This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
What I refer to in this context is NOT the "Mongolian language" but the "Mongolian languages". The latter includes Daur, Dongxian, Moghol and other languages. I used "Mongolic" to distinguish both clearly. -- Nanshu 01:04, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
On Shamanism it is asserted that "shaman" literally means "knower". Can this be confirmed, i.e. is it actually from a Tungus root for "to know" or similar, or is this just a description of the concept? I am asking because the hypothesis that the word is a loan from Chinese would seem rather to depend on whether it has a transparent Tungus etymology. dab (ᛏ) 13:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
"One classification which seems to be advocated for a little more than the other alternatives is that the Tungusic languages can be divided into a northern branch and a southern branch, with the southern branch further subdivided into southeastern and southwestern groups."
Should it maybe read: "Once classification, which is [sometimes] advocated over the other alternatives, is dividing the Tungusic languages into a northern and southern branch, with the southern branch further subdivided into southeastern and southwestern groups."
As it is, I don't think the original is english. I've never heard anything to be "advocated for" before. But you can advocate something "over" something else - that means to favour more than the alternatives. Furthermore, "a little more" is a very wishy-washy phrase. -- Steevm 01:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
The article claims, in the introduction, that the controversial Altaic family is a sprachbund. The Altaic family has neither been formally established as a sprachbund, nor as a language family. There are varying opinions on the topic in linguistics and there is no consensus. There has been some lexostatical research into the possibility of remotely related cognates and there is even a dictionary called An Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianc26 ( talk • contribs) 06:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
In the further reading section there is a whole lot of Private use Unicode that is useless as it does not render. So please whoever put it there, can you find out a character set that is readable from the standard Unicode sets, especially if it is Chinese characters? There is what looks like Pinyin in there, that is whey I think some of this is Chinese. A Google seach on this kind of text eg comes up with nothing. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 10:57, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
Should the sentence: "Following his travel to Russia, he published his collected findings in three editions, 1692, 1705, and 1785." in the section about Nicolaas Witsen not be: "Following his travel to Russia, his collected findings were published in three editions, 1692, 1705, and 1785."
According his wiki page, he died in 1717, so it is quite weird to state he published work in 1785.
This open access publication might be a worthwhile addition to the article's list of references
https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/355
Hölzl, Andreas & Payne, Thomas E. (eds.). 2022. Tungusic languages: Past and present. (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 32). Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7025328
I see that there is an active community editing this article, so I leave it to you whether and how to include this book or the chapters contained therein.
Jasy jatere ( talk) 07:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC) Jasy jatere ( talk) 07:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
References
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
What I refer to in this context is NOT the "Mongolian language" but the "Mongolian languages". The latter includes Daur, Dongxian, Moghol and other languages. I used "Mongolic" to distinguish both clearly. -- Nanshu 01:04, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
On Shamanism it is asserted that "shaman" literally means "knower". Can this be confirmed, i.e. is it actually from a Tungus root for "to know" or similar, or is this just a description of the concept? I am asking because the hypothesis that the word is a loan from Chinese would seem rather to depend on whether it has a transparent Tungus etymology. dab (ᛏ) 13:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
"One classification which seems to be advocated for a little more than the other alternatives is that the Tungusic languages can be divided into a northern branch and a southern branch, with the southern branch further subdivided into southeastern and southwestern groups."
Should it maybe read: "Once classification, which is [sometimes] advocated over the other alternatives, is dividing the Tungusic languages into a northern and southern branch, with the southern branch further subdivided into southeastern and southwestern groups."
As it is, I don't think the original is english. I've never heard anything to be "advocated for" before. But you can advocate something "over" something else - that means to favour more than the alternatives. Furthermore, "a little more" is a very wishy-washy phrase. -- Steevm 01:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
The article claims, in the introduction, that the controversial Altaic family is a sprachbund. The Altaic family has neither been formally established as a sprachbund, nor as a language family. There are varying opinions on the topic in linguistics and there is no consensus. There has been some lexostatical research into the possibility of remotely related cognates and there is even a dictionary called An Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianc26 ( talk • contribs) 06:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
In the further reading section there is a whole lot of Private use Unicode that is useless as it does not render. So please whoever put it there, can you find out a character set that is readable from the standard Unicode sets, especially if it is Chinese characters? There is what looks like Pinyin in there, that is whey I think some of this is Chinese. A Google seach on this kind of text eg comes up with nothing. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 10:57, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
Should the sentence: "Following his travel to Russia, he published his collected findings in three editions, 1692, 1705, and 1785." in the section about Nicolaas Witsen not be: "Following his travel to Russia, his collected findings were published in three editions, 1692, 1705, and 1785."
According his wiki page, he died in 1717, so it is quite weird to state he published work in 1785.
This open access publication might be a worthwhile addition to the article's list of references
https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/355
Hölzl, Andreas & Payne, Thomas E. (eds.). 2022. Tungusic languages: Past and present. (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 32). Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7025328
I see that there is an active community editing this article, so I leave it to you whether and how to include this book or the chapters contained therein.
Jasy jatere ( talk) 07:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC) Jasy jatere ( talk) 07:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
References