Portuguese subtags (Jo?o Miguel Neves & Michael Everson) [was Re: Ietf-languages Digest, Vol 104, Issue 10]

[António H F P A Emiliano (FCSH/UNL)]

Hello.
Bom dia.

On Sep 15, 2011, at 01:57, ietf-languages-request at alvestrand.no wrote:

> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:13:37 +0100
> From: Jo?o Miguel Neves <joao at silvaneves.org>
> Subject: Re: Portuguese subtags
>
> Em 13-09-2011 10:38, Michael Everson escreveu:
>
> I understand that Ant?nio doesn't like the official vocabulary and I
> know for a fact that he's not alone. That doesn't change the fact that
> it's the official wordlist for public education and, from January 1st,
> all the public administration in Portugal.

No govt decree has been issued to that effect.
As far as I'm concerned this is just a recommendation not a matter of  
law.
The said vocabulary is NOT a wordlist. It is a word/lexeme database  
with many problems.

> I honestly haven't found any language change,

I am sorry but 'language change' has a precise technical meaning  
"where I come from" ;) (i.e. in Historical Linguistics) which does  
not apply here.

> dictionary or vocabulary
> that isn't a target of criticism. I'm not knowledgeable enough to  
> check
> the merit of Ant?nio and other's criticism.

The main reason for criticism has already been explained: notorious  
absence of agreement btwn those dictionaries and the fact that they  
do not comply with an officialy established norm. In sum, all  
existing vocabularies fail to fulfil the stipulation of the  
orthographic treaty of 90.

> The VOP (Vocabul?rio
> Ortogr?fico Portugu?s) is the only official reference I know of.

It not a reference (yet).
It is not a publication.
It has no stabilized form.
It is not stable: it is always under maintenance. It has mistakes and  
internal problems.
It even calls for comments and suggestions by the public. How's that  
for an authoritative reference?
It does not contain something that we can call a 'stable lexical core'.
It is the product of a research project developed by a small research  
unit (funded with public moneys): it is not a government project.

> I will
> use it on the template.

I find that absolutely inacceptable. That is tantamount to using a  
Wikipedia entry or a blog entry as a bona fide stable scholarly  
reference.

> If the group decides that this is not enough,

I do hope that it does. Really.
I have yet to find a precedent or simile in a civilized country to  
what's happening right now in Portugal, language policy-wise.

> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:16:12 +0100
> From: Michael Everson <everson at evertype.com>
> To: ietf-languages <ietf-languages at alvestrand.no>
> Subject: Re: Portuguese subtags
>
> On 14 Sep 2011, at 17:13, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote:
>
>> I understand that Ant?nio doesn't like the official vocabulary
>
> So do I.
>
>> and I know for a fact that he's not alone. That doesn't change the  
>> fact that
>> it's the official wordlist for public education and, from January  
>> 1st,
>> all the public administration in Portugal.
>
> OK, so where's the list? Not the decree. The specification. The  
> thing you can turn to to make sure that you're spelling a given  
> word correctly. Is there such a source? If not, then there is  
> nothing reliable to point an orthography subtag to, and that is  
> problematic.

The "list" is not publicly available. You cannot freely browse it.  
You can check any given work but you cannot extract a full wordlist.

As noted previously there are a couple of commecially available  
dictionaries in print. Those could be used in the proposal, provided  
that it clearly states that those dictionaries have been shown to  
contain discrepancies.

> Is that a particular publication, say, with an ISBN?

No.

> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:20:01 +0100
> From: Jo?o Miguel Neves <joao at silvaneves.org>
> To: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> Subject: Re: Portuguese subtags
>
> Em 14-09-2011 18:16, Michael Everson escreveu:
>> On 14 Sep 2011, at 17:13, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote:
>>
>>> I understand that Ant?nio doesn't like the official vocabulary
>> So do I.
>>
>>> and I know for a fact that he's not alone. That doesn't change  
>>> the fact that
>>> it's the official wordlist for public education and, from January  
>>> 1st,
>>> all the public administration in Portugal.
>> OK, so where's the list? Not the decree. The specification. The  
>> thing you can turn to to make sure that you're spelling a given  
>> word correctly. Is there such a source? If not, then there is  
>> nothing reliable to point an orthography subtag to, and that is  
>> problematic.
> I've left the link before:
>
> http://www.portaldalinguaportuguesa.org/index.php?action=vop&page=info
>
> Use the search box on the top right to search/validate words.

Please insert the word 'tectônico' (pt-BR) and tell me what kind of  
validation do you get.
I.e. how do you spell that particular word correctly according to the  
1990 reform?

Please insert the forms 'kwanza', 'quanza', 'cwanza' and  
'cuanza' (the Angolan currency, the name of an African river and of  
two Angolan provinces).
Since there is no cross-reference connecting these variants (cwanza  
is not recognised but it is used) what kind of validation does one  
get? What's the official/correct form according to the 1990 reform?

Please insert the forms 'fraccionar' and 'fracionar': same problem,  
no cross-reference, although they are variants of the same word. As  
far as the database is concerned these count as two separate words.

No wonder the total number of entries in the database is so high.

> No, it's a website online at the above url. This is the way it's
> referenced in ministers' council decision for migrating the public
> administration.

The VOP is one the online resources that are part of the so-called  
Portal da Língua Portuguesa.
Please bear in mind that the fact that its pages bear the logo of the  
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (the Portuguese Natl Board for  
Science) does not give any official statues. All websites of projects  
funded by that entity must use that logo.

Again I can find no official ruling/decree concerning the use of this  
online vocabulary. This is to be expected since the Portuguese  
Academy is the *sole* body with an official mandate re language  
regulation in Portugal.

Best regards. Cumprimentos. - A.

--
António Emiliano
Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Departamento de Linguística
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20110915/65cc8f46/attachment.html>