IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ltru] extlang and stability of macrolanguage

Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> Sat, 24 May 2008 21:25 UTC

Return-Path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ltru-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ltru-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 743FB3A6987; Sat, 24 May 2008 14:25:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ltru@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ltru@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E92C43A6987 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 May 2008 14:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.436
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.436 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.163, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P5z+X-b-YOIs for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 May 2008 14:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (mail1.microsoft.com [131.107.115.212]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C5233A6910 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 May 2008 14:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tk1-exhub-c101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.46.185) by TK5-EXGWY-E801.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.240.5; Sat, 24 May 2008 14:25:52 -0700
Received: from NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.62.44]) by tk1-exhub-c101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.46.185]) with mapi; Sat, 24 May 2008 14:25:51 -0700
From: Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com>
To: "ltru@ietf.org" <ltru@ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 14:25:46 -0700
Thread-Topic: [Ltru] extlang and stability of macrolanguage
Thread-Index: Aci9nFKcfL0MDz4MTUua0NERfVwVSwAR/+vA
Message-ID: <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579562E2A40FBE@NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <mnet2.1211495247.7439.nicolas1.krebs3@netcourrier.com> <002901c8bc7b$de7889e0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579562E268413F@NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <6.0.0.20.2.20080523185603.0730a790@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.20.2.20080523185603.0730a790@localhost>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Ltru] extlang and stability of macrolanguage
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ltru-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

> From: Martin Duerst [mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp]


> I'm somewhat confused. Romans(c)h and Rhaeto-Romance are simply
> alternate names for one and the same language. So I'm not sure
> why there is talking about a narrowing or change.

Indeed, there isn't. There was potential to consider it a narrowing based on how MARC had used roh, but the JAC decided that the denotation was simply Romansh; the name change itself was driven by the fact that the Swiss government uses "Romansh" as the English-language name for that language.



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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email