Persian vs Farsi (half-OT) (was RFC 4645bis: making 'pes' and 'prs' extlangs)

[CE Whitehead]

I tend to favor Doug's option 2 (add the name Persian) to the description fields since we are permitted to do so.  This seems to me the safest way to avoid ruffling any feathers. However as I reread the debates (the links John sent--thanks to John; these are all excellent; also available at these links: http://www.iranian.com/Features/Dec97/Persian/http://www.iranian.com/Sep96/Articles/FarsiReaction2/FarsiReaction2.html)(NOTE:  not long after the Iranian Revolution I went to grad school where there were a number of Iranian but not Afghani students; a number of the Iranians, including the one or two women I knew, preferred the name Farsi as they--at the time--considered 'Persian' part of Western meddling with their culture; however I believe there were some Iranians at the time also who would not have been as interested in calling their language Farsi; this debate at the time seemed to have been political).
I've begun to rethink my original comments; it seems to me that what really has two names is the Persian language as spoken in Iran (Persian/Farsi are thus both English names for Western Persian?)--while maybe the larger (macrolanguage) can be referred to as 'Persian' exclusively--although there does seem to be some debate on this matter as well.  
In "Teach Yourself Persian" (John Mace--but a bit dated & in my opinion rather dry), Farsi was the Persian name and Persian the western name.  The language being taught in that book was Western Persian/Farsi to my knowledge. "Farsi" is as Wikipedia points out actually the Arabic pronunciation of "Parsi."  "Persian" is what the English do with "Parsi" or "Persi" I guess--when trying to make it refer to a language. I'm happy to see the link on the "Academy of Persian Language and Literature"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_of_Persian_Language_and_LiteratureThis academy is controlled by the Iranian government so if this Academy that recommends the name Persian we will not at least get flack from the government(also please do not share http://www.topix.com/forum/ir/mashhad/TN7CK8TKPP616SL46).
 
I also agree with Michael Everson that we had probably best not tell Iranians what we will call the name of their language. But unless I here an overwhelming 'otherwise' from Iranians and Afghanis and other speakers of the Eastern and Western Persian/Farsi, I still tend to support Doug's solution: Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 07:39:19 -0700From: "Doug Ewell" <doug at ewellic.org>> 2. There could be a request on this list (ietf-languages) to add the "Persian" names as > additional Description fields for these subtags, in addition to the "Farsi" names taken from ISO. > Note that there are no "primary" or "preferred" names in the Registry; the ISO 639-3 reference > name (when applicable) is listed first in the Registry for ease of cross-referencing only. > Note also that this request could not be made until the subtags actually exist in the Registry, > i.e. until RFC 4646bis is approved by the IESG. 
 
Thanks.
 
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20081206/2fcc9271/attachment.htm