Re: [Ietf-languages] Latin Sub tags

[Sebastian Drude <[e-mail]>]

I remember having read that the "macrolanguage"-scope was invented and 
applied merely in the context of harmonizing the Ethnologue database 
with the existing ISO-639-2 codeset when Part 3 was implemented.  So I 
would be surprised if many new code elements with that scope would have 
been created since then, and I believe that in the future such requests, 
while not excluded (see below), would need very good support, especially 
if they change the meaning of existing code elements and threaten to 
break existing applications, as Mark rightly pointed out.  And I also 
agree, the inconsistency (comparing, for instance, *ar* with *de*) that 
Mark points out is worrying, and I do not have any coherent and 
practicable solution.

Excerpt from the new ISO 639:

6.2.4    Eligibility of a macrolanguage for language coding

To qualify as a macrolanguage, a proposed macrolanguage code element 
shall meet the following criteria:

  * The encompassed individual languages shall be closely related.
  * Some applications require that a language be treated like an
    individual language in public data interchange.
  * Other applications require that the same language be subdivided into
    two or more individual languages in public data interchange.
  * The relationship between the macrolanguage code element and the
    encompassed individual-language code elements are explicitly
    defined, i.e. there is a defined mapping from the macrolanguage code
    element to two or more specific individual-language code elements.
  * A macrolanguage code element shall not encompass another
    macrolanguage or language group.
  * The creation of new macrolanguage code elements or the widening of
    an existing individual-language code element to the scope of a
    macrolanguage shall be based on evidence of application requirements
    for public data interchange, as well as appropriate linguistic
    relationships between the individual languages involved.

Sebastian

-- 
Museu P.E. Goeldi, CCH, Linguistica ▪ Av. Perimetral, 1901
Terra Firme, CEP: 66077-530 ▪ Belém do Pará – PA ▪ Brazil
[e-mail]  ▪ [phone] ▪ [phone]
Priv: Tv. Juvenal Cordeiro, 184, Apt 104 ▪ 66070-300 Belém

On 04/12/2023 17:44, Doug Ewell wrote:
> Mark Davis wrote:
>
>> While it is too late to change the macrolanguage structure, I would
>> advise against further “reclassifications”, since they just make it
>> harder for people, not easier.
> Based on a search of the Summary of Outcomes documents, it appears that no individual languages have been reclassified as macrolanguages since 2012 (Nepali and Oriya, now Odia), and that no brand-new macrolanguage code elements have ever been created since the inception of the ISO 639-3 annual review cycles in 2006.
>
> All macrolanguage-related changes since then have been to members of a macrolanguage (i.e. encompassed languages): adding them, removing them, or reclassifying their Scope from Active to Retired.
>
> A better analysis would be to scan the 639-3 code set files programmatically, looking for changes in the Scope field of existing alpha-3 code elements from “I” to “M”.
>
> --
> Doug Ewell, CC, ALB | Lakewood, CO, US | ewellic.org
>