Talk:Kurdish languages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Kurdish language)
Jump to: navigation, search



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

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 (talk) 09:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


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)

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

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! (talk) 09:31, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

16mio. speakers[edit]

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

ZAZA is a dialect of the Kuridsh language![edit]

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 (talk) 19:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

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)

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 (talk) 05:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

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 (talk) 05:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

And Swedish and Norwegian are considered distinct languages... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:28, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Status in Iran[edit]

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

yes, it true the kurdish language in iran isn't official language, but it's the locality language, how we know nearly 5 million people's are speaking on kurdish. kurdish language is official language in iraq . BrotherDost (talk) 12:34, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Cool mistake[edit]

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)

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

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 (talk) 03:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

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 (talk) 16:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

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

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

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)

may it be falls but if we lookthat (anyone) if (his, her) native language is kurdish, they are been kurdish... really, the religion isn's scale to know who's the kurdish. like that: the most of ezidi's which live in suburbia of mousl and şangal are speaking kurdish but they aren't muslim, but they are kurdish thank you. BrotherDost (talk) 12:24, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Claims that Kurmanci and Sorani are "as different as English and German"[edit]

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 (talk) 15:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

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)

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 (talk) 15:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
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)
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.-- (talk) 01:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

This sounds like an obvious step. It does not deny any similarities or closeness linguistically or culturally to acknowledge reality of the languages. Quoting passages from Kurmanci and Sorani Wikipedia may well be a good example case to demonstrate those Kurdish languages. Nobody tries to say Norwegian and Swedish are the same language, and there is more substantive differences here. This does not affect the Wiki pages for the "Kurdistan Region", it is just an issue of linguistics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:35, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I think it's very misleading to say "kurmanji & sorani are as different as german & english is". This is true if you just compare technical grammatical aspects. Say you look at whether there is grammatical gender, different cases etc, then yes the statement is true. You might even say kurmanji & sorani are as differnet (grammatically) as kurmanji & english is. But these statements are very misleading. Let me define a new language called "Genglish", which is german with a few changes to make it grammatically similar to english:

  • There is no gender, all nouns are "die" (feminine in German).
  • No cases for nouns, slight simplification of grammar. Pronouns only have accusative & nominative case.
  • Small changes to phonology. For example pronounce "W" like a round one in english rather than a hard "V" as is done in german.
  • Maybe a few other changes too, like modify 20% of the vocabulary.

Now, the new language "Genglish" is grammatically similar to English. One could say that "Genglish is as different from German as English is". However, a German speaker will not be able to understand English without intensitve training. But even if he might find Genglish hard to understand, after very little training he will be able to understand most of it. This is the situation with Kurdish.

My native dialect is "southern kurdish" (feyli/kalhori), which is much more distant from kurmanji (northern kurdish) than sorani is (central kurdish). In the beginning I had a hard time understanding kurmanji, but after 1-2 hours of studying the differences & listening to TV programs I'm able to understand between 75-90% of any kurmanji TV show I see (depending on local kurmanji dialect & how many turkish words are used). On the other hand, I'm a danish citizen and do a PhD in Canada. Thus I speak danish and english at a native or near native level. Knowing both of these (especially danish for vocabulary) helps A LOT when learning german. I've been studying german intensively for months and only recently been able to read simple books & understand a bit of TV Show (Heute Show is my favorite).

Therefore clearly, southern kurdish (and thus definitely also Sorani) is MUCH closer to kurmanji than english & german are. Languages are complicated things and to take some basic binary notions like technical aspects of grammar to talk about "lingustic distance", is very misleading. 2607:FEA8:1D5F:FB98:BD55:D7E2:C10D:4E7E (talk) 07:06, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

What means[edit]

What do these two phrases mean:

  • Çît naw binêm
  • Nawit denêm jîno

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


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

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)

Unacceptable reliance on Mackenzie as a source[edit]

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!


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 Indo-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 Colombians, 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)

Removed pending new citation[edit]

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 re-add it, they should add it with an updated link. - Francis Tyers · 16:55, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Demand for education in Kurdish[edit]

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 (talk) 21:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

kurmanci zazaki gorani sorani =kurdish languages[edit]

kurmanci zazaki gorani sorani =kurdisch languages

im zazaki speaker but im kurd!

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

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

gorani and zazaki =kurdish languages[edit]

gorani and zazaki are kurdish sources!psl change it

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

about kurdish language here true sources[edit]

HERE. " 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


Northern Group

North Kirmanci

Northern Group

South Kurmânji


Central Group

Middle Kirmanci

Central Group




Goraní / Zazai

Hawrami / Dimili



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 (talk) 11:51, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

true kurdish langauges ![edit]

hi here watch :


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

Some references for further info[edit]

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

The number of Kurdish speakers[edit]

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)

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)
Or average of both CIA data and current data (16 million). Gazaneh (talk) 13:50, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)
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)

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. -- (talk) 04:02, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

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 -- (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 (talk) 04:12, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

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

Dialects, distinct languages, or?[edit]

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)

File:Iranian people.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg 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)

Northwestern, southwestern, it isn't that simple[edit]

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)

Unified Kurdish??[edit]

Is this possible? Let's look this:

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

"Old Kurdish alphabet"[edit]

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)

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)
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)
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)
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 (talkcontribs) 19:08, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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. [ Borekeyî Sefizade, Seddîq, Mêjûy Wêjey Kurdî, Volume I, see pages 20-21, Aras publication, 2008, Erbil, Kurdistan (Iran). Musa Anter, Ferhenga Kurdî-Tirkî/Kürtçe-Türkçe Sözlük, see page 164, published 1967, Yeni Matbaa, Istanbul. Shex Muhamed Merdox Kurdistanî, Mêjûy Kurd û Kurdistan, translated into Kurdish by Ebdilkerim Mihemed Seid, 1991, see page 302. ]. Roboskiye (talk) 20:27, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)

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)
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)

Ibn Wahshiyya and the Alphabet[edit]

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)

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)
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)
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)

Persian versus Kurmanji Kurdish[edit]

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)

Wikipedia isn't the place to publish original research. WP:ORLfdder (talk) 21:05, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
You have media under your hand. You have internet. It won't take so much time from you to see the correctness of my work. Just go and check the chicago Univ. media center. Do not be pessimistic at first glance.
Do I have to give my work to a publisher first? What do you mean?
If you have a knowledge regarding Kurdish and Persian I am here for challenge. Or just be quiet. Some times to become quiet is to become merit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurmanjo (talkcontribs) 21:28, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Kurmanjo, please read the policy on original research that Lfdder linked above. Nobody is saying your work is incorrect, but Wikipedia doesn't publish original research. Also, please stop re-adding it to the article without consensus. You've been reverted by 4 different users now. I would also recommend you consider reading and following Wikipedia's guidelines on being civil to your fellow Wikipedians. Cheers, Dawn Bard (talk) 21:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Besides it being original research (OR), it clutters the page. --JorisvS (talk) 22:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

languages, plural?[edit]

From what I've read, it seems that the Kurdish "dialects" are not any more closely related to each other than they are to several other Western Iranian languages; they're considered Kurdish only because their speakers are ethnic Kurds. Should we move the article to the plural? — kwami (talk) 01:36, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd say yes. And move the 'dialects' to "... language".--JorisvS (talk) 07:49, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
We should do some research about WP:COMMONNAME, and how it is commonly addressed in the literature. I'm not familiar with the topic, but we should bear in mind that Arabic language and German language are practically always used in singular, despite the fact that the underlying dialects may even be mutually unintelligible; however, they have [practically a] single standard variant each. Now, judging by the lead, Kurdish has at least two; still, I would go after our sources. No such user (talk) 11:27, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Not that it's really a RS, but the ISO standard has these are four languages, and Ethnologue has "Kurdish" as their superior node. There are several hundred hits at GBooks about Kurdish languages, and only a few are 'X and Kurdish languages'. I'll move the article. — kwami (talk) 10:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
When it is used in plural, Zazaki and Gorani are also counted in. Otherwise, Kurmanji and Sorani are just northern and southern dialects of same single language. Roboskiye (talk) 18:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Number of speakers[edit]

The figure of 20 million speakers seems a bit low, unless a big proportion of Kurds does not speak Kurdish. There is another number available via Ethnologue (I know, not necessarily the most reliable source for this kind of things, but then again, referencing another encyclopedia for it that does not explain where it got those figures doesn't seem particularly reliable either). In any case, it is inconsistent with having 20 million Kurmanji speakers, as said by its article. --JorisvS (talk) 10:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

There are millions of Kurds who do not speak Kurdish, esp. in Turkey. It's a very sensitive subject, and I don't think the survey work has been done. Who knows, maybe it is 30M rather than 20M, but on the other hand there are political reasons for inflating the figures. This has been debated before, and I think should be debated again before changing the figure. — kwami (talk) 05:40, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
So we include both numbers, maybe with a note like that. You admit yourself that it may be the higher end, we don't really know. Is there a good reason to prefer one source over another? If not, it is best to include multiple estimates, with notes whenever appropriate. --JorisvS (talk) 09:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Kwami's response for documentation: [16]. --JorisvS (talk) 11:51, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Kurdish language materials[edit]

Put into further reading

Grammar of the Kurmanji or Kurdish Language (1913)

A Practical Kurdish Grammar

Über die kurdischen Spiranten (1873)

Kurdische texte (1903)

Etudes philologiques sur la langue kurde

Dictionnaire kurde-français (1879)

Injil Muqaddas .. (1919)

Kurdish in Armenian script

P'eymane no e khoiye ma Isa el Mesih (1872)

Grammatica e vocabolario della lingua Kurda By Maurizio Garzoni

Grammatica e Vocabulario della Lingua Curda (1787)


Grammatica e vocabolario della lingua Kurda, by Maurizio Garzoni (Rome, 1787)

Kurdische grammatik, by Ferdinand Justi (St. Petersburg, 1880)

A Practical Kurdish Grammar, by L. O. Fossum (Minneapolis, 1919)

Dictionnaire kurde-français, by Auguste Jaba and Ferdinand Justi (St. Petersburg, 1879)

Dasagirk'e" gurmanchi [Kurmanji Textbook] (New York, 1868)

New Testament in Kurmanji Kurdish (Constantinople, 1857)

A Practical Kurdish Grammar By L. O. Fossum

Rajmaan (talk) 14:00, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Uncaught number vandalism[edit]

This edit of 16 July (note the hilarious edit summary). I take it this page gets a lot of vandalism, and this particular one slipped the otherwise impeccable attention of Dougweller because the offending editor (aptly named "Kurdinator", seeing as he single-handedly doubled the number of Kurdish speakers!) later came back as an IP editor and changed the date of the "reference" (there was no reference, of course, but he changed it anyway). Doug then caught the anonymous edit changing the year number, but not the immediately preceding edit changing the population figure.

These sort of antics waste time and efforts of bona fide editors, and they deteriorate the quality of our articles. Fortunately we have a tool to prevent this sort of thing, or at least make it more difficult to get away with it, i.e. semiprotection. As this article is apparently not on the watchlist of many editors and the vandalism was uncaught for almost half a year, I will semiprotect the page for now. --dab (𒁳) 10:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Fix "Laki" link in 1st paragraph.[edit]

The "Laki" link in the 1st para needs to be pointed to "Laki_language", not "Laki".

Could someone with permission please update that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oscar.newman (talkcontribs) 02:32, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for pointing out. --JorisvS (talk) 11:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Kurdish Wikipedia[edit]

In this article stated: "The Kurdish languages (Kurdî or کوردی) are several Western Iranian languages spoken by the Kurds in western Asia". If there is no kurdish language, which language is using Kurdish Wikipedia? (talk) 17:13, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

My guess would be either Northern or some mixture. --JorisvS (talk) 19:52, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
There are three Kurdish wikipedias., and --Ahmetyal (talk) 00:08, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Those are the Central Kurdish and Dimli WPs, which are both "Central Kurdish" per the infobox, which means that either Southern Kurdish and Laki have no WPs, or the "Kurdish" WP is used also by speakers of those. --JorisvS (talk) 09:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2015[edit]

Typo - replace "Subivisions" with "==Subdivisions==" Plbowers (talk) 13:45, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. --JorisvS (talk) 13:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

German cognates[edit]

There are some suspicious German cognates in the list. And the sources are so poor as they're almost useless. 1st, Mitre which I couldn't find in the Deutsches Wörterbuch, and looks as a borrowing from Ecclesiastic Greek or Latin, 2nd, kupfa (as well as Gipfel), the source seems to connect it to Kopf, which is an early Latin borrowing akin to English cup. The root word *kak would by regular sound evolution have turned to something like hach, anyway, but hoch and high seems to have another origin. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 02:55, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Official status in Armenia, Turkey, Iran, and Syria[edit]

The article says in the lede that Kurdish is recognized as a minority language in Armenia. Can it be sourced?
Also, is Kurdish not a recognized minority language in Turkey, Iran, and Syria? Khestwol (talk) 16:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I will try finding the constitution of Armenia, but I'm pretty sure its not recognized as a minority language in Turkey, Iran, and Syria. --Ahmetyal (talk) 13:14, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
The constitution [17] does not mention Kurdish. I don't think Armenia has official minority languages. --Ahmetyal (talk) 13:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
That is correct. The constitution declares Armenian as the state language but does not declare any language as minority language. We still need citation though if we are going to keep Armenia having Kurdish as minority language officially or we may delete that statement if found to be incorrect. Khestwol (talk) 14:39, 27 March 2015 (UTC)


Need to add brackets around Kurmanji Kurdish|Kurmanji. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:17, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Thanks for pointing out. --JorisvS (talk) 08:48, 1 April 2015 (UTC)


The following test was supposed to be merged here once upon a time (from the now redirect Kurdish main dialects)

Contemporary Kurdish has two main branches: Western branch, and Eastern branch. Kurds mostly speak Western branch. It consists of three dialects: 1. Northern or Kirmanjî(keɾmɑnʤi), Central or Soranî(so:ɾɑni), and Southern which has two sub-dialects i.e. Kirmaşanî(keɾmɑʃɑni), and Lekî(læki). The Eastern branch has two main varieties: 1. Northern dialect or Zazakî(zɑzɑki), and Southern dialect or Hewramî(həʊɾɑmi). The difference of these branches is quite apparent in their infinitive markers. The infinitive markers of the Western brnanch are –in as in kird-in(keɾd-en: to do), and –n as in çî-n(ʧi-n: to go). But the infinitive markers in Eastern branch are –ey as in kerd-ey(kæɾd-eɪ: to do), and –y as in liwa-y(lewa-j: to go).

Written by: M. R. Bahadur

Clearly some of this information has been added since the redirect occurred in the normal process of article expansion.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough11:53, 8 April 2015 (UTC).

Kurdish is a language[edit]

I oppose the plural name which has been chosen just because Ethnologue uses it. Ethnologue is a Christian missionary, and non-reliable tertiary source. It is at odds with most reliable secondary sources. Even for Pashto language (another nearby language related to Kurdish), for example, Ethnologue considers Pashto as a group of 4 languages (!!!) which makes no sense. But reliable secondary sources almost always use the singular term: Kurdish language. The plural would only make sense if Zaza and Gorani were included as Kurdish, but since they are not, the plural wording is wrong. This article is about a single language and its 3 dialects. Khestwol (talk) 05:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Because of this rationale, I moved the article back to Kurdish language. There seems to be though some technical issue and only the talk page moved but not the main entry. Could anyone fix it? Khestwol (talk) 05:39, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Especially because you're the one challenging the stable version and because it has already been contested, you should not move this page alongside initiating a discussion, but only after this discussion and only if it goes that way. --JorisvS (talk) 09:11, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Kurdish is a group of languages: Its "dialects" (and I'm talking about Kurmanji, Sorani, etc., not Zaza–Gorani) are mutually unintelligible (which is in the article with a source that is not Ethnologue). I can give you ample examples of groups of languages that are popularly considered a single language, most notably German, with Low German (which is Ingvaeonic, like English) very different from High German (or Irminonic, a separate group of West Germanic languages altogether), and within High German, the differences are far too great for mutual intelligibility. Yet despite the enormous differences, people still commonly perceive them to be 'dialects' of German. --JorisvS (talk) 09:11, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
@JorisvS: you just supported my case. Wikipedia has an entry for German language (note the singular name). So why are you using this example which goes against you? It is common for dialects of a single language (Kurdish, Pashto, German, etc.) to be mutually unintelligible from one other, it is nothing unusual among world's languages. Khestwol (talk) 15:15, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
The plural form, and comments on heterogenity, can be seen in these sources:[18]. Dougweller (talk) 16:20, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
German language is about the sociolinguistics plus some basics of Standard German. There is a distinct difference between German and Kurdish: Standard German has become pervasive in the entire German-speaking area and the differences between German's different standardized varieties do not preclude mutual intelligibility by a long short, despite the extreme heterogeneity of the German varieties, but this is not the case with Kurdish. The problem here, and in all similar cases, is that ethnicity, and therefore the sociolinguistic situation, does not match the linguistic situation. --JorisvS (talk) 19:23, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
I support the plural form . In Iraqi Kurdistan , that is only a part of kurdish regions , there is no consensus for official language and also official writing alphabet . If you only search the Wikipedias we have , you will find many Kurdish languages . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 11:35, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

copyright violation: Sorani vs. Kurmanji six points[edit]

I have removed the paragraph which started "Sorani differs on six grammatical points from Kurmanji" which was copied and pared down from Section 3 (p. 15) of [19]. (What tipped me off was trying to understand what was meant by come: was this really a Kurdish form or was it a typographically mishandled gloss?) 4pq1injbok (talk) 15:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Zaza Language[edit]

I am trying find about the Zaza people of Turkey, I understand from reading that there are about 1.5-2 millions people, my question is do these people on speak and read this dialect or have they adapted to the Turkish language or Arabic. Thanks for the answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Montie Matlock (talkcontribs) 15:56, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

They speak Zaza(ki). --JorisvS (talk) 09:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 16 June 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 15:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish languagesKurdish language – In the "References" section at the bottom of the article, the overwhelming majority of reliable sources seem to be referring to "Kurdish language" in singular, including the specialist academic sources Encyclopædia Iranica and Kurdish Academy of Language. This is an indication that reliable sources rarely use the term "Kurdish languages" in plural. Google Books search gets about 16,200 results for "Kurdish language", but only about 815 results for "Kurdish languages". Hence "Kurdish language" is about 20 times as common in usage as "Kurdish languages" in books. "Kurdish language" is also, by very far, the WP:COMMONNAME as per Google Ngram. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 14:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC) Khestwol (talk) 12:56, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Support per above. Khestwol (talk) 13:00, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This is really a group of languages spoken by the same ethnicity, with the different varieties not mutually intelligible. These are really just the same name, but with a different disambiguator ("language" vs. "languages") appended. --JorisvS (talk) 15:16, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Comment: JorisvS, your assertion that the different varieties of Kurdish language are not mutually intelligible is of course correct (just as many other languages like German language etc, which still however use the word "language" in their titles). But I would like you to notice that as written above, reliable sources talk about "Kurdish language" in singular, not always but nearly exclusively. Here is, again, the Google Ngram. Khestwol (talk) 17:23, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
As you said, there are bunch of sources that do talk about "languages", which will be for the very reason that they're not mutually intelligible. --JorisvS (talk) 17:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, only a minority of sources talk about "languages", such as Ethnologue, which I honestly consider a not so reliable tertiary source. Wikipedia prefers WP:SECONDARY sources for its article content. As per the policy: "Wikipedia articles usually rely on material from reliable secondary sources. Articles may include an analytic, evaluative, interpretive, or synthetic claim only if the claim has been published in a cited reliable secondary source". As it can be inferred from Google Books search above, "Kurdish language" is about 20 times as common as "Kurdish languages" in books. Encyclopædia Iranica also titled its article, written by a notable linguist Ludwig Paul, using the term "Kurdish language". Academics have always favored the term "Kurdish language" in singular form. So JorisvS should we not use the COMMONNAME here? Khestwol (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
So did you agree with me on COMMONNAME JorisvS? Khestwol (talk) 06:18, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
No, both are the same name ("Kurdish"), but with a different disambiguator ("language" vs. "languages") attached to it. --JorisvS (talk) 09:21, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
JorisvS: Here we are only comparing two, distinct terms/names (not the same word "Kurdish" vs "Kurdish"): "Kurdish language" and "Kurdish languages". It is because we are choosing which among these two terms/names is a more appropriate WP:NATURAL disambiguator. As has been shown, the term "Kurdish language" is far more common, but "Kurdish languages" is relatively rare. Khestwol (talk) 11:36, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
"Kurdish" is the name/term and can already refer to the speech on its own, without any extra word required. However, because it can also refer to the people, and article titles have to be unique, a disambiguator has to be added. This is the "language(s)" part. Both are natural disambiguators, but "languages" is more accurate. --JorisvS (talk) 16:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
"Macrolanguage" (not languages) would be the most accurate NATURAL disambiguator, but on Wikipedia the most important is to have the most WP:COMMONNAME as title. "Language" is the most common. Khestwol (talk) 16:36, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
No, "macrolanguage" is jargon invented by SIL/Ethnologue and not even used consistently by them. Actually, accuracy is more important than commonality, "Article titles should be recognizable, concise, natural, precise, and consistent.". --JorisvS (talk) 16:50, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, "Kurdish language" is also precise enough, at least as precise as other existing titles like Chinese language and Pashto language. All three are macrolanguages, i.e. neither purely "language" nor purely "languages", yet the titles of Chinese and Pashto use "language" as NATURAL disambiguator. In general, Wikipedia's policy prefers commonality in reliable sources. Khestwol (talk) 17:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
That there are articles out there whose titles are inaccurate is no reason to make this article's title inaccurate. --JorisvS (talk) 09:33, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: We also have Chinese language, despite the fact that Chinese is not a language, but a family of perhaps a hundred languages. It's common in the lit to speak of the "language" of an ethnicity, unless they are clearly not a coherent group (and even sometimes when they're not). Even so, it would be unfortunate to lose accuracy by moving to the more common form. — kwami (talk) 02:57, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Kwamikagami, but will you be happy if this move to "Kurdish language" happens because it's the common form in literature? Khestwol (talk) 22:14, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
That would be fine by me. (BTW, I may be the one who moved it to the plural in the first place.) — kwami (talk) 22:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
OK then. Face-smile.svg Khestwol (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: 70.9 percent of people who may be classified to speak Chinese speak Mandarin. Wu comes second at 6.5 %. I believe that when most people speak about speaking Chinese they are typically refer to Mandarin. GregKaye 05:19, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Comment: The convention at Wikipedia prefers that name as title by which a subject is called most commonly in reliable English-language sources (WP:COMMONNAME). Khestwol (talk) 08:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
No, not really. They usually just mean "Chinese" in the context of native speakers, and "Standard Chinese" in the context of language learning. Also, Mandarin is not a single language either, it's just a branch of the Chinese languages. — kwami (talk) 22:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per Khestwol's argument. But if we want to be super-precise then the term macrolanguage is the right one. But please keep in mind that according to ISO_639_macrolanguage page, Chinese, Persian and Pashto are also identified as macro-languages, and yet their wiki names are just 'Chinese language', 'Persian language' and 'Pashto language'. The way I see it, there has to be consistency in naming and one rule for all.Vekoler (talk) 21:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
"Macrolanguage" is SIL jargon. It's not an accepted term in linguistics. — kwami (talk) 22:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I totally agree with Vekoler. Kurdish is a macrolanguage: A language consisting of widely varying dialects, or a group of very closely related languages. Khestwol (talk) 01:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Which are two categorically opposed definitions that have nothing to do with one another. --JorisvS (talk) 09:33, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Although Encyclopædia Iranica use the term Kurdish language in title , but in text it explains the various aspects of calling it languages or language : the result in the article is not exactly clear --Alborz Fallah (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Comment: other than that, also reliable books almost exclusively use "Kurdish language". As shown above, "Kurdish language" is about 20 times as common in usage as "Kurdish languages" in books. In Wikipedia a title should be most importantly based on WP:COMMONNAME. Khestwol (talk) 11:12, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I have to agree w Joris here. COMMONNAME does not directly apply, because we're not debating the name, which is just "Kurdish". We're debating the appropriate disambiguator, which is governed by a different set of WP guidelines (WP:NCDAB). — kwami (talk) 22:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Well I have to disagree with Joris. COMMONNAME directly applies here, because we are comparing two distinct names ("Kurdish language" is a distinct term from "Kurdish languages"). WP:NCDAB allows to use a less common term only if the more common term is ambiguous, which is not in our case. "Natural disambiguation. When there is another term (such as Apartment instead of Flat) or more complete name (such as English language instead of English) that is unambiguous, commonly used in English (even without being the most common term), and equally clear, that term is typically the best to use." "Kurdish language" as the more commonly used term is unambiguous, and so is the best to use. Khestwol (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. COMMONNAME is completely irrelevant. It would apply for the name "Kurdish" only. Furthermore, it would only apply if both names equivalently applied to the same thing, but this is clearly not the case here. "Kurdish language" is one language, while "Kurdish languages" is a group of languages. They're not at all equivalent. Not enough of a case has been made for treating Kurdish as one language. What do linguistic sources say? CodeCat (talk) 18:14, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Kurdish languages= Sorani, Badini, Kurmanci, Zazaki(Discussed), Laki(Discussed) and ...We Can not all these languages compute one language.-SaməkTalk 12:06, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Comment: this article does not consider Zaza language as Kurdish but you are right about the rest... Khestwol (talk) 12:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I said Discussed--SaməkTalk 16:10, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Kurdish languages. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Zazas are Kurds!!!!, Their language is a dialect of Kurdish!!!![edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I wonder what is going on in the Wikipedia. Ethnocentric and ambitious edits to falsifying realities are widespread. Please see WP:POVPUSH . According to evident and authentic sources [[1][2]] they have their identity and language. Please someone stop these vandalism efforts.--Shadegan (talk) 20:09, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Could you please be clear so we know what you are talking about?
  • First, who has whose identity and language?
  • Second, in your first edit summary, you wrote, "Zazaki and Gorani are different from Kurdish", which is what the text you deleted said, so your comment did the opposite of justify your deletion, it justified the presence of the text that you removed. Now your heading to this section says the opposite of your edit summary.
  • Third, the first of your sources says exactly one thing about Zaza (and Sorani) and nothing about Gorani. The one thing it says is "Linguistically, the Kirmanci, Zaza and Sorani dialects (languages) are dominantly used by the several Kurdish groups, and may or may not be mutually intelligible." Can you explain how this contradicts anything that you deleted?
  • Fourth, your second source is a dead end.
—Largo Plazo (talk) 20:42, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


@Largoplazo:-Same user here--Gomada (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kurdish languages. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:50, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2016[edit] (talk) 05:37, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Blank request — JJMC89(T·C) 07:49, 28 August 2016 (UTC)