07:5307:53, 20 May 2024diffhist+4,710
Chibcha language
This information is based on primary sources of the language and on information given by several cited scholars. Any other spelling is not legitimate. Stop promoting a version that does not correspond to reality.Tag: Manual revert
19:4419:44, 19 May 2024diffhist+4,741
Chibcha language
Saravia is not reliable and his phonological proposal of Chibcha and even more so his orthography is not the only one nor the most widespread. His work is not considered serious by any Colombian linguist.Tag: Manual revert
07:2007:20, 19 May 2024diffhist+4,769
Chibcha language
It is you
Fdom5997 who is altering the information, leaving aside sources accredited by institutions such as the University of Pennsylvania, Cambriage University and Instituto Caro y Cuervo. Saravia is not a reliable source, their works are mere PDFs published on a website without review by academic peers, by a foundation with a clear political intention.Tag: Manual revert
18:5118:51, 18 May 2024diffhist+4,630
Chibcha language
Constenla, Adelaar & Muysken & González are reputable sources. Stop promoting the phonology you like or invented and hiding the fact that there is no academic consensus.Tags: Manual revertReverted
08:4208:42, 17 May 2024diffhist+3,250
Chibcha language
Undid revision
1224237919 by
Fdom5997 (
talk) Answer: Constenla, González and Adelaar with Muysken, are authors who have published their proposals in accredited publications and serious institutions, University of Pennsylvania, Cambriage University and Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Tags: UndoReverted
21:0121:01, 15 May 2024diffhist+5
Chibcha language
Undid revision
1224021626 by
Zaquezipe (
talk) Answer: There is a huge difference between "reviving a language" and "revitalizing a language." Revival occurs in cases where there are no native speakers, while revitalization occurs when a dying language is encouraged and promoted so that it does not die. In the case of chibcha all attempts at revival are constructions from the present.Tag: Undo
12:1112:11, 14 May 2024diffhist−43
Chibcha language
Undid revision
1223789223 by
Zaquezipe (
talk) Answer: What is the basis for the claim that the revitalization initiatives are very close to the original? The question is clear. Are there native speakers or not? Do not delete reasoned information and quotes.Tag: Undo
06:2006:20, 14 May 2024diffhist−43
Chibcha language
Undid revision
1223721512 by
Zaquezipe (
talk) Answer: Any attempt at revitalization cannot be compared with any native speakers, but only with incomplete documents produced by non-native speakers. It is a fallacy to say that it is the same language.Tag: Undo
07:5307:53, 20 May 2024diffhist+4,710
Chibcha language
This information is based on primary sources of the language and on information given by several cited scholars. Any other spelling is not legitimate. Stop promoting a version that does not correspond to reality.Tag: Manual revert
19:4419:44, 19 May 2024diffhist+4,741
Chibcha language
Saravia is not reliable and his phonological proposal of Chibcha and even more so his orthography is not the only one nor the most widespread. His work is not considered serious by any Colombian linguist.Tag: Manual revert
07:2007:20, 19 May 2024diffhist+4,769
Chibcha language
It is you
Fdom5997 who is altering the information, leaving aside sources accredited by institutions such as the University of Pennsylvania, Cambriage University and Instituto Caro y Cuervo. Saravia is not a reliable source, their works are mere PDFs published on a website without review by academic peers, by a foundation with a clear political intention.Tag: Manual revert
18:5118:51, 18 May 2024diffhist+4,630
Chibcha language
Constenla, Adelaar & Muysken & González are reputable sources. Stop promoting the phonology you like or invented and hiding the fact that there is no academic consensus.Tags: Manual revertReverted
08:4208:42, 17 May 2024diffhist+3,250
Chibcha language
Undid revision
1224237919 by
Fdom5997 (
talk) Answer: Constenla, González and Adelaar with Muysken, are authors who have published their proposals in accredited publications and serious institutions, University of Pennsylvania, Cambriage University and Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Tags: UndoReverted
21:0121:01, 15 May 2024diffhist+5
Chibcha language
Undid revision
1224021626 by
Zaquezipe (
talk) Answer: There is a huge difference between "reviving a language" and "revitalizing a language." Revival occurs in cases where there are no native speakers, while revitalization occurs when a dying language is encouraged and promoted so that it does not die. In the case of chibcha all attempts at revival are constructions from the present.Tag: Undo
12:1112:11, 14 May 2024diffhist−43
Chibcha language
Undid revision
1223789223 by
Zaquezipe (
talk) Answer: What is the basis for the claim that the revitalization initiatives are very close to the original? The question is clear. Are there native speakers or not? Do not delete reasoned information and quotes.Tag: Undo
06:2006:20, 14 May 2024diffhist−43
Chibcha language
Undid revision
1223721512 by
Zaquezipe (
talk) Answer: Any attempt at revitalization cannot be compared with any native speakers, but only with incomplete documents produced by non-native speakers. It is a fallacy to say that it is the same language.Tag: Undo