Kent Karlsson kent.karlsson14 at
Tue Jun 15 20:51:43 CEST 2010

Den 2010-06-15 17.13, skrev "ISO639-3" <ISO639-3 at>:

> There is a code element in ISO 639-3 which could be a factor in this
> discussion, though I recognize that it raises its own set of complications.
> In ISO 639-3, there is still an active code element for Serbo-Croatian [hbs]
> ([sh] deprecated), with a scope of Macrolanguage, and the constituent
> languages [bs / bos], [hr / hrv], and [sr / srp]. This arrangement
> recognizes the Serbo-Croatian diasystem, with three associated standard
> forms. "Standard forms" would seem to be the more appropriate interpretation
> of [bs / bos] ; [hr / hrv] ; and [sr / srp], as opposed to "all the
> varieties of this language as spoken in Bosnia ; Croatia ; Serbia," but that
> interpretation seems to be at the heart of the matter.  The standard forms
> clearly do not collectively encompass all that the Serbo-Croatian code
> element encompasses.
> I am interested in this group's thoughts regarding whether the
> Serbo-Croatian macrolanguage in Part 3 (though not included in Part 2, and
> deprecated in Part 1) is a factor, and in what ways.

>From the information I've seen, I think 'sh' should be undeprecated in
part 1 (as we did for IANA language subtags), and 'hbs' be included in
part 2 (each part 1 code must have an equivalent part 2 code).

Since the [bs / bos], [hr / hrv], and [sr / srp] codes seem to be created
for purely political reasons, these should be deprecated, and ISO (i.e. the
relevant RA:s for language codes) should resist this kind of politicised
codes. While it sometimes may be hard to draw the line between what should
be regarded as different languages or just different dialects of the same
language, it seems that here there are just some rather minor differences
of dialects of the same language and even smaller differences in
orthography (more of experimental, even failing, spelling reforms than
anything else). The Latn/Cyrl script difference is another matter, and
there is apparently a one-to-one correspondence in this case (which isn't
always the case when converting between Latn and Cyrl for words/names;
depending on languages *and* spelling preferences per word/name).

        /Kent Karlsson

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list