Talk:Mayan languages/Map and graphics debate

message: I added two images: a tree diagram of the mayan language family and a map of their distribution. I pulled out the list of Mayan languages and I will instead make a list at the end of the article with links to the respective Ethnologue ISO-codes and wikilinks to their articles.
This is the material I removed:
*Cholan-Tzeltalan languages
**Chol language 
**Ch'orti' language
**Chontal language
**Tzeltal language 
**Tzotzil language 
* Huastecan languages
**wastec language 
**Chicomuceltec language
* Kanjobalan-Chujean languages
**Chuj language 
**Tojolab'al language
**Jakaltek language
**Q'anjob'al language 
**Mocho' language (also called Mototzintleco)
**Akatek language
* Quichean-Mamean languages
**Mam language 
**Tektitek language
**Ixil language
**Awakatek language
**Q'eqchi language 
**Poqomam language [poqomam]
**Poqomchi’ language
**Quichean languages
***K'iche' language 
***Kaqchikel language 
***Tz'utujil language
***Quiche-Achi languages
***Sipakapense language
***Sakapultek language
***Uspantek language
*Yucatecan languages
**Itza' language
**Lacandon language
**Mopan language
**Yukatek language 
*Mayan Sign Languages
**Yucatec Maya Sign Language
Maunus 11:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'Maunus 11:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Chuj branch is missing from your infobox. Also I notice that Jakaltek dropped out in your tree diagram, which is probably justifiable linguistically (very close to Q'anjob'al) but contrary to ALMG - I'd support you but it's worth mention. Finally, I like your linguistic features edit, it is clearly less idiosyncratic than my own initial attempt, but I think that a few of the things which you cut (effects on Guatemalan Spanish, Lenkersdorf's Sapir-Worfean thesis about Tojolabal, and to a much lesser extent the Lakoff reference), while not necessarily of strictly linguistic interest, are of interest to a general encyclopedic user. Would you object to my putting them back in, conforming of course to your improved format? --Homunq 17:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, go ahead. It was a table syntax error that made the Chujean-Qanjobalan branch fail to show. Poptí is another name for Jakaltek, which is used by Nora C England upon whose book I have based the diagram (and she is a big supporter of ALMG). The lakoff stuff I don't really find relevant because 1. his book is not about the maya and he is not a specialist in mayan languages, and other scientist deal much better with the spatial description stuff in mayan languages (there is a lot of literature references about this in the Mesoamerican Linguistic Area article.) and also to me it is not as much the embodiment part that is interesting but the way in which Mayan languages (and mesoamerican languages in general) use them grammatically: this is the part about relational nouns derived from bodyparts. The lenkersdorf experiment stuff I didn't understand the way it was described, but seemed like a very simple way to connect ergative grammar to the linguistic relativity hypothesis. I think if it should go any where it should be in the article Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in the experimental support part. The effects on Guatemalan spanish I also don't think are documented the very same features are common in rural central mexican spanish and while some linguits argue that here it is due to influence from Nahuatl (which has the sdsame constructin as Maya) it is not really possible to unequivacally attribute it to substrate influence (the same constructions are found in European spanish dialects) If you do chose to put it back in though I will not object, although I may reword it.  Maunus 21:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lakoff: OK, just add a bullet for semantic calques. Influence on Spanish: I have definitely heard this construction more in Guatemala and Chiapas than in Milpas Altas, DF (though the latter was only the outer orbit for me when I was in the DF); I think this should go somewhere but will defer to you on whether here or MLA. Lenkersdorf: I was trying to simplify a whole book of argumentation into a quick paragraph, of course it comes across as simple. How about I put it in Sapir-Worf with here "(This feature has been used to advance the Sapir-Worf hypothesis in relation to the Tojolabal language.)" Honestly, Lenkersdorf's thesis doesn't really rise to the level of experimental support - he has deep experience and several arguments but all of them are just suggestive, not conclusive.--Homunq 18:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sounds fine to me.Maunus 20:20, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: adding images and restructuring

message: Should we have the term "Mayance languages" appearing in the infobox? I had thought that this term was not widely used these days...--cjllw | TALK 02:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Check out Indo-European languages which has "Indo-Germanic" in the corresponding place. I think that means that that slot is reserved for less-preferred terms, so this is fine. (ps. Also note that that page gives priority to its "category template" over its "infobox"... given the flow of the text, from general-interest to detailed, I think that may be the better choice.)--200.6.254.170 20:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mayance in the infobox