Talk:Minority language: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:13, 8 April 2015

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics Start‑class

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Endangered languages Unassessed (inactive)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Endangered languages, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Endangered languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Endangered languagesTemplate:WikiProject Endangered languagesEndangered languages articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Languages Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

comment

This claim very much needs corroborative documentation (and editing - it either is the only or isn't):

In the United States, for example, American Sign Language is the most used minority language yet almost the only minority language which lacks official government recognition.

The United States doesn't have government recognition of languages. --Thnidu (talk) 17:27, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed that sentence. --Thnidu (talk) 20:04, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consciously Created Auxiliary Languages (conauxlangs)

We read the following in the article:

To date, the auxiliary language Interlingua has been most successsful in obtaining official recognition. For example, the Interlingua organization Union Mundial pro Interlingua (UMI) has consultative status with UNESCO and has been influential in the work of the International Organization for Standardization.

Where are the references for this? So far, I do not know about any relationship between ISO and UMI. I would like to know more about that.

I have read somewhere that UEA (Universala Esperanto Asocio) has some symbolic links with UNESCO (something along the lines of an abstract declaration that states "compatibilities of some goals"), but I do not know any real influence UEA has upon UNESCO or ISO. --Antonielly 19:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From what I recall, ISO made Interlingua the main basis for its international standardization of terminology. Gopsill's book International Languages: A Matter for Interlingua briefly discusses the relationship between Interlingua and ISO. I'll include this book as a reference for now, although I think there is a better one and I'll look for that one as well.

Along similar lines, the US Department of Agriculture used Interlingua pretty thoroughly in its large Multilingual Compendium of Plant Diseases, and the Interlingua translation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was actually requested by the UN.

I've also read about a declaration between UNESCO and UEA, but at this point I'm a little skeptical of it. I think this was in a Wikipedia article. As I recall, ISO initially voted to adopt Esperanto but later rejected it almost unanimously in favor of Interlingua. The Interlingua article makes a brief mention of ISO. Cal (talk) 04:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unesco lists the Universal Esperanto Association (UEA) as a "UNESCO NGO". --Lu Wunsch-Rolshoven (talk) 17:48, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanto as a minority language

Should that language be mentioned here? There are some articles and mentions about Esperanto as a minority language, e.g. John Edwards: Minority Languages and Group Identity: Cases and Categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010:"Esperanto" (...) "this rather special minority language", p. 12. Or Fettes, Mark: 1996, 'The Esperanto Community: A Quasi-Ethnic Linguistic Minority?', Language Problems and Language Planning 20 (1), 53-59 --Lu Wunsch-Rolshoven (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian in Serbia

Deutsche Welle link is dead and 250 000 to 400 000 is way to much. Usually they estimate it around 250 000 but official 2011 census is around 35 330. I will put from 35 330 to 250 000. Also there is debate if Vlach is Romanian but I will leave that out. --188.230.189.111 (talk) 01:42, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Minority languages in geographical Articles

Please consider joining the feedback request service.

An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following lists:

When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the lists. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

Context: Some countries recognize some languages of traditional minority ethnic communities as co-official languages. This status generally includes right to equal use of some language at local/regional/state level plus public authorities and governments use minority language in equal scope in its work (documents, road signs, other materials...). You might take a look at these article: European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages... Question: I recently had an editorial conflict regarding the addition of minority languages names into articles about municipalities that officially introduced minority co-official language. My idea is that when there are sources that certain (local) government had introduced additional minority coofficial language, we should add name of that village or town in minority language in article lead section, infobox and name/language section if there is one. Is there a common Wikipedia practice in such cases and if there is not what is your opinion as members of Wikipedia community?--MirkoS18 (talk) 20:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 ==Minority languages in geographical Articles==
-{{Rfc|soc|hist|lang|pol}}
+{{Rfc|soc|hist|lang|pol|rfcid=7A37D8B}}
 <big>'''Context:'''</big>
 Some countries recognize some languages of traditional minority ethnic communities as co-official languages. This status generally includes right to equal use of some language at local/regional/state level plus public authorities and governments use minority language in equal scope in its work (documents, road signs, other materials...). You might take a look at these article: [[European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages]]...