<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div>Not all of the words in the UMMOA English lexicon are necessarily UMMOA English words strictly speaking, and have been added to the list because, like with any real world dictionary, they are words that are frequently used, that have some daily or weekly currency. I have not bothered with words that are never or almost never used.<br><br></div>Some words, on the other hand, appear to be normal English words, but instead have quite distinct meanings in Ummoagian (UMMOA national) context. Examples: 14 Commandments (Cesidian law and religion), advanced country (Cesidian political science that has nothing to do with "rich countries", and is, in fact, entirely about the stage of political development), American law (a Cesidian law item), Antarctican (actual Antarctica native, not mere Antarctica temporary resident, and I had to assist one of these people), or Archimedes (month of the Cesidian calendar, named after the famed Sicilian-Greek).<br><br></div>Some words, which may have been specifically designed or derived from foreign languages like Greek (aren't neologisms often made this way?), are actually new words, or the words imply things or meanings which cannot be found in either your standard Chambers or Websters dictionary, or in the <i>Wikipedia</i>. Examples: ambisexual (term used in en-x-UMMOA instead of bisexual, and for reasons of linguistic consistency), amphiarchy ["government of both kinds" (ie, monarchical and democratic)], Analytic theology (new field entirely about religion and mathematics, and thus having nothing to do with a similar term used by philosophers), "Ancient Athens" (actually related to Cesidian political science, and a specific stage of political development, as exemplified in <b><a href="http://scholar.ac/spc.html">this table</a></b>), Anti-Antarctic Treaty System (new organisation the UMMOA founded), Aphrodite Island (<b><a href="http://ummoa.net/aphrodite-island.html">brand new island</a></b> the UMMOA has claimed, which is still neither neither claimed or named by any sovereign state), Bajo Nuevo Banq ("Bajo Nuevo Bank" in standard English, but we no longer use the word "bank" as a geographic term, since it has been monopolised by financial institutions worldwide, and to the detriment of any other interest, value, or endeavour), Bathetic elements ("Bathetic" is a Cesidian religion term), etc.<br><br></div>Besides all these things, which you can only fully understand if you use things like the Cesidian calendar daily (some non-Ummoagians and non-Cesidians also use it), or if you are a Ummoagian, or a Cesidian, I would appreciate less criticism for the sake of criticism alone (besides being non-constructive, these kinds of criticism are also full of <i>ad homines</i>), and a little more help, if that is possible.<br><br></div>I'm not seeking legitimacy for the United Micronations Multi-Oceanic Archipelago (UMMOA®), since it is already recognised by the <b><a href="http://www.trademarks411.com/marks/86153190">United States Patent and Trademark Office</a></b> (USPTO) as an international political organisation, and most of the people here are probably not Heads of States or Foreign Ministers. I am seeking help for a language classification issue, whether you believe it or not, because I feel that <b>en-x-UMMOA</b> or <b>UMMOA English</b> is neither British English (en-GB), since they don't have months of <i>Archimedes</i>, named after a real Greek God, but months of January, named after a (phoney) god called "Janus", nor do Brits usually have the foggiest idea of what a real world <i>diaxenospitia</i> is. Moreover, UMMOA English doesn't use the orthography of American English (en-US) either, or the terms they often use.<br><br>It would be nice if some new kind of classification (language code) can be developed, regardless of whether it uses 3 letters or 5. I'm just looking for something a little more authoritative than a private language subtag.<br><br><b>If that is possible.</b><br><br></div>Kind regards,<br><br></div>HMRD Cesidio Tallini<br><div><div><br><br><div><div><div><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Doug Ewell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:doug@ewellic.org" target="_blank">doug@ewellic.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Addison raised the procedural point that extlangs cannot be<br>
independently proposed and registered, which is enough. But there is<br>
more.<br>
<span class=""><br>
HMRD Cesidio Tallini <ct at 5world dot net> wrote:<br>
<br>
> The subtag is intended to represent UMMOA English orthography as<br>
> published in "UMMOA English", by Cesidio Tallini.<br>
<br>
</span>If this were indeed an orthography, which it isn't, a variant subtag and<br>
not an extlang would be the proper target.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> UMMOA English, originally an extension of British English (en-GB), is<br>
> now a distinct version of English, and is also distinct from Oxford<br>
> English Dictionary English (en-GB-oed), and American English (en-US).<br>
<br>
</span>"Extended language subtags" don't signify "extensions" to existing<br>
languages, such as English with added vocabulary. Extlangs are directly<br>
related to the ISO 639-3 concept of "macrolanguage," which applies<br>
specifically to the situation where two or more languages, dialects, or<br>
idioms are sometimes considered to be the same language, and sometimes<br>
considered to be different languages. Chinese is a perfect example of<br>
this. Sign languages are a good example. English with added vocabulary<br>
is not at all an example. No evidence is given here, or at the linked<br>
website, that "UMMOA English" is so different from American English or<br>
British English or OED English that anyone would consider it not to be<br>
English.<br>
<br>
It seems that the requester included a link to RFC 5646 on his website<br>
without truly reading or understanding it.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> UMMOA English is the form of English that is standard in the United<br>
> Micronations Multi-Oceanic Archipelago or UMMOA®. The UMMOA is a<br>
> nation or people scattered around the world, which is developing a<br>
> distinct culture, even distinct sciences or branches of science.<br>
<br>
</span>Some evidence might be helpful that this group of people connected by<br>
the Internet (or other computer networks) really speaks a language that<br>
is not English, or differs substantially from English other than in the<br>
use of limited neologisms.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> Currently the en-x-UMMOA private language subtag is being used to<br>
> represent UMMOA English orthography, but the distinct vocabulary is<br>
> rapidly expanding, and requires a language tag that is more official<br>
> and unique, and which leaves out the UMMOA word mark, more<br>
> representative of a recognised political minority, than the minority's<br>
> major spoken language, or unique cultural expression.<br>
<br>
</span>IETF language subtags don't exist to confer legitimacy or "official"<br>
status on languages or variants. They exist so that material in<br>
different languages and variants can be tagged accordingly, so that<br>
people searching for content in a given language or variant can find<br>
what they are looking for.<br>
<br>
The linked website gives this "analogy" to justify the request for an<br>
extlang:<br>
<br>
> zh-yue Chinese as spoken in Hong Kong and Macau language+extlang<br>
> en-ugv English as spoken in the UMMOA language+extlang<br>
<br>
I have no idea where this came from, but:<br>
<br>
1. Cantonese, not Yue, is the main Chinese language spoken in Hong Kong<br>
and Macau.<br>
<br>
2. The description of 'yue' in the Language Subtag Registry is "Yue<br>
Chinese" with no mention of any region. (Evidently the requester<br>
didn't look in the Registry either.)<br>
<br>
3. Neither "zh-yue" or any other language-extlang combination would be<br>
used to mean "Chinese as spoken in Hong Kong and Macau" or in any<br>
other region. These would be "zh-HK" and "zh-MO". Indeed, the problem<br>
of mistagging usually runs in the opposite direction: people use<br>
"language-region" when they should use "language-extlang" or simply<br>
"language".<br>
<br>
4. The differences between Yue, Cantonese, and other Chinese languages,<br>
which led ISO 639-3 to encode them separately and encompass them<br>
under a "Chinese" macrolanguage, are far greater than a list of<br>
unique vocabulary words.<br>
<br>
The website also includes a document called "UMMOA English" which does<br>
not describe any differences from English except to provide a list of:<br>
<br>
1. ordinary, commonly understood English words and terms, such as<br>
"city," "cottage industry," "government," "island," "member," and<br>
"place of birth".<br>
<br>
2. lesser-known or newly invented words derived primarily from English,<br>
Latin, and Greek.<br>
<br>
3. several terms derived from the creator's name ("Cesidian calendar,"<br>
"Cesidian law," "Cesidian virtues").<br>
<br>
These don't begin to prove the existence of a distinct language or<br>
dialect. The closest analogy I can find even in the "variant" category<br>
is Boontling ("en-boont"), a jargon spoken in a single town, and in that<br>
case the unique vocabulary was at least well documented and was<br>
relatively famous at one point. Nothing in the UMMOA word list leads to<br>
the conclusion that this is not English with added words. Orwell's<br>
Newspeak would be better suited for a subtag.<br>
<br>
It seems that "en-x-ummoa", or maybe just "en", will have to be the way<br>
forward.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA<br>
<a href="http://ewellic.org" target="_blank">http://ewellic.org</a> | @DougEwell<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr">HMRD Cesidio Tallini<br>11 Press Street<br>South Floral Park, NY 11001-3536<br>USA<br>Email: <a href="mailto:ct@5world.net" target="_blank">ct@5world.net</a><br>URL: <a href="http://5world.net" target="_blank">http://5world.net</a><br>Tel: +1 (516) 515-0592<br>Fax: +1 (516) 706-0080<br><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div></div>
</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>