Re: Montenegrin
"Doug Ewell" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.languages |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20171010113033.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.b4f541b219.wbe@email03.godaddy.com> |
Peter Constable wrote: > The ISO 639-RA/JAC is processing a request from the National Library > of Montenegro to encode “Montenegrin” in ISO 639-2. This has been > requested before, but on previous occasions there wasn’t much support > for it. This time, though, the level of interest appears to be on the > rise. This is being requested through the JAC, not through ISO 639-3/RA, correct? That would explain why it doesn't appear on the 639-3 change request pages. The 639-2 process is less transparent than 639-3; there doesn't appear to be any publicly available repository of requests. Maybe that path was chosen intentionally. > It’s not clear to me how the changing sentiment much is influenced by > > (i) Perception that this really is a distinct language. I agree with Han Steenwijk on this: if they can demonstrate this within the applicable working definitions -- not with appeals to national pride or political independence, and not by citing the new letters that were invented specifically to lend credence to the "separate language" argument -- only then should a new code element be granted. > (ii) Feeling that it’s no more or less a distinct language than > Serbian vs. Croatian vs. Bosnian, and that it’s not appropriate to > bias against this one. Is that a working model of the JAC, that once an error is made in disunifying language codes, the floodgates are open? I would hope not. It's not a question of "bias against." > (iii) Feeling tired of the issue and assuming there’s no real harm to > encoding, so we’ll be better off putting this behind us. Again, one would hope that exhaustion does not become an acceptable strategy for proposals. Mark Davis replied to the last point: > I do believe the end result of giving their dialect a language code > will be counterproductive, since there is already a code for > expressing what they have: sr-ME. Yep. It would be helpful if the community were required to indicate what it is about "sr-ME" that doesn't meet their needs. -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org _______________________________________________ Ietf-languages mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages