Belarusian 1959acad - LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM (proposed)
yury.tarasievich at gmail.com
Tue Sep 23 21:21:25 CEST 2008
Ihar Mahaniok wrote:
> I don't want to object here, I am actually ok with 1959acad, just some
> clarification: I don't think "1959" is iconic. Actually, vast majority
One may look up any Belarusian higher education textbook on Belarusian
language (section on history of grammar) or newspaper article concerned
with the 2008/2010 issues. It is also possible you misunderstand the
meaning of the word "iconic" here, which is not like "glorifying" but
> of users of academic orthography wouldn't recall this date; the word
> "academic" is more important. Unfortunately, Yury made it clear that he
The vast majority of those do not denominate the norm at all, and "just"
use the "literary Belarusian language".
Also, one may find useful the texts by Gapova and Myachkovskaya (not
mentioned here). The problem of "two norms" is, in fact, endemic to
Internet and its *academic* treatment is rare and specialised and
extremely hard to come by.
More information about the Ietf-languages