Content deleted Content added
Line 253: ::::::You have to consult Pellard 2010, which does cover the data for Yonaguni and numerous other areas and explains the methodology. The first document is merely a linguistic introduction to several Ryukyuan variants, but it's backed by reputable Ryukyuan linguists, reiterates the same classification scheme, and represents a precursor to the book ''Handbook of the Ryukyuan Languages'', which also proposes the same 5-language division (assuming that didn't change since the [http://www.ninjal.ac.jp/Mouton_Handbook/files/members/05_Ryukyuan_languages.pdf book proposal]). As for Ryudai's classification, it doesn't provide any proper comparative data and just inspires itself from a collection of other works, so it shouldn't be considered a direct authoritative source. — '''[[User:Io Katai|<font color="#0065C4">Io</font> <font color="#C40000">Katai</font>]] [[User talk:Io Katai|<font color="#0065C4">ᵀᵃˡᵏ</font>]]''' 00:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC) :::::::I find it odd that Yanbaru Kutuba and Uchinaguchi were melded into one language simply because they're both from the same island. UNESCO's classification seems to still be accurate though.—[[User:Ryulong|<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryulong|<font color="Gold">琉竜</font>]]) 00:28, 9 October 2014 (UTC) :::What Landroving Linguist, Io Katai and I showed is that the external sources published in the last decade still disagree with each other. What I am trying to do is to reflect the very fact in articles and they can be improved with additional sources available to us. That's the point. Whether a lect is a language, language variety or dialect doesn't matter here. :::What Ryulong does is the opposite. His position is that UNESCO is the bible and that everything else must be removed from the articles. He is challenging our [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|NPOV]] policy. :::Readers would notice that descriptive linguists identify the lects they study with ''shima'' or village communities such as Ura, Yuwan and Ōgami. It is because they are aware of the fact that these lects are different from those of neighboring ''shima''. Ryulong is the opposite. He is a [[Wikipedia:Advocacy|political activist promoting a fiction]] that there are Standard Amami, Standard Kunigami, etc. He is trying to remove materials that are at odds with his ideological agenda. He would never allow [[:File:Northern Amami Oshima linguistic sameness.svg|this linguistic map]] to be shown in the articles. --[[User:Nanshu|Nanshu]] ([[User talk:Nanshu|talk]]) 00:48, 9 October 2014 (UTC) *:Yet I've pointed out that there are other sources that amalgamate the smaller languages, for which there is very little dedicated coverage, as dialects of geographically proximate and apparently phonemically similar larger languages. Not to mention Nanshu's sources classify them as "dialects" rather than "languages" and the sources constitute very few pages within themselves.—[[User:Ryulong|<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryulong|<font color="Gold">琉竜</font>]]) 20:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC) *::Agreed. Not only do languages have to prove notability, just like everything else; there's not even going to be much to say about them if there aren't secondary sources for them. See [[WP:Pokemon test]]. [[User:Tezero|Tezero]] ([[User talk:Tezero|talk]]) 22:37, 8 October 2014 (UTC) | |||