Re: [Ltru] Re: Is 639-3 bogus ?

Frank Ellermann scripsit:

> Yes, I found that yesterday, that's where it says "No man's land"
> and "Colloquial blackspeech".
>  
> > I think "orq" doesn't belong there: not a single word is extant.

Well, checking, there is no code for classical Black Speech (spoken
by the Ringwraiths and by Sauron himself), so presumably "orq"
is meant to cover both.  There is a poem in classical Black Speech,
the Ringverse ("ash nazg durbatuluk" etc.), so it marginally counts
as having "a literature", the requirement for conlangs to appear
in 639-3.

> For more on that see <http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/orkish.htm>, I miss
> "Yrch" on that page, otherwise it's apparently complete, about 30 words.

"Yrch" is in fact the Sindarin word for "orcs", the plural of "orch";
not Black Speech at all.

> The IANA registry cannot list all made-up languages with about 30 words,
> for some time any decent science fiction had a glossary with words in
> some made-up language(s).  And 26*26*26 is far too limited to waste it
> for such constructs in 639.

I agree in general.

> Protecting the subtag registry from bogus entries while it's on a one
> way street (nothing ever removed) with a known end (26*26*26).

I have to agree.  What's the right procedure for getting conlangs removed
from the list, Peter?  639/RA-JAC?  Anthony Aristar?  I think Orkish,
Delason, Jakelimotu, Linga, and perhaps Tceqli (aka Ceqli) should be
removed.  The last four are essentially private languages, and all but
Orkish and Tceqli don't even have a live Web presence, just dead pages.

> I can't judge anything else, e.g. why "bet" offers BÃ©te and "bev" BÃ©tÃ©,
> it could be a typo, it could as well be completely unrelated languages.

They are in fact very closely related languages, belonging to the Bete
family (no accents).  Beyond that I can't say.

> The source for the draft is Latin-1 (another detail I didn't know, and
> I checked that it's really Latin-1 and not windows-1252).  In some
> cases like "aue" =/Kx'au//'ein or "gnk" //Gana I'm not sure if that's
> as it should be, it appears to be odd.  Or maybe "//" has a well-known
> meaning, and I just don't know what it is.

/, //, and ! are letters representing various clicks in languages of
South Africa and Namibia.

-- 
John Cowan    cowan@ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan
If a traveler were informed that such a man [as Lord John Russell] was
leader of the House of Commons, he may well begin to comprehend how the
Egyptians worshiped an insect.  --Benjamin Disraeli

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru