Language Subforums Management Discussion 2018

[księżycowy]

Wow, thanks Irusia!

Now let's just hope you didn't dig all those threads up for nothing.

[dEhiN]

That's not a bad idea; there's already precedence for grouping based on geography. But would the term "Oceanian" be self-explanatory? That is, would people know to look there for the Australian Indigenous and Papuan languages?

[księżycowy]

Maybe we could call it "Australian, Papuan and Oceanic languages"?

Not sure how to fit all three into one nice sounding title.
Is Papua New Guinea considered a part of Oceania, by the way?

Or maybe "Indigenous languages of the Pacific Islands"?

Idk.

[dEhiN]

Maybe we could call it "Australian, Papuan and Oceanic languages"?

Not sure how to fit all three into one nice sounding title.
Is Papua New Guinea considered a part of Oceania, by the way?

Or maybe "Indigenous languages of the Pacific Islands"?

Idk.

Well we don't have to fit it into one nice sounding title. After all, we do have "Ancient, Classical and Extinct Languages" as well as "Central and South American Indigenous Languages". One caveat/question: we use the term indigenous for NAIL (North American Indigenous Languages), CSAIL, and AIL (African Indigenous Languages). Should we add the same term after Australian? Or is it pretty much a given that if you talk about Australian languages, you mean the aboriginal ones?

[księżycowy]

If we go that route, I'd suggest "Aboriginal" instead of "Indigenous." That seems to be the preferred term in Australia.

"Australian Aboriginal, Papuan and Oceanic Languages"?

I could get behind that, I suppose.

Here's a question, what about the Formosan languages? Would they be included in this?

[atalarikt]

If we go that route, I'd suggest "Aboriginal" instead of "Indigenous." That seems to be the preferred term in Australia.

"Australian Aboriginal, Papuan and Oceanic Languages"?

I could get behind that, I suppose.

Here's a question, what about the Formosan languages? Would they be included in this?

1. Nice subforum name. I definitely agree!
2. Taiwan isn't all too close towards Australia or any other Oceanic countries. Maybe group it with Philippine/local languages of Nusantara/other Malayo-Polynesian languages that aren't Oceanic?

[vijayjohn]

I wouldn't include the Formosan languages in an Oceanian subforum. They're not spoken in Oceania.

But would the term "Oceanian" be self-explanatory? That is, would people know to look there for the Australian Indigenous and Papuan languages?

I don't see why not. It's not any less intuitive than including Neo-Aramaic under "Ancient, Classical and Extinct Languages."

[księżycowy]

As for the Formosan languages, we have Neo-Aramaic in "Ancient, Classical and Extinct Languages." I don't find that any less intuitive.

I don't think I'd concider them "Southeast Asian" and I don't think I'd put them with Indonesian/Malay.

[Luís]

I don't know if there's enough space for a such a long name, though.

[księżycowy]

Maybe drop "Aboriginal" then? Would that shorten it up enough?

[Luís]

Well, there are already other forum names that are truncated in the main page and nobody has complained, so maybe that's not an issue...

[księżycowy]

Well, if anyone does complain, it's an option.

[atalarikt]

As for the Formosan languages, we have Neo-Aramaic in "Ancient, Classical and Extinct Languages." I don't find that any less intuitive.

I don't think I'd concider them "Southeast Asian" and I don't think I'd put them with Indonesian/Malay.

D'oh! I forgot that we already have the SEA languages subforum when I wrote my earlier message.

[księżycowy]

I mean, we can move the Formosan languages thread to the SEA forum. I guess I have a hard time associating Taiwan with SE Asia, but I can deal.

[księżycowy]

I don't see why not. It's not any less intuitive than including Neo-Aramaic under "Ancient, Classical and Extinct Languages."

I'm kinda with dEhiN on this one. I didn't even know Oceanian was a thing until I googled it after you brought it up. It does work, but who the hell knows what it means?

And even if they did, the name by far expects the Oceanic languages more than Papuan or Australian. Or at least in my eyes.

[vijayjohn]

I don't see why not. It's not any less intuitive than including Neo-Aramaic under "Ancient, Classical and Extinct Languages."

I'm kinda with dEhiN on this one. I didn't even know Oceanian was a thing until I googled it after you brought it up. It does work, but who the hell knows what it means?

You've never heard of Oceania?

[księżycowy]

Not before this discussion, no.

I've heard of Oceanic, so I could have guessed.

[vijayjohn]

What if we just renamed the Polynesian Languages subforum as the Pacific Languages subforum? Then we could include Formosan, too, right?

[księżycowy]

That's simple enough. And would include all of the languages were taking about. Maybe we could call it "Pacific Indigenous Languages" or something.

[atalarikt]

Now that's much better than the previous suggestions!

Also, I edited the thread title to reflect more the many ideas poured here.