request for subtag for Elfdalian

[Mats Blakstad]

2016-03-03 18:01 GMT+01:00 Michael Everson <everson at evertype.com>:

> On 1 Mar 2016, at 16:18, Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > If it's clearly wrong on a linguistic basis, then the right approach is
> to provide to the RA more information that makes clear that linguistic
> argument and shows that it's information that many linguists familiar with
> the languages in question — preferably not just ones within the Elfdalian
> community — confirm that view.
>
>
But that's exactly what we did. The application form gave overview of all
the important reasons why Elfdalian/Övdalian is another language than
Swedish. In addition we sent extensive overview of sources for more
information. Among them two books in English that can even be download on
PDF:
http://www.jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027269133
http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=1567392&fileOId=1567413
The information should be more than available for the RA and I both hope
and expect them to have checked our source if they had any doubts about the
facts.

I think those that really should provide more source must be the two
opposing comments. Several claims are done without any references, why do
RA emphasize claims without sources? Several claims are just simply wrong,
like that there are only some very few linguists that studied the language;
Please check the sources given in the form, it should be clear enough that
many different linguists have been involved in the study of
Elfdalian/Övdalian.

As far as I know there are no linguists from "within the Elfdalian
community" working on the language, most of those that have studied and
written about the language are from "outside the Elfdalian community". Or
do you mean that people that have done empirical research and been in
contact with the community are biased? Are those without empirical research
experience, and without any contact with the community, really a better
source to make the judgement? I find it funny that Swedish officials like
Anna Westerberg in her comment present it like it is suspicious that
linguists that studied the language express clear opinions about the
variant in fact being a language. To me that just gives the whole issue
more credible.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20160308/635370b6/attachment.html>