Talk:Paman languages

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Languages High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Australia Low‑importance Paman languages is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

It has been hard for me to find a classification to use, so I ended up using the one used by Ethnologue, but with slight modifications, such as a Southwestern subgroup,* and a modification of my own, the Uw languages. The latter is not based on any scientific or linguistic work, and I merely created it because I have seen the Uw Oykangand language and the Uw Olkola language being described as sister dialects, and because I wasn't able to find other classifications including them both. If somebody has a better classification, it is very welcome! -- Llonydd (talk) 15:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on the classification once again, and it is now based on both Ethnologue and R. M. W. Dixon. I haven't based it completely on R. M. W. Dixon as the other Pama-Nyungan languages are still classified in the traditional way, so the name Paman languages has been kept and so has some of its traditional and widely accepted classification. I have done it in that way, so that the reader doesn't get confused by two classification schemes, and an interested reader will read into it anyway - perhaps a page could be created describing the differences? The new classification also includes many more languages, as I realized there were lots of pages already created with Paman languages - Paman languages which weren't included in the old classification, but now the reader will be able to access all the created Paman languages pages using the classification. Again, if someone has a better idea for the classification, then it is very welcome! -- Llonydd (talk) 08:17, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The list now includes the languages mentioned in Bowern (2011), except for one: Urratjingu. I can't ID that, and it might be one of several languages we list that she doesn't, so I left it out. (Two others, Kokiny and Kok-Papángk, have the same LingList code and are said to be SW Paman; another, Wagaman, has the ISO code of Wagiman, and so involves an error somewhere.) — kwami (talk) 03:48, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]