Talk:Chadic languages

message: 06:15, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I must say I agree with this comment; this is a problem. — mark ✎ 16:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

message: The Chadic pages are missing so much info on languages.  I think I will create a List of Chadic languages soon.
azalea_pomp
:The problem here is not so much a lack of lists (see also comments above), but rather lack of content! — mark ✎ 08:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs more info

message: Are they tonal languages? Badagnani (talk) 06:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't seem to have read the Wikipedia article on the Hausa language, which notes that Hausa has significant tones.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.62.157 (talk) 12:16, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Tonal?

message: can someone add sources to the article okOo7565 (talk) 04:03, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Source

message: Too many of these language articles are wandering off the path into issues of genetics.  If there is information on the genetics of a physical group (not a linguistic group), then that information needs to be in a separate article, not in a linguistics article as if there is some actual connection between the two.  (Taivo (talk) 17:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Genetics are in no way determinative of language evolution. The genetic data might provide additional context in some instances, but if a relevant connection isn't demonstrated, the material should be removed. There's a fair bit of ethno-nationalist essentialism at play in these articles on languages. O.M. Nash (talk) 10:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics and Linguistics 

message: According to this very site, not a single Chadic language is spoken in Chad. So:
1. Why are they called Chadic languages when they are spoken by large numbers of native speakers outside of Chad and neglible numbers in Chad?
2. (More important to Wikipedia) why does this article claim that they are spoken in Chad?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.243.184.156 (talk) 17:36, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, so almost a month ago this question was asked, and clearly no one cares, so I'm deleting "Chad" from this article, although obviously one can't change the name of the language family, wikipedia can at least not contradict itself without any citations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.240.129 (talk) 23:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So it turns out Chadic languages are so named because of Lake Chad. There you have that. Anyway, there are no Chadic languages spoken in Chad, so Chad should not appear in the list of places Chadic languages are spoken.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.240.129 (talk) 03:43, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Chadic" 

message: Every single part of the Origin section of this page needs sources. How can this be acceptable? 70.190.164.200 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 02:24, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Now there is at least one citation. However, the section still inappropriately privileges genetic evidence, whose reliability in Urheimat discussions is highly questionable because it is ambiguous and difficult to interpret, language shifts complicating matters and muddling the picture, and the section is NPOV, not only giving undue weight to one specific Urheimat proposal, but ignoring all others (see Afroasiatic Urheimat). The view that the origins of Afroasiatic lie in (East) Africa is at least as mainstream, if not more, and Blench (2006) is a good source for a mainstream model on the origins of Chadic. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:17, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin