Another attempt at plain language
petercon at microsoft.com
Thu Sep 17 17:29:42 CEST 2015
Re the first of your reply, I meant "relative to" in exactly the same way it would pertain to any other language tag or subtag: every subtag exists to create a contrastive distinction from something else.
Re the second, "controlled language" is cover term that encompasses exactly what this request is all about: the content was not created in the way people naturally speak or write, but was controlled in some respects for some communicative purpose - e.g., being "plain" or "simple" to facilitate comprehension by L2 audiences, or persons with cognitive disabilities, or whatever.
From: Ietf-languages [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Kent Karlsson
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 2:27 AM
To: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
Subject: Re: Another attempt at plain language
Den 2015-09-15 02:18, skrev "Peter Constable" <petercon at microsoft.com>:
I have no problem with wanting to use a language tag to declare "this is a simplified variant" (relative to some other document that doesn't have that).
There is no need to refer to another "non-simple" variant *document*. The "simplified language" document (radio program, ...) may be quite separate from any other document (or radio program or whatever).
But before proceeding with anything along this line, I think I'd want to see some input from linguistic experts that are dealing with this area generally - and by that, I don't someone working just on accessibility. Content may be authored using controlled language in a variety of contexts for a variety of reasons.
Going for "controlled language" I think is a non-starter for a general variant (as requested). Very few languages will have any *controlled* variant defined. Any variant tag for this will have to much more informal. (I still think the A1-C2 levels in CEF may be of interest.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages