Template talk:Sign language navigation
I created this template today. Basically I used the Category:list, and its subs. I am not a linguist, nor SL involved this much. I have read the most relevant pages to get the line & the subtilities in SL.
To me, new here, the most difficult thing to understand was this: "French SL has nothing to do with Frech language". This is so important to understand SLs, it should be in the titlebar. I have put it in an footnote. Once I got that, chewed, everything was easy. Now how to get that into a template? Also, I created a navbox block: "SL families", and another one "SL by region" -- because SL names are by region -- and not by coincidence nor by spoken language. So, my first version of this template should be OK in this regard.
I could agree with anyone who would change the footnote or the sub title "Sign languages by region" wrote. But still, it should be crisp and clear to any user (Reader!) around here.
While reading ordering and preparing, I've changed some categories at pages. More improvements are welcome. I made some 200+ pages fluently come together, and I think this template now reflects SL nicely. improvements are welcome. -DePiep (talk) 01:11, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I just moved the group "Liguistics" upward, it is more relevant than say "Persons".
Notes on the current version :
- -Group name "Language contact" is not good. For sure, a SL already is a language. However strange, my first try described the thing better: "Related with spoken languages". let's not squeeze letters, being clear is more important.
- -ASL in a separate group looks fine. Now I'd add ASL-phabet and such there. No problem with double mentioning for me too. And I'd add ASL to the "Family" group (even if is is a subfamily of French SL). It would completify the SL view.
- -The below-line could be phrased better. Still, I think it important that the note "French SL is not related to French language, it's about France" is maintained. We are here for readers who do not yet know about SL.
- -Still trying to find a way to have tha main template be auto folded, while the inner (regions) template is folded. -DePiep (talk) 00:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
I think it looked better when you had families as the first row, before I moved the lists above it. But IMO they do belong at the top. Maybe we could put them inside the title row at the very top (row 0)?
I don't follow what is wrong with 'language contact'. Language contact is contact between languages. Mouthing is a result of language contact. So are initialisms and finger spelling.
I don't think ASL belongs in the language families because we do not present it as a family. There would be nothing there. Anyway, ASL is the only language which gets its own row, which IMO is more than it deserves, but it reflects the development of articles on WP.
- I think you like my current edit, using the "above=" for the lists (revertable at no cost). And indeed, I was struggling too with the position of the big foldable regions-block (because it confuses layout with improtance). At this moment it is on top, and that looks OK with me (after my edit ;-)).
- "Language contact" is not clear to me. It sounds like jargon. I am a layman (yes after reading, but our Wikireader does not study the topic like me). Wikilink? (done while I wrote this!)
- So "Isolates" is the word. Wikilink for the average reader?
- re ASL is not a family because we do not present it as a family - I'd expect you to say "it is already in the French family" (as it is). I would say, how we present it should not be relevant (encyclopedians etc). That we present it (it has a dozen of pages) says enough. One of my designing problems was how to present ASL good in the template. In the Category, it is hidden below the French Family! All together, for a layman like me it would be helpful to see ASL links everywhere where applicable.
- -DePiep (talk) 01:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I like the current layout.
Re. ASL family: AFAIK, we have no article or category on this topic. The info is subsumed under FSL family and ASL itself. With a separate row for ASL, it is accessible, so I see no need to make an ASL family entry that is not supported by any WP links.
"Oral" vs. "Spoken"
I am about to change "oral" to "spoken" in the footer, following usage which has now become standard among linguists. See discussion at Talk:Sign_language#.22Oral_language.22_vs._.22Spoken_language.22 AlbertBickford (talk) 14:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
- Kwamikagami undid my change, and proceeded to discuss the matter at the link above. The arguments offered there, however, do not answer my arguments in favor of using "spoken", which is strongly favored by linguists. (Again, see the other page for evidence. The discussion with Kwamikagami, however, did lead to an improvement of the "Sign Language" article, so I appreciate it that the issue was raised.) I have therefore reinstated the change here to the template to use "spoken" instead of "oral". AlbertBickford (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
ASL-phabet - not notable
Please see Talk:Asl-phabet for a discussion on why the reference to ASL-phabet should be removed from the Writing section of this Template (and perhaps from WP itself). Mathglot (talk) 05:29, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- As I noted there, as long as the article stays it should be in this overview template. It may be deleted by WP:AfD though. -DePiep (talk) 07:05, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Code-switching and Diglossia
This template links to Code-switching and to Diglossia, a fact I noticed when the template was added to the Code-switching page. Both of those articles are about languages generally. Neither makes a distinction between signed and oral languages. In fact, as far as I can tell, neither page even gives an example of code switching or diglossia involving signed languages or dialects.
In contrast, the template does not link to Film; it links to Category:Sign-language films. Something similar might be done for code switching and diglossia. I would suggest using red links such as Code-switching in signed language as a spur to create those articles. Alternately, sections dealing with sign language could, I suppose, be added to the general articles, or perhaps a section on code switching could be added to Bimodal bilingualism. But such sections need to be created before the template can link to them. Cnilep (talk) 01:48, 11 June 2014 (UTC)