but there might be other things that should be fixed. What do your sources use, <j> or <y>? What about glotalized (ʔ) vowels, do they use <ʔu>, <'u>, or just <u>? - Io Katai (talk) 21:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate you making these changes, and I hope you don't feel I've pressured you into it. All of my sources use straightforward Hepburn romanization or another standard form of Japanese romanization. So, things with a や　or ゆ, like 安里屋ゆんた (Asadoya yunta) are spelled with 'y' and things with じゃ, like 謝名親方 (Jana Ueekata) are spelled with 'j'. As for glottalization, I'm afraid I'm no linguist, and wouldn't recognize the difference. I've seen use of an apostrophe to mark the separation of morae, that is, the difference between ぬ　(nu) and んう (n'u), but nothing like the Hawai'ian okina which marks glottalization.

I think it is perfectly fine, and perhaps even better, to use your linguistics symbols, IPA, whatever, in the charts under the Phonology section. It's only in the other sections, such as Grammar, where you're representing whole words in romanization that I think a standard romanization system needs to be used. Thanks again for your understanding and flexibility. I think this article is improving greatly under your care, and I thank you for your efforts. LordAmeth (talk) 01:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Alright, so I discovered where the syllabary originates from, but the only place I could find that used this system was this and this website in the links section. Seeing how it was published nearly 50 years ago, I think it's safe to bring the other changes to make it more similar to how Standard Japanese is transcribed. I decided to use the apostrophe for the glottalization, as it was already in use on the Okinawan writing system article. But I also added a table at the end for comparison between the two romanization systems.

And no, it wasn't too much trouble; always glad I can help. - Io Katai (talk) 16:57, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hogan

When I was in Okinawa I heard this language called Hogan. Why is this name not in the article? - 98.247.111.56 (Talk) 01:08, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

In English, the preferred term for referring to the Ryukyuan language or dialect spoken throughout and around Okinawa is the 'Okinawan language'. Hōgen 方言 (variously pronounced Hogan) is a misnomer, as it comes directly from the Japanese word for 'dialect', used in the sense of 'our dialect' or as a shortened form of 沖縄方言 (Okinawa (no) Hōgen), which in English is retranslated as 'Okinawan language' out of context. Although, you can certainly still add this alternative name to the article, but keep 'Okinawan language' elsewhere throughout. - Io Katai (talk) 01:52, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Complicated particles

The particles seem to be more complicated than in (regular) Japanese. Is this a feature retained from Ancient Japanese or did Okinawan get more complicated? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.87.74 (talk) 11:25, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

what about "n"

not final "n", but "n" as in "NAra". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yjfstorehouse (talk • contribs) 06:04, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

口 vs. 語

I hate to fight over such a trivial issue like this, but うちなーぐち uchinaaguchi is rightfully spelled as 沖縄口 in Kanji, which accurately corresponds to both its pronunciation and etymological origin, as well as its semantic meaning. Guchi does not correspond solely to "language", but can be used in the context of dialects as in /naaɸagut͡ɕi/ "Naha dialect"; general speech as in [ʔan̩dagut͡ɕi] "fawning; prattle", [googut͡ɕi] "complaint" or [ʔamagut͡ɕi] "sweet words; flattery"; and can also be used to roughly signify "mouth", "entrance" or "beginning". The morpheme 語, on the other hand, is a loan pronounced [go] as in 英語 [ʲeːgo] "English". Using the spelling 沖縄語 would actually suggest */ʔut͡ɕinaaɡo/, which is nonsensical and why it's uniquely read through Japanese as /okinawago/. Moreover, 沖縄口 is also the spelling employed on the Japanese Wikipedia and the only one provided in the EDICT dictionary. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 04:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Seconding this. 沖縄語 might be (one of) the name(s) in Japanese, but it certainly isn't Okinawan, as 語 cannot be cognate with guchi. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 07:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

While I personally prefer 口, does this argument even make sense? Since when has Okinawan had a standard set of kanji readings? Should we give kanji for this at all? You speak of "The morpheme 語", but 語 is not a morpheme, it's a grapheme, and could potentially be used to write anything the writer desires, just as it is used for the two morphemes go and kataru in Japanese. Is there an established set of Okinawan morphemes written with either 語 or 口? — kwami (talk) 07:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's a morphographeme, and while Okinawan doesn't have a spelling standard per se, it does have spelling guidelines which indicate that corresponding Japanese characters are to be used, except when the meaning is so warped from its etymological equivalent in standard Japanese (see, for example, Y. Funatsu [1], [2], 清ら vs 美ら, and 口 vs　語 (p5)). If you can find me an Okinawan source that actually spells uchinaaguchi as 沖縄語, I might be more inclined to agree, but so far I've only seen it used in Japanese. — Io Katai ᵀᵃˡᵏ 16:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't arguing that it should be 語, just that that doesn't necessarily mean that it should therefore be 口. But it looks like you've got the sources to support 口. — kwami (talk) 17:01, 24 February 2012 (UTC)