Talk:Languages of Finland

Finland Mid‑importance

	Finland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Finland 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.FinlandWikipedia:WikiProject FinlandTemplate:WikiProject FinlandFinland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Languages

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Minority langauge names

No point adding possible secondary names to every place name in Wikipedia in the main text. Secondary names can be found in the lead chapter of the place in question, not messing up every other article with brackets and irrelevant names. --Pudeo ⺮ 22:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, Pudeo misses the whole point. Yes, we should normally use the main names of the cities and there's normally no need to add the names of cities in any other language. But in a paragraph explicitly dealing with the Swedish minority, where the communities are given explicitly in the context of being the communities in which most Swedish speakers live, well, I guess everyone who isn't blinded by silly nationalism can see the rationale for adding the Swedish names in brackets. JdeJ (talk) 02:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop with the false accusations and personal attacks: Wikipedia:Assume good faith. I fail to see what it gives to a English-speaking reader to know that "Espoo (SWEDISH: ESBO)" is correct? The reader can just click the article to see the secondary name. Same with Finnish names. Some users have messed up articles with that in the past [1] but the clear consencus is that they should not be added (guideline approved by Wikiproject Finland) --Pudeo ⺮ 14:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very bad comparison. Adding the names to articles or paragraphs where they lack relevance, such as in the example you gave, is quite different from mentioning them in a relevant context such as Jao did. JdeJ (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minority languages

On what grounds are the minority languages chosen? They are now given as

Sami, Romani, Finnish Sign Language, Russian, Estonian and Turkish.

The first three are official minority languages, Russian and Estonian are big immigrant languages, but Turkish? As the gap between Estonian and the next (English) is clearly bigger than the differences between the following languages it is natural to draw the line there, if there are no guidelines on the matter. --LPfi (talk) 01:31, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Number of speakers

The table showing number of speakers seem inaccurate. It lists only people having a particular language as main language. It excludes multilingualism completely, giving a false picture of the knowledge of languages in this country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filadifei (talk • contribs) 21:55, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that for understanable purposes Population Register Center does not recognize bilingualism. Every citizen has either Finnish or Swedish as first language, never both. --hydrox (talk) 18:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the table. It lacks reference and contradicts other referenced statements in this article. (Filadifei 19:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I've restored the table with proper citation. Instead of just outright deletion of data please at least give a grace period with "citation needed" warning. Thanks, hydrox (talk) 19:05, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hydrox, your reference is just a homepage. The table should be verifiable and accurate. It should preferably have an English reference and, judging from the information in this article "No. of speakers" is confusing/inaccurate. A table with a non-existing non-English reference and confusing labels should not be here. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability. (Filadifei 19:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

English language is definitely not a requirement for a valid reference. For starters, you could read the policy you are invoking. English-language references are preferred when they are of equal quality as the original reference. Why would you think there is a |language= parameter in {{cite web}}, if English was the only allowed language?

Usually we here at Wikipedia Assume Good Faith under no evidence of contrary. If you anyway suspect that I am pulling your leg over here, we have tons of free translators eager to help you verify any sources you have doubts of.

Anyway, back to this case. I did not link to the table because stat.fi, the state official statistics office website, does not allow me to link directly to the database query giving the result. But it's good you mentioned this, because I found a way to link to the table of tables of statistics, and also found out that all the major statistics seem to be available in English as well. --hydrox (talk) 20:54, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I did use the word preferred. There is still an issue with your table though. You refer to the languages as "first" whereas they are referred to as "main" in the article. And then, of course, there is still the question on multilingualism... Anyway, good job on the reference. (Filadifei 21:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

You're right. Updated to article. --hydrox (talk) 04:02, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great, but now you introduced a third variation, "native". I suggest changing to "main", as in the rest of the article, limiting confusion. (Filadifei (talk) 17:16, 17 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Well yes, "native" is strictly according to the stat.fi source.. I think the whole article should use "native language" instead of "main language". Don't you agree? I am no English-speaker, but my impression is that "native language" is way more widespread than "main language." --hydrox (talk) 17:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The most widespread terminology is probably first/second language. But then again, as we have already discussed, there is the issue with (native) multilingualism, for which we have no data. (Filadifei (talk) 20:21, 18 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

The official statistics on main language (earlier based on census, now on language reported at birth or as changed later) uses the term modersmål/äidinkieli ("mother tongue"). But as the information is used for a variety of practical matters nobody cares about the term; main language or preferred language is reported (or whatever language for political etc. reasons). I think "main language" is the best term. --LPfi (talk) 19:27, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have not gone through the procedure of resident registration in Finland as a foreigner, but obviously people of foreign nationality resident in Finland are accounted for and can have a foreign language registered as their native tongue, as the table in the article shows. To gain Finnish citizenship one must proof proficiency in either Finnish or Swedish, but once citizenship is granted one can freely change their registered "native" tongue. I think the use of terminology "main language" is acceptable where we are speaking of the registered language of Finnish citizens, as it is entirely up to individual consideration. When talking about the registered language of a resident in Finland (of any nationality, including Finnish) first language/native language is the terminology I would prefer. --hydrox (talk) 21:32, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Second languages

The source for language proficiency gives four numbers of second languages: first, second and third second language and total. For Swedish the numbers are 8, 39, 13 and 41 % respectively. The three first sum up to 60 %, which was the number earlier used in the fact box and still in the text, the last number is what now is used in the fact box.

I do not understand how all four of these numbers could be true at the same time. If one tenth of respondents answered "Swedish" on both second and third language, then there was a severe problem with the questionnaire. I would rather think there was a typo in the total (which also seems quite strange).

Unless we find a good explanation on how the information (perhaps except some part of it) can be true, I think we have to regard the source as unreliable - which would be a shame. Suggestions? --LPfi (talk) 07:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which reference/source? I have been trying to find information on "native" multilingualism in this country, without luck. (Filadifei (talk) 22:21, 24 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I talked about the EU PDF used as source for knowledge of second languages. There should be plenty of literature on native bilingualism (if not multilingualism, I think there is not yet much research on that) in Finland. In the Swedish schools in the Helsinki region and in Turku most pupils probably come from bilingual homes. Is there something special you are searching for? --LPfi (talk) 20:52, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noted the same thing, the three tables sum up 60% but in the "total table" 41% is the figure given. Very strange imo. Aaker (talk) 20:45, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not wise

It is not wise to endorse the Uralic language family. It has been attacked by User:Antifinnugor. As it is, the alleged affinity is said to be "distant". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.112.11.135 (talk) 10:46, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Finno-Ugric_languages#Denial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.112.11.135 (talk) 11:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Languages of Finland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:04, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

English a "second language"?

The article states English is spoken as a second language by most Finns. Is this really correct? It might well be their best language other than Finnish, but they have probably learnt English as a foreign language. I doubt that English is a second language – sometimes abbreviated L2 – for more than a small minority in the country. (The statement is sourced, but the source seems not to use the term second language.) Fomalhaut76 (talk) 08:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are right & WP:DOIT. Peltimikko (talk) 10:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

tatar

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Charter_for_Regional_or_Minority_Languages#Languages_protected_under_the_Charter tatar is recognized as a minority language in Finland, isn't it? Shouldn't it be added as minority language here? 130.238.112.129 (talk) 23:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]