China Template‑class | |||||||
|
Languages Template‑class | |||||||
|
Before anyone wonders about the difference between "Danzhou" and "Min-dong" and "Pu-Xian", let me try to explain the reason behind my choice:
-- ran 13:35, May 22, 2004 (UTC)
I changed "Historical spoken Chinese" to "Historical Chinese." Speaking of Middle Chinese, we usually make study on its phonology. But the Middle Chinese sounds are, more or less, artificially constructed ones to "read" rather than to "speak." -- Nanshu 04:06, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
Dylanwhs 18:42, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
Done. -- ran 00:06, May 24, 2004 (UTC)
I'm talking about the header. It should cover all items in the cell, otherwise we need to rearrange them. Now, will Proto-Min and Proto-Mandarin be specific to phonology? I don't think so. -- Nanshu 02:39, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
It is possible, because of the precedence in this chart concerning the Subdivisions of Min that other 'subdivisions' of other languages such as Mandarin, Yue, Hakka, etc will be listed, as places. It seems much more sensible to me that pages listing these sub-dialects of various languages should do this task instead. For example, Wu dialects (now Wu (linguistics) list different dialects on that page. Dylanwhs 20:24, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
Why list Subdivisions of Min here but not subdivisions of the other divisions? Why not break off all the subdivisions so this stays a manageable size? -- Jia ng 21:36, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
About my last revert:
First thing: Taiwanese is a part of Min Nan.
Second thing: Please do not put any second-level divisions in there except for the divisions of Min. If we start dividing Mandarin, Wu, etc. and putting all of those in that box, then the box will quickly grow to infinite size. The only reason I split Min up (and not the others) is because Min Bei, Min Nan etc. are commonly listed as separately languages, such as by Ethnologue.
-- ran 15:05, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)
Regarding this edit, is the Dungan language written in Cyrillic script an official writing standard.., and is it one of the spoken varieties? — Insta ntnood 10:35, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
To 61.144.54.45:
-- ran ( talk) June 28, 2005 20:09 (UTC)
I propose a move to Languages in the Chinese language family, & to change the instances of dialect to language. This is because the dialects are not dialects but langauges,, its as simple as that.
100110100 08:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't Taishanese be included (since, for example, we have several divisions of Min)? And do people know what "first-level" means? Wouldn't "major" or "primary" be more clear? Badagnani 01:38, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I've just removed this again, for the same reasons as before, but clearly the edit summary didn't adequately summarise the reasons so here they are. First the link is a duplicate of the link in the Yue section, so is not needed, though on its own that's a poor reason.
More importantly the reason why there's two links to one article is two articles were merged: after a long discussion archived here the article Standard Cantonese was merged into Canton dialect, before that was renamed Cantonese. The consensus was Cantonese is not a standard language in the formal sense, so a separate article was not needed. By the same reasoning is is not an Ausbausprache, so it made sense to remove the link from that section.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 15:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Moved back to official. The bopomofo article is incorrect, and zhuyin fuhao is still officially used to teach Mandarin in Taiwan.
See http://english.moe.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=11752&ctNode=424&mp=1
Roadrunner ( talk) 06:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
China Template‑class | |||||||
|
Languages Template‑class | |||||||
|
Before anyone wonders about the difference between "Danzhou" and "Min-dong" and "Pu-Xian", let me try to explain the reason behind my choice:
-- ran 13:35, May 22, 2004 (UTC)
I changed "Historical spoken Chinese" to "Historical Chinese." Speaking of Middle Chinese, we usually make study on its phonology. But the Middle Chinese sounds are, more or less, artificially constructed ones to "read" rather than to "speak." -- Nanshu 04:06, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
Dylanwhs 18:42, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
Done. -- ran 00:06, May 24, 2004 (UTC)
I'm talking about the header. It should cover all items in the cell, otherwise we need to rearrange them. Now, will Proto-Min and Proto-Mandarin be specific to phonology? I don't think so. -- Nanshu 02:39, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
It is possible, because of the precedence in this chart concerning the Subdivisions of Min that other 'subdivisions' of other languages such as Mandarin, Yue, Hakka, etc will be listed, as places. It seems much more sensible to me that pages listing these sub-dialects of various languages should do this task instead. For example, Wu dialects (now Wu (linguistics) list different dialects on that page. Dylanwhs 20:24, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
Why list Subdivisions of Min here but not subdivisions of the other divisions? Why not break off all the subdivisions so this stays a manageable size? -- Jia ng 21:36, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
About my last revert:
First thing: Taiwanese is a part of Min Nan.
Second thing: Please do not put any second-level divisions in there except for the divisions of Min. If we start dividing Mandarin, Wu, etc. and putting all of those in that box, then the box will quickly grow to infinite size. The only reason I split Min up (and not the others) is because Min Bei, Min Nan etc. are commonly listed as separately languages, such as by Ethnologue.
-- ran 15:05, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)
Regarding this edit, is the Dungan language written in Cyrillic script an official writing standard.., and is it one of the spoken varieties? — Insta ntnood 10:35, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
To 61.144.54.45:
-- ran ( talk) June 28, 2005 20:09 (UTC)
I propose a move to Languages in the Chinese language family, & to change the instances of dialect to language. This is because the dialects are not dialects but langauges,, its as simple as that.
100110100 08:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't Taishanese be included (since, for example, we have several divisions of Min)? And do people know what "first-level" means? Wouldn't "major" or "primary" be more clear? Badagnani 01:38, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I've just removed this again, for the same reasons as before, but clearly the edit summary didn't adequately summarise the reasons so here they are. First the link is a duplicate of the link in the Yue section, so is not needed, though on its own that's a poor reason.
More importantly the reason why there's two links to one article is two articles were merged: after a long discussion archived here the article Standard Cantonese was merged into Canton dialect, before that was renamed Cantonese. The consensus was Cantonese is not a standard language in the formal sense, so a separate article was not needed. By the same reasoning is is not an Ausbausprache, so it made sense to remove the link from that section.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 15:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Moved back to official. The bopomofo article is incorrect, and zhuyin fuhao is still officially used to teach Mandarin in Taiwan.
See http://english.moe.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=11752&ctNode=424&mp=1
Roadrunner ( talk) 06:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)