Talk:Dutch language/Archive 2

message: What is a 'thorpe'?
:See thorp. 惑乱 分からん 00:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thorpe 

message: :I believe the term 'English disease' is mainly used to describe the increasingly common error of writing two words seperately, where according to Dutch grammar they should have been 'glued together', as mentioned in the article.  Using too many English loanwords is not referred to as 'English disease' as far as I know, and I'm a native speaker of Dutch. Is there anyone who agrees with this?
:Hi, guess you're right. But just asking for interest: When in the Netherlands I had the impression that the Dutch -for all their usual competence in English- even more than the Germans tended to write together English compounds that ought to be written seperated. Guess you could call that "reverse English disease" (more catchy than "Non-English Germanic desease" ;ö) Anybody else have an opinion on that? Edwing 12:54, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: English disease

message: There is a mistake in note 6) on the pronunciation of Dutch consonants.
The phoneme /w/ is never pronounced as a voiced labial-velar approximant (except by the speakers of Surinamese Dutch). In the Southern dialects the phoneme /w/ is pronounced as a bilabial approximant. 84.193.165.47 18:08, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mistake

message: Don't agree with the statement on the joining of words in Dutch. Though this is common in German, as is stated correctly, this is not the case in Dutch. Even words which were formerly joined through the use of "trema" are now mostly at least broken up through hyphenation (the famous "zee-eenden-eieren" or sea bird eggs). In Dutch it is not accepted to simply combine words into new words and therefore the examples of "long" words in the Dutch language must be qualified as pure fabrication. There are no words in Dutch such as "randjongerenhangplekkenbeleidsambtenarensalarisbesprekingsafspraken" or "hottentottententententoonstellingsmakersopleidingsprogramma". No Dutchman will use such words and they are not accepted in school in, for instance, spelling tests or essays. In German, it is however quite common to find such extended cojoined words.--Michaelmarinus 20:45, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: With which part don't you agree? We do join words without spaces and hyphens (except in the former-trema-case you mention). (I once added this explanation, but apparently that was a bit to long). Sixtus 19:59, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, as far as the commonness of "such extended cojoined words" is concerned, I'd like to point out that also in German examples like the ones above are made-up jokes. It is true however that words tend to get "long" in German more often than in Dutch (which has something to do with bad style and German thoroughness) but your perception is -like all perceptions- subjective and in this case selective insofar as it may simply not acknowledge all those (80-90%) of cases where German words aren't really longer than Dutch ones, only those that "stick out". Edwing 12:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: I'll need know how is pronounced the word ending  '-tie' (as in politie, coördinatie), as [siː] or as [tiː] IPA-transcription?
Ludor 02:24, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: both [siː] and [tsiː] are used. the former is more common in the south, the latter in the north. [tiː] is rare and generally considered incorrect. --Lenthe 06:40, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  -tie pronounciation 

message: "Further examples for the close vicinity of Dutch and German:
Op de berg staat een klein huisje (Dutch) - Auf dem Berg steht ein kleines Häuschen (German) 
(in English: "There's a small house on the mountain", or alternatively, "On the mountain is a small house", demonstrating English's ability to conform to Dutch/German word order in this sentence)"
This is a bad example of English's ability to conform to Dutch/German word order, because the word order is exactly the same in both languages. Does someone know a correct example?--194.78.199.56 14:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a good example of the close vicinity of Dutch and German. The English translation only serves to help understand the example. AvB ÷ talk 22:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The article gives a correct translation of the sentence 'Op de berg staat een klein huisje.' (If you think you have a better one, feel free to propose it here). The current version of the article contains the word-by-word translation 'On the mountain stands a small house'. AvB ÷ talk 22:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: word order

message: These are the Indo-European languages, not all of course because there are currently 443 of them, but the most prominent/known/spoken of them.Of Which, according to my count, around 100 languages (not hypothetical subgroups) are represented on the map.Only 2 of these can claim the following:
To have produced another language while still being spoken
These languages are Dutch and German who produced Afrikaans and Yiddish respectively.
Because it would be an virtually impossible task to make a list of all human languages let alone a tree. (And get or create all the information needed for relating them to each other) I will use mathematics to prove my point.
2 of the 100 language have produced other languages (not pidgins or creoles) that's 2 %.
The suspected totall of all languages on earth is 6000, 2% of is 120 languages that have produced other languages while still being spoken today.
Now I don't know what all you 'opposers' think, but when 2% of the people survives a certain dissease, then they are part of the lucky 'few'.
Therefore, the remark: 
" Dutch is one of the few languages to have produced another language while still being spoken itself. " 
Stands proven.
--Sandertje 22:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please try to be less hostile. Your presentation may indeed give support for your argument, but I have to concur with ClairSamoht, that it is unreadable even magnified. As you have been able to provide this professional looking graph, why can't you just provide the source where you got it from. Finally a point that may be more interesting than this bickering: At what moment do we call an isolated dialect a new language? This apparently has happened with Afrikaans, but not (yet) with Amish or Brasilian? I raise this question as I think it is not easy to make a strict line, but this seems to be important in this case as it excludes some offshoot languages asdialect. Arnoutf 09:24, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The Seneca language article starts out Seneca (in Seneca, Onödowága or Onötowáka). Duh. If the Seneca and the Onondaga both call their languages Onondaga, I suppose that means that Seneca comes from Japanese, and Onondaga comes from Celtic?
And since you are having trouble using google, allow me to extend to you a link: Ocracoke language search
Your level of ignorance and your level of intellectual dishonesty is why original research is prohibited here on Wikipedia. 
As far as proof, it's right here| in the first item. Please quit vandalizing this site! ClairSamoht 18:55, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Please could you both return to civil behaviour and stop shouting at each other. Sandertje, "no orginal research" is a rather strong requirement in wikipedia. You will really have to show published sources agreeing with your ideas, before you can vent them in an article. −Woodstone 19:34, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  What do you want? An article?I'm pretty much sure there is no article on "Dutch being one of the few language to have produced another language while still being spoken itself". Thing is that I have proven my point and no matter how hard Andries & Co squeel it remains on the page.
I can believe that nearly half of the space on this talk page is devoted to one little sentence, and even now, while the point has been proven the opposers (lead by a lost mathematician and a layman of all sorts) still continue their futile actions against the sentence in question. If there is one thing that (should) characterise civil behaviour on wikipedia it's that once proven wrong you admit you were wrong.If you're too proud for that, fine leave then but don't keep bugging people trying to make a good article.
How long will it take for them to find that out, and will it happen before or after interference by higher spheres on wikipedia?
Goodnight.
Sandertje 20:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Sandertje, you are going too far. You have violated the official policy Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. So far you have not proven your point and seem to be the only one believing your assertion. You admit above that there is no source for your statement. You cannot go on behaving like this. Please come with substantiated support for your ideas before putting them in again. −Woodstone 21:39, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presentation to prove point. 

message: A small but important point: the genders of Dutch are said in the article to be 'animate' (de) and 'neuter' (het). Anyone with the slightest acquaintance with Dutch will know that this is misleading and untrue- a child is HET kind and yet a table is DE tafel!! I suggest the frequently used terms 'common gender' and 'neuter' to describe the genders of Dutch.
Also, I think the word 'collapse' to describe the transition from a 3-gender to a 2-gender system is rather imprecise- this word suggests that the change happened all of a sudden, whereas it is the combination of gradual sound changes and then a slow process of catch-up in the spelling system which removed unpronounced forms such as 'den', 'ener' etc.
It might also be worth noting that the Dutch do actually use 3 genders fairly consistently with some words (particularly with feminine abstract nouns such as 'vrijheid' and 'bewering'), using 'zij' and 'haar' when referring back to them. If you look in the Van Dale the 3 genders are all consistently indicated, and during my time in Belgium there was no sign of a 'collapse' amongst speakers of the standard language.
This is obviously only a minor issue and a small part of the text but it demonstrates the scope for improvement and extra precision in the article.
--Anonymus
Everything is explained in:
 
Dutch grammar
Gender in Dutch grammar
--Sandertje 10:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but then, why don't you think the edit by Anonymus, which you reverted, is correct? "Animate" gender is incorrect (Dutch is not, e.g., an American-Indian language), and everything Anonymus states above seems more correct to me than the current explanation in the article. Sixtus 13:25, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: If I remember correctly, we agreed in a previous discussion on this topic so I don't understand why you reverted the edit by Anonymus. Sixtus 13:28, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genders 

message: The Wikipedia Babel entry for Dutch native speakers says this: Deze gebruiker heeft het Nederlands als moedertaal. Wouldn't it be a little nicer if it were to say something like "Deze gebruiker spreekt Nederlands als moedertaal"? Or "Deze gebruiker draagt bij met Nederlands als moedertaal"? The links to the templates here: Template:User_nl, Template:User_nl-1, Template:User_nl-2, Template:User_nl-3, Template:User_nl-4.
Does anybody have any further suggestions? Do you think that it should be changed at all? Let's hear what you have to say. --Michiel Sikma 19:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the heeft het entry is better, sounds as good Dutch so why change it. Moreover the others can be ambiguous spreekt Nederlands als moedertaal  can also mean speaks Dutch as if it is native, The last option sounds very strange Contribute with Dutch as native language, so on Wikipedia Dutch is my native language, but out in the streets it may also be Chinese? In other words I think it just fine as it is. Arnoutf 20:19, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My point is, how can you "have" Dutch? You can speak it, you can be proficient in it, et cetera, but I doubt it's really correct to "have" it. Have you ever heard someone say that they own their native language when you talk to them about it? It's not a physical object. That's my objection. --Michiel Sikma 20:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babel 

message: I've noticed that User:Big Adamsky has edited the article and stated the Afrikaans was an official language of RSA until 1925 - edit. AFAIK, Afrikaans is still an official language of the RSA, along with English and a number of African languages. Additionally, I do not see the relevance of writing about the official status of Afrikaans in an article about the Dutch language. If anything it could be written that "Afrikaans, a language derived from Dutch, is an official language in South Africa". Thanks,  Ronline ✉ 07:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. While the edit was not quite accurate, User:Big Adamsky had a point, which is hopefully reflected in my edit. AvB ÷ talk 11:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies for any inaccuracies. As for the "relevance of writing about the official status of Afrikaans [etc]", my intension was merely to write about the official status of Dutch, not the official status of Afrikaans. Thanks again. //Big Adamsky 13:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit was quite welcome. It led to an improvement. Keep up the good work. AvB ÷ talk 21:27, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the information about Dutch being official until 1961 is very useful. I didn't know that both Afrikaans and Dutch were official at one time. Thanks,  Ronline ✉ 06:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afrikaans 

message: I would like to inform you that I have/are going to put up a request for a Arbitration.
Mainly because I feel, we've reached a stalemate and the mediation (to me at least) was merely an extension of the discussion rather than a solution.
I have left the "" Statement by party 2 "" open as I don't want to put false words in your mouths, but please make sure that someone fills that piece of text explaining your views. (500 words)
[Because I need to inform all of you before posting my request, this piece of text will soon be replaced by the link to the ArbCom request. All involved users will recieve a message on their talkpage as wel]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Statement_by_Sander_on_Talk:Dutch_language
Sander 10:28, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitration Committee 

message: I have posted a warning on Sandertje's Talk page here.
 Unsigned comment by User:AvB ^  
Sander has taken notice of the 'warning' above and thinks that Avb could better devote his time to expanding Wikipedia rather than provoking conflicts between users.
Sander 12:58, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:NPA]] warning for Sandertje

message: User Aeusoes1 has started systematically delinking IPA symbols from their formal description article. This destroys a lot of work done by other people. Before continuing, please discuss first at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_%28pronunciation%29#Linking_single_IPA_symbols. −Woodstone 16:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delinking IPA 

message: Hi all, edited the section on "Dutch as a Foreign Language" to reflect the difference between orthography and phonology. Okay, e.g. phonetics and morphology would also be issues when counting the number of sounds (and thus consecutive consonants) in word of a certain language, but I guess it's allright like that, or would somebody disagree?
Edwing 13:21, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consonant Clusters 

message: What does "transvesting" mean? Should this be "transversing", or is there some meaning in the word "transvesting"? If so, can this be noted with the citation.(83.118.38.37 17:09, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm wondering whether these quotes are notable at all. AvB ÷ talk 08:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say it's pretty obvious they don't belong here. I think that on Wikipedia quotes sections are generally seen as a bad idea, better suited for Wikiquote. Would anyone object to moving this to Wikiquote? Junes 19:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would suggest removing them. They are all pretty negative anyway, so the balance is off. The language is not that bad (sais the Dutchy) Arnoutf 20:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotes about the Dutch language

message: The Spanish version of Wikipedia calls the Dutch language "Idioma neerlandés", not holandés.
Does somebody know what the official correct term is for "Dutch" in Spanish?
I believe neerlandés is the official form, but if (like in many other countries) holandes or similar is also used ... I think both should be in included.
Sander 07:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Before the Dutch Revolt the synecdoche had a different form: the language was called (idioma) flamenco just as holandés nowdays.  ---moyogo 22:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names for Dutch 

message: The Scots article acknowledges that there is debate about whether Scots should be considered a language or an English dialect.  I believe that we should mention that here when we talk about the closest language to English.  What do others think?  A discussion here would be a lot more productive than an rv war in the article. David 16:51, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scots language controversy 

message: A few weeks ago, someone removed most of the links to dictionaries from the page and added the Cleanup-spam template.  I had found the links quite useful, actually, even though I suspect some of it was spam.  I am puzzled by the ones that remain.  They are not particularly major dictionaries, and while the names imply they have a list of all dutch dictionaries, they don't.  Unless there are objections, I will either create a list of the major useful Dutch and Dutch-English dictionaries or look for a comprehensive neutral list to link to on an external site and delete all but Wiktionary.
Tono-bungay 18:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Link Spamming 

message: Hi all, I have a few small remarks I wish to share:
1) Dialects:  In Flanders, Antwerps is considered to be an important dialect as well. There used to be sitcoms in this dialect (Den Bompa), and there's still the Echt Antwaarps Theater, a well known theater group who performs in this dialect.
Also, the last few years the city of Antwerp has used a pun on the dialect in it's public campaigns: the use of an A as it's symbol, which is also the local dialect for jij (you). So slogans like 'Zot van A' (Crazy about A) can be interpreted as Crazy about Antwerp / Crazy about you. Most recent example of a slogan is 'Het verdriet is van A' (The sorrow is yours / The sorrow is of Antwerp) after a tragic shooting.
I hope I won't get bashed for bringing up a Flemish dialect in a Dutch article, but since the other 4 were there, I thought Antwerps (or Antwaarps) was worth mentioning too.
2) Dutch as a foreign language: In Belgium, German is less widely spoken, and not always required, but it still spoken by a considerable number of people. Well, German is an official Belgian language, and a part of Belgium (de oostkantons) which we got after one of the World Wars (... lack of history knowledge here, sorry) speaks German. Might want to mention it here. But maybe the title is wrong alltogether: Foreign languages for those who speak Dutch seems better fit for this section.
All thoughts on this are welcome :)Ninja neko 13:34, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small remarks