Jump to content

Requests for new languages/Wikipedia West Frisian (creole)

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

West Frisian Wikipedia

[edit]
submitted verification final decision
This proposal has been rejected.
This decision was taken by the language committee in accordance with the Language proposal policy based on the discussion on this page.

The closing committee member provided the following comment:

Westfries does not have the ISO 639-3 code required for eligibility. —{admin} Pathoschild 11:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Proposal summary
  • Language details: West Frisian (Westfries, no code)
  • Editing community: Mechielsen (NP), Dolfy (N), Plaats (N).
    List your user name if you're interested in editing the wiki. Add "N" next to your
    name if you are a native speaker of this language.
  • Relevant pages: Test project (incubator)
  • External links:
Please read the handbook for requesters for help using this template correctly.

Westfries is not recognised as a language. It is a prerequistite for new languages. GerardM 11:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Language information

[edit]
  • West Frisian has some subdialects, we want to make a wikipedia like the Limburgish or the Low German wikipedia. So all the articles can be written in the West Frisian dialects.
  • The West Frisian wikipedia will be for the subdialects: West Frisian(West-Fries), Wierings, Tessels, Enkhuizers, Egmonds, Kennemers, Volendams, Zaans and Markens. Things like the main page will be in the West Frisian subdialect West-Fries.
  • West Frisian is not the language spoken by the people in the province of Friesland.

Arguments in favour

[edit]

Arguments against

[edit]
  • I am from Westfriesland and I know it is not really spoken except for people who use it in cabaret. Also when you consider the dialect, it is spoken different from village to village. With the big influx from people from Amsterdam, there is hardly some authentic Westfries left. Really.. GerardM 14:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General discussion

[edit]

Can you provide an external reference, confirming the recognition of West Frisian as a distinct language/variety? Also, an estimate concerning the app. number of speakers would be useful. Is there anything to say concerning the language history, media, literature and its current status? Lastly, when you call it a "creol language", is this a generally recognised classification of this language? --Johannes Rohr 19:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • De codes used are ISO 639-1, ISO 639-2, ISO 639-3 for the dialects. West Frisian is bit like the dialects Stadsfries and Blits, but the strong language more Frisian language while the light is more Hollandic and Dutch. West Frisian can be seen as a regional language

in the same way as Zeeuws en West-Vlaams both already have a Wikipedia by the way.. Also my support of the Wikipedia as been with in mind that the dialects (there some variety's around) can be also be used, because this stil in use in writing. There is a organisation that gives information and support the writing (and speaking) in dialect (not the old languag by the way) See more (in Dutch and bit in West Frisian): http://www.westfriesgenootschap.nl, they also give out books in West Frisian, mostly written by people who send stuff like stories in.. Dolfy 13:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have to confess, I'm confused. West Frisian (Frysk) is of course a recognised language with its own ISO code. However, this proposal is not entitled "West Frisian" but "w:West Frisian (creole language)", for which neither the Englisch nor the Dutch article give an ISO code. Further, the English article states that In the 19th century the language itself has almost completely disappeared.. Likewise, the Dutch article confirms, that the language is extinct: Het Westfries was de taal van de Westfriese bevolking in West-Friesland. At the same time, the above proposal seems to describe a living language (West Frisian is the language / strong dialect of West-Friesland). Personally I am not convinced, that a Wiki in an extinct regional creol language would make too much sense. However, I would strongly suggest that you first become clear about the fundamentals? Is the language you are proposing the same that is described by the Dutch and English Wikipedias as "extinct" or are you proposing a wiki for a contemporary Dutch dialect? --Johannes Rohr 16:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
West Frisian creol is a language, but the language has not many speakers. Now it is more the strong dialect that still exists. The West Frisian creol wikipedia will be in the strong dialect, but the strong dialect is hardly the same as the language. And a Wikipedia in the West Frisian langue would make sense, I am sure about it. Maybe the start will be difficult, but I'm sure that the wikipedia will be a success in the future. --Mechielsen 17:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, can I take this as your confirmation, that the language "Westfries" is extinct and that what you are proposing is a Wikipedia edition in a contemporary Dutch dialect? If so, the name should be changed accordingly, probably to "West Frisian (Dutch dialect)" (to avoid confusion with the language which is also called "West Frisian" in English). Further, in this case, the link to the article at en: would be misleading, as it is about the extinct language, not the current dialect. --Johannes Rohr 20:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S.: When you state that "a Wikipedia in the West Frisian langue would make sense", do you refer to the West Frisian language (Frysk, which already has its own wiki at fy:), to the extinct creol language or to the contemporary "strong dialect"? --Johannes Rohr 20:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is almost nobody speaking the language, but now it's mostly the heavy dialect so mainly I refer to the heavy dialect. In the begin I said strong, but that had to be heavy, sorry for that. It's the almost the same as Zealandic, West Frisian is a collective term for some dialects and Zealandic too. West Frisian is registered in some books, a special dictionary and they use it in a radio program on the West Frisian (regio in North Holland so not the province of Friesland) radio.--Mechielsen 20:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
@Johannes Rohr: I known a wrote the two articles... :-) It is bit of confusing indeed, general speaking the real language is extinct, but the dialect of it, meaning in sense that the as still a small number of speakers and writers, not many do as Mechielsen als points out. For some this state that the language continues and for others it states that the language it self is really dead. Not to mention that there's also linguists that think that the original language was dialect (really distinct one) of the Oldfrisian, and later on became a dialect of Hollandic wich became a Dutch dialect as we now know... So it not one two three slam dunk thing.. :-) But it is a agreed that still distinct dialect even in way it used now (from heavy to light).
Most people who speak in dialect are speaking the the light version and write in, what the Wikipedia article calls the strong dialect. Both are dutch dialects, the more real strong, heavy, dialect is only partly used in some area's or subdialects with the two lighter ones. So it still around. What the idea is that you can use normal strong dialect on the Wikipedia beside and with influence of the heavy one. So you can use daik and doik besides dìk (meaning: dyke) in the text, in real life all three are used, only dìk not as much as daik and doik. Maybe it is idea to use same principal als the Limburgse Wikipedia, in that sense that you state that this is such a dialect you used for the text. Or something similar to that, because i do not think that really necessary. Think also in the way that there are some small variations and some bigger ones, same as American Englisch and British Englisch, or more even like north and south in Dutch. By the way the code's are on the fy.Wikipedia article... Dolfy 20:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC) At the ps, that's a problem in the Englisch language, that they both called West Frisian.. Some linguists use Dutch name just for not confusion it... :-) I hope that mine answer provided already a bit of the answer, in real sense the "strong dialect" and the dialect of the creol language combined...[reply]
I admit having problems in sorting out what you say. Both varieties appear as Westfries (creole and dialect), as you note. I seem to understand that dialect would be the shift this linguistic entity received during its overexposition to Dutch proper, while the creole version developed as a contact language between Frisian proper, Low Saxon and Dutch proper. Is that correct? Not having an ISO code is a deadly issue for your project, but it's interesting to know about it anyway. FMI, I see you indicate a deviation of the tonic A->O (as in daik->doik). We have a similar phenomenon in piemontese, along the contact line with the ligurian lingustic entity. It happens in both lingustic areas, which led some of our linguists to call it "Langue d'O" for the sake of brevity. Is this phonetic deviation following a clearly locatable line in your entity, too? --Bèrto 'd Sèra 21:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Let me give my view on the case. Dolfy's edits and articles on this dialect group are at best confusing and sometimes utterly misleading, but indeed West Frisian, or Westfries, exists. It is a dialect/regional language generally considered part of the Hollandic dialect group but with a stronger Frisian substrate. Indeed, all Hollandic dialects have a Frisian substrate. That's essentially what distinguishes them from other Low Franconian dialects like Brabantic. This Westfries, now, has been under the continuous influence of the Amsterdam dialect ever since Westfriesland was incorporated into Holland. On the other hand, its less urbanized nature has also provided some shelter from more recent innovations. Thus, while the South Hollandic dialects (e.g. Amsterdam, The Hague and Rotterdam speeches) have become mere accents, Westfries represents a lot of authentic Hollandic elements that were lost in standard Dutch. This makes it quite distinct from the latter, and thus, Westfries is essentially a different language system, almost as distinct as Zeelandic.
Now, a few words about the language used. There is a lot of talk about "strong" and "weak" dialects, which is a rather unlucky concept. It is common sense that "all" dialects/regional languages converge towards the Standard Language. This goes for Zeelandic, for Low Saxon, for Brabantic and also for Westfries. But it is an exaggeration to state that there would be two Westfries dialects, strong and weak. Westfries is still widely spoken and it is not endangered, even though many specific words disappear. The language used by Mechielsen and Dolfy, however, is not so living. It is deliberately historising in nature, bordering on sheer purism. This kind of Westfries is hardly spoken indeed and it is questionable if it was ever spoken. It reminds me a little of the Siberian Wikipedia. This stands in stark contrast with the Low Saxon, Limburgic, West Flemish and Zeelandic Wikipedias, where a living vernacular is used.
Conclusion: even though Westfries has no ISO code, it exists and it is different enough for a Wikipedia. However, the language used on this wiki should be less historising and a little more based on living Westfries. Just realise for whom you write this Wikipedia: for the speaker. If the Westfries Wikipedia has too little in common with living Westfries it won't hit, for who is supposed to read it if the average West Frisian can hardly understand it? Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 15:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that there is a need for Westfries to have its WMF project. We are not in the business of having a stamp collection of projects. There is no real use of Westfries in real life and it does not serve any purpose. GerardM 11:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Need is a big word. Of course, the speakers are fluent in standard Dutch and can use the Dutch projects. This also goes for Zeelandic, West Flemish etc. But if enough people show up to turn this project into something beautiful, why not? The only reason against is: no-one considers it a separate language and it has no ISO code or recognition by Ethnologue. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 16:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Steinbach, I do sympathize with all small linguistic entities in principle, since I'm myself from what often gets defined as a couple of cattle-herders. Yet I voted against everything that misses an ISO code and I will oppose this project, too. The reason is that I don't want the WMF to become a place in which linguistic entities come to be judged as cows at a rural market (damn it, I AM a cattle herder, after all LOLOL). All linguistic entities (even the smaller one) are peers in dignity and NOBODY (starting from myself) can be authorized to issue a judgement in value about any of them. The only way we have to ensure that LangCom does not start to behave as the Emperor giving out the Magdeburgh Rights to those towns he personally likes consists in identifying a standard EXTERNAL source of definition, as ISO. You have all my sympathy, as apart from coming from a small bunch of supposed to be cattle-herders I'm also a great fan of Skutsjes, so the word Friesland has a special affective value for me. But sympathy cannot become a source of judgment. I hope you understand my position and I wish you to get an ISO code asap. --Bèrto 'd Sèra 15:53, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Steinback does not have a personal link to Westfries.. If anything when the dykes break his feet won't get wet. GerardM 17:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I understand it's not good that it has no ISO code, but I think the reason for that is that Westfriesland, the regio where they speak Westfrisian is a small part of the province of North-Holland and the province of North-Holland has not many attention for our culture, so they don't think about an ISO code for our language/dialect. But I think Westfrisian is more different than Dutch than Zeelandic, so why no Westfrisian Wikipedia?. And in the low german (Nedersaksisch, low saxon) wikipedia all the articles are in different dialects, so some articles are in the dialect of the Veluwe written and some articles are in dialect of Drenthe written, it's not ONE language or dialect with the same rules and Westfrisian is ONE dialect/language and has the same rules, so another reason why a Westfrisian Wikipedia is a good idea. Mechielsen 19:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid I must contradict you to some extent. The fact that Zeelandic has an ISO code and Westfries doesn't has nothing to do with a lck of attention for North Holland. On the contrary, Westfries has been regularly written down and extensively studied for decades. However, the Westfries dialects, unlike the Zeelandic dialects, have joint the Brabantic sound shift, which made Dutch into the language it is now. That's why Westfries, like the other Hollandic dialects, Utrechts, Brabantish and East Flemish, are considered Dutch dialects and Zeelandic and West Flemish are sometimes not. You think Westfries is more distant from Standard Dutch than Zeelandic is, this depends entirely on what you find most important. For example, this map tells a different truth. (I must confess this map can be equally misleading). It will be very difficult for non-Dutch users to find out whether West Frisian is distant enough. Anyway, the non-recognition of Westfries by Ethnologue has nothing to do with low interest in North Hollandic culture. I gave my opnion before ("let's give it a try, these dialects are ideosyncratic enough"), and I still approve it. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 17:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that map is made by someone who never heard someone who speaks the Westfrisian dialect and never read something in the Westfrisian dialect. For the normal Dutch speaking people it's hard to understand Westfrisian and the Westfrisian dialect has many different words so the normal Dutch people don't understand many words. So I don't know why the map says that the distance between Dutch and Westfrisian is 2 or 3. But I'm glad you give it a change. I become crazy of the vagueness of the people who are saying Westfrisian is a Hollandic dialect and people who say it's a Frisian dialect, I hope it will be clear soon. I think it's a dialect of Frisian, there are so mutch same things in the Westfisian dialect and the Frisian language like the grammar and words. Mechielsen 12:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This map was made by some of the Netherlands' most outstanding dialectologists after a lot of profound research. If you are so much involved with you dialect, you should at least do a little more research on dialects and regional in the Netherlands. Westfries is in no way a Frisian dialect, since nearly all of its vocabulary is of Franconian origin, as is much of its grammar. Even the label creole language is a slight exaggeration, although its origin exhibits many hallmarks of creolisation. Stadsfries comes closer to what you might call a creole language. Most dialectologists, by the way, share the view that Westfries belongs to the Hollandic dialect group while some recognise a separate North Hollandic group. This is not the place to discuss this topic in detail; I can give you an elaborate treatise on it if you like. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 13:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oke the West Frisian wikipedia will be in the subdialects of West Frisian, so it will be like the Limburgisch and the Low German (Nedersaksisch) Wikipedia. The dialects are West Frisian(West-Fries), Wierings, Tessels, Enkhuizers, Egmonds, Kennemers, Volendam, Zaans and Markens. With this method we reach to more people.
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_West_Frisian_(creole)&oldid=1182220"