Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration form & ISO 21636 Dimensions
Sebastian Drude <drude@xs4all.nl> Fri, 27 November 2020 19:14 UTC
Return-Path: <drude@xs4all.nl>
X-Original-To: ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F4B03A0DFC for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:14:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.333
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.333 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=xs4all.nl
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id stS03kik69Xl for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:14:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2::117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEDF23A0DF6 for <ietf-languages@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:14:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) id 892817C64FC; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 20:14:22 +0100 (CET)
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
X-Comment: SPF skipped for whitelisted relay - client-ip=2620:0:2830:201::1:73; helo=pechora3.dc.icann.org; envelope-from=drude@xs4all.nl; receiver=ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from pechora3.dc.icann.org (pechora3.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2830:201::1:73]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 422227C6168 for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 20:14:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: from lb1-smtp-cloud9.xs4all.net (lb1-smtp-cloud9.xs4all.net [194.109.24.22]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pechora3.dc.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E09AE7000DEB for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 19:14:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cust-d2ef4cbd ([IPv6:fc0c:c138:75cc:34bc:4631:c48c:494:61cb]) by smtp-cloud9.xs4all.net with ESMTPA id ijBokYP5dkGBYijBskQNpR; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 20:13:59 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xs4all.nl; s=s2; t=1606504439; bh=UtlWS6/fzSP3lOOCLWSvDBv/OIbSIq2RLLeLL4vACgk=; h=Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:From: Subject; b=nCgm7UEYaOvfaKcR50pOjOL+uaiPhxjTu2HtOqUopW8m2HGJgzf22knFJAC2zAPWM Z8SRhrn6qJGrwxVgG8Q7tZjST3dWghgMIR0eMhNldRHykoXbWq1C6q/CH51YooVNaD bC71wU2R+n5GiwU+Oilv62o2H6SwnOHXFATnHjGD5WnEAml+f1GzVy2LKR62gciHHG ZRZxWU5bHx0ERgkW9biAItofRBrDDxYxQ7zWM+WxuRoBYIFxNsT13ekGY5n1beNdLr PiuG4Xt6gk2dtbx+VldAt5qC+rwp1jD9uRInnqWZtPI2qzoPa2hGv6vzF+mAnM0RBD hfsALIa/zpQwQ==
To: "ietf-languages@iana.org" <ietf-languages@iana.org>
References: <20201124215217.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.b4f450f0ec.wbe@email15.godaddy.com> <CAE=3Ky-h3zmj=A7QHCOMYgscN9VU0eY7T1OA7ybzO+HXws0d4Q@mail.gmail.com> <MWHPR1301MB211227738A865129320DBA0286F90@MWHPR1301MB2112.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
From: Sebastian Drude <drude@xs4all.nl>
Message-ID: <f93bbc3a-6433-d59b-021a-354f78f9b7db@xs4all.nl>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 16:13:51 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR1301MB211227738A865129320DBA0286F90@MWHPR1301MB2112.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------2EAFB684BEAEF2957C55A44E"
Content-Language: pt-BR
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfM+u23fGUBvotRnybr1+2AHk0QMwVcO9rHD4YhejUo9kglEcieHK5IOJQ57VSCk73vs0pFzOFg8Dmk90FQa6SuoXeY90lcJY86qzcISLq4JJxPSiDIme z6+sfFb9W2CUgkhGcF5Fr+Yr4D4jXWp0r3e/Iuo3wG3edxuXgcaCDjbDRKKLVK1puJt81CbiU/QrFtpKfgl0WtrQCMw4xcb9e+cDmPRf1vt/DU/Yy9veZaWg j2VIgNAnmSj5oJzcakjzT7ttrTSrEWNqIKJIpUCxrN/HhSzaLJVjpenCvwd3H+Za
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (pechora3.dc.icann.org [0.0.0.0]); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 19:14:21 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-languages/GJYPjyFpQXQ3JIVX1vNHIVbDdMs>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration form & ISO 21636 Dimensions
X-BeenThere: ietf-languages@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-languages.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-languages/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-languages@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 19:14:27 -0000
Dear all, here I bring my comments to these two threads, as they continue to cross-reference one to another. *Michael*: /I don’t know if I prefer “variety” to “dialect”/ I did not think that “dialect” was among the options; we are discussing “sociolect” vs. “register” or perhaps the neutral “variety” (sociolects, registers, and dialects are all different kinds of varieties, as ISO 21636 understand these terms). "Dialect" is not compatible with ISO/TR21636 (see below). To *Peter* (on code-switching and “register”): I agree with all you wrote, and thanks for pointing to the ISO registry TR. Let me add that that TR has been devised by a different working group, but in coordination with the group working on language varieties that I lead. Their conceptual framework is thus compatible with the set-based understanding of languages and language varieties. They do, however, cover some phenomena under “register”. *Hugh*: /My understanding is that whistle speech and drum speech are being presented in the report as separate mediums (which it also appears the report also equated with modalities, it seems to conflate the distinction between medium and mode) but clearly whistle speech is an oral speech modality the same as speaking is an oral speech modality. So separating these in the medium dimension seems to be unnatural./ ‘Medium’ is the name of the dimension (analogous to ‘space’), and ‘modalities’ are the varieties belonging to the medium dimension (analogous to dialects belonging to the space dimension). We do not use the ambiguous ‘mode’ afaik. The whistled modality is clearly different from the spoken/oral modality, although it is, of course, derived from it: the whistler transfers crucial properties of oral speech into the signal formed by whistling, that is why it works. (The same holds true for the drummed modality.) But the same is also the case of writing, which is also derived from or based on speech, and yet writing is a different modality. The other genuine basic modality of human language is that of signing, in the case of sign languages. (If real sign languages are represented in writing or symbol systems, the writing is based on the signs.) In the case of regular spoken languages, such as English, which also do have a signed modality (such as “Signing Exact English”), this modality is based on the spoken/oral modality. I am not totally sure, but there may be some constructed languages where the basic modality is the written modality – languages which have first been devised in writing, without any concrete pronounciation in mind. Bliss symbols, as far as they indeed are a full-fledged language (and not a variety of another language), are a candidate. *Michael*: /“Dialect", please. “Chronolect” is a nonsense. It is not a register because it has different accidence than Esperanto does. (Not just like English “thou hast”, but throughout the system./ We use “dialect” in a more specific sense in ISO/TR21636: A dialect is always bound to a certain geographical region. This does not hold for the Archaic Esperanto at hand here. I continue to defend that it is best characterized as a register, applied in certain situations or to achieve a certain effect, just like overly formal (and often arachaic) registers in other languages. Using a different inflecional system (is it that what you mean by “accidence”?) is a perfectly plausible means by which such a different register can be marked (each variety is always defined simultaneously by an external criterion – to be spoken by persons form a certain region, social class, … or in a certain type of situation, etc. – and by a structural criterion – phonetic, lexical, or other formal properties, which includes inflection, a morphological property). Why should such formal properties be excluded in the case of registers but not in the case od dialetcs? TR 21636 does not use the indeed rather rare term “chronolect”, but speaks of epochs, periods, and stages. But one could argue that these are “chronolects” (of different size/extension). To *Peter* (on TR21636): thanks for that correct characterization and comments. I agree with all of what you write there. Thanks for pointing me to the t and u extensions, which I will study to fully understand what you say about them. Best whishes to all, Sebastian Sebastian -- Museu P.E. Goeldi, CCH, Linguistica ▪ Av. Perimetral, 1901 Terra Firme, CEP: 66077-530 ▪ Belém do Pará – PA ▪ Brazil drude@xs4all.nl ▪ +55 (91) 3217 6024 ▪ +55 (91) 983733319 Priv: Tv. Juvenal Cordeiro, 184, Apt 104 ▪ 66070-300 Belém On 26/11/2020 04:32, Peter Constable wrote: > > I think in a context that pertains to linguistic variation, I think > the sociolinguistic usage of “register” will generally be understood, > not the phonological usage. (The latter perhaps might be assumed by > default if the context were specifically speech resources, but the > former would be relevant to all types of language resources.) And it > would be trivially easy to clarify in a spec that that is meant. > Moreover, there isn’t any more widely-used term for that meaning. It’s > relevant enough to the domain of language resources that ISO TC37/SC1 > has published a technical report on sociolinguistic register, and > referring to it as “register”: ISO/TR 20694:2018 A typology of > language registers <https://www.iso.org/standard/68852.html>. > > As for the first usage you mentioned, I think “code switching” or > “diglossia” are more widely used than “register”. I can’t say I’ve > ever encountered this being referred to as “register”, though I admit > it’s not an area I’ve studied much. And I guess there might be cases > in which it might not be obvious at first glance whether two distinct > varieties should be considered distinct languages or distinct > registers of a single language. (In fact, TR 20694 has a section > discussing the distinction.) But I don’t think this argues against use > of “register” in the sociolinguistic sense: if it’s determined that > what was observed are two distinct languages, then from then on I > would expect “diglossia” or “code switching” would be the terminology > used, being more conventional for that sense and less ambiguous. > > My 2 cents. > > Peter > > *From:* Ietf-languages <ietf-languages-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of > *Hugh Paterson III > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 24, 2020 11:52 PM > *To:* Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org> > *Cc:* ietf-languages@iana.org; Ben Scarborough > <scarboroughben@gmail.com>; drude@xs4all.nl > *Subject:* Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration form > > FYI: register is a problematic term from a linguistic perspective. > There are at least three senses of the term. The first as it is used > here is a social register in which language a or language b is chosen, > the second is in southEast Asian languages where word forms differ > based on register - which may also have social applications of use, > and third in register tier theory, a phonological theory of tone > analysis. So in general, the word seems to be over loaded, and should > IMO be avoided. > > - Hugh Paterson III > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 5:53 AM Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org > <mailto:doug@ewellic.org>> wrote: > > Ben Scarborough wrote: > > > I will gladly amend my form if the opinion is that "sociolect" > is not > > a suitable term to use here. > > Just for the record, we aren't absolutely required to wrap ourselves > around this axle. For example, the line could simply read: > > Comments: "Archaic" Esperanto variety defined by Manuel Halvelik > > It's just a comment, after all. > > -- > Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fewellic.org%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7C87e491a522614bcff81c08d891171769%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637418875651855487%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=%2BuxrCeYz%2BwsAGQFKqX%2FrFFNQdI7v9cjNOUT5hG0uN7w%3D&reserved=0> > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-languages mailing list > Ietf-languages@ietf.org <mailto:Ietf-languages@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fietf-languages&data=04%7C01%7C%7C87e491a522614bcff81c08d891171769%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637418875651855487%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=gCaK4Pu0CpsBCpOhQo%2FoUR8z%2FeETHrpIoqUUfVxr3AY%3D&reserved=0> > > -- > > All the best, > -Hugh > > Sent from my iPhone > Paris, France >
- [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration form Ben Scarborough
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… John Cowan
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… John Cowan
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… John Cowan
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Ben Scarborough
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Ben Scarborough
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Hugh Paterson III
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Phake Nick
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Phake Nick
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Mark Davis ☕️
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Hugh Paterson III
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Mark Davis ☕️
- [Ietf-languages] ISO 21636 Dimensions (was: Langu… Richard Wordingham
- Re: [Ietf-languages] ISO 21636 Dimensions Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Michael Everson
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Michael Everson
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Peter Constable
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Peter Constable
- Re: [Ietf-languages] ISO 21636 Dimensions Hugh Paterson III
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Peter Constable
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] ISO TR 21636 Dimensions Richard Wordingham
- Re: [Ietf-languages] ISO TR 21636 Dimensions Sebastian Drude
- Re: [Ietf-languages] ISO TR 21636 Dimensions Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] ISO TR 21636 Dimensions Richard Wordingham
- Re: [Ietf-languages] ISO TR 21636 Dimensions Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration… Ben Scarborough