Variant subtag proposal: Høgnorsk variety of Norwegian

Leif Halvard Silli xn--mlform-iua at
Sat Jan 2 02:55:05 CET 2010

Thorgeir Holm, Sat, 02 Jan 2010 02:08:22 +0100:
> <hermer John Cowan frå 02.01.2010 01:27>
>> and as speaking a different language from Danes or Swedes.
>> (A Swedish net.friend of mine from central Sweden says he understands
>> his neighbors across the border better than he does Swedes from other
>> parts of his country; it's hardly surprising that many isoglosses should
>> run east and west on the Norway-Sweden peninsula.)
> This would be our friends in Jamtland, whose dialect is considered as 
> Norwegian even by Swedish linguists. What would be the recommended 
> prefix in this case? ;-)

Prefix of what ... For spoken Jämtlandish, one could insist that it 
should be tagged as either 'nn-SE' or 'no-SE', I suppose. And if their 
dialect was a written in a form that followed the  Høgnorsk principles, 
we could add -hognorsk thereafter, I guess:  'nn-SE-hognorsk'. 

Cool. I never thought about that Sweden had their own Nynorsk. ;-)
>>> It is vital that 'no-hognorsk' be valid, the practical circumstances in 
>>> Norwegian language tagging being as chaotic as they are. 
>> In no case will "no-hognorsk" be invalid. 
> That's what I wanted to hear.

Very useful as reference, indeed.
> Okay, Leif, I think we exhausted this: 'nn-hognorsk' *is* preferrable, 
> and other uses lie beyond the scope of the registry.

I think Kent's viewpoints are very valuable as well - if only they 
could be carried through. If I _could_ tell people to not use 'no' for 
monolingual Bokmål texts. That 'no' can validly be used for both 
Nynorsk and Bokmål texts is a just as much a practical as an 
"activistic" benefit - and just as much curse as a blessing. But any 
principle is a double sword, including the principle that 
'no'/'Norwegian' covers two languages.

So, then I would like to hear your opinion about inserting a note 
explicitly forbidding to use 'nb' as a prefix of 'hognorsk', as doing 
so would be illogical and not intended. The rest - whether to use 'no' 
or 'gem' or whatever before 'hognorsk', would then be up to judgement 
and needs etc. And it would also in itself be telling that 'hognorsk' 
is not listed as forbidden after 'no'. 

(Sidekick: 'høgnorsk/hognorsk' would have to be written 
'høynorsk/hoynorsk' in a traditional Bokmål rendering, should the 
Bokmål fraction happen to want to use the same term for something. 
'Høg' is permitted in Bokmål, but it is predominantly used in names of 
official institutions - such as 'høgskole' - where something that is 
equally good [or equally artificial] within in both norms, often is 
strived for.)
leif halvard silli

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list