Talk:West Frisian language

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


According to Ethnologue (see the info behind the ISO-639-3, Westerlauwer Fries is a dialect.. GerardM 15:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, of the FRISIAN language... 12:58, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Please read the article: Ethnologue. Westerlauwer Fries is a dialect of WESTERN FRISIAN. :) GerardM 13:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, you can say that indeed as WESTERN FRISIAN also includes the dead languages/dialects West Frisian and East Lauwers Frisian. All Western Frisian with living native speakers is West LauwerS (!!!!!!!!!) Frisian. Of course, the fact that that resource of yours shows Est-Lauwers on the same level as its own dialects, shows that it is not reliable. Something I would not have expected from "Mr. Westerlauwer" :))ThW5 13:26, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


I think this should be rephrased:

Originally, Frisian was the language closest related to English, but after at least five hundred years of being
subjected to the influence of Dutch it is obvious to most observers that nowadays it bears a greater similarity to 
Dutch than to English.

Looks like an example of faulty logic. That Frisian is the language closest to English, doesn't necessarily mean that English is the language closest to Frisian. I think Frisian would remain the language most closely related to English (after Scots) even if Frisian has evolved to look more like Dutch. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 09:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 09:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Yups, it's the same rasoning as in: Dutch is the (main) language closest to English, but the language closest to Dutch is German. Visually the closeness of languages could be seen as something like this English------Frisian---Dutch---German, with Frisian closer to Dutch even though Dutch doesn't belong to the "Anglo-Frisian" group. --Lamadude (talk) 12:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The first commentator makes a good point...except that there is no "Scots" language. (Clearly the commentator's knowledge of the UK is very limited!) The old Scottish language is Gaelic - which is certainly not closely related to English. Frisian is the language most closely related to English, as the Americans would say "period". John2o2o2o (talk) 21:26, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

It seems I owe the first commentator an apology - of sorts. I'm still wondering if it's an "april fool" joke, but I have been reading that a previous government has accepted the idea of a "Scottish" language. Nevertheless, it is certainly no more than a politically motivated concept.

Being controlled politically from England is deeply resented by many in Scotland. It seems that some rather "sad" Scots also resent the fact that their mother tongue is English and have apparently moved to have their regional accent recognised as a separate language in order to distance themselves from the hated English. This absurdity has apparently been accepted - presumably to please those Scots who are pushing for independence. There are variations in wording and accent of spoken English in every region of Britain - not only in Scotland. No-one is seriously suggesting that these variations make them separate languages. I am English, I speak English. My mother is Scottish, she speaks English - "period". Believe me, you won't need to attend any classes to learn "Scottish" if you know English! John2o2o2o (talk) 23:22, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Speaking of politically motivated concepts... The existence of the Scots language as separate from the English language has been accepted by most professional linguists as a fact. It's your argument that it's somehow an language invented out of resentment towards the English which is the politically motivated view here. Furthermore, you seem to be confusing Scottish English with Scots. You're certainly not automatically a speaker of the latter if you know English. - TaalVerbeteraar (talk) 08:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Then name them.

The Scots speak their own distinctive and instantly recognisable dialect of English, but so do persons from all corners of Great Britain. The Scots are not a special case. The argument for a separate "Scots" language is a politically motivated one promoted by a powerful Scottish nationalist movement that resents any suggestion of English influence. Naturally these people do not want to be regarded as "English" speakers.

I have tried to make this point on the discussion page that was referred to, but another contributor keeps removing it. Those who wish to promote a "Scots" language as part of their national identity do not take kindly it seems to being challenged about this. John2o2o2o (talk) 16:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I should also just add - and I think this is sadly true - that Wikipedia, while motivated by the noblest of intentions is, nevertheless often a hotch-potch of ideas and opinions, truths, half truths and urban legends. The existence of a Wikipedia page - I refer in particular to the one on "Scots" - does not in itself constitute evidence of the validity of the concept under discussion. As I have recently stated, those in charge of that page do not tolerate views that contradict their own. I sincerely hope I will not be motivated to comment further on this matter. I have said more than enough and I am very tired of it. John2o2o2o (talk) 17:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Just like the English have – for purely political (nationalist and separatist) reasons and because of their hate of Germans – been in denial for centuries that they, too, are really Germans and merely speak a funny German dialect. :P
Anyway, this silly debate does not belong here. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 11:54, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Map cleanup needed[edit]

The map labels and legend are not in English. -- Beland (talk) 01:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The Letter Ô[edit]

In all my years of speaking, reading and writing in Frisian, I have only ever encountered "ô" in French loan words; yet this article has it included in the alphabet. "Ô" has long been replaced by "oo" in West Frisian.

Bôle dan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC) And grôt, nôt, fôle, ôffal, ôfgryslik en noch folle mear? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

What sound is associated with ô? Is it IPA o/oː (Frisian o/oo) or is it something more like the English o in not, rot, etc? Since there are cleary a number of words with that letter, could someone please an example into the appropriate place in the chart? D P J (talk) 19:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

legal status[edit]

I'll add a small bit of info regarding the legal status as there was some confusion over it on someones talk page. RonaldKunenborg (talk) 22:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Middle Frisian and New Frisian[edit]

"Current-day Frisian is moving towards standard Dutch rapidly in most aspects, and differs less from Dutch than most dialects spoken in the Netherlands."

I'm not sure what this means. It (West Frisian?) differs less from (Standard?) Dutch than most (Dutch?) dialects spoken in the Netherlands? And the footnote doesn't appear to have anything related to this claim. Rainfrog (talk) 16:37, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


In the fifth paragraph of the section West Frisian language#Dialects, the phrases "mainstream Frisian" and "mainland dialects" are used. However, it is not clear what is meant by these phrases.

In the sixth paragraph of this section, the phrase "The fourth mainland dialect" is used. In my opinion, it is not clear what this means. It seems that some of the dialects mentioned in this section are island dialects and some are mainland dialects, but it is not entirely clear which is which. Perhaps the dialects could be organized into two groups. CorinneSD (talk) 22:34, 21 December 2014 (UTC)