Misplaced Pages

Talk:Norwegian language: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:36, 28 September 2016 editGeneCallahan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users766 edits →Map← Previous edit Latest revision as of 20:41, 27 October 2024 edit undo130.238.112.129 (talk) →nynorsk 2012: new sectionTag: New topic 
(64 intermediate revisions by 33 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Skip to talk}} {{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header|search=yes}} {{Talk header|search=yes}}
⚫ {{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1=
⚫ {{WikiProject Norway |importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Languages|importance=Low}}
⚫ }}
<!-- please do not remove this tag --> <!-- please do not remove this tag -->

{{AutoArchivingNotice
|small=no
|age=90
|index=./Archive index
|bot=MiszaBot I}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
⚫ {{WikiProject Norway|class=C}}
⚫ {{WikiProject Languages|class=start}}
⚫ }}
{{User:WildBot/m04|sect={{User:WildBot/m03|2|Comparison#In grammar|comparison}}|m04}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:Norwegian language/Archive index |target=Talk:Norwegian language/Archive index
Line 26: Line 21:
}} }}


== mitt tilbaketrukne tannkjøtt ==
== Map ==

It's not explained at all why there are two shades of blue in the first map although another map explains the Bokmål and Nynorsk distribution. The latter includes neutral areas as well. These aren't present in the introduction map either. --] (]) 15:19, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
:Those two shades of blue are discussed in the discussion above. The map was removed earlier this year for being totally wrong, but someone seems to have put it back. ] (]) 15:48, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
:: But there IS no "discussion above" this one! ] (]) 14:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
::I don't know Norwegian, but as someone who doesn't know the language, the fact that the caption doesn't include an explanation is more confusing than the fact that the map is disputed. --] (]) 16:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

{{outdent}} The map in question is on Commons, here:
* https://commons.wikimedia.org/File:Idioma_noruego.png
It was removed from the article at the end of August this year by ] who wrote, as an edit-summary:
* ''Removing misleading map. Norwegians are not in minority in Northern Norway; nor are there really Norwegian-speaking minorities in Sweden (apart from recent immigrants).''
Since August it has been added back in. I believe that the several comments (comment sections) above, and the edit-summary, show consensus that this map is unwanted. I'll remove it again. --] (]) 20:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

== Descriptions of certain vowel phonemes ==

⚫ In the article I read:

u /ʉ/, /u/ close central rounded (close front extra rounded)


really? this is delightful and brings a smile to my face, but there is a reason language 101 exposition confines itself to things like "the boy's football" and "my brown suitcase" and the like. ] (]) 09:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
From the article on IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) I gather that /ʉ/ indeed indicates a central vowel, but that /u/ indicates a ''back'' vowel rather than a ''front'' vowel.
:Maybe this sort of graphic detail is peculiar to the Nordic languages. A reading in a 1945 Icelandic grammar: "What were the children doing? They were playing. In the classroom was a table; on the table were papers, ink, and pens. On the wall were maps and pictures of animals. There was a picture of a raven pecking a lamb's eyes out. ..." (Stefán Einarsson, ''Icelandic: grammar, texts, glossary'', The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1945.) ] (]) 11:30, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
::It may be that we have a taste for the macabre in the Nordic countries, but I do find it an odd example. I don't see what value it adds either. There is already an example for the neuter gender. An example with plural is missing, but that might perhaps require some more explanation. An example with the feminine gender is also missing, although that would look identical to the masculine example, so one can not tell if it actually is an example of feminine, as that is an optional grammatical gender in Bokmål. ] (]) 17:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)


== Map of norway needs fixing ==
Furthermore, in several instances two IPA symbols are given but either only one description or two descriptions that fit only one of the symbols, for example in the case of:


The zoomed in map showing the spread of norwegian features Jan Mayen (1) outside of the text box and (2) in the middle of Libya. There are (presumptively) no norwegian speakers in the middle of Libya. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:34, 4 February 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
e (short) /ɛ/, /æ/ open mid front unrounded


== Apparent error in Frysian example ==
Since I am not a speaker of Norwegian, I hesitate to edit a change.] (]) 07:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)


The current article contains:
== Unreferenced sections ==


”De reinbôge hat in protte kleuren”
FYI: I have today added the {{tl|unreferenced section}} template to several unreferenced sections in this article. Since several of these sections refer to a "Main article", I wondered if Misplaced Pages policy might consider that "good enough" as a reference, so I asked at ] (Section: ‎Use of {{tl|unreferenced section}}). There my opinion was validated; all sections should have references. --] (]) 08:48, 14 July 2016 (UTC)


in a table. I doubt it is correct Frysian, since - according to a couple of sources - “in” is a singular indefinite article whereas “kleuren” is a plural word. I suspect “in” needs to be removed. Can someone knowledgeable about the Frysian language confirm this?] (]) 15:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
== How many speakers? ==


:I removed it, because it was ] anyway, like the rest of that section. Seems to be a major problem in general with these linguistics articles, people just add content without citing verifiable sources. ] (]) 18:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
The number of speakers of Norwegian was recently changed from '''5 million''' to '''4.7 million''' in the infobox. Our article ] says the population of the country is 5,214,900. So what do the other half-a-million speak? The youngest infants don't speak yet and some immigrants don't speak much Norwegian yet, but I think there can't be a half-a-million in those categories. Some ], travelling people and immigrants have Norwegian as a 2nd language, but they should count as "speakers", surely. And some speakers live outside of Norway.
== "]" listed at ] ==
]
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 1#Vikværsk}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ]]] 00:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
== "]" listed at ] ==
]
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 1#BokmaalAndNynorsk}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> <span style="border:1px solid;padding:2px 6px;font-variant:small-caps">'''〜 ] • ]'''</span> 06:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


== nynorsk 2012 ==
The 4.7 million figure comes from which credits for the figure. But although the ethnologue site is dated "2016", there is no indication that that page has been updated recently.


The article reads:
Call it ] if you like, but I think 5 million is a more logical figure. I'm very tempted to change it back. Any objection? Or any better source?--] (]) 06:22, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
: It was I who changed it to 4.7 based on the source cited. But the CIA World Factbook gives Norway's population as 5,265,158 (July 2016 est.). It's true that it's hard to imagine a half million non-Norwegian speakers. There's a book on Google Books "Composition Linguistique Des Nations Du Monde, Volume 5" By Heinz Kloss that gives the number as 5 million. Thanks for the suggestion, I've gone ahead and implemented it. --] (]) 11:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


"Nynorsk still adheres to the 1959 standard."
:: Thanks, {{ping|Cornellier}}, and I apologize for not thinking of notifying you! --] (]) 13:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Not at all, I think you did it correctly. The talk page is the best place to discuss this. --] (]) 16:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


⚫ but the article at
== Native to "parts of Sweden"? ==


https://en.wikipedia.org/Nynorsk
The claim that the Norwegian language is native to parts of Sweden has been removed a number of times, but is added back again every time. Based on what? There's a dialect continuum in certain areas along the long common border between the two countries, but the language spoken on the eastern side of the border is no more Norwegian than the language spoken on the western side of the border is Swedish, and I have never ever seen anyone claim that the Swedish language is native to parts of Norway... -&nbsp;'''Tom'''&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] ] 18:19, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:Since Sweden has acquired and kept parts of Norway in wars of old, but not (at least significantly) the other way around, it is perhaps not so strange that this only goes one way. I'm not sure to what degree what is spoken in those regions can be considered Norwegian, since Norwegian has certainly changed since those wars and those regions have certainly been swedified over time. If it is, then Danish should perhaps also be a native language in Sweden, since Scania was also lost by Denmark-Norway to Sweden at the same time. There seems to be some variation between language articles as to whether "native to" refers to current usage, or historical use. English and Spanish simply don't use this field at all. ] (]) 19:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::The dialects of Swedish spoken in Jämtland/Härjedalen and Bohuslän are definitely not Norwegian, nor is the dialect of Swedish commonly spoken in Scania Danish (we're talking about areas that were annexed by Sweden more than 350 years ago). And ''"Native to"'' of course refers to areas where the language is spoken natively (i.e. as ]) by people who are not recent or fairly recent immigrants, unless you claim that Norwegian-speakers are the native (i.e. pre-Columbus) population of parts of the American Midwest (see the infobox in the article...). -&nbsp;'''Tom'''&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] ] 20:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:::"Native to" needs a definition, and both of these statements need referencing. The numbers in the mid-eastern US is tiny, and I think to say it's native to there is nostalgic thinking. If you used the same yardstick on English you'd have to say it's native to dozens of countries. There are 5-6000 Norwegians working in the oil industry in Houston. There are three quarters of a million Britons in Spain. What does that imply? --] (]) 22:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::::When I look up ''native'' on this very wiki, I get two possible relevant definitions. One definition looks just one generation back, another goes much, much longer. This wiki's article for the Portuguese language follows the first definition, while the article for the French language follows the latter (with a note about current usage being different). Minor border adjustments are not taken into consideration, nor is Southern Belgium or Monaco(!). As mentioned, English and Spanish mostly avoids the issue altogether by using "Region" rather than "Native to". English uses similar wording to French, while Spanish follows Portuguese. So it does not appear to me that one interpretation is more obvious than the other, which might be why there is disagreement as to where Norwegian is native. (One could perhaps argue that Norwegian is native to Strömstad according to both definitions, but I mention this only because I find the idea amusing, not as a serious argument.) Another reason for why someone insists stating that Norwegian is native to Sweden and not the other way around might simply be editing bias. That the editor is not interested in contributing to the article about Swedish. I haven't checked the edit history. ] (]) 05:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
:::I think we need a good source before we even discuss adding this piece of information. I don't see any sources, so our own speculations on what could possibly be meant are not all that useful.] · ] 06:08, 27 September 2016 (UTC)


writes about
== Very Strange Sentence ==


"the 2012 language revision"
"As of June 5, 2005, all feminine nouns could once again be written as masculine nouns in Bokmål, giving the option of writing the language with only two genders – common and neuter."


Could any of you clarify? Thanks! ] (]) 20:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
First of all, typical language changes do not occur on a single day. If there was some piece of legislation passed that day, that should be mentioned here. But even if that is the case, that does not mean the language itself underwent a fundamental change that day. And the claim that nouns "could once again" be written in a particular way is not backed up by any reference to when they previously could be written that way. ] (]) 14:35, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 20:41, 27 October 2024

Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Norwegian language article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconNorway Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconLanguages Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


mitt tilbaketrukne tannkjøtt

really? this is delightful and brings a smile to my face, but there is a reason language 101 exposition confines itself to things like "the boy's football" and "my brown suitcase" and the like. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:484F:92D0:543:F7A1 (talk) 09:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Maybe this sort of graphic detail is peculiar to the Nordic languages. A reading in a 1945 Icelandic grammar: "What were the children doing? They were playing. In the classroom was a table; on the table were papers, ink, and pens. On the wall were maps and pictures of animals. There was a picture of a raven pecking a lamb's eyes out. ..." (Stefán Einarsson, Icelandic: grammar, texts, glossary, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1945.) Largoplazo (talk) 11:30, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
It may be that we have a taste for the macabre in the Nordic countries, but I do find it an odd example. I don't see what value it adds either. There is already an example for the neuter gender. An example with plural is missing, but that might perhaps require some more explanation. An example with the feminine gender is also missing, although that would look identical to the masculine example, so one can not tell if it actually is an example of feminine, as that is an optional grammatical gender in Bokmål. Ters (talk) 17:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Map of norway needs fixing

The zoomed in map showing the spread of norwegian features Jan Mayen (1) outside of the text box and (2) in the middle of Libya. There are (presumptively) no norwegian speakers in the middle of Libya. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.250.128.97 (talk) 19:34, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Apparent error in Frysian example

The current article contains:

”De reinbôge hat in protte kleuren”

in a table. I doubt it is correct Frysian, since - according to a couple of sources - “in” is a singular indefinite article whereas “kleuren” is a plural word. I suspect “in” needs to be removed. Can someone knowledgeable about the Frysian language confirm this?Redav (talk) 15:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I removed it, because it was WP:OR anyway, like the rest of that section. Seems to be a major problem in general with these linguistics articles, people just add content without citing verifiable sources. TylerBurden (talk) 18:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

"Vikværsk" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Vikværsk has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 1 § Vikværsk until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

"BokmaalAndNynorsk" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect BokmaalAndNynorsk has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 1 § BokmaalAndNynorsk until a consensus is reached. 〜 Festucalex • talk 06:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

nynorsk 2012

The article reads:

"Nynorsk still adheres to the 1959 standard."

but the article at

https://en.wikipedia.org/Nynorsk

writes about

"the 2012 language revision"

Could any of you clarify? Thanks! 130.238.112.129 (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Categories: