New extension for transformed languages
kent.karlsson14 at telia.com
Tue Mar 6 00:31:53 CET 2012
Den 2012-03-05 04:16, skrev "Philippe Verdy" <verdy_p at wanadoo.fr>:
> Even about French itself (e.g. it is still impossible to encode the
> Norman language, considered a dialect of standard French, from which
> there are several continental and insular variants in Jersey and
You are free to propose variant subtags to the iet-languages list (giving
appropriate background and supporting documents). (Or even propose
new language codes to ISO 639-3 MA, if you think that is warranted.)
> You could say the same between Danish and Swedish (there are still
> promoters of an unified languages).
News to me. Swedish and Danish are like (Castillian) Spanish and Portuguese.
Or French and Valencian (not entirely sure about the 'distance' here). Do
you consider unifying those? Most Swedish speakers considers (spoken) Danish
quite incomprehensible, though some dialects are harder to understand than
others. If you want closer related languages in the Scandinavian region,
look for Swedish and (New) Norwegian. Though fairly close, and have fair
mutual intelligibility, the differences are sufficient for status as
> Look at German and Dutch: it's
> hard to make a strong delimitation between them, and only the official
> standardized forms are just particular points in a continuum too.
I would think these two "points" are quite distinct and warrant to be
regarded as separate languages.
But this is getting far off-topic relative to the Subject of this thread.
More information about the Ietf-languages