kent.karlsson14 at telia.com
Fri Apr 3 02:06:40 CEST 2015
Well, http://www.native-languages.org/languages.htm has a direct link from
"Mingo" to the page for "Seneca". And that page appears credible...
The one page I find that lists Mingo as a separate language is
http://mingolanguage.org/iroquoianlanguages.html. Seems more
personal opinion ("From my own perspective, I..."), hand-waving,
and indeed seems to be solely targeted at promoting that Mingo is
a separate language... It also lists Huron as a separate language,
but both Ethnologue and www.native-languages.org/languages.htm regard
it as the same as Wyandot (or a dialect of Wyandot). Unfortunately,
Ethnologue does not mention Mingo.
Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mingo, says "The "Mingo dialect"
that dominated the Ohio valley from the late 17th to early 18th centuries is
considered a variant most similar to the Seneca language."
Not sure we will get much closer, given the very few remaining speakers.
Den 2015-04-02 21:42, skrev "Doug Ewell" <doug at ewellic.org>:
> Mark Davis 🍺 wrote:
> i-mingo. On the other hand, it would be nice to get
> this resolved.
> There are few sources on the web for Mingo; some indicate
> that it is
> a variant of Seneca
> http://www.native-languages.org/seneca.htm), while I think Doug found
> that contended that it was a separate language.
Since it isn't blindingly
> obvious whether this is or isn't a separate
language, I don't think we should
> be the ones to make that
determination. Someone with knowledge about Mingo
> should make a request
through ISO 639-3/RA and see what they say.
> Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺�
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
More information about the Ietf-languages