Talk:Niger–Congo languages

message: :The Niger-Congo languages are the largest group of the world in terms of different languages.
Any data supporting this claim ?
----
Try this one for some fairly exact figures on a whole raft of language families:
http://www.ethnologue.com/family_index.asp
It shows the Niger-Congo family way in front of everything but Austronesian, and ahead of that too. -- Paul Drye — Preceding undated comment added 17:05, 24 October 2001 (UTC)
replies: text: Difference between language and dialect is quite arbitrary and the difference in numbers isn't that big anyway, so I added "probably". -- Taw — Preceding undated comment added 15:51, 25 February 2002 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which family is the biggest?

message: I think the links to the countries in which the example languages are spoken make that part of the article disorderly. Would it be OK to remove them, or is there another possibility to reduce the clutter? Strangeloop (talk) 18:14, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Clutter

message: Niger-Congo languages 
*Kordofanian
*Mande
*Atlantic-Congo
**Atlantic
**Ijoid
**Dogon
**Volta-Congo
***? Senufo
***Gur
***Adamawa-Ubangi
***Kru
***Kwa
***Benue-Congo
****Cross River
****Bantoid
*****North
*****South
******(Narrow) Bantu
******Ekoid
******Jarawan
I've added a navbox to see if we can come up with a nice template to navigate along the major subgroups of Niger-Congo. I've not added it to other articles yet because it needs to be polished a bit first. What do others think? — mark ✎ 14:36, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The box might be helpful in a later stage. This moment is just adds a third outline which even is not displayed properly in my FireFox browser on a wide screen. Currently I think adding more meat to the arcticle itself is of higher priority. For example which features a common to Niger-Congo languages (noun classes, serial verb constructions etc). Hirzel 08:48, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair point. I've parked it here for now. — mark ✎ 07:25, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm slowly expanding the article, having added a classification history and a bit on common features recently. Sections on tone, noun classes, and syntax will follow, and maybe a more detailed map. — mark ✎ 14:34, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navbox 

message: Does anyone have any idea how long ago the proto-Niger-Congo language is believed to have been spoken?  This would be an important addition to the article. --Saforrest 17:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time since proto-language? 

message: the yoruba language is incorrectly listed as a bantu language it should be listed under benue congo which is a part of the larger volta congo family —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.203.33.225 (talk) 11:22, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it is listed under Benue-Congo and I couldn't find anyplace in the article suggesting that it is a Bantu language. — mark ✎ 12:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  the yoruba language is listed under bantu 

message: Mel,  is it really your argument that I have to source the statement that the Bantu languages  include most of the languages of central, eastern, and southern Africa, or you will remove it?  This is trivially verifiable. john k 20:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So why exactly do you not provide a source?  Is your claim that editors don't have to provide sources for what they say (or even explanations of their edits in edit summaries), but that it's up to others to do it for them? --Mel Etitis  (Talk) 22:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BUt u dont remove it if it isnt a disputed fact, add a fact tag, but it could b considered a WP:POINT if someone said the sky is blue and u said prove it. The map of Africa shows the distribution of Bantu languages, i dont c the problem. also watch the language thing, if an editor feels someone is being unreasonable just explain it on the talk page. the bad languages weakens your case. I think the cursing editors changes are allowable, esp due to the fact the many things have no --Halqحَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ 23:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologize for my inappropriate language earlier.  As to the rest, like Halaqah says - not everything has to be cited, and the basic claim in my statement is about as close to "common knowledge"  as one can get.  Columbia says, for instance, that  the Bantu  "inhabit most of the continent  S of the Congo River except the extreme southwest."  The map in this article shows more or less my point.  The revert was clearly a WP:POINT violation because I was arguing with Mel on another talk page.  Would Mel revert me if I made an unsourced edit that George W. Bush is President of the United States, or that the  Earth is the third planet from the sun, too? john k 05:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I will be 100% honest, when i saw that edit dispute i knew it had personal roots. It happens to me, where people dont like you disrupt all your edits. It is sad, but what the revert was about was a WP:POINT and yes we should cite references, dont get me wrong but just add fact tags and allows the user to reply, esp if the addition isnt crazy stuff. We need to edit wiki not attack each other.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ 11:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bantu 

message: This page lacks any discussion of written forms for the languages under examination. It may be obvious to experts that no written forms exist, but non-experts like myself may find themselves here.
If there are written forms, they should be discussed here.
If there aren't written forms, that fact should be clearly stated.
 
72.207.90.34 02:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it's not that obvious that no written forms would exist — Swahili for example has been written for more than a millenium, and in the last few hundred years lots of Niger-Congo languages have been 'reduced to writing', as the experts call it. I do agree that this is an important topic, but perhaps this particular article is not the right place for it. Niger-Congo is a huge language family, and no simple generalizations can be made about written forms of the languages that belong to it. Compare the article on Indo-European language, which like this article focuses mainly on linguistic and historical issues and consequently doesn't mention the issue you raise at all. — mark ✎ 21:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  written forms? 

message: The number of Luyia and Ganda speakers on this page is certainly incorrect: a quick look at Luyia shows the former should be at over 5 million speakers, while the latter should be at  least six million. I propose to change the language map to reflect this shortly. Wanyonyi (talk) 08:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the figures date from about 1980, some are newer.  I'd prefer to enter a remark about the sources, such as "data base 1980 - 2000"). Otherwise I would have to adapt not only the figures but also their graphic visualization every few months.--Ulamm (talk) 12:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Actual Number of Luyia And Ganda Speakers

message: The page needs to be moved back. The article is about the entire family, and this is not the common name.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 08:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I was already wondering about it. I have just moved it back. (Why didn't you just do it, though?) --JorisvS (talk) 09:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Because I can't delete redirects.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 09:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I just moved it over the redirect created by his page move. I don't have special permissions here. --JorisvS (talk) 09:31, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I didnt know that was possible.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 09:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It is only possible in some cases. It is not possible if the redirect has been edited and, apparently (I found out trying to move Atlantic languages back the first), when the page was moved a second time. --JorisvS (talk) 10:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: Just wanted to enquire about whether the word "Niger" should be removed because of its offensive connotations, and use only these days in rap pop songs. As many know, it is the alternative word for the word "negro" which is not very appropriate. Can anothe term be used instead? 2001:8003:6A23:2C00:1433:5EF:D49:C433 (talk) 06:24, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not applicable. Niger, with one g only, pronounced in English Nigh-dger is a river, and it also gives name to the country Nigeria as well as the country Niger. It is not to be confused with the double gg "N" word, which is pronounced to rhyme with trigger. By the way, Congo is also a river.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megustalastrufas (talk • contribs) 13:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate/offensive term to blacks 

message: There was a 
warning at the top of the page from March 2014.   Looking back at the 2014 version of the page, there was a mix of refs appearing in Notes with in-text citations and Further Reading.  The page now has a good number of in-text citations.
Newystats (talk) 05:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have removed the citation style template  

message: I have restored the description of Niger–Congo as "hypothetical" for two reasons.
1. The first is technical and still much more more than that: the citation "in favor" of Niger–Congo was incomplete. The authors of the chapter about Niger–Congo in Heine & Nurse's book are Kay Williamson and Roger Blench. Here's the quote again with a full citation:
*
The authorship of Willimason is relevant, because she was a major proponent for the genetic relationship between Mande and Atlantic–Congo. The statement that vaguely distinguishes between "linguists" and "specialists" thus comes from an involved party in Niger–Congo debate. To use this source as solely authoritative for an evaluation of the validity of Niger–Congo is quite problematic.
2. It is not hard to find sources which do not support Niger–Congo (in the meaning of Atlantic–Congo + Mande) as a given and valid language family. Here are just two recent examples:
* (emphasis added)
* (Less directly stated, but clearly not in favor of Niger–Congo = Atlantic–Congo + Mande)
There is simply no scholarly consensus about the validity of Niger–Congo. The books by Güldemann and Vossen & Dimmendaal are equally strong as sources as the volume by Heine & Nurse. So I support the characterization of Niger–Congo as "hypothetical" in the lede, since this correctly depicts the current state of research. –Austronesier (talk) 10:28, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks for the additional sources. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:52, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acceptance 

message: Hi a "?" Sign should be added to every language under it since this is a hypothetical language family and not yet proven valid. Its done for Nilo-Saharan to remind people and so should be done for this proposed language family as well. Wojak6 (talk) 06:33, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add a question mark like in Nilo-Saharan 

message: There is intense research going on among first speakers from Africa of Niger-Congo languages to firmly establish the genetic unity and validity of this language family.
However,there is a link here on a recent research that establishes the genetic unity:https://llacan.cnrs.fr/nigercongo2/abstracts/Grollemund_Hombert_Pagel-Genetic%20Unity%20of%20the%20Niger-Congo%20family.pdf
Therefore,referring to the language family as "hypothetical" might be wholly premature.Mwenemucii (talk) 11:20, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: We shouldn't take a 2016 conference abstract as the final word about the topic, especially since the methodology behind that piece of research (= phylogenetic statistical methods) is not generally accepted by historical linguists as a tool for "proving" genealogical relationships between languages and language families. And since the maximal version of Niger–Congo (i.e. including Mande and Ubangian) is not accepted by several experts in the field (e.g. Dimmendaal, Güldemann), we still have to use the label "hypothetical". Personally, I would favor to say that while Niger–Congo is established, its exact scope is controversial. But this would create a terminological fuzziness for which there is no consensus among editors that have been actively shaping this article and other related articles (see Talk:Atlantic–Congo_languages). –Austronesier (talk) 19:24, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Validity and Genetic Unity of Niger-Congo