Jump to content

Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Scanian

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Scanian Wikipedia

submitted verification final decision
This proposal has been rejected.
This decision was taken by the language committee in accordance with the Language proposal policy based on the discussion on this page.

The closing committee member provided the following comment:

Scanian lost ISO 639-3 code and it is not likely that it will get it in the near future. Besides that, it is a group of dialects without central standard. Standardizing language should be before creating a Wikimedia project. --Millosh 04:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Proposal summary
  • Language details: Scanian (Skånska, scy ISO 639-3)
  • Editing community: Skånes Kung (P) (N)
    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.

The Scanian language is a regional language formerly spoken in all of Scania, but today only spoken by elderly in the most rural areas of the region. Even though it is mutually intellegible with most Scandinavian languages it is phonologically and lexically different from both Swedish and Danish, and it has been attested in written form since the Medieval Age. In the treaty of Roskilde from 1658 the Scanian people was promised by Sweden to be able to continue using there own language, but since the Swedish annexed Scania they have tried to erase the Scanian language and today it is considered an endangered language by UNESCO. The creation of a Scanian Wikipedia would surely raise both the awareness and the literacy of the Scanian language. Today it lacks a standardised spelling mostly because it is not recognised as a language by Swedish authorities but as a dialect. The creation of a Scanian Wikipedia would drastically increase writing in Scanian and the possibility for a standardised written form of Scanian. Scanian is not yet dead but if we won't do anything it will soon just survive through some singular words and the true understanding of them will sadly be lost.

Arguments in favour

  • The Scanian language is highly endangered and there are not many forums to encounter written Scanian today so the creation of a Scanian Wikipedia would be of much help. There is a strong interest in the Scanian language in Scania but since the lack of forums the development is instead that fewer and fewer speak Scanian. Instead most people turn to Swedish since the feel more secure speaking Swedish since all media around them is in Swedish and there is no input in Scanian. This ought to change if the Scanian language should survive and live. Today Scanian is considered by young people as a part of the past and therefore they don't speak it, but if they would encounter Scanian in a modern context they woulde maybe be more appealed to use it.The preceding unsigned comment was added by Skånes Kung (talk • contribs) 22:22, 2 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Arguments against

  • There is no standardized orthography. We shouldn't make one up due to the original research policy. /Grillo 18:24, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Recently removed from Ethnologue. /Grillo 18:24, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is rather amusing to read the entries in the test version. But, as a matter of fact, the texts are written in normal Standard Swedish with some home-made phonetich "write-as-you-speak"-spelling. Other Swedish dialects have already been rejected as "own languages, e.g. "Vestgjøtska" and "Värmlandic". This is the same thing. --Vedum 23:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other discussion


What do you think about making a conversion engine between standard Swedish or standard Danish and Scanian? --Millosh 10:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Scanian doesn't have a standardised ortography isn't a serious problem since e.g. the Lombard, the Alemannic and the Bairisch (Bavarian) Wikipedias also lack a standardised ortography but still yet they are functioning Wikipedias.Skånes Kung (talk • contribs) 12:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

The fact that Scanian was removed from Ethnologue recently is most likely a political act by the Swedish representatives and not something that is specially linguistically defendable. So when bringing that up as an argument against Scanian one must be aware of the political motives behind it.Skånes Kung (talk • contribs) 12:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

That's speculation, and in my opinion paranoia. Njaelkies Lea 12:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's easy to become paranoied when the language of your ancestors and people is on the brink of extinction ... Skånes Kung 16:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are talking about "political motives". But what about your own agenda? On your User page you write the following: "Welcome to the user page of Skånes Kung, the most probable king of Scania". With the magalomanic user name "Skånes Kung" (Swedish for "King of Scania") one can wonder. --Vedum 23:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]
My username is ironical, which I guessed one would understand. And furthermore what that has to do with Scanian being a language or not is totally irrelevant. I am also aware of that branding the actions made by the Swedish representatives as with "political motives" is provocative, but one have to realise that this issue has a complicated and infected history. And seen in the light of history I would say that it has politcal motives. Skånes Kung 15:53, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does Scanian differ much from east-Danish, which - I believe - is it's nearest relative? --Special:Contributions 06:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

With East-Danish you probably mean the dialect spoken on the island of Bornholm. Yes there are great similarities. But as Bornholm is in Danmark the dialect there has developped into Danish and as Scania is in Sweden the dialect there has developped into Swedish.--Vedum 23:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Scanian spoken on Bornholm does differ substiantially from Scanian spoken in Scania, but insular dialects have a tendency to differ from mainland dialects (cf. dialects of Normandy and the Jersey dialect). One have to remember that most Scanians today speak the Swedish dialect called Scanian or Southern Swedish, but there is also a Scanian language which is moribund. Skånes Kung 15:53, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vedums criticism of this test wiki to be a "write as you speak" wiki is totally correct. That's the problem with Scanian, since it lacks an official ortography. Scanian is not recognised as a language and therefore there is no chance that an official ortography will come into existence. As one might see, one problem causes another. Skånes Kung 16:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it is not only a "problem with Scanian". Sweden is, when it comes to area one of the largest countries, in Europe. But the populaton is only 9 millions. There are some variations in pronounciation all over the country. You can mostly hear if a person is born and raised in e.g. the Stockholm region, the Gothenburg area, Scania, Värmland, Östergötland, Norrland (the northern half of country very often "clumped together", which is not always appriciated by the inhabitants), "Gnällbältet" (in the middle), Gotland and so on. Some of the dialects are perhaps more clearly identified than others. Scanian is, together with Gotlandic and Värmlandic, one of theese. But that does not make it a language of its own. With the "write-as-you-speak-method" you could create perhaps 20 "new languages" out of standard Swedish. But that is really not very desireble. In Norway they have two official spelling varietes. All official forms and so on must be in two different versions. Image we should create av Scanian orthograhy and even make it official. All information from state and municipal authorities should then be written in to versions, almost, but not entirely the same. What a waste of money. And if the Scanian should succed in this the same demand would come from other dialect groups. And a question: What is the difference between the "moribund language" and the southern Swedish dialect?? A number of 80.000 speakers of the "language" has been circulating on the Internet. But always without any source whatsoever. Do you belong to this group yourself? Can you describe it? --Vedum 12:45, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]