headers
Doug Ewell | 1 Apr 01:05
Picon

Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

C Eddie Whitehead wrote:

> My one concern with the year names for the subtags is that perhaps 
> other people from the former Soviet areas will pick say the 1933 
> subtag up and use it incorrectly;
> so I think we need something a bit more explicit here;
> we are allowed 8 characters;
> at least maybe be1933 or bel1933 (for the Soviet reform orthography)

Is it just me, or are we in danger of going overboard using years in 
subtags when the variants in question already have names?

My impression of "1901" and "1996" was that there really wasn't any 
other choice, because neither of the reforms had a name associated with 
it.  The variant of Belarusian in question is apparently called 
"Taraskievica."  Why on earth would we use a year number instead of 
that?

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Frank Ellermann | 1 Apr 01:30
Picon
Picon

Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

Doug Ewell wrote:

> The variant of Belarusian in question is apparently called
> "Taraskievica."  Why on earth would we use a year number
> instead of that?

We wouldn't, nothing's wrong with the proposed "tarask".  I've
used year numbers while talking about the "official" orthography
(not "tarask") after John reported that "narkam" or similar is
not PC.  If Jaska isn't interested to register two variants, no 
matter what its name would be, the point is moot, only "tarask"
is on the table.

Frank
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Peter Constable | 1 Apr 02:56
Picon
Favicon

RE: policy wrt politics (was RE: be-tarask language subtag registration form)

Can we safely judge when all the opponents have reached consensus? Doesn't that create a risk that we're
making political evaluations? When some opponent comes along after the fact and says, "You didn't wait to
hear my opinion," won't we appear to have taken sides in the political debate?

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: mrc <at> ndcms.cac.washington.edu [mailto:mrc <at> ndcms.cac.washington.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Crispin
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2007 9:53 AM
To: Peter Constable
Cc: ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
Subject: Re: policy wrt politics (was RE: be-tarask language subtag registration form)

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Peter Constable wrote:
> a)  Reject any request with political issues to ensure this list avoids
> politics?
> b)  Evaluate any request solely on non-political criteria? (We would
> still need to ensure that subtags are non-offensive.)
> c)  Try to judge on a case-by-case basis what is the best way to walk
> through the political minefield?

d) A modified synthesis of (a) and (b).  In the event that any request is
determined to have political undertones, then reject ALL requests
associated with the politics until such time as ALL the players in the
politics can come up with a unified proposal that is acceptable to ALL of
them.

This explicitly means that any player can veto his opponent's proposal,
but only at the cost of blocking his own proposal.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Yury Tarasievich | 1 Apr 10:56
Picon

be-tarask language subtag registration form

Hello,

Some background info to your questions. Hope this helps and not
complicates matters.

Some background info, if you don't mind. Sorry for the shoddy and
sketchy form. Romanisation used is BGN/PCGN. References may be
produced, if needed, but these will be Belarusian books.

Notes:
1.Belarusian is state language, language of schooling etc. Official
grammar is what's taught at school, either in Belarusian school, or in
Belarusian language classes.
2.Belarus is positioned in the borderline between two major cultures:
Polish (strongly Western and Latin) and Russian (strongly Bysantic).
3.In Belarusian literary tradition, word "pravapis" which literally
means "orthography" (spelling), is frequently used for "grammar" in
general.
4."Soft" is local ling. term for palatalised consonants. "Hard" is
local ling. term for velarised consonants.
5.Belarusian language has the "dark L" (velarised or hard L) phoneme.
6.Belarusian language has native phonetic feature of "Akannye" --
change of the "E/YE" unstressed to the "A/YA" when spoken.
7.Belarusian language has very native phonetic feature of
"Dzyekannye/Tsyekannye" - change of the palatalised "D,T" to the
affricates, not so dental as Russian, not so palatal as Polish. There
is no soft D and T, only soft DZ and TS instead.
8.Belarusian phonology is characterised by the generally untensioned
state of the organs of speech, as compared to Caucasian or Ukraininan.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 17 comments |
headers
Yury Tarasievich | 1 Apr 11:19
Picon

Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

Ah, sorry, while using the term Russification, I just forgot to add
that the issue 2, esp. in its clean pre-1933 form, is (and was)
(arguably) considered to be outright Polonisation influence.

---
Permalink | Reply | 16 comments |
headers
Yury Tarasievich | 1 Apr 11:24
Picon

Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

Sorry, one more amend:
In 1959, the prominent, but not wholesale, "akannye" was introduced,
in assimilated words, too.
Permalink | Reply | 15 comments |
headers
Michael Everson | 1 Apr 11:28
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

Taraskievica in LOC transliteration is Tarashkevitsa
--

-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
Permalink | Reply | 14 comments |
headers
Michael Everson | 1 Apr 11:31
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

This is extremely interesting and informative 
http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~np214/lacin.htm

--

-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Everson | 1 Apr 11:49
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

And this http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~np214/taras.htm corroborates the 
source in Jaska's request.

I would be a little happier if the subtag was tarash or tarashk than 
tarask as it would promote more accurate pronunciation.
--

-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
Permalink | Reply | 12 comments |
headers
Frank Ellermann | 1 Apr 13:13
Picon
Picon

Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

Michael Everson wrote:

> I would be a little happier if the subtag was tarash or tarashk
> than tarask as it would promote more accurate pronunciation.

On the interesting page http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~np214/lacin.htm
that you've found (thanks) the author states:

  It is natural that Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Croatians, Slovenians,
  Germans, French, Spanish, and all other nations using a [national
  version of] Latin script do not transliterate their words and 
  names into say English, such as according to some US Congress
  Library System, but write them as they are, with all the
  diacritics or without.

That would be "tarask" without "sh".  The users should recognize
a subtag as what it is where possible, the correct pronounciation
then simply follows.

Frank
Permalink | Reply | 11 comments |

Gmane