Requests for new languages/Wiktionary Pitjantjatjara

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Pitjantjatjara Wiktionary

main page Requests for new languages (Wiktionary Pitjantjatjara)
submitted verification final decision
Applications-system.svg This language has been verified as eligible.
The language is eligible for a project, which means that the subdomain can be created once there is an active community and a localized interface, as described in the language proposal policy. You can discuss the creation of this language project on this page. (See an unofficial analysis of this request.)

Proposal summary
  • Language details: Pitjantjatjara (Pitjantjatjara, pjt)
  • Editing community: CarlKenner (P)
    List your user name if you're interested in editing the wiki. Add "N" next to your
    name if you are a native speaker of this language.
  • Relevant pages: development wiki project
  • External links:
Please read the handbook for requesters for help using this template correctly.

Pitjantjatjara (pjt) is one of the most commonly spoken, and most famous, Aboriginal languages of Australia. It is spoken around Uluru (Ayers Rock) and Alice Springs. Uluru is a Pitjantjatjara word. A Pitjantjatjara Wiktionary is needed to provide Pitjantjatjara translations of words (from English and other languages). Many Pitjantjatjara words already exist in the English Wiktionary, but the other half of the dictionary (other languages to Pitjantjatjara) is needed, ie. a Pitjantjatjara Wiktionary. Pitjantjatjara has an official standard spelling system (using latin alphabet, with some underline diacritics), so there is no need for multiple orthographies. The entire continent, and top-level language family that this belongs to, does not have a single Wikimedia project of any kind yet. So it definately satisfies the uniqueness criteria, and does not overlap with existing projects. Pitjantjatjara is the name of the most common dialect of the w:Western Desert Language, and is also used to refer to the language as a whole. (There is no seperate collective language code for "Western Desert Language", only language codes for individual dialects). In the long run, a Pitjantjatjara Wikipedia should also be created, but I think it is best to start with a Wiktionary first. I am currently studying Pitjantjatjara. My language skills are sufficient for working on a Wiktionary, but probably not (yet) for a Wikipedia. Also I've noticed that most of the new language Wikipedias are basically little more than dictionaries anyway, so I think a Wiktionary is the place to start. Given that I have edited lots of articles on other language Wikipedias, I am confident that a Pitjantjatjara Wiktionary would be able to jump ahead of dozens of other Wiktionaries in a very short amount of time. CarlKenner 22:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Arguments in favour

  • 1. The proposal is to open a new language edition of Wiktionary. Pitjantjatjara Wiktionary does not exist yet. No Australian language family wikimedia projects exist yet.
  • 2. The language has valid ISO-639 3 language code "pjt".
  • 3. Unlike other language requests, this language has zero genetic relationship to any existing wikimedia project, because the entire top level language family "Australian languages" is currently unrepresented on wikimedia. It could never be part of a future more general project, because there is no more general language grouping that has an ISO-639 language code. The next most general language code is the ridiculous ISO-639 2 code "aus" which represents the entire toplevel language "family" and which includes non-parma-nyungan languages that have no proven genetic relationship to parma-nyungan languages like Pitjantjatjara. There is however some uncertainty among linguists as to whether Pitjantjatjara is a language itself, or just the main dialect of a language called "Western Desert Language". But either way it makes no difference, since the entire "Western Desert Language" is often refered to as Pitjantjatjara anyway, and there is no language code for "Western Desert Language", and no dictionary is ever marketed as a "Western Desert Language dictionary". The most general dictionaries are all marketed primarily as Pitjantjatjara dictionaries.
  • 4. Pitjantjatjara is a living language. One of the largest living Australian languages. It has about 3000 native speakers (including related dialects). Ethnologue says that 80% of speakers are monolingual. They live in towns or desert communities in Central Australia. It is neither an artificial language, nor a trade language or criole. It's just a normal, naturally evolved language. I know 3000 native speakers isn't much compared to languages like English, but it should be enough for a dictionary project. And it would mean a lot to the hundreds of thousands of Aboriginal Australians who feel their languages and culture are neglected.

CarlKenner 06:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The English version of the Pitjantjatjara Wiktionary is coming along nicely: wikt:index:Pitjantjatjara. But to complete the picture we also need a Pitjantjara Wiktionary. CarlKenner 12:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Arguments against

  1. There should be at least one interested native or near-native speaker to start a project. Additionally, there is no incubator project yet. --Thogo (talk) 12:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
For conditional approval, there is no need for either. Often an incubator project is only started AFTER conditional approval is given. GerardM (unsigned)
What is a conditional approval?? --Thogo (talk) 07:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I think conditional approval means you are allowed to start the incubator project. Then if that is successful, you can start creating the actual project. CarlKenner 11:06, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I thought everyone is allowed to start every kind of incubator project (if it is a language version of wp,wt,ws,wq,wv,wn). Hm. Anyway, I think, without any native speaker a project will fail. Do you speak Pitjantjatjara, Carl? (I mean, I generally support this idea of a pjtwikt, but I see huge problems in fulfilling the requirements.) --Thogo (talk) 11:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

General discussion

For a Wiktionary, there is a requirement to write all the definitions and all the accompanying information in the language that it is intended for. Also you will have to localise the most relevant messages of MediaWiki. This will be hard given that you are not a native speaker. What you can do without any problem already is add the terminology to the English language Wiktionary or to OmegaWiki. Both projects would love to include your data. Thanks, GerardM 00:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

There isn't a lot of text in the definitions, or a lot of accompanying information in the English Wiktionary for most non-English words. This is the same for any real-life foreign-language dictionary. Just a few standard terms for parts-of-speech, etc. and the definition. For Pitjantjatjara to Pitjantjatjara definitions, it would be slightly more wordy, but it doesn't need to be anything like an Encyclopedia, it just needs to show what a word means.

Localising the user interface would be more difficult. This is one of those languages where most computing is done in English. There probably aren't really established Pitjantjatjara terms for computing concepts. And creating new terms is sort of frowned upon, since Pitjantjatjara elders feels a sense of ownership over the language, and don't want it corrupted, rather than seeing it as just a tool to communicate that's in need of enhancement. So I'm not sure how well the interface can be translated.

I can add Pitjantjatjara words to the English Wiktionary, but it feels like only doing half the job. I haven't tried OmegaWiki before, and don't know how it works. I'll have a go at adding more words to the English Wiktionary after Christmas. But it would be good if I could add to both halves instead of just the English half. CarlKenner 10:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Localisation update

No localisation efforts can be observed at Betawiki. Localisation of the most used messages is mandatory for a first project. Thanks, GerardM 07:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

MandatorY? Betawiki is NOT a Wikimedia project. How come Wikimedia projects have to depend so heavily on a non-Wikmedia project? --83.38.110.109 11:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
When localisation work happens to the MediaWiki software, it is observed at Betawiki. When you want to have an in some sense to do this work, you do it at Betawiki. If you do not want to localise at Betawiki, you still have to comply with the same requirements. Your choice to use Betawiki or not... Yours is a silly argument, almost all the localisation work is done at Betawiki ... GerardM 11:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Comply with? Lots (dozens, and not 1 or 2) of now established projects had/have no or almost no localization for at least months while they were developing. Are you saying that they should have been/be nipped in the bud? Localsation is clearly desirable, advisable, something to encourage, something that eventually will be done etc but certainly not mandatory. Who are the authorities who make it obligatory and the Wikimedia organism policing and enforcing it?
> Almost all... / easy time...
He, he, that says a lot. Silly? I do not think so but I think you are right in some sense. On the other hand I have read quite a few silly arguments around here (some with seriously silly consequences) that I guess it's fair and humbling your calling my (argument? it was a question, not an argument, but I think I get your point) question silly. Thanks for pointing it out anyway, if I happen to find my questions above thoroughly silly sometime I'll let you know. --83.38.110.109 16:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Currently 0% of the most used MediaWiki messages have been localised. Localisation of these messages is a requirement before your request is finally assessed. This is the recent localisation activity for your language. Thanks, GerardM 13:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC)