Moderator: Forum Administrators
księżycowy wrote:I'm not sure I like the "Indo-European" idea, because depending on how we define Europe, we can include: Basque, Frisian, Albanian, Armenian, Caucasian languages, Georgian, Sammi and the other Uralic languages (a lot of them are spoken in what I would concider European Russia, or at least a close enough tolerance).
I vote for "Other European".
atalarikt wrote:this may have a chance of making the subforum much more active than it is currently (or should I say, arise from its grave? ) and I've seen some Unilangers actively speak or use minority Uralic languages like Livonian, Mari, Udmurt, and so on.
Irusia wrote:Not all the Uralic languages are spoken in Europe.
I suggest two subforums: Uralic languages forum and Minority Indo-European languages forum (we can include also those outside Europe).
Naava wrote:I like this idea. It makes sense to keep languages that belong to the same language family in the same place.
Karavinka wrote:We can dissolve "Other Languages", which has been the beloved orphanage of languages that don't belong anywhere, by renaming:
- Turkic to Central Asian
- Sami to Aboriginal European (I'm not serious in suggesting this as the forum name, though to me they're just as aboriginal as Yi or Cree. Eh, whatevs. Eurocentrism FTW.)
- Northeast Asian and Siberian
- Southwest Asian and Caucasian
and finally, remove:
- Other languages
This way, we can divide up the rest of the world... that is, Eurasia. Going completely by geography solves the problems like Samoyedic.
- most Mongolic Languages will go to North Asian, except the likes of Kalmyk which can go to Southwest Asian and Caucasian
- Minority languages in China will go to either Northeast Asian (e.g. Manchu, Dagur, etc), Southeast Asian (Zhuang, Yi, etc), or Central Asian (Uyghur, Sibe).
- Kick Yakut to North Asian, and invite whatever that is vaguely interior to Asia, such as Tibetan to Central Asian. (Or, if we want to respect its Indic connection, South Asian can be "South Asian and Tibetan")
- The remaining languages of Southwestern Asia / the Middle East will find their places in Southwest Asian
Instead of going with "Uralic" and "European", this can at least solve the problems for the foreseeable future, though it will add one more forum. The only thing that we need to change will be if a language attracts enough people to create its own forum.
h34 wrote:I think one advantage of keeping language families like Uralic together in a common subforum is that it would make it easier to create threads about common features and differences within the language family, just like some threads on the Turkic languages subforum.
Linguaphile wrote:Edit: h34 posted above while I was writing my post. I agree completely:h34 wrote:I think one advantage of keeping language families like Uralic together in a common subforum is that it would make it easier to create threads about common features and differences within the language family, just like some threads on the Turkic languages subforum.
księżycowy wrote:I'm surprised noöne has suggested we reorganized our subforums into linguistic groupings yet. That's kind of what has been hinted at, but mostly about the creation of new subforums.
księżycowy wrote:Since I'm interested in more than just my ideas of this, how would you propose we do that, Linguaphile?
As in, what would it look like?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest