<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
<H1><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt" color=#000000 size=2>Hi! My main question at this point is whether or not we need a matching variant subtag for the variety of this language spoken in Catalona (so as not to have it appear that Valencian is a sub-dialect of Catalan, but instead to treat these as two equal dialects/variants, with none being the default dialect/variant).</FONT></H1>
<FONT color=#000000></FONT> <BR>
<FONT color=#000000>To me these are both dialects related to Occitan but these have picked up some Spanish vocabulary, which distinguishes them from Occitan (which has in its turned picked up some French vocabulary).</FONT><BR>
<BR>
Doug Ewell <A title="Valencian Language Tag registration request" href="mailto:ietf-languages@alvestrand.no?Subject=Valencian Language Tag registration request&In-Reply-To=">doug at ewellic.org </A><BR>Wed Jun 17 04:04:56 CEST 2009 <BR>
<P> <BR><PRE>CE Whitehead <cewcathar at hotmail dot com> wrote:
> As was the case with Romanian/Moldovian, it seems that documents
> translated into both Valencian and Catalan tend to be identical in
> both languages, so linguistically there is very little difference
> between the two languages.
As was the case with Romanian/Moldovan, there is only one language, not
two.
> Nevertheless, I do feel that the requester has the right to petition
> ISO 639 for a code for Valencian should the requestor wish to do so,
> though 'val' would not work, as Addison has pointed out.
> One might benefit from reading John Cowan's note from a day ago:
>> 3) In August of 2007, ISO 639-3/RA rejected the request for a separate
>> code unit for Valencian, so "talk to ISO first" is unnecessary.
Ah, I was busy & skimmed his note but somehow glossed completely over that (which was hidden down as item 3).</PRE><PRE>> It would be pointless to go back to the RA less than two years later
> with the same request and the same supporting information. "Insanity:
> doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different
> results." - Einstein</PRE><PRE>Agreed, although the Universe is strange and somewhat random sometimes.
>> However, although having the code 'ca' stand for both languages may be
>> a little problematic from a political standpoint,
> The political standpoint does not matter. ISO 639 and the IETF Language
> Subtag Registry exist for the purpose of tagging and identifying content
> in human languages. They do not exist for the purpose of settling
> political disputes or validating people's nationalistic identity.
</PRE><PRE>Well we do not offend people's political sensibilities with the assigned codes, or try not to,</PRE><PRE>but there really are only so many two- and three-letter codes, and in my opinion, you probably have to take what you get; the variant subtags can be a bit more descriptive (though there are fights over these too).</PRE><PRE>(And I do definitely question any theory that Valencian descended from Mozarabic while Catalan did not, because during my own quite brief work with Mozarabic I turned up much verse in Gallego that was clearly uttered in sort of a tenson with the Mozarabic kharjas or 'refrains' that authors of poems in Iberia included at the end [perhaps these 'refrains' came from popular Mozarabic songs that the writers of the poems had heard].</PRE><PRE>So to me Gallego was certainly influenced by Mozarabic and Spanish at least in part descended from it; so I can't see a unique descent for Valencian from Mozarabic-- </PRE><PRE>though I may be quite wrong, and I suppose this is not the place to discuss this anyway; in any case today a text translated into Valencian is not different from the same text translated into Catalan and that's enough for me) </PRE><PRE> </PRE><PRE>> . . .</PRE><PRE>> Under BCP 47, the language-variant combination "ca-valencia" is
> available to distinguish "Valencian" from "Catalan." Whether the
> difference is one of dialect, orthography, vocabulary, or what have you,
> this is more than sufficient and no other solution is needed</PRE><PRE>Which brings up the issue foremost on my mind. Should we, at this point, apply for a second variant subtag, for the Catalan variety of Catalan-Valencian,</PRE><PRE>to keep things perfectly perfectly balanced? (And so as not to seem to favor one variant or the other?)
> --
> Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14<BR></PRE><PRE>Gerard Meijssen <A title="Valencian Language Tag registration request" href="mailto:ietf-languages@alvestrand.no?Subject=Valencian Language Tag registration request&In-Reply-To=C65E7E36.DE5F%25kent.karlsson14@comhem.se">gerard.meijssen at openprogress.org </A><BR>Wed Jun 17 12:37:27 CEST 2009 <BR><PRE>> Hoi,
> There is a difference between the literature of the Dutch and the Belgians.
> Given the prominence of libraries in the history of the ISO-639 I expect
> that this is an explanation for this.
> Thanks,
> Gerard
</PRE><PRE>Interesting. What other literatures will we ultimately have to distinguish?</PRE><PRE> </PRE><PRE>Best,</PRE><PRE> </PRE><PRE>C. E. Whitehead</PRE><PRE><A href="mailto:cewcathar@hotmail.com">cewcathar@hotmail.com</A><BR></PRE></PRE></body>
</html>