User talk:TaivoLinguist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Taivo)
Jump to: navigation, search

Voegelin[edit]

A paper coauthored by Voegelin, titled "Seneca I", is cited on Seneca language. I can't confirm that that paper exists, but it would presumably show that Voegelin did work on at least one Iroquoian language. —swpbT 19:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

He also has a paper cited on Siouan languages, "Internal Relationships of Siouan Languages". It seems there's ample evidence he did work on both language families. I'm re-adding the categories accordingly. —swpbT 19:32, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Language isolate[edit]

Re. [1]: While you may be technically correct, I've studied linguistics (primarily in Norwegian though), and I've never really come across "daughter" being used this way. I'm not saying it's not, just that it's kind of rare. In any case, I think using "language" in that sentence makes it clearer, so I don't see the need to insist on using "daughter". Jon Harald Søby (talk) 22:07, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

It's not rare at all in English historical linguistics. "Daughter language", for example, is an entry in Campbell & Mixco's A Glossary of Historical Linguistics (pg. 39) without any notice that it's an unusual construction at all. Indeed, we speak normally of the "mother tongue" as the original language. "Daughter" is the normal word used in English historical linguistics for the descendants of a common ancestor. Nothing unusual about it whatsoever. --Taivo (talk) 00:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Indeed, we call a group of related languages a family. The mother/daughter/sister/cousin metaphor is part of the overall metaphor for language relatedness in English. Other references include David Crystal, A Dictionary of linguistics & Phonetics (pg. 176, family): "A 'family' of languages is the set of languages deriving from a common ancestor, or 'parent', e.g. the Indo-European (IE) family consists of the 'daughter' languages Sanskrit, Greek...". P.H. Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics (pg. 92, daughter): "1. Any of the later languages that develop separately from a single earlier language. E.g. French and Spanish are 'daughter languages' in relation to Latin." "Daughter" is, quite simply, the most common term used in English to describe the descendant of a parent language. --Taivo (talk) 00:23, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

reverts because of not "reliable source"[edit]

The source is reliable. It seems more that you do not like it, or you not know about this topic at all. The southern theory is well known in Korea. Also all edits from me are sourced. Also the revert of koreanic language was to the version before I made an edit. So it seems that you are reverting all the time sourced content. Explain me why and what is wrong on the source?

Here look: 1.: asiasociety.org/education/korean-language 2.: linguistics.byu.edu/classes/ling450ch/reports/Korean.html 3.: aboutworldlanguages.com/Korean

Also there are much more parts in wikipedia with even no source and no one reverts it. And when someone reverts it it get rereverted...

It is a fact that scientists/linguists be life that Austronesian people arrived on the Korean peninsula.

I think you have a personal problem with the southern theory. Explain please... 213.162.68.215 (talk) 19:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

You need to actually read Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources. The source which you are trying to cite is a set on on-line class notes, not a published article or book. --Taivo (talk) 20:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Definition of a source

The word "source" when citing sources on Wikipedia has three related meanings:

The piece of work itself (the article, book) The creator of the work (the writer, journalist) The publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press) Any of the three can affect reliability. Reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both. These qualifications should be demonstrable to other people.

http://linguistics.byu.edu/classes/Ling450ch/reports/korean.html : References Chun-u, Kim. (1983). The Making of the Korean Language. In Korean National Commission for UNESCO, The Korean Language (13-42). Korea: The Si-ya-yong-o-sa Publishers, Inc. Ohno, Susumu. (1970). The Origen of the Japanese Language. Kodusai Bunka Shinkokai, Tokyo. Sang-ok, Yi. (1983). The Theory of Altaic Languages and Korean. In Korean National Commission for UNESCO, The Korean Language (43-54). Korea: The Si-ya-yong-o-sa Publishers, Inc. Woong, Huh. (1983). The Development of the Korean Language. In Korean National Commission for UNESCO, The Korean Language (1-12). Korea: The Si-ya-yong-o-sa Publishers, Inc. Korean Overseas Information Services. (1990). A Handbook of Korea. (p.45-55 ). Seoul, Korea.

so this is all nothing? if we follow your opinion about source, than we must delete half of wikipedia... 213.162.68.215 (talk) 21:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Despite your ranting, you failed to comprehend what I said or to understand Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources. Reliable sources are not links to class notes that might be based on other sources. Reliable sources are the SOURCES, not the class notes that might use those sources. Use the original sources if you want to pass the reliable source test, not someone's class notes. --Taivo (talk) 21:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Two articles[edit]

Sorry, Taivo, but I think you are wrong about the last edit on Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia. The event was part of a systematic inhumane terror against a minority group whose rights were violated on the basis of pseudoscientifc propaganda despite the international conventions of which Greece is a party, it is significant enough and described here

I have one more concern. Recently one user wrote a new fringe lead of the article Ancient Macedonians and claims that his unsuitable edits should stay there only because he nominated it for GA status, reverted arrogantly the unstable version without consensus from other editors and said "enough". He pushed the view that the Macedonian language was a Greek dialect and that the Macedonians were solely a Greek tribe, which I have plenty of sources to disagree with, both primary and secondary.--Judist (talk) 06:25, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

I was to quick for the second concern, the user is cooperative and has already fixed the controversial issues.--Judist (talk) 08:38, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

This Barnstar is for you![edit]

Socratic Barnstar Hires.png The Socratic Barnstar
I have been following your responses in this talkpage, where you have proven to be extremely skilled and eloquent in your arguments. This one was the most striking ever: link, which embodies a classic characteristic which is very commonly seen among non-neutral editors, but is rarely described as eloquently as you did there. Face-smile.svg Please, you shouldn't be surprised if other editors (such as me) start copying your fine writing skills elsewhere to make up for their lacking skills! Face-grin.svg " SILENTRESIDENT 12:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Shoshoni vowels[edit]

I'm a bit confused. Does Shoshoni have an [e] vowel sound? I've seen it written as [ai], and many sources say it is pronounced like [e]. Fdomanico51997 (talk) 17:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Shoshoni has an underlying diphthong /ai/. It is pronounced both as [ai] and [e]. All surface [e] reflect underlying /ai/. --Taivo (talk) 20:34, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
By the way, you need to learn how to post on another editor's talk page. I had to fix your post so that it wasn't just placed randomly on the page where you put it. --Taivo (talk) 20:35, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

May 2017[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.Judist (talk) 11:04, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

I am sorry but Wikipedia has policies and I had to report the violation of the 3RR. I am always reported for that, Regards.Judist (talk) 11:04, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

  • I just have urged the Admins on the Noticeboard to dismiss without any hesitation this retaliatory filling by User:Judist against User:TaivoLinguist. With this AN filling against Taivo and the recent ARBMAC warning against me, Judist is dangerously close to WP:HARASSing those editors who couldn't agree and consent to his POV edits and disruptions. --SILENTRESIDENT 11:24, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

ATTENTION[edit]

Please see the summary of my last change. [2]

Piscataway[edit]

Hello, I thought I did reference the source of information, also, what did you mean by a "shout-out"? I'm a bit confused. Fdomanico51997 (talk) 20:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

You didn't reference it. You just wrote "Linda made it" (or whoever). That's not a reference. --Taivo (talk) 01:28, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Ok, so what else should I put then? Fdomanico51997 (talk) 04:01, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Seriously? You've been editing Wikipedia for months and you don't know what a proper reference looks like? WP:REF. --Taivo (talk) 07:10, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

No, I didn't. Just calm down a bit, no? Fdomanico51997 (talk) 00:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I have found errors in almost all of the phonological inventories provided by FDomanico. Just having a source is not enough - the source has to be reliable AND the text entered has to correspond with the source says. Mackie for example does not posit a kw phoneme for Piscataway, this phoneme seems to have been gratuitously added by Fdomanico. I suggest double checking all information added by this user.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 06:33, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Taivo, I don't have access to Ester Martinez dictionary of Ohkay Owingeh Tewa which Fdomanico is using for the phonology at Tewa language. If you have access to the book maybe you could check it.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 05:31, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
I'll see if I can get it on interlibrary loan. --Taivo (talk) 07:57, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
User:Maunus, it's not available on interlibarary loan. Sorry. --Taivo (talk) 20:48, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Ok, too bad.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 12:10, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you commented on[edit]

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you commented on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Allow private schools to be characterized as non-affiliated as well as religious, in infobox?

Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.

The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".

The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".

Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:19, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Please stop deleting my contribution on Ancient Macedonian[edit]

My contribution is as follows: "There is absolutely no proof that Ancient Macedonian was a different language from Ancient Greek: the fact that sometimes Ancient Macedonian words (from Hesychius' glossary) "reveal voiced stops where Greek shows voiceless aspirates", meaning b,d,g, instead of ph, th, kh is analogous to a similar, yet not identical phenomenon that occurs in German, i.e. within the same language, between dialects of the same language: Low German lopen vs. (High/literary/standard) German laufen, Low German riek, German reich. This Ancient Macedonian shift constitutes by no means a proof that Ancient Macedonian was no Ancient Greek dialect." This in no POV, those who say Ancient Macedonian was not Greek base their theory on the above consonant shift.

This is absolutely POV and I will continue to delete it. --Taivo (talk) 17:49, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Dnipropetrovsk[edit]

Please do not undo edits asking for a citation. I do not care whether you know that it happened. You need to cite it. –Sb2001 talk page 17:18, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

We do not add a citation for these name changes in Ukraine from Rada action last spring as part of the decommunization process. Compare Kamianske, for example. --Taivo (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Look, if you want the 'fact' to remain, cite it. –Sb2001 talk page 17:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Wikipedia. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Please do not remove [citation needed] tags. Sb2001 talk page 17:28, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.[edit]

Peacedove.svg

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Archive
Archives


Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thankyou for giving sign that IP is vandalizing the page Korean language. I gave given him the final (4im) warning, but if he continues to do so, please tell me or send to WP:ARV. Anyways Thankyou once again. You have proved yourself best anti-vandalizer. Thanks for improving Wikipedia. SahabAliwadia 14:00, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit warring on Korean language[edit]

I've fully protected this article so that consensus may be determined on the article talk page. If, after the protection expires, one side or the other in this dispute attempts to edit the article without consensus on the contentious point I will begin blocking accounts. Tiderolls 17:24, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Donetsk and Luhansk[edit]

Dear friend, you can add articles Donetsk and Luhansk to your watchlist, and then these articles are constantly being subjected to vandalism and adding false information. Пугачов Иван Петрович (talk) 18:36, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello TaivoLinguist[edit]

I appreciate your work, can we talk a bit more Brunswicknic (talk) 15:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC)