Jump to content

Talk:Southern Nilotic languages

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Recent reversions by User:Cookiemonster1618

[edit]

@Cookiemonster1618: If you're going to claim that the classification you just reverted this and several pages back to is the correct one, you need to add sources. As it currently stands, you're just asserting that the previous one is correct without evidence. Arctic Circle System (talk) 00:21, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kuulopuhe: As you are also involved in this via your recent edit on Acholi dialect, I'm pinging you as well. Arctic Circle System (talk) 00:27, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the source cited with evidence that proves that the classification system I used is the mainstream one and not one from glottolog.
https://www.ethnologue.com/subgroup/768/ Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 05:59, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look at both the Ethnologue and Glottolog classifications. They have some key differences (e.g. Nandi-Markweeta/Pökoot in Ethnologue corresponding to Central Kalenjin/Northern Kalenjin in Glottolog). I drew up a table of correspondence between the classifications given in the two sources.
Ethnologue Glottolog
Kalenjin Kalenjin
 Elgon  Elgon-Mau Kalenjin
  Kupsapiiny (kpz)   Kupsabiny
  Sabaot (spy)   Sabaot
 Nandi-Markweta
 Central Kalenjin
  Kipsigis (sgc)   Kipsigis
  Nandi
   Keiyo (eyo)   Keiyo
   Kisankasa (kqh)
   Nandi (niq)   Nandi
   Terik (tec)   Terik
   Tugen (tuy)   Tugen
 Northern Kalenjin
  Markweta (enb)   Markweeta
 Pökoot (pko)   Pökoot
 Okiek-Akie
 Okiek (oki)   Okiek
  Akie
Tatoga Tatoga-Omotik
 Omotik (omt)  Omotik
 Datooga (tcc)  Gemein Datooga
Note that I flattened Glottolog's subdivisions of the Central Kalenjin group for easier comparison, and didn't list the languages given on Glottolog as part of the Gemein Datooga group. Also note that the sources used by Glottolog are Distefano 1985 and Rottland 1982; I couldn't find the exact sources Ethnologue used, however I will note that it seems to be considered a standard for language classification.
I shall be back at a later point to comment further. User:Kuulopuhe 00:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we are going by Ethnologue, I would recommend the following:
User:Kuulopuhe 01:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Going by Ethnologue seems... Ill-advised. I'll admit I don't have many examples on hand, but there are various instances of Ethnologue being... Less than accurate. I think there was a discussion about it a bit ago. One particularly egregious error is their assertion that Barranquenho is a dialect of Extremaduran. They provide no sources for this, and the most likely basis for this claim is that Barrancos was partially populated by settlers from Extremadura, even though those settlers weren't even from an Extremaduran-speaking part of the region. Arctic Circle System (talk) 05:33, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have to find the discussion later, I'm quite tired right now. Arctic Circle System (talk) 05:34, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for informing me about this: I'll look into it more. I will also try to see if I can have a look at the sources cited by Glottolog or other relevant writings on this topic. User:Kuulopuhe 23:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]