Talk:Shilha language

message: the article needs to tell something about the PEOPLE who SPEAK the language.
Gringo300 07:15, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Working on it, Gringo. (What does it say above your comment? 'Add more info on demographics, etc'.) Though most of this would rather belong to the article Chleuh. Maybe you want to read something on this people and expand the article? — mark ✎ 08:23, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  People 

message: One of the very first treatises of Tashelhiyt in European philological literature is Jones, dissertatio de lingua Shilhensi, which itself is part of John Chamberlayn's (1715) collection of language samples titled Dissertationes ex occasione sylloges orationum Dominicarum scriptae (Amsterdam: Willem & David Goeree).
A Berber (Tashelhiyt) version of the Lord's Prayer gives in Jones (1715) is cited in Adelung & Vater's Mithridates, vol. III, p. 54. The first sentence, along with the German interlinear glosses, runs thus:
:Amazeagh 'na baba erby ghi y ginna Berkat ysmanick
:Herr unser Vater Gott, welcher im Himmel, Geheiligt.werde Nahme.dein
It would prove very interesting to compare this (admittedly mangled) tašlḥiyt with the products of the Sous literary tradition of that time. — mark ✎ 20:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  On hold 

message: Beginning July 2015,  has been making many changes to the article. Work is still in progress (September 2015). Several long sections (on Shilha literature and premodern spelling) were moved to other articles (Shilha literature and Berber orthography) and replaced with shorter sections. Most other sections were expanded. The article now more narrowly focuses on the language. It may end up being on the long side, but this is justified by the almost total lack of publications on Tashelhiyt in English, while many of the French and German sources are severely dated.
Recently,  made the following changes to the article:
#tasousiyt > tasusiyt (tasousit)
#*That's fine.
#[təgəm:in:ək] 'your house' > [təgəm:in:əm] 'your house'
#*'your house' is in fact [təgəm:in:ək], but I assume 84.178.x.x was just copying the non-IPA notation, which was had tigmmi-nn-m indeed (wrongly). I'll fix this.
#1st person singular possessive suffix was changed from -ø to -inu/-nu (and "ø = zero morpheme" was removed from the legend of the table)
#*While it is correct that there is a possessive suffix -(i)nu, it doesn't belong in the paradigm given (see the text). I'll fix this later today by adding the full second paradigm.
#the number nine was changed from tẓẓa to ttẓa
#*I'll check this later today with my sources.
— mark ✎ 10:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It took some time to get to this, but I have just corrected the errors the above edit introduced. — mark ✎ 19:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent changes 

message: I have added a couple of {fact} tags in the verb section.  I could have added more.  It seems to me that the situation has rather more explanations than the one offered as standard in this article.  For example, we are saying that there are four basic forms of the verb.  However in Campbell 1995 under the "Berber" chapter I read:
Three bases are distinguishable: (1) C1C2; (2) C1C2C2 + a; (3) C1C2 + i/a [...].  It is customary to designate these bases, (1) aorist-imperative, (2) strengthened aorist, (3) preterite.  Exactly how these bases are related to tense and mood – if, indeed, the categories of tense and mood can be usefully applied to the Berber verb – is a controversial question.  Different researchers have distinguished an aorist and a preterite, a past tense from a present/future, a present/past from a future; some make an aspectual distinction between perfective and imperfective.
Etc.  My small Initiation à la Langue Berbère – Tachelhit by Mohammed Lamzoudi (Casablanca 2005) also agrees that there are three basic forms, although he calls them very different things: the impératif immédiat, the impératif perpetuel, and the "rare" indicatif.  So either we try to explain some of the different approaches or we should say whose individual view we are supporting here.  Widsith (talk) 21:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verb morphology 

message: Is the same Berber Latin alphabet used for Tachelhiyt as for Kabyle, or is a different version used? Mo-Al (talk) 05:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orthography 

message: This statement...
Derived verb forms exist: a causative s, medial m (or nasal), and passive tt... can be recognized, as in muddu 'travel' from ddu go' + medial, or smugr 'meet each other' from gr 'touch' + causative + medial. However, derivation is no longer productive, i.e. speakers no longer consciously produce causatives, medials, or passives by applying derivative morphology to verbs.
... doesn't seem to be right. Medials might not in fact be productive, but I think a good case could be made that causative and passive prefixing is still very productive in Tashlhiyt. Speakers regularly add these prefixes to base verbs (kšm "to enter" --> skšm "to bring in"), including more recent lexical additions from Arabic (dwwx "to be dizzy" --> sdwwx "to make dizzy"). Since the t-prefixing for passivity model is identical to that of Moroccan Arabic, and a lot of the more recent innovations in Tashlhiyt come from that source, it's harder to argue, but it could definitely be interpreted as productive. In any case I think the aforementioned  statement needs to sourced or, if not, removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.12.233.19 (talk) 19:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Longer Productive? 

message: I have listed just the things I have in my personal library and a few other references in English (sources in any other language do not serve as evidence of English usage) and do not represent this as a thorough review of the linguistic literature, nor do I claim that this is the final answer--it's just a start and subject to discussion.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In more recent works (see above for an example), Blazek has switched to "Shilha".  --Taivo (talk) 11:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

text: I agree.  The Wikipedia policy of WP:COMMONNAME does not give priority to specialist usage.  --Taivo (talk) 22:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  there are many version of the term Kabyle in affixes (taqbaylit) other english spelling is Qbaylie, kabyle, Qbayla.. just like (Tamazight, Tamaziɣt) Amazigh, Mzgh, Amaziy.--Uchronicle (talk) 22:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but anything other than "Kabyle" is uncommon, and so loses out on that account. — kwami (talk) 22:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: you are also suggesting that Tamazight should be renamed mzgh--Uchronicle (talk) 23:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, "mzgh" is not an English word. We use the English word "Berber". We don't need to rename it; it's already at that name. (Do you even read what you write?) — kwami (talk) 23:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

text:  neither  is "Shilha/Shelha (not an English word). (The affixes/ root word (Tamazight is Mzgh)).--Uchronicle (talk) 00:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Uchronicle, You still don't get the principle of WP:COMMONNAME, that the only language that matters here is English and any sources above that are not in English, or are transliterations from French or Berber, are unacceptable to the discussion and can be completely ignored.  You're compiling a nice bibliography that can be used elsewhere, but is totally useless for our purposes here.  The Berber etymology of the word does not matter one whit.  Only the English form matters.  "Shilha" and "Tamazight" are both English words as such.  --Taivo (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

text: "Shilha" is used in English. "mzgh" is not. "Shilha" is in the dictionary. "mzgh" is not. Do we really need to explain that to you? — kwami (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Taivo, I think we're wasting our time here. You've explained that several times; I can only assume he's being obtuse. I'm done with this "discussion". — kwami (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

text: At this time. I will let other future users/editors or new readers. To continue this discussion( the matter of renaming (commonly used, appropriate and respected title), (in English usage and spelling). I have listed all the ( Book lists, Sources, and References, of the use of Tachelhit in the English language and French).  Thank you.--Uchronicle (talk) 01:03, 27 
Uchronicle, one thing that would be helpful would be spelling out the name in Tifinagh and in Shilha Arabic. — kwami (talk) 01:16, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References concerning naming 

message: *Merritt Ruhlen, 1991, A Guide to the World's Languages, Volume 1: Classification, Stanford
*Joseph R. Applegate, 1958, An Outline of the Structure of Shilha, American Council of Learned Societies.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Shilha

message: *George L. Campbell, 1995, Concise Compendium of the World's Languages, Routledge.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Shluh

message: *William Bright, 1992, "Berber Languages," International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Oxford, vol. 1, pp. 174-175
*Richard J. Hayward, 2000, "Afroasiatic," African Languages: An Introduction, Cambridge, pp. 74-98.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tachelhit

message: *"We will speak Tashelhit, by Abdallah El Mountassir, 1999. ISBN-10: 2911053524 (Uchronicle (talk) 11:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tashelhit

message: *Robert Hetzron, 1990, "Afroasiatic Languages," The World's Major Languages, Oxford, pp. 645-653.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tshalhit

message: *Michael Mann & David Dalby, 1987, A Thesaurus of African Languages: A Classified and Annotated Inventory of the Spoken Languages of Africa, With an Appendix on Their Written Representation, International African Institute.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Taʃlɦiyt

message: *David Dalby, 1999/2000, The Linguasphere Register of the World's Languages and Speech Communities, Observatoire Linguistique.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: ta-'''shelhit'''

message: *Vaclav Blazek, 1998, "Berber Numerals," Archiv Orientalni 66:149-168.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In more recent works (see above for an example), Blazek has switched to "Shilha".  --Taivo (talk) 11:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Taʃelhait

message: *Chritopher Moseley & R.E. Asher, ed., 1994, Atlas of the World's Languages, Routledge.  --Taivo (talk) 10:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tashelhait

message: *Andrew Dalby, 2004, Dictionary of Languages: The Definitive Reference to More Than 400 Languages, rev. ed., Columbia.  --Taivo (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tashelhet

message: *Cécile Fougeron & Rachid Ridouane 2006 On the phonetic implementation of syllabic consonants and vowel-less syllables in Tashlhiyt, Estudios de Fonética Experimental 18 (2008) 139-175
*Dell, François and Mohamed Elmedlaoui. 1985. 'Syllabic consonants and syllabification in Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber.' Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 7.105-130.
*Dell, François & Elmedlaoui, Mohamed. 2002. Syllables in Tashlhiyt Berber and in Moroccan Arabic. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers
*Mohamed Lahrouchi, nd. Tashlhiyt Berber triconsonantal roots A binary branching head-complement structure. UMR 7023 CNRS-Université Paris 8
*Darin M. Howe, 2001 Syllabic obstruents in Oowekyala, Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas/Workshop on American Indian Languages, U C Santa Barbara, 7-6-2001
·Maunus·ƛ· 13:57, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tashlhiyt

message: Linguists working on the language have been using the name Tashelhiyt exclusively for the past two or three decades. The name Shilha apparently continues to be used by some non-linguists. The article is still entitled "Shilha language", but the text of the article now uses "Tashelhiyt". It is a linguistic article, and the convention among modern linguists is to call a language by its own name, not by somebody else's name. Reading the leader should prevent any confusion. -- talk 07 September 2015
It seems to me that a name used both in academic and lay literature would be more accessible to the average reader than one used primarily in specialist lit, and better follows WP:COMMONNAME. Per that guideline, technical terms are not preferred simply because they're technical; often common names are used rather than "a more elaborate, formal, or scientific alternative". When several terms are of comparably frequent use, other considerations should be used, such as "titles which follow the same pattern as those of similar articles are often preferred". (For example, we use the anglicized form of Kabyle, without the ta-t affixes, and following that pattern we would drop the affixes here.) — kwami (talk) 17:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  The Wikipedia policy of WP:COMMONNAME does not give priority to specialist usage.  --Taivo (talk) 22:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  there are many version of the term Kabyle in affixes (taqbaylit) other english spelling is Qbaylie, kabyle, Qbayla.. just like (Tamazight, Tamaziɣt) Amazigh, Mzgh, Amaziy.--Uchronicle (talk) 22:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but anything other than "Kabyle" is uncommon, and so loses out on that account. — kwami (talk) 22:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: you are also suggesting that Tamazight should be renamed mzgh--Uchronicle (talk) 23:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, "mzgh" is not an English word. We use the English word "Berber". We don't need to rename it; it's already at that name. (Do you even read what you write?) — kwami (talk) 23:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

text:  neither  is "Shilha/Shelha (not an English word). (The affixes/ root word (Tamazight is Mzgh)).--Uchronicle (talk) 00:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Uchronicle, You still don't get the principle of WP:COMMONNAME, that the only language that matters here is English and any sources above that are not in English, or are transliterations from French or Berber, are unacceptable to the discussion and can be completely ignored.  You're compiling a nice bibliography that can be used elsewhere, but is totally useless for our purposes here.  The Berber etymology of the word does not matter one whit.  Only the English form matters.  "Shilha" and "Tamazight" are both English words as such.  --Taivo (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

text: "Shilha" is used in English. "mzgh" is not. "Shilha" is in the dictionary. "mzgh" is not. Do we really need to explain that to you? — kwami (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Taivo, I think we're wasting our time here. You've explained that several times; I can only assume he's being obtuse. I'm done with this "discussion". — kwami (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

text: At this time. I will let other future users/editors or new readers. To continue this discussion( the matter of renaming (commonly used, appropriate and respected title), (in English usage and spelling). I have listed all the ( Book lists, Sources, and References, of the use of Tachelhit in the English language and French).  Thank you.--Uchronicle (talk) 01:03, 27 
Uchronicle, one thing that would be helpful would be spelling out the name in Tifinagh and in Shilha Arabic. — kwami (talk) 01:16, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The usual referent in English of the term Shilha (and Tachelhit, šəlħa, tašəlħiyt) is the language of SW Morocco discussed here.  However, the same word is also used to refer to Berber dialects all across the northern Sahara - notably in Tunisia (eg ), but also for South Oran Berber and Touggourt Berber.  It is also used locally to refer to the Songhay language Korandje.  A disambiguation link at the top might be helpful for some readers. - Lameen Souag (talk) 20:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation

message: I strongly think that this move was a huge and rather ridiculous mistake due Cultural/Specialist bias. The pages that were moved were stable since their creation in 2005. From this page and the history of the concerned articles, you can see that several editors have contested the move and tried to move manually, that gives you an idea how of unusual this name is (Where is WP:Consensus in this?). 
What's funny is that arguments used by the people/person who performed this move (WP:English and WP:Commonname) actually support the proponents position. This is rather an old name used by so-called "specialists" loaned from Moroccan Arabic totally vague and inaccurate to the subject matter of the article.
I'm compiling evidence to request a move, this entire story is rather irritating, and an instance of Wikipedia failure: Obscure subjects do not get enough attention and thus error risk is higher--Tachfin (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Absolutely ridiculous name

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/38/49/49/PDF/Ridouane-et-al_ICPHS07.pdf
*:Triggered by \bhalshs\.archives-ouvertes\.fr on the global blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Shilha language. 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  tag to http://www.hcp.ma/Recensement-general-de-la-population-et-de-l-habitat-2004
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130511100746/http://mlahrouchi.free.fr/papers/Lahrouchi_handout_GLOWXXX_2007.pdf to http://mlahrouchi.free.fr/papers/Lahrouchi_handout_Glowxxx_2007.pdf
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) 06:36, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Can we please change the name of the article and get it back to the name of "Tachelhit" istead of "Shilha" ?Ayour2002 (talk) 00:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shilha to Tachelhit