Oerlis:Arabysk
In algemiene sprektaal is der net. As de minsken yn de Arabyske wrâld dan mei-inoar kommunisearje dogge se dat faak yn it dialekt fan Kairo. Dat is it meast prestisjeuze dialekt fan de Arabyske wrâld. Yn Arabyske films en televyzjeprogramma’s foar in ynternasjonaal publyk wurdt oer it algemien dat dialekt brûkt.
- Sorry dat ik in het Nederlands schrijf: Dit klopt niet! Veel films en liedjes zijn weliswaar in het dialect van Kairo, maar de reden hiervoor is dat Kairo gewoon het centrum van de Arabische entertainmentindustrie is. Als een Arabier met een andere spreekt en ze sterk verschillende dialectachtergronden hebben, gebruikt hij meestal een mengeling van 1.) de standaardtaal en 2.) het prestigedialect van zijn eigen land (meestal dat van de hoofdstad). Een Syrier uit Latakia zou dus het dialect van Damaskus spreken en dat een beetje aan de standaardtaal aanpassen. Maar hij zou nooit in het Kairoos spreken en zou dat ook niet kunnen (ook al verstaat hij het).
- P.S. Misschien zou hij wel bepaalde woorden uit het Egyptisch-Arabisch gebruiken die hij kent en waarvan hij verwacht dat de ander dat ook doet. Maar dat wil niet zeggen dat hij inderdaad dat dialect spreekt.
It wurdt yn it grutste diel fan de Arabyske wrâld ridlik ta hiel goed begrepen en hat in status dy’t mooglik te ferlykjen is mei dy fan it Amerikaansk Ingelsk yn de westerske wrâld.
- Ook hier kan ik absoluut niet aan toestemmen. Arabieren krijgen hun opleiding in het Hoogarabisch, lezen kranten in het Hoogarabisch, kijken het nieuws in het Hoogarabisch, ezv. Het wordt dus voor dingen gebruikt waarvoor het Engels zelfs in Nederland niet gebruikelijk is (en hier hebben we het over het veruit meest geangliseerde land van het westen). Aan de andere kant zijn wetenschappelijke teksten meestal juist niet in het Hoogarabisch, maar in het Frans of Engels. En voorts beschouwen Arabieren het Hoogarabisch als iets wat van hun is en niet als iets vreemds. Dus het kan daar absoluut niet mee worden vergeleken.
Map
[boarne bewurkje]File:Arabic Dialects fr.svg => "This file has been superseded by Arabic Varieties Map.svg. It is recommended to use the other file. Please note that deleting superseded images requires consent. Reason to use the other file: "Up-to-date SVG version based on Ethnologue's 2022 report and other reliable sources." " => File:Arabic Varieties Map.svg A455bcd9 (oerlis) 8 nov 2022, 09.27 (CET)
- In the so-called improved map, Arabic language varieties follow, for the most part, international borders, especially in North Africa. That obviously has no basis in reality, since languages don't conform to arbitrarily drawn political boundaries. The Saharan Arabic language in Morocco and Algeria is erased entirely. And the "improved" map has no legend, so the colored areas and numbers on it are meaningless. Fix these obvious mistakes, and we will be more then happy to replace the so-called "superseded" image. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (oerlis) 8 nov 2022, 12.09 (CET)
- Hi @Ieneach fan 'e Esk.
- Thanks for your message.
- You can find the legend here. The legend doesn't appear on the map so that the map can be used on any language edition.
- The old map is wrong and grossly inaccurate. For instance, it mentions a dialect that just doesn't exist at all: "Somali Arabic". Indeed, Somali is a language totally different from Arabic, it's not a dialect of Arabic. This old map was so inaccurate that the English Wikipedia community decided to remove it from all articles, even before creating a new one. Contributors and linguists on the English Wikipedia considered that it was better to have no map than to have this terribly wrong map. You can follow the debate that led to this decision here.
- This old map is also entirely unsourced. It is pure original research.
- Of course, the new map may have issues as well. As the saying goes, "the map is not the territory", so no map is ever perfect. But at least, this map is fully sourced and based on highly reliable sources, namely, en:Ethnologue, "the standard reference" in linguistics. If you think there are issues in the new map, feel free to provide feedback to Ethnologue or to suggest improvements on Wikimedia Commons.
- To conclude, unless the Frysk Wikipedia has lower quality standards than all other Wikimedia projects and prefers an unsourced grossly inaccurate map, I think it would be better for the Frysk Wikipedia to follow what all other language editions did (especially the English and Arabic Wikipedias) and use the new map.
- Cheers, A455bcd9 (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 11.13 (CET)
██ 3: Saharan Arabic
- By the way, Saharan Arabic in Algeria is not "erased entirely", it is number 3 (blue) in the large area in southern Algeria. A455bcd9 (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 11.24 (CET)
Look, a legend on Commons is completely useless, because no reader of this article is going to go there to see it. If they don't see the legend in the caption or the map itself, the legend might as well not exist. Alright, I was wrong about Saharan Arabic, though on the map you promote, it's in an entirely different place. But you are wrong about "Somali Arabic". There is no such thing on the old map, only some Yemeni Arabic spoken by the Arab ethnic minority in northern Somalia (which, strangely, is missing entirely on the new map). As for the source, it seems to me that the language situation in North Africa on the old map is based on this this map, which I found with no trouble at all on Google. Hmm... Ethnologue a "highly reliable source"? That is not how I would describe it. Also, since it's no longer a free database, it's of no use anymore to me and most other interested people, even in instances where it would have been in the past. And, "provide feedback to Ethnologue", really? Like that wouldn't by an exercise in futility. Look, I appreciate what you are trying to do here. But in my opinion the new map is at least as flawed as the old one. The legend thing is a dealbreaker for me. If the new map had a legend, I would put it in the article. As it doesn't have one, we might as well put in this map:
Which at least has the advantage of having the names of the languages written into the map itself. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 12.26 (CET)
██ 1: Hassaniya Arabysk
██ 2: Marokkaansk Arabysk
██ 3: Saharaansk Arabysk
[...]██ 30: Malteesk
- @Ieneach fan 'e Esk you're right, it turns out that the French version of this map (used on the Frysk Wikipedia) doesn't include "Somali Arabic" (good news!) whereas the English translation of the exact same map includes "Somali Arabic". This situation tells you something about the lack of reliability of this map: it's just each contributor who modifies it at will, without quoting any source. And therefore each language translation of the map is different...
- Regarding the legend, you can easily add it below with this template or that one, using the Frysk translation for each dialect. See an example on the right. This solution is better because then:
- The legend is in Frysk (instead of... French in the current version!),
- It is clickable, and
- It is editable (if the map changes, if there's a typo, if a dialect is renamed, etc.).
- A455bcd9 (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 12.44 (CET)
- @A455bcd9: Yes, it could be done. Seems like a lot of work, though, and it will take up a lot of space. First, tell me what you think of the source for the old map I found. You complained that it was completely unsourced, but obviously it's not. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 12.59 (CET)
- The old map doesn't mention any source. So we can try to guess which source[s] they used, but I have no idea. This map is quite nice indeed! It seems to be well sourced, Ethnologue is mentioned as one of the sources, and in practice it seems to follow exactly Ethnologue's dialects' borders at least in North Africa and the Levant (for instance, compare to the new map for Moroccan Arabic, Hassaniya, Algerian Arabic, and Saharan Arabic => they're identical). That being said, that map doesn't show Arabic minorities in Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kenya, Uganda, the Central African Republic, Cameroon, Djibouti, and Eritrea; it doesn't show Dhofari Arabic and Omani Arabic; it merges the 3 dialects spoken in Yemen into one "Yemeni Arabic". But if you prefer to use it: go for it! A455bcd9 (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 13.26 (CET)
- @A455bcd9: Ah. I'm sorry. I can see how you could you misunderstand me as, in hindsight, I wasn't very clear. I was talking about this map I found on Google. You say there is no source for the old map, but it took me less than a minute to find this map on Google images. It is very similar to the old map in the Maghreb en Egypt, and this map and this one of the Middle East (both related to the North Africa map) are also, for the most part, extremely similar. It looks to me as if the old map is a simplification of these three maps. I haven't read the entire discussion on the English Wikipedia you linked to above (I don't have that kind of spare time at hand), but didn't this come up there? These maps are very easy to find. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 15.07 (CET)
- Hi @Ieneach fan 'e Esk, ah OK sorry, now I understand. As far as I know, no one mentioned maps from this website "Muturzikin" (North Africa, Middle East, Levant & Irak) during the discussion on the English Wikipedia. Muturzikin maps look quite different compared to the "old map" (the one currently on the Frysk Wikipedia). For instance, look at Hassaniya in Mali: a small area in the old map vs a huge area on Muturzikin. Also, the author is anonymous and unknown, so this source cannot be considered reliable for Wikipedia. And as Muturzikin doesn't mention any source, we can assume it is original research by this anonymous author. In any case, these maps clearly display "Copyright: All the reproduction rights are prohibited except from the express authorization of the author" so they aren't free and cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. A455bcd9 (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 15.19 (CET)
- @A455bcd9: Hello again. I wasn't proposing to upload them to Wikipedia or Commons, and you are right that there are differences in some areas vis-à-vis the old map, but if you look at the position and shape of, for instance, the Saharan Arabic language area on the old map and the North Africa map of Muturzikin, or the shape of the Mesopotamian Arabic language area, which Muturzikin calls Iraqi Arabic, especially the "hook" in Central Syria, I'm convinced that these maps formed at least in part the basis for de old map. I'm surprised no one involved with the discussion on the English Wikipedia thought to look on Google. Anyway, in the meanwhile I've finished the translation of the legend of "your" map. I was afraid it would have to go in one long vertical line, which would make de map equally illegible as when the legend was only availible in Commons, but it turns out you can put it in 3 columns, so it is workable. I did notice one omission: en:Khorasani Arabic in northeastern Iran is missing from "your" map. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 15.58 (CET)
- @Ieneach fan 'e Esk: thanks a lot, the Frysk legend below the map looks awesome!
- Regarding Khorasani Arabic: the new map follows the en:ISO 639-3 international standard for language codes. Khorasani Arabic is not part of the languages/dialects recognized in this standard as you can see here. Indeed, it seems that Khorasani Arabic is a dialect of Uzbeki Arabic (source). So it appears as such on the new map. A455bcd9 (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 17.18 (CET)
- @A455bcd9: Hello again. I wasn't proposing to upload them to Wikipedia or Commons, and you are right that there are differences in some areas vis-à-vis the old map, but if you look at the position and shape of, for instance, the Saharan Arabic language area on the old map and the North Africa map of Muturzikin, or the shape of the Mesopotamian Arabic language area, which Muturzikin calls Iraqi Arabic, especially the "hook" in Central Syria, I'm convinced that these maps formed at least in part the basis for de old map. I'm surprised no one involved with the discussion on the English Wikipedia thought to look on Google. Anyway, in the meanwhile I've finished the translation of the legend of "your" map. I was afraid it would have to go in one long vertical line, which would make de map equally illegible as when the legend was only availible in Commons, but it turns out you can put it in 3 columns, so it is workable. I did notice one omission: en:Khorasani Arabic in northeastern Iran is missing from "your" map. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 15.58 (CET)
- Hi @Ieneach fan 'e Esk, ah OK sorry, now I understand. As far as I know, no one mentioned maps from this website "Muturzikin" (North Africa, Middle East, Levant & Irak) during the discussion on the English Wikipedia. Muturzikin maps look quite different compared to the "old map" (the one currently on the Frysk Wikipedia). For instance, look at Hassaniya in Mali: a small area in the old map vs a huge area on Muturzikin. Also, the author is anonymous and unknown, so this source cannot be considered reliable for Wikipedia. And as Muturzikin doesn't mention any source, we can assume it is original research by this anonymous author. In any case, these maps clearly display "Copyright: All the reproduction rights are prohibited except from the express authorization of the author" so they aren't free and cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. A455bcd9 (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 15.19 (CET)
- @A455bcd9: Ah. I'm sorry. I can see how you could you misunderstand me as, in hindsight, I wasn't very clear. I was talking about this map I found on Google. You say there is no source for the old map, but it took me less than a minute to find this map on Google images. It is very similar to the old map in the Maghreb en Egypt, and this map and this one of the Middle East (both related to the North Africa map) are also, for the most part, extremely similar. It looks to me as if the old map is a simplification of these three maps. I haven't read the entire discussion on the English Wikipedia you linked to above (I don't have that kind of spare time at hand), but didn't this come up there? These maps are very easy to find. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 15.07 (CET)
- The old map doesn't mention any source. So we can try to guess which source[s] they used, but I have no idea. This map is quite nice indeed! It seems to be well sourced, Ethnologue is mentioned as one of the sources, and in practice it seems to follow exactly Ethnologue's dialects' borders at least in North Africa and the Levant (for instance, compare to the new map for Moroccan Arabic, Hassaniya, Algerian Arabic, and Saharan Arabic => they're identical). That being said, that map doesn't show Arabic minorities in Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kenya, Uganda, the Central African Republic, Cameroon, Djibouti, and Eritrea; it doesn't show Dhofari Arabic and Omani Arabic; it merges the 3 dialects spoken in Yemen into one "Yemeni Arabic". But if you prefer to use it: go for it! A455bcd9 (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 13.26 (CET)
- @A455bcd9: Yes, it could be done. Seems like a lot of work, though, and it will take up a lot of space. First, tell me what you think of the source for the old map I found. You complained that it was completely unsourced, but obviously it's not. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (oerlis) 14 nov 2022, 12.59 (CET)