Talk:Iberian language

message: here is another thing i'm going to have to do research on. Gringo300 16:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: I've continued the translation that somebody else began.
I'm not translating literally in some cases for sever reasons:
*It sounds better to me my way (the distinction isn't clear vs. the distinction is unclear).
*The Spanish is NPOV (or otherwise seems un-wiki-wise.  "Debo" (should)is a pretty good indication of this.
*The literal Spanish phrasing doesn't make sense in English.
Otherwise I'm trying to say mostly true to the original. I've re-organized a bit, but that's about all.
I have more to say, but I'm gonna go.  I'll continue translating soon I hope. --Quintucket 05:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation

message: Removed a line from the intro, which needs a source (paraphrase): "the substrate of the Sardinian language has been identified as an Iberian language or close to the Iberian language."---Alexander 007 12:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sardinia

message: I've realized that I've been translating some sections that are of marginal interest even to me, and I'm fascinated by linguistics.  Is there any reason anybody can see for me to continue along this path?  I'm fairly certain a lot of what I've so far left untranslated will get cropped by later editors if I translate it anywhen.  
The Spanish and Galician Wikipedias have far less editing than the English does.  I'm just going to work on the more relevant stuff for now, and leave the minor linguistic notes (which make up about half the content of the article) for later if at all.  
I suppose though that the notes themselves are interesting, it's more the examples, which are irrelevant and confusing.  And those just involve copying-pasting large sections and then changing o/u, y/e, como, que, and así to their English equivalents. The example texts for example, are an excellent example of this.  They don't have Spanish equivalents, and hence would be of little interest to the average reader.  And some interpretations, while fascinating to the linguist in me would again be of little interest to the average reader.  Though I'd advise against cutting that one entirely, I might prune it down a bit if others suggest it.
Basically, I don't want to go through pointless effort.--Quintucket 00:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a quick look at the new material, and I didn't see anything I would crop yet. It is all pretty much interesting and worthwhile so far. Alexander 007 00:30, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Damn.  Now that I know somebody's reading it I feel like I should hurry up and finish rather than skip about between projects.  Nevertheless, Tartessian language is in a similar situation to where this one was.  At this point I have a good chunk of Iberian done so I'm gonna go work on translating that for a bit.  I'm sure I'll come back to this fairly soon unless somebody else gets there first. --Quintucket 01:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Areas of Marginal Interest

message: Iberian has five vowels, the same as in Spanish or Basque - strikes me as an unhappy wording. 5 vowel systems such as this are the most common in the world's languages and phrasing it like this seems like an attempt to tie Iberian to Spanish/Basque. How about "has the 5 vowel system encountered in many languages, including some modern languages spoken on the Iberian peninsula"? Akerbeltz (talk) 11:40, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Vowels

message: Akerbeltz, you can probably analyze the proposed limited Basque connections better than me. BTW, Iberian is not a language isolate. It simply isn't well attested enough to classify. kwami (talk) 01:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers ;) I looked at it - it can stand as it is at the moment in terms of the references to Basque. The link is bollox but it states on the page that it's disputed and that's good enough I guess. As far as isolate goes - difficult one to argue. I guess I'd personally call it unclassified. Akerbeltz (talk) 01:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I also moved the old Vasconic languages and rewrote the article as a mainstream topic. Not the most common name in the world, but not terribly uncommon either. kwami (talk) 02:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basque 

message: What's the justification for the inclusion of the Aquitanian-Basque table? We say nothing, but note that very few Iberian words can be identified. Take aŕs : HARS- : hartz "bear". Do we know that Iberian aŕs means bear, or something like it? Or is it simply an onomastic element that looks like an Aquitanian/Basque onomastic element? kwami (talk) 09:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question. None. Been trying to make that point till I'm blue in the face and have given up. And "male gender suffix" isn't even English and certainly not what -(t)ar means in modern Basque. But what do I know of these things... Akerbeltz (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a problem with anyone who tries to sell pseudo-science as science, whether that's on this page or any other page. Congratulations, you've now reduplicated your table on both the Iberian page and the Aquitanian page. Akerbeltz (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Okay, if we do not have reliable sources (or, as it appears, any sources) that the Iberian corresponds to the Aquitanian or Basque, then it is OR for us to claim they correspond. "Look alikes" are meaningless: I could make a table of English-Korean lookalikes, and even some with similar meanings (two-tul "two", many-manhi "many"), but its very existence would be misleading. I'm deleting the table. kwami (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Actually you provided some references that refer to the broad onomastic shared pool. You have not provided a SINGLE reference for any of the supposed Iberian-Aquitanian word pairs. Secondly, the wording refers to onomastics, but the table doesn't contain a single onomastic, neither a place name nor a personal name. They're just supposed pairs of common nouns you're listing. Akerbeltz (talk) 09:57, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Please stop copying text, this isn't an email exchange. For a topic as controversial as this one is, it's not good enough to just say "oh it's in the book somewhere, you go find it..." Akerbeltz (talk) 10:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  comparative table 

message: I admit to total ignorance - how can it be argued that Iberian was ergative? That seems like a long shot. If one argued that certain endings mark agents, that would be a reasonable deduction but has it actually been proven that it's an ergative language? Akerbeltz (talk) 13:31, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As you can see, it is what Untermann says in the quote. BTW I am looking now at a recent articleon Iberian as an ergative language, although this one says that the ergative suffix was -ka.--Dumu Eduba (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah thank you. I didn't realise that ref applied to more than one case ending. Perhaps we should add it to all it applies to. I might fiddle with the formatting a bit too. Akerbeltz (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ergative

message: I'm failing to see how that tag is appropriate. The section up the arguments, pro and contra and leaves open the question of whether it's a genentic link or sprachbund or coincidence. How much more neutral can you get? Which aspect in particular do you take exception to Talskubilos? Akerbeltz (talk) 14:10, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I see it's a re-hash of the previous debate, right, deleting the tag. Akerbeltz (talk) 14:11, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless you can bring better arguments than you brought in 2010, the debate stands as it did back then. Seriously... Akerbeltz (talk) 11:39, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Iberian language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607202936/http://www.sussex.ac.uk/linguistics/documents/lxwp23-08_edb.pdf to http://www.sussex.ac.uk/linguistics/documents/lxwp23-08_edb.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uned.es/sel/pdf/jul-dic-94/24-2-Correa.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081227095813/http://www.webpersonal.net/jrr/index.htm to http://www.webpersonal.net/jrr/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081006160601/http://www.arqueotavira.com/Mapas/Iberia/Populi.htm to http://www.arqueotavira.com/Mapas/Iberia/Populi.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:00, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Iberian language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.museuprehistoriavalencia.es/resources/files/TV/TV008_Beltran.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071023223039/http://www.dpz.es/ifc2/publi/fichapublic.asp?recid=2622 to http://www.dpz.es/ifc2/publi/fichapublic.asp?recid=2622
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090616050747/http://www.ffil.uam.es/reib3/hoz.htm to http://www.ffil.uam.es/reib3/hoz.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081203114339/http://iespontdesuert.xtec.cat/tesis.pdf to http://iespontdesuert.xtec.cat/tesis.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717205827/http://stel.ub.edu/llati/files/Calafell.pdf to http://stel.ub.edu/llati/files/Calafell.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080104101441/http://iespontdesuert.xtec.cat/iberico.html to http://iespontdesuert.xtec.cat/iberico.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:21, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is still aome confusion of terminology with Iberian. Iberian can mean either the Iberian peninsula or the Iberian language. Paleohispanic was invented by the scholars to help straighten out the confusion. Also another point of confusion is that the script covers two languages, one known, Basque, and the other not, Iberian. There is no unity of pre-Roman scripts and languages. Nothing is easy in the topic. Someone needs to work through the terminology making sure of what these names really mean. It has to be someone with some knowledge of historical linguistics and epigraphy.Botteville (talk) 01:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The Iberian script was not used to write Basque. At least not until we manage to establish whether the Iberian language was related to Basque or not. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Iberian confusion