Welcome to Wikimedia Incubator, the project of Wikimedia Foundation where new language versions of Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikinews, Wikiquote and Wiktionary are maintained!
Do you maybe speak a language which has a test wiki here? You are welcome to contribute! Search the full list
Or do you want to start Wikipedia or another project in your language? Make sure it doesn't already exist and go ahead! Consult the manual linked in the box at the right for how to do it.
- You can select your interface language in your preferences.
-- Welcoming Bot 17:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Hmong Dawb Wikipedia
Hello! I don't wanna look too daring in your eyes, but it's very obvious that you use Google Translator while editing pages in Hmong Daw. Is it actually true? --Midnight Gambler (talk) 08:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yo no tengo ni idea de "proto-indoeuropeo" pero te puedo ayudar con plantillas, categorías, imágenes, etc. Para responder, tienes que hacer click en donde pone "talk" en mi firma, que te lleva a la pagina "User talk:Katxis" y ahí me respondes. Un saludo. --Katxis (talk) 23:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Proper Proto-Indo-European grammar spelling and dictionary
Alphabet is here: http://www.koeblergerhard.de/idg/idg_vorwort.html
Months and weekdays translated
- See Wp/ine/Essential_dictionary - all days already done according to Latin scheme. 126.96.36.199 13:07, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Notorious bad spellings
Two main pages
- But... why? I think we're not gonna need it, it just had to be redirected to the new one (Prmom Paginom) --Guillermo2149 (talk) 16:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
You moved article about horse, but your move proved wrong, see http://www.koeblergerhard.de/idgwbhin.html
- I'm sorry, I'm not understanding you, just in case, I'm not a native English speaker as you can see... Do you think I should use source editor instead of visual editor as I always do? --Guillermo2149 (talk) 20:32, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- By the way, don't you think we must elaborate a more effective communication method so that this site can be more organized? --Guillermo2149 (talk) 20:53, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for informing! --Guillermo2149 (talk) 18:06, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- It still doesn't work in the Incubator or in Meta, but it already works with Wikipedia, so go ahead! and add PIE to your Babel template!... Preview: click here
- Update: Now it's available in Meta and English Wikipedia --Guillermo2149 (talk) 18:39, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I didn't understand you... If you say there's an error in the translation, I just copied the translation. --Guillermo2149 (talk) 18:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch
Whilst I was browsing around your Proto-Indo-European test wiki, I noticed you used "Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch" as your word source. Whilst this was good at the time of it's making, it's from 1959 and outdated compared to the information that we have today. For example Laryngeals are widely accepted, and it would be a good idea to use them. -AngrySheep03 (talk) 15:20, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- I agree with what you're saying, and I already thought about it. That's why I proposed to make a change and to use only the information we find on Wikipedia (most of the information is from Beekes). I already proposed it but seems like I'm not having that much support. As you may notice, I'm not a professional linguist or PIE reconstructor, I just wanted to create this project and people to help me with it. Would you help me to discuss them? --Guillermo2149 (talk) 15:34, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- See Wp/ine/Pr̥mo·Sendʰro·U̯erokᵘ̯esi̯om for reason why Pokorny and Köbler is superior. It is simply because PIE has its most similar descendants in its indoiranian daughters. It is good for Proto Indo Hittite this reform proposed here. Such thing should have separate wiki at best. We should not deface PIE into PIH, which is different thing, since PIH actually might never exist, according to this source which supports indoiranian branch as most similar to its PIE ancestor. Whatever is in Wikimedia articles, it resembles w:en:Greeklish w:en:leetspeak oddity. Never ever we should allow such amatorish oddity here. Beekes defaces PIE by word-internal capital letters and numbers, contrary to Pokorny and Köbler, who only cite such forms as inferior ones. Oddities from Wikimedia articles most obviously use y instead of j, and j instead of dz. Of course, Wiktionary never ever has as more as 7 thousand PIE roots which is provided by both Pokorny and Köbler summarized. What does Beekes with his mixed case H#, now looks like nothing else than defacing of actual PIE into dubious PIH. Besides greeklish/leetspeak H#, i found in Beekes another spurious thing, namely "ʔ" blatantly ripped off from Poul Anderson, more specifically from his High Crusade alien names like Prʔ*tans. As you see, Kobler and Pokorny still allows normal word uppercasing like in God, Vatican, etc... including ALL CAPS text. 188.8.131.52 16:12, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Life of Jesus Christ, which itself is revelation from God, says the following: "The first tongue, the mother tongue, spoken by Adam, Shem, and Noah, was different, and it is now extant only in isolated dialects. Its first pure offshoots are the Zend, the sacred tongue of India, and the language of the Bactrians. In those languages, words may be found exactly similar to the Low German of my native place. The book that I see in modern Ctesiphon, on the Tigris, is written in that language." It simply reveals that indoiranian branch is most similar to its ancestor from beginning of time. As you see, laryngeal/glottal theory is dismissed by God as false one, since nothing anatolian is called as first pure offshoots of PIE there.
- Above revelation is confirmed already:
- "Anne Catherine Emmerich died at 8:30pm on February 9, 1824. It was only during the last five years of her life that she began to write down the history of her visions which have become a treasury for many of the faithful. She was Beatified on October 3, 2004 by Pope John Paul II."
- 184.108.40.206 16:23, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- "Historical linguistics was not possible in Europe from the dominance of Christianity in the late Roman empire to the Age of Enlightenment due to literal adherence to Genesis 11:1-9, which offers an explanation of why languages differ: "And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech." According to the Genesis narrative, the descendants of Noah gathered together in the land of Shinar and began constructing the Tower of Babel in an attempt to reach heaven. In response to their over-reaching God decided to "confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech" and "scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of the earth." In other words, if languages were given by God, then they did not evolve, and there is no point in comparing them." Quoted from Wikipedia. People like you were the reason there was no such thing as historical linguistics up untill 1500-1600s. Your mindset is highly medieval, 220.127.116.11 -AngrySheep03 (talk) 13:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- The language confusion is only for God-denying ones. God is capable of being dynamic, so language confusion can be dynamic too. 18.104.22.168 15:24, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- We should have fork to two wikis here, one for Proto Indo European without laryngeals, and other for Proto Indo Hittite with laryngeals. PIE and PIH are different languages, like Faliscan and Latin: http://dnghu.org/indo-european-schleicher-fable.pdf AA (talk) 16:36, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Guillermo2149 Yes, I would I like to discuss these with you. It's an interesting topic. Whilst I'm more interested in Nostratic and Uralic as well as in Etruscan, I'd happily help you with this. @22.214.171.124 and @126.96.36.199 If uppercases in words is your problem, we can simply have lowercase accented letters like "ħ" or "ĥ" etc. Also, this source: http://dnghu.org/indo-european-schleicher-fable.pdf CLEARLY shows that your PIH is not dubious in any way, rather Common Anatolian seems alot closer than any other branch. What's more, if you think Indo-Iranian is the closest, you might as well make a Wikipedia for Proto-Indo-Iranian instead of Proto-Indo-European. @AKIA AYAK It seems like PIH and PIE aren't different, just PIH is Early Indo European and Proto Indo European is later. Also @AKIA AYAK and @188.8.131.52, our content in the PIE Wikipedia should match up to content in the other Wikipedias. A classic example of this not happening is in the article "Hunnic Language", where the Chuvash, Portugese, Turkish, and Uzbek Wikipedias say it is Turkic, whilst the Hungarian Wikipedia says it is Uralic, and the English Wikipedia says it is "Unclassified". Something like that is not very professional. Lastly, if you're looking for the ORIGINAL language, i'd recommend looking into Proto-Nostratic, Proto Sino-Caucasian, and Proto-Borean. Those seem like the most eligible candidates. They are also interesting articles, which I would reccomend you read. -AngrySheep03 (talk) 17:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Talk:Wp/ine/Pr̥mom_Pā̆g̑inom#Avoid_human_errors.2C_stick_to_God_instead clearly dismisses anything earlier than Kobler+Pokorny PIE as figments, it is based on God+Pope authorities. 184.108.40.206 18:49, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Nostratic and Borean are even worse in terms of umbrella phonemes with uncertain values. This alone dismisses them as real languages, just like Indo-Hittite with its umbrella laryngeals of uncertain value. At least Kobler + Pokorny are 100% certain with their phoneme set in PIE. AA (talk) 19:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- @220.127.116.11 It should also be noted that your "confirmation" doesn't confirm anything, and that "Anna Catherine Emmerich" is classed as "Christian Mysticism". Furthermore, @AKIA AYAK laryngeals aren't uncertain. They are consonants produced in the larynx. Also, uncertainty does NOT make a language non-real. For example:
- Language A, B, C, and D are part of the same language family, let's call it "Wikimedian". However, in lang "A" and "B" there is the word "Hāuro" , but in lang "D" and "C" there is "Hōuro". As there are no attested earlier versions of all the langs, it's impossible to know which vowel is the original. Hence, the reconstructed word in Proto-Wikimedian is "hV:uro", "V:" indicating an uncertain long vowel.
- Best way is to fork this wiki into new one, not deface it here from Kobler/Pokorny state. 18.104.22.168 09:54, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
- None, since laryngeals are akin to leetspeak which is NON-realistic. AKIA AYAK (talk) 10:42, June 23, 2020 (UTC)
- How? Reading the discussion above, they seem to be realistic and worth considering. Danishjaveed (talk) 10:19, June 27, 2020 (UTC)
- Indo-European Linguistics in the 21st Century (1): From trilaryngealism to monolaryngealism: returning to Oswald Szemerényi
- By the present day only a handful of models are left to compete for a solution concerning the reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) laryngeal and vowel system. The remaining hybrid versions of the laryngeal theory, as proposed by EICHNER, MELCHERT, KORTLANDT, and RIX, explain the Indo-European (IE) vocalisms with both the laryngeals *h1 *h2 *h3 and at least two of the proto- vowels *e *o *a. Due to this dual fixation these models are inherently ambiguous, as in principle every IE vocalism can be explained with both a laryngeal and the respective vowel. This means that the laryngeal theory is ultimately incapable of solving the PIE laryngeal and vowel problem, and the only way out is a radical simplification of the framework. A simplification was first proposed by Oswald SZEMERÉNYI, who reconstructed a single glottal fricative PIE *h = Hitt. ḫ, accompanied by a near equivalent of the Neogrammarian vowel system *a e o ā ē ō å ǝ. Despite the need for additional work on a number of key problems, monolaryngealism, as proposed by him, remains the only realistic option for Indo-European linguistics in the 21st century. AKIA AYAK (talk) 14:37, July 9, 2020 (UTC)
- How? Reading the discussion above, they seem to be realistic and worth considering. Danishjaveed (talk) 10:19, June 27, 2020 (UTC)
- It should also be noted that no one will ever use the Dacian Wiki. -AngrySheep03 (talk) 09:30, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
"Vul" is not a valid ISO code. Therefore this wiki is likely not to be approved and to be closed. Additionally: I cannot find a request on Meta for this project. Please show me where on Meta this request exists. Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:38, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
- This is the request. The code is lat-vul but... --Guillermo2149 (talk) 18:36, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
- OK. Understood. Language committee will not approve unless you can get SIL to approve a separate ISO639-3 language code for lat-vul. Other projects here with similar suffixed codes (like nds-nl) are grandfathered from much earlier days before the current policy was set in place.
- More to the point, there are no current speakers of Vulgar Latin. As many people point out, standard Latin is sui generis at Wikimedia, in that (a) the projects were started before the current language policy was in place, (b) there has constantly been new written work in standard Latin over the centuries, and (c) "dead" though the language was, there was continuous liturgical use. So as a "dead" language, it was never really quite dead. (Hebrew of about 125+ years ago would have been in about the same boat.) In contrast, you will have a hard time convincing the Language Committee that there is a community around that will work with Vulgar Latin. Yes, it may be relatively intelligible to a lot of people, but it's not really in use by anyone, as far as I can tell.
- On the whole, I'd really recommend that you work on this project at Incubator Plus instead. But for the moment I will leave the project open here, because by policy we do not close test projects for which a request is open at Meta. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:56, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
- Y instead of J and J instead of DZ and V instead of W and W instead of U is from the evil of http://www.yog-sothoth.com/wiki/index.php/R'lyehian , avoid it at all, we are not casting hellbent spells here. 2001:888:2000:61:0:0:0:2 20:39, 27 December 2016 (UTC)