be-tarask language subtag registration form

Ihar Hrachyshka ihar.hrachyshka at gmail.com
Sat Mar 31 01:44:51 CEST 2007


У Пят, 30/03/2007 у 19:35 -0400, John Cowan піша:
> Michael Everson scripsit:
> 
> > Is there another orthography of Belarusian that we need to know about 
> > in order to evaluate this?
> 
> Belarusian has three orthographies in modern use.  One is Latin, and
> not relevant here.  Of the other two, one (this one) is the pre-1933
> orthography, the other is the russified orthography that became official
> in 1933 and revised in 1959 and is still official.  It is hotly disputed,
> and highly political, exactly who uses or should use which orthography
> for what, but the existence of the two is not disputed.
> 
> In addition to purely orthographical differences, people who write in the
> official orthography accept a larger number of Russian loanwords.  I can't
> get an unbiased view on whether there are differences in morphosyntax.
> 
You are definitely wrong about the quality of language of offial
spelling users. I don't know where you have heard such a lie but it's
wrong. The problem is that lots of words that "tarask" users think to be
"russizms" are belarusian words indeed (f.e. a word "востраў", that is
in all the dialects works but is not used by "tarask" users and is
removed in their speech with polonizm "выспа").
> One name for the official orthography is "narkamauka", but this is a
> derogatory term inappropriate for a language subtag.  I don't know what
> would be appropriate.
Narkamaŭka is an abuse word for most of active users of the official
orthography so if it's needed to find some name info us.
> 



More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list