Talk:Kunigami language

message: I think it would be great if this article included a bit more comparisons to Okinawan; that it's a separate language from Japanese is a given, but I think that for many readers it would be a surprise to learn that Kunigami is considered a separate language from Central & Southern Okinawan.
Also, while I understand the value of IPA to linguists, there are those of us who approach this topic from a Japanese Studies (or Okinawan Studies) background, an approach which I would argue is equally valid. For those of us with an intimate understanding of Japanese - kanji, kana, and romaji - and a strong interest in the various Ryukyuan languages, but no knowledge of IPA, it would be wonderful if more kana were used, and if more care were taken to represent romaji more accurately. This is not just a matter of what would be easier for me, or some weak argument like that, but indeed speaks to the accuracy of representing the language as it would be written natively, i.e. in kana, along with the closest English transliteration (romaji).
I'd make these changes myself, but as the state it's in is already incomprehensible, I can't know what's being referred to well enough to make the proper changes. What's a glottal stop doing in the middle of haʔkai? Is that just はかい, or does Kunigami uses particularly noted glottal stops where Japanese does not?
Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 12:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: LordAmeth, that's not a glottal stop, it's a glottalized consonant. Most of these sounds do not have a standard representation in kana, since there is no standardized kana version of the IPA. --ಠ_ಠ node.ue ಠ_ಠ (talk) 20:26, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Then its transcription is just plain wrong. Is the consonant preglottalized (/ˀk/) or just 'simply' glottalized (/kˀ/)? --JorisvS (talk) 22:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

text: LordAmeth, please try to understand that kanji, hiragana, and katakana are the orthography of the Japanese language. They cannot be accurately used to write non-Japanese languages, as they've been developed to represent Japanese phonology only. IPA is the only way to transcribe words so that the pronunciation is unambiguous. As most, if not all, of the Ryukyu languages lack a native writing system (and even if they had a writing system, it would be imperfect, as all writing systems are) we have to do the best we can with IPA. As for the glottalized consonants, I too am very confused. As it is transcribed, haʔkai contains a glottal stop, which is different from /ˀk/ and /kˀ/, not to mention the vague possibility that what the article describes as "glottalized consonants" could include ejectives. Do we have any published work containing a phoneme inventory?? 97.81.65.138 (talk) 05:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparisons 

message: On Ryukyu Islands the Kunigami word ルーちュー is mentioned. Is the use of a hiragana chi an error, or is there something special going on in Kunigami?
:There is debate on whether to use hiragana or katakana to write Ryūkyūan languages, but that was just a mistake and I've corrected it. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 17:48, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, you should sign your posts with tildes (~~~~) so other editors know who you are and can easily contact you on your talk page. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 17:59, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

text: To my foreign eyes and ears, 「ちゅ、チュ、チゅ、ちュ」all make the same sound and are romanized as "chu". Because of this, it seems silly or eccentric to me to mix hiragana and katakana, but because you have a source I won't press it. However, what on Earth do you mean there's no such thing as a Kunigami word "in the real world"? I interpret that as you not believing Kunigami language even exists. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 19:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ルーちュー 

message: #The article cites no sources for its content. 
#There is by no means agreement in the scholarly literature that . The preponderance of scholarly sources I've seen disagree, and consider Kunigami, Yoron and Okinoerabu separate, mutually unintelligible languages. Examples include the International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, published by Oxford University Press () and Evidentials in Ryukyuan (). At the very least, alternative views should be presented. (I came here because this article was referenced in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northern Okinawan language.) Andreas ,JN466 10:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: All of the same content is found on the Northern Okinawan language page so it can just be copied here and the International Encyclopedia do Linguistics has a single sentence entry on Yoron and Okinoerabu. This is e original article and should be retained while everything at Northern Okinawan language should end up ,edged back here, so long as it does not contain any of Nanshu's original research.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 15:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The entry on Kunigami in the International Encyclopedia of Linguistics is just as long as that on Okinoerabu and Yoron. I've removed the unsourced sentence claiming that the latter two are included within Kunigami. Please don't re-add without a source stating so (if one can be found); and if you do, please also add one of the many sources considering them separate to present that point of view as well. Andreas JN466 17:58, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Kunigami has more coverage overall as something unto itself. And UNESCO considers Yoron and Okinoerabu as part of Kunigami.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 18:08, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to add a source, mate. And UNESCO is not the final arbiter of linguistics. Andreas JN466 18:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't matter. They still include Yunnu Futuba and Shimamuni as parts of Yanbaru Kutuba.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 18:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Sourcing, NPOV