Central Atlas Tamazight has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Central Atlas Tamazight:
|
IRCAM does not really deal with tzm but rather zgh. The way IRCAM sees it the Dahir deals with zgh (a convergent norm of all three Berber/Amazigh dialects/languages) not only tzm.
A Course in Spoken Tamazight indicates in one place that /ṇ/ is a phoneme, but I suspect this may be a typo. (I haven't seen any examples of it in the book, and the grammar book it's paired with doesn't include it in its phoneme list.) Can anyone clear this up? Mo-Al ( talk) 17:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Abdel-Massih (1971) implies that /ḳ g̣/ are pronounced as fricatives in Ayt Ayache just like /k g/, but doesn't state it explicitly. Is this true? Mo-Al ( talk) 05:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Do Ayt Ayache /ḳ g̣ q̣/ become /k g q/ in Ayt Seghrouchen? Mo-Al ( talk) 05:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Abdel-Massih p.33 surprisingly doesn't say that 'the third' would be w/tisːtlata in Ayt Seghrouchen. Is it really wisːšrad/tisːšratː? Mo-Al ( talk) 04:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Abdel-Massih (1971) p.30 has wisːrbʕa with an undotted r which p.32 (referring to the fraction, though I'd assume it's the same basic word) has wisːṛbʕa. I'd think the latter would be more expected given that the word '4' is given as ṛbʕa. I think it's very likely that either is acceptable given the amount of variation in pharyngealization seen in other places, but I just want to make sure. Mo-Al ( talk) 04:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
[1] implies that the Berber Latin alphabet is used by all (or perhaps just most) Amazigh, but it doesn't explicitly state its use in Central Morocco Tamazight. Can anyone find a source which explicitly states which writing systems are used for Central Morocco Tamazight? Mo-Al ( talk) 01:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Can isːiwlas mean both 'he spoke to him' and 'he spoke to her' in Ayt Seghrouchen? (Abdul-Massih p.79 has a gap.) Mo-Al ( talk) 06:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Similarly, can ašːuninɣ mean both 'he will kill you (mp)' and 'he will kill you (fp)'? (c.f. Abdul-Massih p.80) Mo-Al ( talk) 01:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I notice that the Romanization 'tamazigt' is used in the infobox. Wouldn't 'tamaziɣt' be more appropriate? Mo-Al ( talk) 05:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Ethnologue states that one name for CMT is "Shilha". Is this because they are grouping it with Tashelhiyt? Mo-Al ( talk)
I'm not sure that I believe (Chaker, 1) in saying that 'Tamazight [is] the Berber word for language'. I would think that 'tamazight' would refer to Berber language, deriving from 'amazigh'. Is this fair to say? Mo-Al ( talk) 00:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
This article seems to contradict itself: one source states that Tifinagh isn't found on public signs in Morocco, yet there is an image of a sign in Morocco with Tifinagh. How can this be resolved? Is it just that Tifinagh has only been put on some public signs recently, or perhaps that it is legal but uncommon? Mo-Al ( talk) 05:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Is South Oran a seperate dialect of Tamazight or a collection of dialects spoken by tribes (presumably southern varieties)? Mo-Al ( talk) 21:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
While Abdel-Massih refers to the Tamazight emphatics as velarized, I strongly suspect that he's not making a clear distinction between velarization and pharyngealization. Can anyone find either confirmation that what is used is velarization, or evidence that's it's pharyngealized? (Note that the article on Tashelhiyt uses pharyngealization.) Mo-Al ( talk) 16:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
While Abdel-Massih uses the word "flap" in referring to /r/, he also describes it as involving "vibration" of the tip of the tongue. As such, I'm not convinced that this article should use <ɾ> for it. Mo-Al ( talk) 05:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Two suggestions for the moment:
I've created a very short version of the lead that I could insert for a day or so to see how it looks; or we could simply not worry about re-writing the lead until later.
Some information from the lead that as a lay reader I have questions about:
I was wondering if, between the end of Roman colonization, and before the push for Islamism, there may have been some Christian activities in the area, and hence the Latin. The article about Adrian of Canterbury indicates that there must have been some monastic activities which would have included a scriptorium and Latin orthography. Now all we need are sources! Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 22:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Strangely this source does imply that the Latin alphabet was used for a short while over a millennium ago. I doubt it's related to the modern Berber Latin alphabet, but I had never heard of that before! Mo-Al ( talk) 03:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
What's a good synonym in linguistics for "related genetically"?
"In the same family"?
"In the same language family"?
This is a question I truly don't know the answer to , but the use of genetically is confusing as currently written.
Truthkeeper88 (
talk) 02:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Truthkeeper88 removed the sentence According to some{{Who|date=June 2009}} Tamazight should be grouped with [[Tashelhiyt]].. For now the deletion probably makes sense given that it's remained uncited for a long time. However, note that this isn't redundant -- the wording is poor, but it should state that "Tamazight should be grouped under Tashelhiyt". This comes from an unsourced statement on the current revision of the Atlas languages article. Perhaps it shouldn't be included until a source can be found -- none of the sources I looked through adopted this view specifically, although I remember one (I can't recall which) implied that Tashelhiyt was Tamazight's "umbrella" language.
If anyone has information regarding this question, it would be extremely helpful. In my opinion, this is an important detail if true, because of the great confusion surrounding the classification of Berber dialects. For reference, the statement was added by User:S710 here. Mo-Al ( talk) 04:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Here's an attempt at combining/reorganizing the material from the following sections: Nomenclature, Classification, Dialects. From the perspective of a lay audience, the text flows better without the section interruptions, but am not sure whether I've retained the meaning. If it's good we'll move it into the article tomorrow. It needs one more run through as I still see a few little things to be copy edited, but nothing that can't be done in mainspace. Let me know what you think, and it's fine to tell me if I'm totally wrong! Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 01:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
As per the comment in the [ peer review] I'm removing wiki links as necessary. Ideally terms only need to be linked once, but I'm struggling with the question of having a heavily linked lead (not ideal) or delinking the lead and re-linking in subsequent paragraphs. Advice is welcome. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 19:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm finished here for now, but will return later. In my view, this is a good article, and deserves to be brought to GA status. I've learned a lot while working on it, which is one of the reasons I prefer working on articles such as these. My advice is to fill in the content a bit: it's better to overwrite, and then delete if necessary, rather than leaving the reader struggling for information. Last night I read the Inalco source which was interesting and I thought some of that information could be brought into the article in greater detail. Also, I haven't worked on any of the sections after "Orthography" as they are quite technical, so before I return here I'll copyedit one or two other such articles to get a sense of the formatting and presentation for those sections. Finally, the lead is still problematic: I've been tweaking it slowly in my sandbox, but have decided to wait until the entire article is finished before rewriting the lead, and at that point decide where to wikilink and where not. Thanks for allowing me to work here; I hope I haven't made any content errors. Let me know if you need any help, and I'll return for the sections I've left undone when I have a better sense of how to copyedit those areas. Again, really interesting subject and a good article. I don't think it really needs too much more in the way of content work, but it does need some. Thanks again. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 02:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I've decided to move the claim that "some argue that Central Morocco Tamazight should be considered a dialect of Tashelhiyt" from the article, as I've been unable to locate any evidence that it is valid. Does anyone else know anything which would support this claim? Mo-Al ( talk) 03:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
This article is in an appalling state. For a start, it seems to be based on the false premise (taken from the Ethnologue, no doubt) that the Zenati varieties "South Oran" (ksours sud-oranais) and northern Ait Seghrouchen belong to Central Atlas Tamazight. For another thing, someone seems to have stuck pretty much the entirety of an article on Berber into it, yielding vast sections of no relevance at all to its topic. I can see the remnants of a good article somewhere underneath, but unraveling it would not be easy. - Lameen Souag ( talk) 21:25, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
To be more specific: I suggest removing or rewriting from scratch the entirety of "History", almost all of "Official status" and "Orthography", and most of "Geographic distribution" and "Status", as properly belonging in an article on Berber in general, not on Middle Atlas Tamazight. The rest looks great, apart from the conflation of Ait Seghrouchen and South Oran into Central Atlas; since Abdel-Massih makes the same mistake, the bits citing him might need to be checked to confirm that they refer to Ayt Ayache rather than Ayt Seghrouchen. - Lameen Souag ( talk) 11:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I take it that means that deleting all the non-Tamazight-related material about Chaouis and Kabyles and Casablanca and so forth is uncontroversial?
As for the applicability of a single label, I should be more specific. Obviously it should be mentioned that some sources use the term to cover Ait Seghrouchen - understandably, since, like the Rifis, this group calls its own language tamaziγt. However, it is well-established that northern Ait Seghrouchen (there are two geographically separate Ait Seghrouchen tribes) and the "ksours sud-oraniens", including Figuig, are Zenati varieties, genetically more closely related to Tarifit or Chaoui than to the "Beraber" Middle Atlas varieties of the Ayt Ayache or Ayt Atta; see Destaing's "Essai de classification des dialectes berbères du Maroc" (Etudes et Documents Berbère, 19-20, 2001-2002 (1915) and Kossmann's "Les verbes à i final en zénète" and Essai sur la phonologie du proto-berbère. In fact, I can't find any sources at all by a linguist studying Berber languages claiming that the "ksours sud-oraniens" of Algeria belong to Middle Atlas Tamazight - not even Abdel-Massih (whose map excludes Figuig as well as Algeria) nor the INALCO site (which, bizarrely, includes Figuig on its map but excludes all the mutually comprehensible ksour varieties across the border.) Since the Ethnologue is not written by Berber specialists, and does not give any reference for the idea, I think it can safely be disregarded unless someone comes up with a reliable source. - Lameen Souag ( talk) 12:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm extremely grateful for your contributions. My only concern is that I hope useful information about Berber in general will get subsumed into the Berber languages page rather than being lost into the depths of WikiHistory. Mo-Al ( talk) 02:28, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I've removed everything which was gave examples explicitly for Ayt Seghrouchen. However I myself am not qualified to judge whether Abdel-Massih's data was tainted or not. Mo-Al ( talk) 02:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
I merged the phonology article back in, since it had no independent content. Sorry if I messed up anything you were working on above. (That, of course, is one of the problems with content forks.)
There were some minor problems of IPA not being formatted as such, but more importantly, the uvular consonants were transcribed as ‹x ɣ› and ‹xʷ ɣʷ›, while the velar consonants ‹kʷ ɡʷ› were said to be fricatives [xʷ ɣʷ]. This is quite confusing. I assume it's because one of the sources transcribes them improperly, but we need to be more accurate for a general audience. — kwami ( talk) 05:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
The only source provided for the pronunciation * /ˈtæməzaɪt/ is the Random House Dictionary. No one in these discussions reports ever hearing it used. I have worked at the Linguistic Data Consortium for nine years on many languages, including the Berber / Amazigh family, and I have never once heard or seen reference to anything like this pronunciation, which I can only imagine to have arisen as a spelling pronunciation. Someone, or some algorithm, at Random House said, "Oh, look, it ends in <ight>. It must rhyme with 'light'. I'll put it in that way."
Rather than have WP support such a dubious loan form, I am removing it without replacement. /tɑmɑˈzɪgt/ or /tæməˈzɪərt/ would be miles closer to correctness here, since both seem to be used, but until I can find a citation for them I will not insert them, lest I be accused of violating WP:NOR. Thnidu ( talk) 05:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
[Tzm] is not the language IRCAM standardize but [zgh]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.143.217.83 ( talk) 16:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
dictionnaire français tachelh'it et tamazir't (1907)
https://archive.org/details/DictionnaireFrancaisBerbere
Textes berbères en dialecte de l'Atlas marocain (1908)
https://archive.org/details/TextesBerbresEnDialecteDeLatlasMarocain
Rajmaan ( talk) 07:52, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:23, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ru.nl/aspx/download.aspx?File=/contents/pages/498535/amazigh_voice_in_morocco_and_algeria.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:34, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://people.pwf.cam.ac.uk/cbl23/ContactRevised170708.pdf{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://people.pwf.cam.ac.uk/cbl23/revisedjesaraber.pdf{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ciemen.org/mercator/butlletins/54-10.htm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.uea.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.35902%21the%20mother%20tongue%20in%20morocco.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Central Atlas Tamazight has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Central Atlas Tamazight:
|
IRCAM does not really deal with tzm but rather zgh. The way IRCAM sees it the Dahir deals with zgh (a convergent norm of all three Berber/Amazigh dialects/languages) not only tzm.
A Course in Spoken Tamazight indicates in one place that /ṇ/ is a phoneme, but I suspect this may be a typo. (I haven't seen any examples of it in the book, and the grammar book it's paired with doesn't include it in its phoneme list.) Can anyone clear this up? Mo-Al ( talk) 17:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Abdel-Massih (1971) implies that /ḳ g̣/ are pronounced as fricatives in Ayt Ayache just like /k g/, but doesn't state it explicitly. Is this true? Mo-Al ( talk) 05:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Do Ayt Ayache /ḳ g̣ q̣/ become /k g q/ in Ayt Seghrouchen? Mo-Al ( talk) 05:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Abdel-Massih p.33 surprisingly doesn't say that 'the third' would be w/tisːtlata in Ayt Seghrouchen. Is it really wisːšrad/tisːšratː? Mo-Al ( talk) 04:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Abdel-Massih (1971) p.30 has wisːrbʕa with an undotted r which p.32 (referring to the fraction, though I'd assume it's the same basic word) has wisːṛbʕa. I'd think the latter would be more expected given that the word '4' is given as ṛbʕa. I think it's very likely that either is acceptable given the amount of variation in pharyngealization seen in other places, but I just want to make sure. Mo-Al ( talk) 04:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
[1] implies that the Berber Latin alphabet is used by all (or perhaps just most) Amazigh, but it doesn't explicitly state its use in Central Morocco Tamazight. Can anyone find a source which explicitly states which writing systems are used for Central Morocco Tamazight? Mo-Al ( talk) 01:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Can isːiwlas mean both 'he spoke to him' and 'he spoke to her' in Ayt Seghrouchen? (Abdul-Massih p.79 has a gap.) Mo-Al ( talk) 06:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Similarly, can ašːuninɣ mean both 'he will kill you (mp)' and 'he will kill you (fp)'? (c.f. Abdul-Massih p.80) Mo-Al ( talk) 01:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I notice that the Romanization 'tamazigt' is used in the infobox. Wouldn't 'tamaziɣt' be more appropriate? Mo-Al ( talk) 05:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Ethnologue states that one name for CMT is "Shilha". Is this because they are grouping it with Tashelhiyt? Mo-Al ( talk)
I'm not sure that I believe (Chaker, 1) in saying that 'Tamazight [is] the Berber word for language'. I would think that 'tamazight' would refer to Berber language, deriving from 'amazigh'. Is this fair to say? Mo-Al ( talk) 00:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
This article seems to contradict itself: one source states that Tifinagh isn't found on public signs in Morocco, yet there is an image of a sign in Morocco with Tifinagh. How can this be resolved? Is it just that Tifinagh has only been put on some public signs recently, or perhaps that it is legal but uncommon? Mo-Al ( talk) 05:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Is South Oran a seperate dialect of Tamazight or a collection of dialects spoken by tribes (presumably southern varieties)? Mo-Al ( talk) 21:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
While Abdel-Massih refers to the Tamazight emphatics as velarized, I strongly suspect that he's not making a clear distinction between velarization and pharyngealization. Can anyone find either confirmation that what is used is velarization, or evidence that's it's pharyngealized? (Note that the article on Tashelhiyt uses pharyngealization.) Mo-Al ( talk) 16:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
While Abdel-Massih uses the word "flap" in referring to /r/, he also describes it as involving "vibration" of the tip of the tongue. As such, I'm not convinced that this article should use <ɾ> for it. Mo-Al ( talk) 05:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Two suggestions for the moment:
I've created a very short version of the lead that I could insert for a day or so to see how it looks; or we could simply not worry about re-writing the lead until later.
Some information from the lead that as a lay reader I have questions about:
I was wondering if, between the end of Roman colonization, and before the push for Islamism, there may have been some Christian activities in the area, and hence the Latin. The article about Adrian of Canterbury indicates that there must have been some monastic activities which would have included a scriptorium and Latin orthography. Now all we need are sources! Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 22:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Strangely this source does imply that the Latin alphabet was used for a short while over a millennium ago. I doubt it's related to the modern Berber Latin alphabet, but I had never heard of that before! Mo-Al ( talk) 03:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
What's a good synonym in linguistics for "related genetically"?
"In the same family"?
"In the same language family"?
This is a question I truly don't know the answer to , but the use of genetically is confusing as currently written.
Truthkeeper88 (
talk) 02:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Truthkeeper88 removed the sentence According to some{{Who|date=June 2009}} Tamazight should be grouped with [[Tashelhiyt]].. For now the deletion probably makes sense given that it's remained uncited for a long time. However, note that this isn't redundant -- the wording is poor, but it should state that "Tamazight should be grouped under Tashelhiyt". This comes from an unsourced statement on the current revision of the Atlas languages article. Perhaps it shouldn't be included until a source can be found -- none of the sources I looked through adopted this view specifically, although I remember one (I can't recall which) implied that Tashelhiyt was Tamazight's "umbrella" language.
If anyone has information regarding this question, it would be extremely helpful. In my opinion, this is an important detail if true, because of the great confusion surrounding the classification of Berber dialects. For reference, the statement was added by User:S710 here. Mo-Al ( talk) 04:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Here's an attempt at combining/reorganizing the material from the following sections: Nomenclature, Classification, Dialects. From the perspective of a lay audience, the text flows better without the section interruptions, but am not sure whether I've retained the meaning. If it's good we'll move it into the article tomorrow. It needs one more run through as I still see a few little things to be copy edited, but nothing that can't be done in mainspace. Let me know what you think, and it's fine to tell me if I'm totally wrong! Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 01:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
As per the comment in the [ peer review] I'm removing wiki links as necessary. Ideally terms only need to be linked once, but I'm struggling with the question of having a heavily linked lead (not ideal) or delinking the lead and re-linking in subsequent paragraphs. Advice is welcome. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 19:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm finished here for now, but will return later. In my view, this is a good article, and deserves to be brought to GA status. I've learned a lot while working on it, which is one of the reasons I prefer working on articles such as these. My advice is to fill in the content a bit: it's better to overwrite, and then delete if necessary, rather than leaving the reader struggling for information. Last night I read the Inalco source which was interesting and I thought some of that information could be brought into the article in greater detail. Also, I haven't worked on any of the sections after "Orthography" as they are quite technical, so before I return here I'll copyedit one or two other such articles to get a sense of the formatting and presentation for those sections. Finally, the lead is still problematic: I've been tweaking it slowly in my sandbox, but have decided to wait until the entire article is finished before rewriting the lead, and at that point decide where to wikilink and where not. Thanks for allowing me to work here; I hope I haven't made any content errors. Let me know if you need any help, and I'll return for the sections I've left undone when I have a better sense of how to copyedit those areas. Again, really interesting subject and a good article. I don't think it really needs too much more in the way of content work, but it does need some. Thanks again. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 02:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I've decided to move the claim that "some argue that Central Morocco Tamazight should be considered a dialect of Tashelhiyt" from the article, as I've been unable to locate any evidence that it is valid. Does anyone else know anything which would support this claim? Mo-Al ( talk) 03:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
This article is in an appalling state. For a start, it seems to be based on the false premise (taken from the Ethnologue, no doubt) that the Zenati varieties "South Oran" (ksours sud-oranais) and northern Ait Seghrouchen belong to Central Atlas Tamazight. For another thing, someone seems to have stuck pretty much the entirety of an article on Berber into it, yielding vast sections of no relevance at all to its topic. I can see the remnants of a good article somewhere underneath, but unraveling it would not be easy. - Lameen Souag ( talk) 21:25, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
To be more specific: I suggest removing or rewriting from scratch the entirety of "History", almost all of "Official status" and "Orthography", and most of "Geographic distribution" and "Status", as properly belonging in an article on Berber in general, not on Middle Atlas Tamazight. The rest looks great, apart from the conflation of Ait Seghrouchen and South Oran into Central Atlas; since Abdel-Massih makes the same mistake, the bits citing him might need to be checked to confirm that they refer to Ayt Ayache rather than Ayt Seghrouchen. - Lameen Souag ( talk) 11:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I take it that means that deleting all the non-Tamazight-related material about Chaouis and Kabyles and Casablanca and so forth is uncontroversial?
As for the applicability of a single label, I should be more specific. Obviously it should be mentioned that some sources use the term to cover Ait Seghrouchen - understandably, since, like the Rifis, this group calls its own language tamaziγt. However, it is well-established that northern Ait Seghrouchen (there are two geographically separate Ait Seghrouchen tribes) and the "ksours sud-oraniens", including Figuig, are Zenati varieties, genetically more closely related to Tarifit or Chaoui than to the "Beraber" Middle Atlas varieties of the Ayt Ayache or Ayt Atta; see Destaing's "Essai de classification des dialectes berbères du Maroc" (Etudes et Documents Berbère, 19-20, 2001-2002 (1915) and Kossmann's "Les verbes à i final en zénète" and Essai sur la phonologie du proto-berbère. In fact, I can't find any sources at all by a linguist studying Berber languages claiming that the "ksours sud-oraniens" of Algeria belong to Middle Atlas Tamazight - not even Abdel-Massih (whose map excludes Figuig as well as Algeria) nor the INALCO site (which, bizarrely, includes Figuig on its map but excludes all the mutually comprehensible ksour varieties across the border.) Since the Ethnologue is not written by Berber specialists, and does not give any reference for the idea, I think it can safely be disregarded unless someone comes up with a reliable source. - Lameen Souag ( talk) 12:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm extremely grateful for your contributions. My only concern is that I hope useful information about Berber in general will get subsumed into the Berber languages page rather than being lost into the depths of WikiHistory. Mo-Al ( talk) 02:28, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I've removed everything which was gave examples explicitly for Ayt Seghrouchen. However I myself am not qualified to judge whether Abdel-Massih's data was tainted or not. Mo-Al ( talk) 02:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
I merged the phonology article back in, since it had no independent content. Sorry if I messed up anything you were working on above. (That, of course, is one of the problems with content forks.)
There were some minor problems of IPA not being formatted as such, but more importantly, the uvular consonants were transcribed as ‹x ɣ› and ‹xʷ ɣʷ›, while the velar consonants ‹kʷ ɡʷ› were said to be fricatives [xʷ ɣʷ]. This is quite confusing. I assume it's because one of the sources transcribes them improperly, but we need to be more accurate for a general audience. — kwami ( talk) 05:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
The only source provided for the pronunciation * /ˈtæməzaɪt/ is the Random House Dictionary. No one in these discussions reports ever hearing it used. I have worked at the Linguistic Data Consortium for nine years on many languages, including the Berber / Amazigh family, and I have never once heard or seen reference to anything like this pronunciation, which I can only imagine to have arisen as a spelling pronunciation. Someone, or some algorithm, at Random House said, "Oh, look, it ends in <ight>. It must rhyme with 'light'. I'll put it in that way."
Rather than have WP support such a dubious loan form, I am removing it without replacement. /tɑmɑˈzɪgt/ or /tæməˈzɪərt/ would be miles closer to correctness here, since both seem to be used, but until I can find a citation for them I will not insert them, lest I be accused of violating WP:NOR. Thnidu ( talk) 05:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
[Tzm] is not the language IRCAM standardize but [zgh]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.143.217.83 ( talk) 16:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
dictionnaire français tachelh'it et tamazir't (1907)
https://archive.org/details/DictionnaireFrancaisBerbere
Textes berbères en dialecte de l'Atlas marocain (1908)
https://archive.org/details/TextesBerbresEnDialecteDeLatlasMarocain
Rajmaan ( talk) 07:52, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:23, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ru.nl/aspx/download.aspx?File=/contents/pages/498535/amazigh_voice_in_morocco_and_algeria.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:34, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Central Atlas Tamazight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://people.pwf.cam.ac.uk/cbl23/ContactRevised170708.pdf{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://people.pwf.cam.ac.uk/cbl23/revisedjesaraber.pdf{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ciemen.org/mercator/butlletins/54-10.htm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.uea.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.35902%21the%20mother%20tongue%20in%20morocco.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)