Talk:Shilha language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


the article needs to tell something about the PEOPLE who SPEAK the language. Gringo300 07:15, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Working on it, Gringo. (What does it say above your comment? 'Add more info on demographics, etc'.) Though most of this would rather belong to the article Chleuh. Maybe you want to read something on this people and expand the article? — mark 08:23, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

On hold[edit]

One of the very first treatises of Tashelhiyt in European philological literature is Jones, dissertatio de lingua Shilhensi, which itself is part of John Chamberlayn's (1715) collection of language samples titled Dissertationes ex occasione sylloges orationum Dominicarum scriptae (Amsterdam: Willem & David Goeree).

A Berber (Tashelhiyt) version of the Lord's Prayer gives in Jones (1715) is cited in Adelung & Vater's Mithridates, vol. III, p. 54. The first sentence, along with the German interlinear glosses, runs thus:

Amazeagh 'na baba erby ghi y ginna Berkat ysmanick
Herr unser Vater Gott, welcher im Himmel, Geheiligt.werde Nahme.dein

It would prove very interesting to compare this (admittedly mangled) tašlḥiyt with the products of the Sous literary tradition of that time. — mark 20:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Recent changes[edit]

Beginning July 2015, Ahulandiy (talk · contribs) has been making many changes to the article. Work is still in progress (September 2015). Several long sections (on Shilha literature and premodern spelling) were moved to other articles (Shilha literature and Berber orthography) and replaced with shorter sections. Most other sections were expanded. The article now more narrowly focuses on the language. It may end up being on the long side, but this is justified by the almost total lack of publications on Tashelhiyt in English, while many of the French and German sources are severely dated.

Recently, (talk · contribs) made the following changes to the article:

  1. tasousiyt > tasusiyt (tasousit)
    • That's fine.
  2. [təgəm:in:ək] 'your house' > [təgəm:in:əm] 'your house'
    • 'your house' is in fact [təgəm:in:ək], but I assume 84.178.x.x was just copying the non-IPA notation, which was had tigmmi-nn-m indeed (wrongly). I'll fix this.
  3. 1st person singular possessive suffix was changed from -ø to -inu/-nu (and "ø = zero morpheme" was removed from the legend of the table)
    • While it is correct that there is a possessive suffix -(i)nu, it doesn't belong in the paradigm given (see the text). I'll fix this later today by adding the full second paradigm.
  4. the number nine was changed from tẓẓa to ttẓa
    • I'll check this later today with my sources.

mark 10:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

It took some time to get to this, but I have just corrected the errors the above edit introduced. — mark 19:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Consonant inventory[edit]

According to Abdallah El Mountassir, Tachelhit has 31 consonants. [1] I believe their IPA values are [b d d̴ f g gʷ ʁ ʁʷ h ħ χ χʷ ʒ k kʷ l m n q qʷ r s s̴ ʃ t t̴ w j z z̴ ʕ]. There is also phonemic consonant lenghthening (gemination).

These are all consonants common to Maghrebi Berber languages (Rif and Kabyle have a few more). I'd rather get further verification before I'd edit the article itself. -- LudwigVan 11:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Van den Boogert & Stroomer (2004) list 33. Unfortunately, I don't really have the time at this moment to find out what the differences are, but in case you're interested, I've made a quick scan and put it online here. I'll remove this link in a few days since their work isn't published yet and it shouldn't be circulated without permission. — mark 19:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
The two additional consoants are pharyngealized ("emphatic") /l̴/ and /r̴/, and I've seen other sources list them as phonemes distinct from non-emphatic /l/ and /r/ in Tachelhit and other Berber languages (both are also found in Maghrebi Arabic), so I'd include them in the inventory.
I also have stored away somewhere a Xerox of the chapter from Phonologies of Asia and Africa: Including the Caucasus, edited by Kaye and Daniels, that discusses Berber languages in general, and Rif and Tuareg in particular. I don't remember what it says about Tachelhit. -- LudwigVan 16:54, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Yep, pharyngalized /l/ and /r/ definitely should be included. Feel free to edit, by the way! — mark 07:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Just did so, but the uvular fricatives might be velar instead, I'm not sure. Also, should I indicate an emphatic /t/ as /t̴/ or /tˁ/? -- LudwigVan 03:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, it looks beautiful! For emphatics, I'd favor /tˁ/ etc., because that way it is more easy to see the symbol that is modified. — mark 14:31, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Verb morphology[edit]

I have added a couple of {fact} tags in the verb section. I could have added more. It seems to me that the situation has rather more explanations than the one offered as standard in this article. For example, we are saying that there are four basic forms of the verb. However in Campbell 1995 under the "Berber" chapter I read:

Three bases are distinguishable: (1) C1C2; (2) C1C2C2 + a; (3) C1C2 + i/a [...]. It is customary to designate these bases, (1) aorist-imperative, (2) strengthened aorist, (3) preterite. Exactly how these bases are related to tense and mood – if, indeed, the categories of tense and mood can be usefully applied to the Berber verb – is a controversial question. Different researchers have distinguished an aorist and a preterite, a past tense from a present/future, a present/past from a future; some make an aspectual distinction between perfective and imperfective.

Etc. My small Initiation à la Langue Berbère – Tachelhit by Mohammed Lamzoudi (Casablanca 2005) also agrees that there are three basic forms, although he calls them very different things: the impératif immédiat, the impératif perpetuel, and the "rare" indicatif. So either we try to explain some of the different approaches or we should say whose individual view we are supporting here. Widsith (talk) 21:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


Is the same Berber Latin alphabet used for Tachelhiyt as for Kabyle, or is a different version used? Mo-Al (talk) 05:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC) yes,it is the same

No Longer Productive?[edit]

This statement...

Derived verb forms exist: a causative s, medial m (or nasal), and passive tt... can be recognized, as in muddu 'travel' from ddu go' + medial, or smugr 'meet each other' from gr 'touch' + causative + medial. However, derivation is no longer productive, i.e. speakers no longer consciously produce causatives, medials, or passives by applying derivative morphology to verbs.

... doesn't seem to be right. Medials might not in fact be productive, but I think a good case could be made that causative and passive prefixing is still very productive in Tashlhiyt. Speakers regularly add these prefixes to base verbs (kšm "to enter" --> skšm "to bring in"), including more recent lexical additions from Arabic (dwwx "to be dizzy" --> sdwwx "to make dizzy"). Since the t-prefixing for passivity model is identical to that of Moroccan Arabic, and a lot of the more recent innovations in Tashlhiyt come from that source, it's harder to argue, but it could definitely be interpreted as productive. In any case I think the aforementioned statement needs to sourced or, if not, removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Concerning the Name of the Article[edit]

The User:Kwamikagami (has changed the name of Article from Tachelhit Language to "shilha language") The entire article has Deteriorated and lost its Credibility due to the change of name. “shilha" is a Moroccan Arabic term and spelling (for all Berber Languages of Morocco) The Term "shilha" is Vague term (Moroccan Arabic ) that describes all varieties of Berber Languages in general (Morocco).

_ Middle- Atlas shilha

_ Rif shilha

_ High-Atlas (souss) shilha

Linguistically, The proper term is (Tachelhit ) it is an Anglophone spelling, as well as a native , spelling. Linguistically, All English and French authors use the spelling Tachelhit. Chleuh is both English and French term. plural : Chleuhs “Shilha people” is not a proper grammar usage..., anyway.... its like saying (English People to “Englishs” people )

NOTE: the term shilha is no longer in use . Its rename Amazigh or Imazighen More over, (Tachelhit is called “Atlas language” of Morocco or “Atlas Tamazight Language). Both Tachelhit Page and central-Morocco Tamazight page, Articles should be place under one Page call ``Atlas Language`` or “Atlas Tamazight language”

Classification of Berber languages

Group 1. Atlas Language or Tachelhit *(Wikipedia page (central-Morocco Tamazight) )

Group 2. Zenati language or Tazenatit, Rif

Group 3. Kabyle

Group 4. Touareg, Ghadamsi

Group 5. Zenaga of" Mauntania

References Shilha’ is the Arabic name for Moroccan Berber language varieties in general [2]

'Shilha' is the Moroccan Arabic name for all Berber dialects in general (Morocco) [3]

(Adrar (talk) 16:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC))

"Shilha" is the common English version of Tashelhit: It's just the ŠLH root without the Tamazight affixes. It's used, for example, in Ruhlen, A Guide to the World's Languages, and is given as a synonym in Ethnologue. Arabic usage is irrelevant, as this is not Arabic WP.
We generally want to try to keep the same name for a people and their language, where possible. "Shilha people" is used as a synonym for "Shluh" as far back as 1931,[4] and continues today.[5]kwami (talk) 16:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Merging this article with Central Atlas Tamazight is another issue. That may be a worthwhile project, if you wish to notify people on all relevant articles about a centralized discussion. — kwami (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes ( Affixes for Tamazight - Amazigh or Imazighen) Affixes (Tachelhit Chleuh or Chleuhs or Ichelhiyn)

False , "shilha" is a Moroccan Arabic Term. Yes “as far back as 1931” for all Berber language dialects of Morocco. The page should be renamed back to it’s original name (Tachelhit Language)

as for Merging. yes, a worthwhile project. (Adrar (talk) 17:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC))

You don't understand. Yes, Shilha comes from Arabic, but also from Berber. It's now also an English term, as I've demonstrated, and is generally used specifically for Tashelhiyt. Arabic usage is irrelevant: this isn't Arabic WP. — kwami (talk) 18:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I should know, I speak the Berber language and study it. I undertsand the differences (I give you all list of the reasoning that support the issue.) (Adrar (talk) 18:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC))

Oh, I have no doubt that you know Berber far better than I! I'm not questioning your knowledge on the topic. The point here is English usage. In English usage, "Shilha" is typically used to refer to Tashelhiyt, not to other varieties.
If you think that merging is the way to go, then I would suggest making a request using {{merge}} on the three articles (here, C. Atlas Tam., Atlas languages). That would sidestep the whole naming issue. — kwami (talk) 19:18, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, "shilha” is an old term and ( diminishing), it’s no longer in use : whether within "Tachelhit" as it is referred and or general Varieties (Berber Languages)

Tachelhit or Tashelhiyt is the most Common use in the English language.[6] (Ra nsawal Tachelhit)

It would be best to restore the page to it’s original name, in the meantime.

Merging these Pages central-Morocco Tamazight, Atlas-Languages, and Tashelhiyt would require your contribution and a talk with other users and page creator . (Adrar (talk) 19:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC))

Your link does not support your claim. Both terms are relatively common, but "Shilha" has the advantage of being clearer, as it can be used for both the people and their language.
If we merge the articles, the point becomes moot anyway. — kwami (talk) 20:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

in English publishing world and the Moroccan publishing all sources use the "Tachelhit" and it's more clear , just like the word [Tamazight].

in the meantime. Can you change the title Page back to (Tashelhiyt Language) like it was before. thanks (Adrar (talk) 21:00, 23 August 2010 (UTC))

(edit conflict) No, not all sources use "Tachelhit", as I've demonstrated. Ignoring evidence doesn't make it go away. As a native English speaker, I find "Tachelhit" decidedly less clear, as it incorporates non-English grammar. Keeping track of all the Ta-X-t terms can be a problem for the naive reader.
I made the merge proposal, and notified the principal authors of the articles. If they oppose the merge, they may have thoughts on the name. — kwami (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Up until this day I had only read about Tashelhiyt in the linguistic literature. I cannot say that this necessarily means that this is more common usage than Shilha, but I do think the move should have been better motivated by sources and discussion before being implemented. I would support to return the article to Tashelhiyt language unless it can be shown more clearly that Shilha is the prefered name in the English language linguistic literature.·Maunus·ƛ· 23:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
There's a tendency to use Tachelhit in ling lit, esp. recently, but 'Shilha' has a long tradition as an assimilated English word. For example, the Library of Congress uses 'Shilha language' and 'Rif language' for its subject headings rather than Tachelhit and Tarifit,[7] as does Ruhlen,[8] which is targeted at a lay audience as we are. 'Shilha' also has the advantage of being applicable to both the language and the people, which is relevant to a general encyclopedia but not as much to a linguistic text. IMO, it's a matter of common usage for a lay audience over technical jargon for an audience who is already familiar with the subject. — kwami (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Looking around abit for materials it seems that there is a slight preference of Shilha over Tachelhit and of Tachelhit over Tashelhiyt in american linguistics materials. For example the reference grammars of the language seems to use Shilha. I am convinced by that and would support having the article staying here per your arguments above and my own small study of sources.·Maunus·ƛ· 02:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Fine. The EB also uses "Shilha" (though, oddly, also "Tarifit").
I strongly disagree. Most common, is Tachelhit in English. (Moroccan Arabic: Shilha or Shelha). Google web Search is not reliable: for most Wikipedia users rely on. A possible (English) alternative could well be (Chelyh or Chily). I would like to remind you that most Berber Language studies are under the name Tamazight . A unified Standard Tamazight (the National Standard Tamazight Language of Morocco) regulated by IRCAM Royal institute of the Amazigh culture in both cities Agadir and Rabat, Morocco.(Uchronicle (talk) 07:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC))
You need references for your edits, esp. for things like claiming "Moyen Atlas" is the common English name for Central Atlas Berber.
"Chily" is English? Really? And "Ariffia language"? English in which country?
I am curious about one of your edits, that the speakers of C. Atlas are the Zayanes. My understanding was that the Z. are only one of many C. Atlas-speaking tribes, not the entire C. Atlas-speaking population. If they are, I would be interested in your sources. — kwami (talk) 08:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
First thing, no such thing as Regional language . I stated (IRCAM Royal institute of the Amazigh culture has regulated and unified the Berber Language (the National Standard Tamazight Language of Morocco). There is no such thing as Central Morocco Tamazight language. it's called tribe dialects.(Uchronicle (talk) 09:28, 26 August 2010 (UTC))
Zayanes one word that can represent the whole (Middle Atlas) (Uchronicle (talk) 09:28, 26 August 2010 (UTC))
Uchronicle, the IRCAM Royal Institute is only one possible source for English usage, although I don't know if they have ever published in English. Wikipedia does not rely on only one source, but on the entire body of English literature on the subject. "Shilha" is more common in the literature as both Kwami and Manaus have stated. My own searches through the linguistic literature confirm that usage as the most common. --Taivo (talk) 09:32, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
None of the books in French or Berber count--this is the English Wikipedia and only English usage counts. So your list above has only two sources. --Taivo (talk) 10:25, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
You should know that, the word (Tachelhit) is renamed Tamazight. All current sources are published under (Tamaizght, Amazigh, Imazighen, Mzgh, Berber). it would be hard to find new books that are published in Tachelhit or even Tarifit in Morocco or else where.(Uchronicle (talk) 10:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC))
the only way to distinguish (Tamazight language) is by region or tribe. (e.g Tiznit, Khenifra etc... or Ayt Achutouken, Ayt Seghrouchen etc... or High-Atlas, Middle-Atlas etc...) (In English.... even French or German) (Uchronicle (talk) 11:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC))
The usage in Morocco is irrelevant to the issue of what the most common name in English is. There are plenty of sources published recently in English that name this language (Shilha/Tachelhit). --Taivo (talk) 11:09, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Uchronicle, let me say this again since you don't seem to understand: sources must be in English. Berber, Arabic, and French sources have absolutely nothing relevant to say about common English usage, which is all we care about here. --Taivo (talk) 11:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Uchronicle, if the world Tachelhit has been replaced, as you say, we definitely should not use it. — kwami (talk) 23:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
that would mean (Tarifit central-Morocco-Tamzigtht/Middle Atlas and so on. With one word (Amazigh).--Uchronicle (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

References concerning naming[edit]

I have listed just the things I have in my personal library and a few other references in English (sources in any other language do not serve as evidence of English usage) and do not represent this as a thorough review of the linguistic literature, nor do I claim that this is the final answer--it's just a start and subject to discussion. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Added a few more, including the EB and LOC. — kwami (talk) 18:37, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • Merritt Ruhlen, 1991, A Guide to the World's Languages, Volume 1: Classification, Stanford
  • Joseph R. Applegate, 1958, An Outline of the Structure of Shilha, American Council of Learned Societies. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Akio Nakano, 1976, Dialogues in Moroccan Shilha: (Dialects of Anti-Atlas and Ait-Warain), ILCAA
  • Robert Martin Kirchner, 2001, An Effort Based Approach to Consonant Lenition, Psychology Press
  • Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles Albert Ferguson, & Edith A. Moravcsik, 1978, Universals of Human Language: Phonology, Stanford.
  • Jeffrey Tayler, 2003, Glory in a Camel's Eye: Trekking through the Moroccan Sahara, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (A travelogue.)
  • Lionel Galand, 2002, "Archaism and Evolution in Berber," Etudes de linguistique berbere, Peeters, pp. 109-116
  • Harry Stroomer, 2000, "An Early European Source on Berber, Chamberlayne (1715)," Etudes berberes et chamito-semitiques: melanges offerts a Karl-G. Prasse, Peeters, pp. 303-316
  • Douglas Porch, 2005, The Conquest of Morocco, Macmillan. (A history.) --Taivo (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Theo Vennemann, 2002, "Key Issues in English Etymology," Sounds, Words, Texts and Change: Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7-11 September 2000, John Benjamins, pp. 227-252
  • Harrie Wetzer, 1996, The Typology of Adjectival Predication, Walter de Gruyter
  • Clarence G. Williams, 2003, Technology and the Dream: Reflections on the Black Experience at MIT, 1941-1999, MIT. (Sociology and history.)
  • Vaclav Blazek, 2008, "A Lexicostatistical Comparison of Omotic Languages," In Hot Pursuit of Language in Prehistory: Essays in the Four Fields of Anthropology: In Honor of Harold Crane Fleming, John Benjamins, pp. 57-148
  • Leon Stassen, 2004, Intransitive Predication, Oxford
  • Selena Montgomery, 2002, The Art of Desire, Kensington Books (this is a romance novel, but it illustrates the use of "Shilha" as a common English term). --Taivo (talk) 11:32, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Eugene A. Nida, 1972, The Book of a Thousand Tongues, ed. 2, p 389
  • GN Clements & Annie Rialland, "Africa as a phonological area". In Bernd Heine & Derek Nurse, 2008, A linguistic geography of Africa, p 83
  • Werner Vycichl, "Beja - A Language with Seven Seals". In Bechhaus-Gerst & Serzisko, 1988, Cushitic-Omotic: papers from the International Symposium on Cushitic and Omotic Languages, p 417
  • Akio Nakano, 1974, Dialogues on Moroccan Shilha: Dialects of Anti-Atlas and Ait-Warain
  • PR Bennett, 1985, "On Reconstructing Qualitative Verbs in Berber" In Papers from the Tenth Minnesota Regional Conference on Language and Linguistics (May 11-12, 1984)
  • Daniel Newman, 2002, The phonetic status of Arabic within the world's languages: the uniqueness of the lughat al-daad, p 67
  • DE Johnson, 1976, Languages of the Middle East and North Africa. A Survey of Materials for the Study of the Uncommonly Taught Languages, p 37
  • Helmut Satzinger, 2004, "Some remarks on the Afroasiatic case system", Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 94:177–183
  • Ian Maddieson, 1984, Patterns of Sounds.
  • Encyclopedia Britannica, 2010. "Amazigh languages".
  • Library of Congress subject headings: Volume 1 (19th ed, 1996) (used by the LOC to organize all books on the subject) — kwami (talk)


  • Patrick Bennett, 1998, Comparative semitic linguistics: a manual, p 63 — kwami (talk)


  • George L. Campbell, 1995, Concise Compendium of the World's Languages, Routledge. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • William Bright, 1992, "Berber Languages," International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Oxford, vol. 1, pp. 174-175
  • Richard J. Hayward, 2000, "Afroasiatic," African Languages: An Introduction, Cambridge, pp. 74-98. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Amarg: Anthology of Tachelhit poety, by Abdellah El Mountassir.
  • The Berber Literary Tradition of the Tachelhit sous: with an edition and translation of 'The Ocean of Tears' by Muhammad Awzal. by Nico van den Boogert. Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten (Witte Singel 25, Postbus 9515, 2300 RA Leiden, Netherlands, fax : 071-5272038), publication of De Goeje Fund (n° XXVII), Leiden, 1997, 456 pages, Hfl 150. ISBN 90-625-8971-5. (Uchronicle (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC))
  • Mark Aronoff & Janie Rees-Miller, ed., 2003, The Handbook of Linguistics, Blackwell. --Taivo (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
  • We Share Walls: Language, Land, and Gender in Berber Morocco (Blackwell Studies in Discourse and Culture) by Katherine E. Hoffman, 2008, ISBN-13: 978-1405154215 --Uchronicle (talk) 12:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Culture and Customs of Morocco (Culture and Customs of Africa),by Raphael Chijioke Njoku , 2005, ISBN-13: 978-0313332890 --Uchronicle (talk) 12:31, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
  • The Languages of the World , by Kenneth Katzner, 2002, ISBN-13: 978-0415250030
  • Modals in the Languages of Europe: A Reference Work (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology [Ealt]),by Björn Hansen,2009, ISBN-13: 978-3110219203
  • An Introduction to the Languages of the World, Anatole V. Lyovin, 1997, ISBN-13: 978-0195081169
  • Language Diversity Endangered (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs),by Matthias Brenzinger, ISBN-13: 978-3110170498
  • University of Oxford, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Rotheray International Broadcast [9] Page43
  • Abdelkrim Jebbour,1996, Syllable weight and syllable nuclei in Tachelhit Berber of Tiznit [10] --Uchronicle
  • Ethnologue Languages of the World Tachelhit [11]
  • Keith Brown, Sarah Ogilvie, Concise encyclopedia of languages of the world, Page,152,156.
  • Colin J. Ewen, Ellen M. Kaisse, John Mathieson Anderson, Phonology, Volume 25, Cambridge University Press[citation needed]
  • Björn Hansen, Ferdinand de Haan, Modals in the Languages of Europe: A Reference Work, pp 449-453. --Uchronicle


  • "We will speak Tashelhit, by Abdallah El Mountassir, 1999. ISBN-10: 2911053524 (Uchronicle (talk) 11:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC))
  • Maarten G. Kossmann & Harry J. Stroomer, 1997, "Berber Phonology," Phonologies of Asia and Africa, Eisenbrauns, vol 1, pp. 461-475. (My mistake, kwami, I originally put this in the wrong section. The term "Tashelhit" occurs on nearly every one of the first 5-6 pages.) --Taivo (talk) 22:08, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • Robert Hetzron, 1990, "Afroasiatic Languages," The World's Major Languages, Oxford, pp. 645-653. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • Michael Mann & David Dalby, 1987, A Thesaurus of African Languages: A Classified and Annotated Inventory of the Spoken Languages of Africa, With an Appendix on Their Written Representation, International African Institute. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • David Dalby, 1999/2000, The Linguasphere Register of the World's Languages and Speech Communities, Observatoire Linguistique. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • Vaclav Blazek, 1998, "Berber Numerals," Archiv Orientalni 66:149-168. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
In more recent works (see above for an example), Blazek has switched to "Shilha". --Taivo (talk) 11:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • Chritopher Moseley & R.E. Asher, ed., 1994, Atlas of the World's Languages, Routledge. --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • Andrew Dalby, 2004, Dictionary of Languages: The Definitive Reference to More Than 400 Languages, rev. ed., Columbia. --Taivo (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


  • Cécile Fougeron & Rachid Ridouane 2006 On the phonetic implementation of syllabic consonants and vowel-less syllables in Tashlhiyt, Estudios de Fonética Experimental 18 (2008) 139-175
  • Dell, François and Mohamed Elmedlaoui. 1985. 'Syllabic consonants and syllabification in Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber.' Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 7.105-130.
  • Dell, François & Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 2002. Syllables in Tashlhiyt Berber and in Moroccan Arabic. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers
  • Mohamed Lahrouchi, nd. Tashlhiyt Berber triconsonantal roots A binary branching head-complement structure. UMR 7023 CNRS-Université Paris 8
  • Darin M. Howe, 2001 Syllabic obstruents in Oowekyala, Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas/Workshop on American Indian Languages, U C Santa Barbara, 7-6-2001

·Maunus·ƛ· 13:57, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


Linguists working on the language have been using the name Tashelhiyt exclusively for the past two or three decades. The name Shilha apparently continues to be used by some non-linguists. The article is still entitled "Shilha language", but the text of the article now uses "Tashelhiyt". It is a linguistic article, and the convention among modern linguists is to call a language by its own name, not by somebody else's name. Reading the leader should prevent any confusion. --Ahulandiy (talk · contribs) talk 07 September 2015

It seems to me that a name used both in academic and lay literature would be more accessible to the average reader than one used primarily in specialist lit, and better follows WP:COMMONNAME. Per that guideline, technical terms are not preferred simply because they're technical; often common names are used rather than "a more elaborate, formal, or scientific alternative". When several terms are of comparably frequent use, other considerations should be used, such as "titles which follow the same pattern as those of similar articles are often preferred". (For example, we use the anglicized form of Kabyle, without the ta-t affixes, and following that pattern we would drop the affixes here.) — kwami (talk) 17:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree. The Wikipedia policy of WP:COMMONNAME does not give priority to specialist usage. --Taivo (talk) 22:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
there are many version of the term Kabyle in affixes (taqbaylit) other english spelling is Qbaylie, kabyle, Qbayla.. just like (Tamazight, Tamaziɣt) Amazigh, Mzgh, Amaziy.--Uchronicle (talk) 22:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but anything other than "Kabyle" is uncommon, and so loses out on that account. — kwami (talk) 22:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
you are also suggesting that Tamazight should be renamed mzgh--Uchronicle (talk) 23:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
No, "mzgh" is not an English word. We use the English word "Berber". We don't need to rename it; it's already at that name. (Do you even read what you write?) — kwami (talk) 23:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
neither is "Shilha/Shelha (not an English word). (The affixes/ root word (Tamazight is Mzgh)).--Uchronicle (talk) 00:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Uchronicle, You still don't get the principle of WP:COMMONNAME, that the only language that matters here is English and any sources above that are not in English, or are transliterations from French or Berber, are unacceptable to the discussion and can be completely ignored. You're compiling a nice bibliography that can be used elsewhere, but is totally useless for our purposes here. The Berber etymology of the word does not matter one whit. Only the English form matters. "Shilha" and "Tamazight" are both English words as such. --Taivo (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
"Shilha" is used in English. "mzgh" is not. "Shilha" is in the dictionary. "mzgh" is not. Do we really need to explain that to you? — kwami (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Taivo, I think we're wasting our time here. You've explained that several times; I can only assume he's being obtuse. I'm done with this "discussion". — kwami (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
At this time. I will let other future users/editors or new readers. To continue this discussion( the matter of renaming (commonly used, appropriate and respected title), (in English usage and spelling). I have listed all the ( Book lists, Sources, and References, of the use of Tachelhit in the English language and French). Thank you.--Uchronicle (talk) 01:03, 27

Uchronicle, one thing that would be helpful would be spelling out the name in Tifinagh and in Shilha Arabic. — kwami (talk) 01:16, 27 August 2010 (UTC)


The usual referent in English of the term Shilha (and Tachelhit, šəlħa, tašəlħiyt) is the language of SW Morocco discussed here. However, the same word is also used to refer to Berber dialects all across the northern Sahara - notably in Tunisia (eg [12][13]), but also for South Oran Berber and Touggourt Berber. It is also used locally to refer to the Songhay language Korandje. A disambiguation link at the top might be helpful for some readers. - Lameen Souag (talk) 20:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely ridiculous name[edit]

I strongly think that this move was a huge and rather ridiculous mistake due Cultural/Specialist bias. The pages that were moved were stable since their creation in 2005. From this page and the history of the concerned articles, you can see that several editors have contested the move and tried to move manually, that gives you an idea how of unusual this name is (Where is WP:Consensus in this?).
What's funny is that arguments used by the people/person who performed this move (WP:English and WP:Commonname) actually support the proponents position. This is rather an old name used by so-called "specialists" loaned from Moroccan Arabic totally vague and inaccurate to the subject matter of the article.
I'm compiling evidence to request a move, this entire story is rather irritating, and an instance of Wikipedia failure: Obscure subjects do not get enough attention and thus error risk is higher--Tachfin (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

    Triggered by \bhalshs\.archives-ouvertes\.fr on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)