This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
There are way to many individual pages for ISO-639 macrolanguages that are destined to be stubs. I propose that they be merged to this page and the ISO 639 macrolanguage category deleted. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 20:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
The mention of “elements that have two ISO 639-2 codes“ (fas, msa, sqi, zho) in section Types of macrolanguages seems misleading: those four (macro)languages have two ISO 639-2 code elements because there are two sets of codes in ISO 639-2, bibliographic codes (ISO 639-2/B) and terminology codes (ISO 639-2/T). Most codes are the same in both sets, but some differ, as the four aforementioned ones, but this has nothing to do with their status as macrolanguages. Other languages have different codes in ISO 639-2/B and ISO 639-2/T that are not macrolanguages in ISO 639-3 (e.g., Armenian is arm/hye, Basque is baq/eus, Czech is cze/ces, etc.). Arthur ( talk) 11:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Isn't Hindi in the inclusive sense of Hindi language (Hindi belt) a macrolanguage? LADave ( talk) 19:13, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
This article is all technical jargon. Is it possible to define "macrolanguage" in 25 words or less for the general reader? Kotabatubara ( talk) 17:48, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
I agree with above. This page describes a very technical definition of the word "macrolanguage." A second article is needed describing macrolanguages in the general (nontechnical) sense. Nicole Sharp ( talk) 21:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
The second statement of this paragraph "on the grounds of ethnic, cultural, and political considerations, rather than linguistic reasons" is somewhat problematic. As pointed out in Talk:Chinese language#Change "dialects" wording?, a macrolanguage could be a multicentric actively coevolving group of topolects where the development cannot be discussed individually or monodirectionally (unlike the Standard French's monodirectional influence other Romance languages in France). Neither writing system, geographic distribution, ethnic, cultural, and political considerations alone can explain the case of Chinese, and when they're combined they affect Chinese through Chinese linguistic evolutional, so it is a linguistic reason. Altogether, neither the first statement (dialect continua) nor the second statement can explain the case of Chinese, so this statement potentially infer Chinese and some other languages to be the case of the second statement, is problemic. The problem is some languages cannot be well-defined in common English terms (such as language, dialect, intelligibility) is not unique to Chinese but to many languages outside Europe and Northern America. Each one deserves its own discussion. 209.2.227.244 ( talk) 03:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
There are way to many individual pages for ISO-639 macrolanguages that are destined to be stubs. I propose that they be merged to this page and the ISO 639 macrolanguage category deleted. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 20:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
The mention of “elements that have two ISO 639-2 codes“ (fas, msa, sqi, zho) in section Types of macrolanguages seems misleading: those four (macro)languages have two ISO 639-2 code elements because there are two sets of codes in ISO 639-2, bibliographic codes (ISO 639-2/B) and terminology codes (ISO 639-2/T). Most codes are the same in both sets, but some differ, as the four aforementioned ones, but this has nothing to do with their status as macrolanguages. Other languages have different codes in ISO 639-2/B and ISO 639-2/T that are not macrolanguages in ISO 639-3 (e.g., Armenian is arm/hye, Basque is baq/eus, Czech is cze/ces, etc.). Arthur ( talk) 11:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Isn't Hindi in the inclusive sense of Hindi language (Hindi belt) a macrolanguage? LADave ( talk) 19:13, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
This article is all technical jargon. Is it possible to define "macrolanguage" in 25 words or less for the general reader? Kotabatubara ( talk) 17:48, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
I agree with above. This page describes a very technical definition of the word "macrolanguage." A second article is needed describing macrolanguages in the general (nontechnical) sense. Nicole Sharp ( talk) 21:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
The second statement of this paragraph "on the grounds of ethnic, cultural, and political considerations, rather than linguistic reasons" is somewhat problematic. As pointed out in Talk:Chinese language#Change "dialects" wording?, a macrolanguage could be a multicentric actively coevolving group of topolects where the development cannot be discussed individually or monodirectionally (unlike the Standard French's monodirectional influence other Romance languages in France). Neither writing system, geographic distribution, ethnic, cultural, and political considerations alone can explain the case of Chinese, and when they're combined they affect Chinese through Chinese linguistic evolutional, so it is a linguistic reason. Altogether, neither the first statement (dialect continua) nor the second statement can explain the case of Chinese, so this statement potentially infer Chinese and some other languages to be the case of the second statement, is problemic. The problem is some languages cannot be well-defined in common English terms (such as language, dialect, intelligibility) is not unique to Chinese but to many languages outside Europe and Northern America. Each one deserves its own discussion. 209.2.227.244 ( talk) 03:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)