Jump to content

Talk:Kurdish language

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kurmanjo (talk | contribs) at 20:45, 11 June 2013 (→‎Persian versus Kurmanji Kurdish: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Infobox

Created infobox, but I need help with the lettersAsdf169 (talk) 18:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It sais that there are 16 million speakers of kurdish, and at the same time there are 40 million kurds... Get my point? Please, let those who KNOW write, not those who THINK that the know... // Zaza-Goran Rasi

please note: one word in isoglosses tabel is written wrong: mountain in kurdish language is "shâkh" or "şax" but not : "kash". i think, it must be a mistyping. thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.180.186.212 (talk) 09:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Phonology

The article states, "The vowel pairs /i/ and /iː/, /e/ and /eː/, and /u/ and /uː/ contrast in length and not quality." This is not true... the vowel pairs are a distinction of quality, not quantity. Naahid بنت الغلان Click to talk 04:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Can someone add this orphaned map to the article & to Wikimedia Commons?

I found this map through a Kurdish-language forum, but it has not been incorporated into Wikipedia; can someone who knows how to add it, please do that? Thanks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kurdish_language.jpg
68.174.101.64 (talk) 09:31, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

16mio. speakers

16 Mio Speaker it is a fake. there must be min. 40mio. Please korect it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.181.214.37 (talk) 21:12, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ZAZA is a dialect of the Kuridsh language!

Why haven't you edited Zaza a dialect of the Kurdish language? The Zaza dialect is related to other Kurdish dialect as Gorani, Kalhoori that are spoken is southern and western part of Kurdistan, in Hewraman, the Kuridstanina cities of Kermanshah (Kirmashan in Kurdish) and Ilam. Just because the Kurds haven't have the opportunity the last 100 years to rule themselves, the enemies of Kurdistan want to confuse the more than 4000 years old brave history of Kurdistan by try to distinguish the Kurds. The Zaza is a Kurdish dialect and they are an undevided part of Kurdistanian people. Separating the Zaza dialect from Kuridsh language is THE SAME MISTAKE as saying "British is not English, American in English" (reffering to that sorani, kurmanci, gorani and kalhori are as American in that example; british as Zaza dialect and english as Kurdish). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.151.43.53 (talk) 19:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a famous saying regarding politics of languages: A language is a dialect with an army and navy.Heja Helweda (talk) 23:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can a Zaza from Bingol, and a Kurd from Erbil communicate fluently? How about a Kurd from Suleymaniyah, and a Kurd from Van? The answer to both questions is no, and this should make us think deeply about what Kurdish really means. It seems like this term is applied to all of the languages spoken by the inhabitants of the regions where Kurds live. It may make sense politically (that is, Kurdish politics) but to me it doesn't make any sense linguistically. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.50.81 (talk) 05:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to have become fashionable to accuse the Kurds of engaging in cultural supremacy and bullying people who live "in regions where Kurds live" (as though they even held many basic freedoms, let alone AUTHORITY outside of northern Iraq to control the people who live in "the regions where Kurds live") into being Kurdish. This is absurd and totally baseless, and I suspect the motive is nothing more than creating division within what little exists of a weak Kurdish unity as it is, not least of all due to the impassable borders between them, but also the employment of this very tactic, nothing new, cause fractures within previously strong bonds as has been worryingly weakened with the Zaza. They were given the idea that Kurmanci speakers neglected or ignored the Zaza culture and language while promoting Kurmanci. It's inconceivable to me how Kurmanci speakers can be accused of holding any advantage with which to do so, as I was totally unaware that Kurmanci speakers had the resources and freedom at hand to promote their culture and language. Accusing a people like the Kurds, who hold no rights even to their own culture in most of the countries they inhabit, of engaging in Kurdification of others is positively absurd. For you to go on to suggest there is a need to question the meaning of "Kurdishness" is just the most retarded thing imaginable, as if to suggest the Kurds have grown into a formidable unified force, and who can only be stopped by adding FURTHER divisions between them, beyond the international borders and the linguistic, cultural and religious barriers between their different communities, though in spite of which they have little faltered in their determination to hold strong to their identity as Kurds. There is more than linguistics here to take into account, there is a shared history, a shared culture, a shared identity. For this very reason, most Zaza continue to identify as Zaza KURDS, to the frustration of those who'd like to establish deep divides. Linguists appear to have an utter obsession with drawing distinctions between the various Kurdish groups, especially the Zaza and other Kurds, but even between Sorani and Kurmanci, the endless argument of whether they are dialects or languages as though such terms, by their own admission completely abstract, relative, and most importantly irrelevant, served any purpose whatsoever aside from creating artificial divides between people who against all odds have attempted to overcome them.

Kurds in kurdistan can understand both Kurmanci and Sorari!! how the hell did you came up to that conclusion?? It's harder with zazaki but it's still some kurds how nderstand it to. Kurmanci and Sorani is like Swedish and Norwegian!! ans as i know this people can understand eachother!! this is only something brought here by ur enemies to seperate the kurd more!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.179.6 (talk) 05:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Status in Iran

The only official language in Iran is Persian [1],[2],[3]. Heja Helweda (talk) 04:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool mistake

Ethnologue makes a funny mistake where it gives the total polulation for speakers of central group: Population total all countries: 3,712,000. [4] :) The origin of this mistake is that instead of 4,620,000 speakers in Iraq it has 462,000! and this number is far smaller even than population of big central-Kurdish-speaking cities in Iraq such as Suleimania and Arbil! Finally one can conclude that the total number of Kurdish speakers as 16 mil, given in the template is totally wrong. Ellipi (talk) 15:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Article is not written in a scientific tone and is heavily biased

There are several passages that are written with obvious bias, of which I will only give two exapmles:

1. "In Iran, though it is used in some local media and newspapers, it is not used in schools [13] [14]. As a result, some Iranian Kurds have left for Iraqi Kurdistan where they can study in their native language[15]."

--> HOWEVER, reference [15] states: "March 9, 2005 · In a new educational experiment, a university in the Kurdish region of Northern Iraq has offered more than 80 Kurdish students from neighboring Syria and Iran scholarships to "study abroad" in Iraqi Kurdistan."

Thus, it is obvious that the author of the article was biased here, since A) the leave of the Iranian Kurds did not take place "AS A RESULT" of the fact that Kurdish is not taught in schools, as the author implies; B) the number of the "some" Kurds who "have left" is only 80 and they have left to take part in a "study abroad" program, as the article says; "some Kurds" is an overly exaggerating statement in semantic terms and implies a significant migration - at least significant enough to be mentioned in an encyclopedic article! (80 people aren't significant by FAR). BTW - any serious encyclopedia would remove this line due to absolute insignificance for the article overall.


2. "However, there are two other dialects spoken by a smaller number of Kurds: Southern Kurdish, consisting of Feyli, Kalhori traditionally known as Gorani, spoken in Ilam, and parts of Kermanshah, Khaneqin and Bijar; The other is Hewrami (known as Gorani in linguistics) spoken in Pawe district in Iran and narrow Hewraman district in iraq. [...] Some people consider Zaza and Laki dialects as kurdish dialects but it can not be verified."

A) Gorani and Zazaki are not Kurdish languages, their speakers are not Kurds. The article simply states wrong, disproved facts. See, for example, works by Ludwig Paul, Rüdiger Schmitt (Compendium Linguarum Iranicarum), Joyce Blau or Garnik Asatrian, and works by all serious scholars of Iranian Studies today (the listed are the LEADING scholards of Gorani and Zazaki).

B) The mentioning of extreme minority views ("some people consider ...) who do not follow linguistic methods, but are possibly otherwise motivated is not serious in a serious encyclopedia. Agreed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.12.115.97 (talk) 03:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Kurdish language is spoken at least by 40-50 million people world wide. Aroud 3 million Kurdistanian are abroad, and just in Istanbul there are 4-6 million Kurds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.151.43.53 (talk) 16:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you have wrong Zazaki and gorani is a kurdish dialect!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.179.6 (talk) 05:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish as the only language of the Kurds; Northeastern Neo-Aramaic

The first sentence says - "Kurdish is the language spoken by Kurds". I think it should be mentioned in the article that despite its name, Kurdish is not the language of all the Kurds, but only of the Muslims among them. Kurdish Christians and Jews still use the semitic Northeastern Neo-Aramaic language. Ben Gershon (talk) 00:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Claims that Kurmanci and Sorani are "as different as English and German"

According to Philip Kreyenbroek (1992), it also may be misleading to call Kurmanji (Northern Kurdish) and Sorani "dialects" because they are in some ways as different from one another as German and English.

This is complete arse. My father is a Kurmanci speaker, and he has very little trouble understanding the Sorani dialect. To make a comparison like German and English is wholly unfounded and inaccurate, and I believe is an outsider's pedantic study of the two dialects. An English speaker would be hard pressed to understand anything spoken in German beyond the simplest of sentences, and only then by estimation. The same goes for a German speaker trying to understand English. Sorani and Kurmanci speakers have a level of mutual intelligibility far greater than do German and English speakers, comparable to Spanish and Italian.

If there are any other Kurmanci or Sorani speakers, I'd like to hear their opinions on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.108.128 (talk) 15:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a Kurdish speaker, but I have a couple of comments. You deleted the article's claim that Kurmanji (aka Kurmanci) and Sorani are as different as English and German, but you did not delete the following claims the article makes:
Sorani differs on six grammatical points from Kurmanji. This appears to be a result of Gorani (Haurami) influence.[citation needed]
  1. The passive conjugation: the Sorani passive morpheme -r-/-ra - corresponds to -y-/-ya - in Gorani and Zaza, while Kurmanji employs the auxiliary hatin, come;
  2. a definite suffix -eke, also occurring in Zazaki;
  3. an intensifying postverb -ewe, corresponding to Kurmanji preverbal ve-;
  4. an 'open compound' construction with a suffix -e, for definite noun phrases with anepithet;
  5. the preservation of enclitic personal pronouns, which have disappeared in Kurmanji and in Zaza;
  6. a simplified izafeh system.
Those claims are unreferenced, but do you deny them? The article makes the well-referenced claim that "Sorani has neither gender nor case-endings, whereas Kurmanji has both" -- a big difference. The cited source for that also says: "In Sorani pronomial enclitics play a crucial role in verbal constructions, while Kurmanji has no such enclitics." The fact that written Kurmanji is in a Roman alphabet while written Sorani is in a Persian alphabet creates an important further barrier between them in the modern world where so much language communication is in the written form. Seanwal111111 (talk) 16:25, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The new clarifications added to that section of the article are welcome. It makes sense to compare it to English and German from a grammatical perspective, but the previous entry did not draw that distinction, and made no mention of the similar vocabulary and pronunciation, which might have mislead readers with regards to the extent of the differences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.156.86 (talk) 15:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know many Kurds and they cannot understand spoken Sorani. Even Wikipedia has two separate wikipedias: Kurdish wikipedia is entirely in Kurmanci and a separate Sorani wikipedia exists. I am not talking about the issue of Arabic and Latin script which is a different question. Why wikipedia recognizes this difference but English wikipedia calls them one language in this article, I do not know. We should move everything to a Kurmanci and Sorani article and leave here only the differences and linguistic things, changing the name to "Kurdish languages". That way we can include Zaza too. Plentoytime (talk) 17:48, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am Kurmanji speaker and I can pretty much understand Sorani but not completely. As for GOrani and Zaza, I cannot understand these at all, actually at times I can pick up more what a Persian says then a Gorani/Zaza.--87.194.107.249 (talk) 01:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What means

What do these two phrases mean:

  • Çît naw binêm
  • Nawit denêm jîno

Thanks in advance. —Stephen (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

... there is none.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 19:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is now: I added a link to the article on Kurdish grammar. I did not attempt to summarize that article here. Mcswell (talk) 23:18, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unacceptable reliance on Mackenzie as a source

The first objection is clearly that he is used as the primary source despite being 50 years old and being highly questionable in its metholodology, as well as the expertise of Mackenzie in the field of Kurdology when his work was produced so long ago. Additionally, the ethnic origin theory he provides is totally irrelevant and based on the same flawed metholody and inconclusive sample sizes and analysis. Mackenzie is NOT a reliable source for these reasons.

What is perhaps more so disturbing is that the sources provided for his alleged studies are merely small and hideously undetailed mentions in the works of OTHERS. I have attempted to provide criticism of Mackenzie's work based on the immensely valid point made by van B., whose work was sourced for the information on Mackenzie's study while his CRITICISM WAS COMPLETELY LEFT OUT. That is not neutral! The limitations of Mackenzie's so-called studies, as well as inter-connected nature of his theories in that many are based on the findings of already unreliable studies he has conducted, render most of his arguments completely invalid and unscientific, yet before I touched this article, his opinion was stated as fact, indeed the preposterous claim that it was the "LEADING" opinion, with no trace of academic crticism of his work being mentioned. He appears to do no more than draw conclusions and make assumptions with little fact to go on, not least of all because of the unacceptable limitations and incomprehensive scope of his studies, but the limitations the studies already face by the lack of consistent evidence aside from words of Median origin in Old Persian, which apparently is totally acceptable to compare to modern Kurdish and declare them different! How ABSURD. More so, the claims of a relationship between Kurdish and Persian as being genetic rather than a result of influence. WHY would Kurdish have such origins, yet have formed into the language it has today despite the centuries of suzerainty Persians held over Kurdish populations? It doesnt even make clear which dialects of Kurdish he has analysed, as it is common knowledge that Sorani Kurdish is vastly influenced in vocabulary and grammar by its proximity to South-Western Iranian languages, most significantly in this case from PERSIAN.

This is a complete shambles. These sources are totally unreliable and i find it obscene that whoever had written the article in the form I found it relied upon a SINGLE SOURCE who also happened to be the LEAST RELIABLE. Stop providing decisive information, and try to outline the differing viewpoints IN EQUAL SHARE by different academics. What happened to Minorsky? He is an EXPERT source, far more reliable than this Mackenzie or the Armenian ideologue "G. Asatrian" whose anti-Kurdish sentiments are so abundantly clear upon reading his work that it makes me cringe to think he believes he's hiding it well. This is the man who would label the Yezidi religious group a separate ethnic group from Kurds because they've at times been in conflict which is, whatever he may say, so retarded that I believe most academics would find it positively laughable. In addition, he refuses to recognise even those Zazaki speakers who identify as Kurds as anything but what he'd believe a totally separate and distantly related ethnic group. By their own identification! Yet the Yezidis? It's not enough that they even speak Kurdish and are ethnically Kurdish, but because they refuse to identify as such, they're given the status as a separate ethnic group. Anyway, I've made myself incoherently clear. Fix this shit!

Biases

Why is this article so poorly written (save the phonology section) and so blatantly biased? It starts with calling Kurdish part of the "Indo-Iranian" branch of the IE languages. The statement is true, but as true as calling French a member of the Celto-Italic languages, or Russian as a member of the Balto-Slavic languages. Even the text of the article specifies that Kurdish has a smaller, more accurate language family affiliation: Iranian. Why can't people get over their political bias and be proper when discussing a scientific subject. Kurdish is an Iranian language, which is the western branch of Ind0-Iranian, which is a branch of the Satem group of the Indo-Iranian languages.

Then, I seriously doubt the status of Kurdish as a SOUTH-western Iranian language. Only Persian is southwestern, linguistically speaking. Kurdish and Baluchi are NORTHwestern.

Then, I don't again understand why we have to be political when considering scientific issues. Zazaki people consider themselves to be ethnically Kurdish, at least now. But their language, although yet another northwestern Iranian language, is NOT Kurdish in classification. It basically has a "sister" relationship to Kurdish. Languages do not determine ethnicity (Americans are not English, nor are the Belgians French or Columbians, Spanish). Zazaki people are free to consider themselves part of a Kurdish "nation", but that does not make their language, which has clear phonological and morphological differences from Kurdish, a "Kurdish dialect".

Please grow-up and leave philology alone and outside your petty political feuds.--Khodadad (talk) 09:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed pending new citation

Written Kurdish was illegal in Turkey for most of the 20th century. Encyclopaedia Iranica: Kurdish languages. accessed: 19 May 2009].

I have removed the above text as the link is dead. I have made a cursory attempt to find the place in the two articles on Kurdish language in Iranica, without success. If someone wants to readd it, they should add it with an updated link. - Francis Tyers · 16:55, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Demand for education in Kurdish

The article says "but there has been little demand for these (private) courses (in Turkey)". I expect it to also say that when private courses are opened, the state creates bureaucratic obstacles like the necessary height of doors.

On a separate note, it is a very biased and political claim which implies that those who wanted it do not use it. Therefore, what they want is is not real; Kurds have different plans, etc. First of all, there is no statistics about the attendance rate. Secondly, the current Nazi-like political atmosphere puts pressure on attendants, let alone the institutes.

If I demand for education in my mother tongue, you just have nothing to say because you cannot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.182.203.228 (talk) 21:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

kurmanci zazaki gorani sorani =kurdish languages

kurmanci zazaki gorani sorani =kurdisch languages

im zazaki speaker but im kurd!

and kurds are only kurds from kurdistan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.224.181.226 (talk) 13:50, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a good reference for this, it is definitely something we should include. — kwami (talk) 07:06, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

gorani and zazaki =kurdish languages

gorani and zazaki are kurdish alnguages..here sources!psl change it http://www.joshuaproject.net/people-clusters.php?rop2=C0114

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ru/a/a4/Linguistik_kart_Kurdistan.jpg


greets serhed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.224.181.13 (talk) 17:40, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

about kurdish language here true sources

HERE.

http://www.kurdishacademy.org/?q=node/212 " Kurdish dialectology

Dialectology is a sub-field of historical linguistics, the scientific study of linguistic dialect. It studies variations in language based primarily on geographic distribution and their associated features. Dialectology treats such topics as divergence of two local dialects from a common ancestor and synchronic variation.

Dialectologists are ultimately concerned with grammatical features which correspond to regional areas. Thus they are usually dealing with populations living in their areas for generations without moving, but also with immigrant groups bringing their languages to new settlements. The Dialects of Kurdish Language

This section is currently available in Kurdish and Persian only. Please view these section at the provided link below. Dabesh búnewey zarawe serekékaní zimaní Kurdí

Zebíhí (1967); Northern Group ; Central Group ; Southern Group ; Hawrami / Dimili


Table 1) Some alternative names for the Dialect Groups in Kurdish language.

M. Izady 1992


A. Hassanpour 1989


D.N. MacKenzie 1981


J. Nebez 1976


A. Zebíhí 1967

North Kurmânji


Kurmanci


Northern Group


North Kirmanci


Northern Group

South Kurmânji


Sorani


Central Group


Middle Kirmanci


Central Group

Dimili


Hawrami


Non-Kurdish


Goraní / Zazai


Hawrami / Dimili

Gurâni


Kirmashani


Southern Group


South Kirmanci


Southern Group Source: 

  1. Prof. Mínorskí, Kurdnewey médékanin, wergérraní D. Kemal Mezher Ehmed, govarí korrí zanyarí Kurd, Bergí yekem, bendí yekem, Sallí 1973, Bexda, Laperrí 563.
  2. Dr. Moyín, Burahaní Qatie', bergí yek, laperrí 37-41.
  3. Dr. Mihmedí Mukrí, Goraní ya tranehay Kurdí, Taran, Kitébxaney Danish, 1957, laperrí 8.
  4. Dú nawcey picúkin le mellbendí zarawey Bashúrída.
  5. Dr. Kemal Fuad, Zarawekaní zimaní Kurdí u zimaní edebí u núsínyan, govarí korrí zanyarí Kurd, Jhimare 4, Sallí 1971, Bexda, Laperrí 22.

" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.224.185.66 (talk) 11:51, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

true kurdish langauges !

hi here watch :

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/6391/languagejd3.jpg


AND PLS CHANGE THIS PAGE:

THX AZAD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.224.180.8 (talk) 15:16, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some references for further info

The references below may help in expanding Kurdish and Kurd related articles a lot, please have a look and implement them on Wikipedia in an appropriate manner;

--Stultiwikiatext me 04:12, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:IRS. The book may be a reliable source (I can't see anything on the page linked), the rest are not. Dougweller (talk) 05:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK then, don't do it, let the wrong info hang out there in all these articles. Whetever. --Stultiwikiatext me 18:36, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it's wrong, there should be numerous academic sources with the correct information. Dougweller (talk) 18:52, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but actually if it is right, there should at least be any kind of a source with the current information (i.e considering the population of Kurdish-speaking population in Turkey in here, before my edit of course). --Stultiwikiatext me 21:15, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The number of Kurdish speakers

The number of Kurdish people (CIA etc.) is not same with the number of Kurdish speakers. For example in Turkey about half of Kurdish people doesn't speak Kurdish language. Takabeg (talk) 13:28, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we better consider min and max population for Kurdish speakers. CIA data (July 2011 est.): Iran --> min (ethnic groups): 5,452, 385 - max (languages): 7,010,209. Iraq --> min: 4,559,935 - max: 6,079,914. Turkey: 14,181,398. So we can use: 24,193,718-27,271,521 (24-27 million) or average: 25,732,619 (25 million). Gazaneh (talk) 13:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Or average of both CIA data and current data (16 million). Gazaneh (talk) 13:50, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to CIA World Factbook, Ethnic groups (in Turkey): Turkish 70-75%, Kurdish 18%, other minorities 7-12% (2008 est). But there is no detail about Languages. Takabeg (talk) 16:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to KONDA, 11,97% of total population of Turkey knows Kurdish language as their mother tongue or second language.

According to the CIA World Factbook, 9% of total population of Iran speaks Kurdish language.

Takabeg (talk) 16:46, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't be making our own calculations, that would be WP:OR, just report accurately what the sources say without comment and making sure the sources are talking about language. Dougweller (talk) 18:18, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They are the CIA data for 2011 est (see Iran, Iraq,and Turkey). But Takabeg is right. There is no language data for Iraq and Turkey (only Iran have both section). For these two countries, I calculated Kurdish population (ethnic). I don't know we can consider and use ethnic groups data or just language data? If we just use language data, then there is no data for Iraq and Turkey in CIA World Factbook. Just Iran. So we can only use Iran data. And for other countries like Iraq, Turkey, Syria, and etc... we must find another reliable sources. Gazaneh (talk) 03:22, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to do a more thorough google books and google scholars search on the subject...

But we should mention the number of ethnic Kurds according to various sources (such as CIA factbook) is much higher than nuber of Kurdish speakers. --108.18.222.120 (talk) 04:02, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the numbers, it should be mentioned that there are Kurds in Europe (probably at least 1 million), and also Caucasus, Kazakhistan, Russia, Lebanon and etc. Doing a quick google books search, 25-35 million seems reasonable? [5].. At least that should be mentioned in the article --108.18.222.120 (talk) 04:09, 24 September 2011 (UTC) The 25 million mark is not too off: [6] I believe it is closer to 30 million (sometimes Kurds from Khorasan or Central Asia, Europe, Caucasus, Lebanon..are not counted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.222.120 (talk) 04:12, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The ethnologue figure on Turkey is showing from 1980? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.222.120 (talk) 01:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dialects, distinct languages, or?

There seems to be an unwillingness to show the various points of view in this article. For instance, see [7]. "The disagreement ar scholars in categorizing and classifying the Kurdish language and its die can be at times amusing. Ihe majority or these specialized and non-specialized scholars mistakenly classify the Kurdish dialccts as languages. Or they view their classifications as variants of one another. Martin van Bruinessen categorizes the language into three dialects: Kurmanji, Sorani and the third as the sub- dialects of Sinc'i (Sanandaji), Kerma/ishaJji and Lcki, but it was categorized under different terminology and geographical places.40 Hassan Arfas classifi- cation has been: Zaza, Kirmanji and Gurani.4I David McDowall divides the Kurdish language into two major languages or dialects: Kirmanji and Sorani. He asserts that another three languages exist in various places in Kurdistan: Kennanshabi, Zaza and Gurani.4: Kreyenbroek argues that there is no one language or dialect. For him there arc five different dialccts: Kcrmanshabi, Zaza, Gurani, Kurmanji and Sorani** Nader Entessar classifies it as three languages rather than dialccts: Kurdi, Kurmanji and ZazaHe contends that the failure to adopt a lingua franca has not only hindered inter-Kurdish communication, but it has also reduced the importance of language as a symbol of ethnic identity for the Kurds.45

Entessar puts Gurani and Suleimani into the same dialect group. However, whether identified as the dialect spoken mostly by the Kurds of Kermanshab'"1 or used as a label for the Hawrami dialect, Gurani cannot be placed in the same group with Sulcimani. 'North and South Kurmanji (better kntnvn as Sorani), which he puts in one group, also belong to two dialect groups. Entcssar fails to mention that Sorani is the most developed standard variety of Kurdish. He locates Zaz/i (Ditnili) speakers in 'the Iranian province of Western Azerbaijan and central Turkey'. " There's more on that page, and I'm sure more sources. Dougweller (talk) 19:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iranian people.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Iranian people.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 20 March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Iranian people.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Northwestern, southwestern, it isn't that simple

I noted that someone changed the text of this article to read northwestern although the source says southwestern. This is clearly pov and a bain of Wikipedia to change text so that it contradicts the source. The subject is very complicated. Eg, The A to Z of the Kurds By Michael M. Gunter[8] says "At the present time, some would argue there are only two main Kurdish languages, or branches of Kurdish. Kurmanji and Sorani may be considered major dialects of one language, belong to the southwestern branch of Iranian languages, and have by far the most speakers of any Kurdish dialects. (Some, however, consider these two to be separate languages.) Gurani and Dimili (Zaza) may be considered dialects of a second language, belong to the northwestern branch of the Iranian lan- guages. and have far fewer speakers. As already noted, there are many different dialects of each one of what may be called the two main Kur- dish languages. If one were to compare the Kurdish languages to the Romance languages, the relationship between the two main Kurdish languages might be somewhat analogous to that between French and Italian. To further complicate matters, some would consider the south-" (it goes on but you can read it on Google).

Turkey's Alevi Enigma: A Comprehensive Overview edited by Paul J. White, Joost Jongerden[9] says "The scholar Basilc Nikitinc states that the Kurdish language (he does not differentiate between dialects/alleged dialects) is part of north- west group of Iranian languages (Nikitinc, 1956: 9). Vladimir Minorsky, however, agrees with most linguists today, including the Kurdish language specialist D. N. MacKcn/.ic, thai Kumiancl is actually a southern Iranian language (MacKenzie, 1961: 68-86; Minorsky, 1964: 13-14)."

And so it goes. This is a particular problem as editors try to use the Kurdish language to prove descent from Medes, going so far as to distort the sources. Dougweller (talk) 13:49, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unified Kurdish??

Is this possible? Let's look this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ9JcjquIPA

--ZazaShadow (talk) 20:44, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Old Kurdish alphabet"

I've reverted because there was no reliable source for this plus copyvio. Ibn Wahshiyya's book can be read and searched at [10] and [11] - can't find this alphabet but it may not use the words Kurd or Kurdish. You can download the Google pdf at [12]. Scrolling through didn't turn up anything that resembles this image. I found "54- Notably in the ease of Ibn Wahshiyya, who asserts that the ancient Syriac script was the first divine alphabet, taught by God to Adam (see his Ancient Alphabets and Hieroglyphic Characters, ed. and tr. J. Hammer, London 1806, pp. 116 = 42); cf. also the notion of the pure language of the Babylonians before the confusion (Chwolson, Ubtrreste, p. 11)." in [13] Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World By Patricia Crone, Michael A. Cook which isn't encouraging. Dougweller (talk) 15:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Old Kurdish alphabet, according to Ibn Wahsiyya 856 AC.
Because you are looking at wrong chapters of the book. Here is direct link to Ibn Wahsiyyas Kurdish alphabet, and its English translation.
So before I revert it to the previous version, revert your edit please. Thank you. Roboskiye (talk) 16:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He mentions 2 Chaldean alphabets and an unknown one - which is 'Curdic'? I don't see the mention of 30 books either, just 33 inscriptions in an unknown alphabet and I note that he doesn't say that the 2 names books were in any particular alphabet. We would need some solidly reliable sources by our criteria at WP:RS and WP:VERIFY so please don't replace your edit. Dougweller (talk) 17:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The guy who translted it into English in 1806 made some remarkable mistakes. The original Arabic text does not labell it as unknown but as Qadima which means old/ancient. The Arabic text reads: I saw in a sarcophagus in Baghdad, thirty books (and not thirty three inscriptions!) written in this alphabet, I possessed two books out of these in Levant (Arabic: wa kan indi minha bishsham kitabayn), ... and translated them from Kurdish to Arabic. No original research. no censorship. Also the Arabic text does not use strong words such as falsely pretend but uses claim. It appears that the translator was much more biased than Ibn Wahshiyya himself who is famous for being proud of his Chaldean/Nabatean heritage. I'm not going to engage in a revert warring, but expect you to re-add the text. Roboskiye (talk) 18:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, 'ancient' instead of unknown perhaps. I wonder how he could read it. But it doesn't say it was a Kurdish alphabet. You can write a language in a variety of alphabets. In any case, translations are original research (which is one reason why translations are always copyright) so we need reliable sources and these would need to be academic. Or, you could take your source to WP:RSN and argue that it meets our criteria, but I don't see how. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 19:08, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Then why English alphabet exists? Why not delete it and redirect to Latin alphabet? More about the false and missleading translation: The English translations states: We are ignorant to what alphabet these letters belong, as we never could make out the language which they express, while original Arabic text reads: For the rest of these letters (i.e. the last seven undeciphered ones), we could not find any equivalents in any other language, (of course since Kurdish belongs to a different language familly, and is different from other surrounding Semitic languaes). So, yes, whatever the origins of that alphabet, it was used for Kurdish in pre-Islamic era, and this makes it Kurdish, just as Latin alphabet used for English is labelled English alphabet. Roboskiye (talk) 19:25, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When you have reliable sources we can discuss it, so far this is original research, see WP:NOR. Dougweller (talk) 22:08, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, the source does not say that the alphabet was Kurdish and we cannot claim that it was an ancient Kurdish alphabet - at best we can say it was used by the Kurds and that still would require an independent academic source, not someone's website. Dougweller (talk) 09:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In response to your edit summary: Kurdish writing in an unknown alphabet does not make that alphabet a Kurdish alphabet, you again did not answer why there exists English alphabet, French alphabet, German alphabet...etc. despite being originally Latin alphabets. Same is true for the old Kurdish alphabet; Whether call it Hurrian or Luwian, it was used also for Kurdish. BTW I found following sources from prominent Kurdish scholars who have paid attention to this old Kurdish script. [1][2][3][4]. Roboskiye (talk) 20:27, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Who are these people and where are they professors ('scholars' means academic here, not just author)? Who is Masi Surati? And so far as I can see Yanbushadis a legendary/mythical person who taught Adam. Dougweller (talk) 14:53, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
These persons (Dr. Siddiq Safizadeh, Mardox Kurdistani, Musa Anter) have writen hundreds of books on Kurdish history, literature, and society. I'm ok with changing the wording to Kurdish authors, if this makes you happy. Masi Surati AKA Masi the Suranian, Yanbushad, Adam, Adonay, etc are Mesopotamian sages/scientists mythologised in the works of the author. I will modify the wording of the text. Roboskiye (talk) 21:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Writing systems (scripts and alphabets) need reliable/academic linguistic sources. At least one academic source by an expert in the linguistic studies is needed. There is nothing about such an old alphabet on the article Kurdish alphabets and in Kurdish Wikipedia 1 and 2. It seems those claims and sources are original research and weak hypothesis, so per WP:RS, WP:NOR, and WP:VERIFY, It's better to take this "Old Kurdish alphabet" claim and sources to WP:RSN for verification.

Suggestion. Check sources like Encyclopædia Iranica and "The Iranian languages" (author: Professor Gernot Windfuhr) to see if you can find anything about this old alphabet. Zheek (talk) 20:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?? Already 207 years ago the original book was mistranslated into English, so I think there is not much about it in western sources. However Kurdish authors (call them whatever you like), largly have paid attention to this Hurrian/Luwian signs and it's now for decades known in Kurdistan. (Google result in Kurdish); according to wiki rules, it is notable. Roboskiye (talk) 21:04, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ibn Wahshiyya and the Alphabet

The English translation of the original work is available on google books[14]. There are two separate issues:

1) The books in Kurdish: On p. 53, Ibn Wahshiyyah says that "During my stay at Damascus, I met with two books, one of them on the culture of the vine and the palm tree, the other on water, and the means of finding it out in unknown ground. I translated both from Curdic into Arabic, for the benefit of mankind." So there is no doubt that he found and translated two books written in Kurdish, and I suggest including this in the article.

2) The alphabet: Ibn Wahshiyya clearly says that "This (the alphabet on p.134) the Kurds falsely pretend to be the alphabet in which Binushad and Masi Surati composed all their scientific and mechanical works. Now the arabic text on p.134 says : "Tad'ee al-akrad..." i.e. "The Kurds claim...". Now the word claim is not as strong as falsely pretend, but since we would like to be on the safe side and the author considers it only a claim in the arabic text, I suggest to remove the alphabet's image and its discussion from the article.

3) The Kurdish sources are not very reliable in my view. I know some of the writers and they are neither linguists nor historians in the academic sense. In their reference to the allegedly Kurdish alphabet, they have conveniently forgotten to mention the word "claim" as written in Arabic in the original manuscript. So I suggest removing them. Vekoler (talk) 21:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what you said, but you missed some parts of the Arabic text.
I had already provided and discussed the English source you added. Me, like many other easterns had only paid attention to the original Arabic text. For which I had provided several sources. The English text which pretends to be a translation does not much with the original Arabic one. Look at this original Arabic text: و قد رايت في بغداد في ناووس من هذاالخط نحو ثلاثين کتابا. و كان عندي منها بالشام كتابين فترجمتهما من لسان الاكراد الي اللسان العربي Roboskiye (talk) 21:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can read the Arabic text and that's exactly where the problem is. If you look at the Arabic text on p.134 second line, it clearly says " Tad'ee al-akrad...", i.e. he wrote that the Kurds claimed this and that. It is kinda weak to include that in the article, but he clearly says on p.53 [15] that he translated two books from Kurdish into Arabic. I hope that clears it up. It's definitely exciting to hear about an ancient alphabet for Kurdish, but we have to be careful what to include in the article for the sake of reliability and accuracy.Vekoler (talk) 21:10, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You still think as the English translator did. The phrase Kurds claim is for Kurds claim that the alphabet is thousands of years old and that Yanbushad used it. But then he leaves Kurds' claim and talks about his observations: I saw thirty books in Baghdad in this alphabet, out of which I translated two scientific books from Kurdish into Arabic; one of the books on the culture of the vine and the palm tree, and the other on water and the means of finding it out in unknown ground. Hope you get the point. Roboskiye (talk) 21:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Persian versus Kurmanji Kurdish

Dear fellows, I respect you all. I made a research that took me severe days sleepless. So if you see an erroneous in may work just warn me, or just correct it by notifying me. Please be polite and do not waste my work without a consultation. Thank you for your kindness.

Kurmanjo (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Borekeyî Sefizade, Seddîq, Mêjûy Wêjey Kurdî, Volume I, see pages 20-21, Aras publication, 2008, Erbil, Kurdistan (Iran).
  2. ^ Musa Anter, Ferhenga Kurdî-Tirkî/Kürtçe-Türkçe Sözlük, see page 164, published 1967, Yeni Matbaa, Istanbul.
  3. ^ Shex Muhamed Merdox Kurdistanî, Mêjûy Kurd û Kurdistan, translated into Kurdish by Ebdilkerim Mihemed Seid, 1991, see page 302.
  4. ^ http://www.penusanu.com/penusanu/penusanu-02.pdf
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kurdish_language&oldid=559446107"