Talk:Tuareg languages

message: All Berber languages have the alveolar trill [r].
I couldn't help but notice that Tuareg - at leasat on the Wikipedia page - lacks /r/, and only has /l/.
May I know if this is correct, or a mistake?
There is a Tuareg verb spelld as "izgăr", and the Tuareg alphabet DOES have a letter for /r/.
So why the lack of /r/ in the table of consonants?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.224.129.18 (talk) 15:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: No /r/?

message: Question. In my experience, this languages are best known as 'Tuareg' (at least in the literature). Can anyone confirm this? If so, shouldn't Wikipedia follow this consensus and shouldn't the article be called Tuareg languages (with a redirect from here)? I know, of course, that the Tuareg themselves do not call their language Tuareg - but that would be beside the point (I speak Dutch although I call my language Nederlands myself). Besides, Tamasheq is a local (Mali) variant of the name of the language, adding to possible confusion. - Mark Dingemanse (talk) 15:28, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I see you just did it. Thumbs up! Also thanks for Hanoteau and Motylinski - nice to have them in digital form! The todo list got lost along the way, I recreated it. Currently looking for as many maps of the (language) area as possible; if you know a good one, let me know. - Mark Dingemanse (talk) 13:20, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: Thanks. I couldn't use that one (I exceeded my book quota) but I used the following sources for the first rough map of the Tuareg area: Sudlow 2001, Bernus 1996 (Touaregs: un peuple du désert), Lhote 1984. I think this map could be used in the opening paragraph of this article, as well as in the Tuareg article. Of course we need a more detailed map also; I'm working on that one. Any comments? - Mark Dingemanse (talk) 12:27, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: OK, thanks. Actually Sudlow 2001 also shows more Tuareg in the northeast; but I consider Bernus (who shows less) more of an all-round 'Touaregologue': he has extensively travelled the area and has written very good stuff on Tuareg (mostly cultural/anthropological). I have taken a sort of average of the three sources. - Mark Dingemanse (talk) 22:45, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: I'll park the map here till we have more text; at present, a map only interferes with the layout. Mark Dingemanse (talk) 15:58, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Name: "Tuareg"?

message: :After looking up some more sources, including Basset (1952), Bougchiche (1997) and Zavadovskij (1967), I think it is more correct to extend the Tuareg to Ghadames (just like Langues du monde does - which for the Tuareg part is actually based on Basset 1952). So it changed it. - Mark Dingemanse (talk) 14:10, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep - this is one of the areas where my non-English background comes out. In Dutch, the default meaning of 'to' implicates 'but not including'. I should've said something like up to the very edge of Ghadames :P - Mark Dingemanse (talk)
Even in English, it's ambiguous - I was just being pedantic ;) - Mustafaa 15:48, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: I wondered why you didn't mention at least the particular Berber dialect and the number of speakers >:) - Mark Dingemanse (talk)
Not many!  A few thousand?  Ghadamsi's of interest, though, for having preserved distinct reflexes for proto-Berber *h1 and *h2, which Prasse regrettably treats as identical. - Mustafaa 16:20, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: This remark got me thinking. Kossman (1999) reconstructs proto-Berber *Ĥ and argues that Ghadamsi β is a reflex of it. Judging from Kossman (1999:134-5), I would say there are too few words with h in Ghadamsi to safely reconstruct a *h2. In any case, what I don't understand about it is how a (proto) language could have two identical but different consonants. I'm not very much into historical linguistics, so maybe you could explain what is meant here.  ¶ Mark Dingemanse (talk) 10:12, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the clarification. I understand the issue better now. And on rereading Kossmann (1999:131-132) I see he says the same thing about h / β.  ¶ Mark Dingemanse (talk) 11:42, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Proto-Berber article really needs consonantal info... Mo-Al (talk) 00:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ghadames

message: What are ă, ĭ, and ŭ supposed to represent?  Can someone replace them with IPA or something? 216.70.225.98 19:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Phonology

message: The syntax section contains many < æ >s. If Tamasheq really only has two phonemic short vowels, why not represent it as < a >? While I'm still somewhat unclear on the topic, I'm under the impression that this is the common practice for other Berber languages...Mo-Al (talk) 03:38, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  So many æs! 

message: https://archive.org/details/DictionnaireTouareg
Rajmaan (talk) 07:47, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  dictionnaire touareg (1893) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tuareg languages. 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/20061208062646/http://www.ehess.fr/centres/ceifr/assr/N112/019.htm to http://www.ehess.fr/centres/ceifr/assr/N112/019.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) 22:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified