[Foundation-l] Allow new wikis in extinct languages?

Sun Apr 6 05:20:10 UTC 2008

Hoi,
I do not buy into your argument.  People DO make up new vocabulary and in my
opinion that is a sufficient argument.
Thanks,
     GerardM

On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:

> We've had this discussion, and your best rebuttal to my argument was
> that Navajo is not an extinct language... that is a logical fallacy,
> you did not argue successfully or even at all against the idea of
> using descriptive phrases rather than creating new words to refer to
> new concepts. Instead, you continued to rail on against ancient
> languages.
>
> Mark
>
> On 05/04/2008, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> >  The argument against new wikipedias in extinct or ancient languages is
> that
> >  as a consequence of their status new vocabulary prevents the writing of
> a
> >  modern encyclopaedia. With the creation of neologisms you change the
> >  language to the extend that it no longer IS that language.
> >
> >  This has nothing to do with the relevance of the language but
> everything
> >  with the historic accuracy of that language. People that read all this
> >  modern terminology will expect that as a consequence they are learning
> the
> >  language while in fact they will not truly do this. Latin is in my
> opinion
> >  different in that it has seen continued use and the Vatican does
> publish a
> >  dictionary with neologisms (new in relation to the classical Latin).
> >
> >  When it can be proven that there has been a continued use, it would not
> >  surprise me that this is true for Sanskrit, I would personally
> re-evaluate
> >  my position and consider an exception to this rule.
> >  Thanks,
> >      GerardM
> >
> >  On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 5:01 AM, Crazy Lover <
> always_yours.forever at yahoo.com>
> >  wrote:
> >
> >
> >  > I noticed that the present discussion started  as an answer to the
> >  > rejection of the ancient greek wikipedia. and i haven't seen a hard
> defence
> >  > like this project.
> >  >  i think is due to the ancient greek is always a special case. as the
> >  > quote of Edward Sapir found   in the classical language article of
> >  > wikipedia; the ancient greek is with latin, classical chinese, arabic
> and
> >  > sanskrit is the foundation of all the culture of the whole world,
> >  > and the modern world refers to them, all the time.
> >  >
> >  > I ask to the subcommitte:
> >  >
> >  >  if the discussion provide good reason to the project of ancient
> language.
> >  > it's possible a reconsideration of the rejection of ancient greek
> Wikipedia,
> >  > and others projects of ancient language like classical japanese or
> ottomanic
> >  > turkish that were proposed, too?.
> >  >
> >  > J. case
> >  >
> >  > _______________________________________________
> >  > foundation-l mailing list
> >  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
>  ____________________________________________________________________________________
> >  > You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of
> Blockbuster
> >  > Total Access, No Cost.
> >  > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
> >  > _______________________________________________
> >  > foundation-l mailing list
> >  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >  >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  foundation-l mailing list
> >  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>