Talk:Blackfoot language

message: I am interested in adding subsections on inflection of intransitive verbs and noun number to the Morphology and syntax section.  Here are my proposed edits:
===Noun number===
Nouns are inflected with suffixes to be singular or plural, depending on their grammatical gender classifications (animate or inanimate).Frantz (1997:2)
         	Singular	Plural
Animate  	-wa     	-iksi
Inanimate	-yi     	-istsi
===Inflection of intransitive verbs===
Intransitive verbs in Blackfoot are inflected with prefixes and/or suffixes to distinguish person.
Two first-person plurals exist in Blackfoot: ‘we’ including the addressee, and ‘we’ excluding the addressee (i.e. “us and you” and “us but not you”)
Blackfoot distinguishes between second-person plural and singular.
               	Singular	Plural
1st (inclusive)	nit-    	-'pa
1st (exclusive)	nit-    	-nit-...-hpinn
2nd            	kit-    	kit-...-hpowa
3rd            	-wa     	kit-...-ywa
Drjudgy (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Verb inflection and noun number

message: Intransitive verbs in Blackfoot are inflected with prefixes and/or suffixes to distinguish person.
Two first-person plurals exist in Blackfoot: ‘we’ including the addressee, and ‘we’ excluding the addressee (i.e. “us and you” and “us but not you”)
Blackfoot distinguishes between second-person plural and singular.
               	Singular	Plural
1st (inclusive)	nit-    	-'pa
1st (exclusive)	nit-    	-nit-...-hpinn
2nd            	kit-    	kit-...-hpowa
3rd            	-wa     	kit-...-ywa
Drjudgy (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Inflection of intransitive verbs

message: How do I display the characters for ᓱᖽᐧᖿ?
ICE77 -- 81.104.129.226 20:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It displays them just fine for me.  It must be that my browser is set up to read the glyphs in the UCAS UniCode range, as I have fonts in that range. CJLippert (talk) 19:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I want to display ᓱᖽᐧᖿ 

message: Taivo, what did you not understand about the pronunciation indications I added? Hyacinth (talk) 20:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Simple, [ts] does not occur in the word 'snake' and is not the sound a snake makes and [ts:] does not occur in the word 'eagle' and is not the sound an eagle makes.  If you want to bring some wording onto this page for discussion, then do so and we will make better wording, but IPA stands for International Phonetic Alphabet and THAT tells us how it is pronounced, not some animal noise which changes from language to language.  Look at other language articles--none of them (or virtually none of them) have "pronunciation aids" to "clarify" the International Phonetic Alphabet.  That's the point of the IPA, you don't NEED "clarification" with it.  (Taivo (talk) 01:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this article intended only for linguists? Is this article restricted to providing information only from the perspective of linguistics? Hyacinth (talk) 20:11, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is Wikipedia practice to present all pronunciation in the International Phonetic Alphabet.  The IPA is 100% clear in what it means.  Even non-linguistic articles use the IPA for pronunciation (see the article on "Chaps", for example).  Even in this case, the symbol [ts] is crystal clear even if one does not specifically know the IPA--a "t" followed by an "s".  If you are concerned about "nonlinguists", then are you also going to explain "typologically polysynthetic"?  It seems that needs more nonlinguistic explanation than [ts].  (Taivo (talk) 21:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation

message: Are we sure we want the geminates listed as separate phonemes in the table?  Typically phonological inventories in published studies don't do this.  Also, some theories posit that short and long stops are not separate phonemes in the same sense as, e.g., /p/ and /t/ are separate phonemes.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnDillinger43 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Phonology

message: A huge rewrite of this article was just posted by a nonlinguist whose POV is clearly nonlinguistic and ill-informed.  If you have things to contribute to a positive discussion of issues in this article, then discuss them here, but unreferenced and inaccurate linguistic statements will be reverted. (Taivo (talk) 06:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I wouldn't call it unreferenced ill-informed statements, since if you bothered to read the editor's rewrite, most of the information had been cited, and included information on phonology, morphology, syntax; information that's not very detailed on the present-state article. I can't say anything for the history/ecology sections, since I decided they were too long to read for me, but the biggest problems I could see were a) the removal of all of the current article's information, format, and sources; b) the suspicious addition of large amounts of text; and c) the lack of formatting. If those issues can be addressed, along with confirmation that the information is not copied and not copyrighted from somewhere else, then it's workable. - Io Katai (talk) 06:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's sad when good information must be deleted along with questionable.  I agree that it is suspicious when so much of the original text is removed, especially text that was properly referenced and non-controversial.  Especially problematic was the new author's assertion that Blackfoot was somehow not universally accepted as a member of the universally accepted Algic (Algonkian-Wiyot-Yurok) language family.  The "controversy" over Algic's genetic status was resolved over 50 years ago and there is no longer any controversy concerning it among linguists.  The "reference" that the new author used to imply that Algic was controversial is 100% supportive of the Algic family as a valid genetic unit.  Lyle Campbell is one of the most conservative Americanists when it comes to linking languages together into language families and he finds nothing whatsoever controversial about Algic. (Taivo (talk) 07:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discuss Major (Especially Controversial) Edits Here First 

message: Someone with a little more time may wish to do this. Djembayz (talk) 01:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turn radio station section into its own article? 

message: This page was recently moved from Blackfoot language to Siksiká. It may be appropriate to use the indigenous name rather than the English colonialist one. I take no strong position on that, though I imagine some editors do. However, Siksika (without diacritic) currently redirects to Siksika Nation, a specific first-nation community in Canada. There is a link to "Blackfoot language" (which redirects to this article) in the text, but no hatnote or other aid to people who may be looking specifically for the language. 
The titles Blackfoot people and Blackfoot Confederacy both redirect to Niitsítapi, the broader ethnic/national group.
Usual Wikipedia practice is to have two titles with names such as French people and French language, or Igbo people and Igbo language. If that solution is not appropriate for these entities, then some combination of redirects, hatnotes, and other disambiguation should be worked out so that readers can find the appropriate articles with a minimum of difficulty. Cheers, Cnilep (talk) 03:29, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There are three branches of the Blackfeet nation, not just Siksika.  Need to move the language back. Montanabw(talk) 08:30, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored all the moves to their original locations, further moves needs to be discussed. Montanabw(talk) 08:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

text: You guys notice  Iron Confederacy move?--Moxy (talk) 01:30, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads up.  Montanabw(talk) 02:01, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page name 

message: Is this the language of Chief Napi? הראש (talk) 21:17, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Wonder Woman film 

message: I am not here to advocate for anything except consistency.
There are language naming inconsistencies between this article, categories, templates and MediaWiki:
*Wikipedia has the article Blackfoot language (with redirects from Blackfoot (language), ISO 639:bla, Siksika language, Siksiká, and Siksiká ᓱᖽᐧᖿ).  There has been previous discussion regarding the article name; see (see .
**categorized in 
*the en.wiki article identifies an ISO 639-3 language code: bla in the info box
**ISO 639-2 bla refers to the language name 'Siksika' (the English name) and 'blackfoot' (lower case; the French name)
**ISO 639-3 bla refers to the language name 'Siksika'
**IANA language-subtag-registry file bla refers to the language name 'Siksika'
*MediaWiki language support returns the name 'Siksika'
** → 
*templates:
** →  (deprecated; to be replaced with  – see TfD)
**:categorizes to  – calls 
** → 
**:categorizes to 
** →  (replaces )
**:categorizes to 
** →  (has a tool tip that reads: 'Siksika language text')
**:categorizes to 
** → 
**:categorizes to Category:Articles containing Siksika-language text
**the cs1|2 template suite using , , or :
*** → 
***:categorized in 
*** → 
***:categorized in Category:CS1 foreign language sources (ISO 639-2)
*** → 
***:categorized in 
Of the above, we can do nothing about MediaWiki.  For the others, we can standardize on one of 'Siksika' or 'Blackfoot' and modify the templates, categories, and article as necessary.
*, , , , and  all rely on Module:Lang
**if 'Siksika' is the preferred language name, no action is required
**if 'Blackfoot' is the preferred language name, Module:lang/data is modified to override IANA / ISO 639 code-to-name definitions
*the cs1|2 template suite relies on the MediaWiki language name table.  However, cs1|2 is capable of overriding MediaWiki code-to-name definitions
**if 'Siksika' is the preferred language name, no action is required
**if 'Blackfoot' is the preferred language name, Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration is modified to override the MediaWiki code-to-name definition
Consistency matters.  Article name should match category names should match template renderings.  So the question is:
*which language name: 'Siksika' or 'Blackfoot'?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Weak preference for Blackfoot since that seems to be more inclusive towards the non Siksika tribes speaking this language. Since it's difficult to know if they're refering to the first nation or the language it's dificult to know what's the more common name, but while looking there seemed to be a preference for Blackfoot. --Trialpears (talk) 13:28, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

text: Blackfoot is the chosen name.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:19, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  language naming inconsistencies 

message: — Assignment last updated by Emmawiddifield (talk) 19:05, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: ANTH473 INLG480 Living Languages