Talk:Romansh
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
On the orthographic level, Heinrich Schmidt sought to avoid all 'odd-looking' spellings, in order to increase general acceptability of the new idiom and its spelling. Therefore, words with /c/ plus /e/ or /i/ have <tg> (tgirar) instead of <ch>. Words with /c/ followed by /a/, /o/, /u/ have <ch> (chalanda) as both speakers of Engadin (chalanda) and the Rhine territory (calanda) except a spelling with <c->.
- This sentence complete confuses me on several levels. What is intended by /c/? Do you mean /C/ (real IPA /ç/), as German ich-laut? Or /tS/, as in English "charm"? Or something else? Moreover, how on earth is <tg> not an "odd-looking spelling" of anything other than /tg/ or /tk/?
At the same time, che and chi are - due to this rule, called "Leza Uffers Kompromiss" - pronounced /ke/ and /ki/. <k> on the other hand would be a grapheme deemed unfit for a Romance tongue such as Romansh.
- Isn't this just the same as Italian orthography?
On the other hand, the fact that there is no <ü, ö> in Romansh may not only be due to the lack of /y/ and /2/ in most Romansh idioms, but also to the graphic form which is seen as non-Romance. This also shows that it is not always phonetics that leads to the adoption of a new grapheme, but sometimes also the lack of a grapheme that leads to a certain phonetic shape of the standard.
- This does not make it at all clear that the lack of the letters is not due to the rarity in Rumantsch of the sounds they represent in German.
Contents |
[edit] Very unclear explanations
I can only guess as to the real sounds behind this rather unorthodox transcription. Please clarify. --Anon
- I believe those symbols within the slashes are SAMPA and those letters within the angle brackets are orthography. --Menchi 02:16, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
- Some [] are SAMPA, some are IPA.
-
- [S] [Z] [tS] are SAMPA.
-
- [ə] [ʃ] [ʒ] [ʧ] [ø] are IPA.
-
- [c] [e] [i] [a] [o] [u] [y] are both SAMPA and IPA. — Monedula 05:40, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I hate SAMPA...a pronunciation guide that nobody is actually familiar with is completely worthless. Plus, it looks ridiculous. john k 02:34, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
All SAMPA should be deleted and replaced with correct IPA. Chameleon 22:59, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I've removed the SAMPA, and done away with the angle brackets. I've changed [c] to [tɕ] in accordance with Daniels and Bright The World's Writing Systems (OUP 1996). But some of the wording could still do with tidying up! rossb 18:53, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Assistance
The Romansh section of Romance copula needs some attention. If you can describe how the verb "to be" works, go to it! Chameleon 22:59, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] New intro
Pardon me if I do not adhere to the correct stylistic conventions for talk pages; I am a relative Wikipedia novice.
I have added a slightly less-specialist introduction to this page, giving some figures and context for the language both in the country, in Europe and relative to the other Rhaetian languages. This is my first significant addition to a linguistics page on WP; I am only an interested amateur in the field.
References & sources:
- http://www.romansh.ch/
- http://switzerland.isyours.com/e/guide/graubunden/romansh.html
- http://www.bartleby.com/65/rh/RhaetoRo.html
Liam Proven 00:25, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] ?!
"Romansh is not a single language but a group of closely-related dialects"
Anyone think of an organic language which ISN'T a group of closely-related dialects?
- It's possible there are a few cases where the language-dialect distinction is meaningless because every speaker uses the same dialect, but Romansh is clearly not an example of this. I have changed this paragraph accordingly. Jsteph 06:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sociolinguistics?
I have taken the liberty of renaming the chapter called "Sociolinguistics", as it obviously is rather on Dialects than on Sociolinguistics. --Unoffensive text or character 16:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Half the size
...about half the size of Switzerland's largest community of speakers of a non-official language, with some 111,000 speakers, quoth the article, but what is this "non-official language"? Jpatokal 12:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, well, it seems it fell victim to political correctness. It used to be Serbo-Croatian, but as today this has been replaced by a bundle of languages (Serbian, Bosnian, Croatian, and I expect we will soon see Montenegrinian), someone "corrected" the entry by deleting the word "Serbo-Croatian".Unoffensive text or character 16:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- I've tried to add an acceptable description of which language - sorry, languages - are being talked about, because the previous situation was silly. It might make more sense to delete the sentence completely. --Dtcdthingy 19:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Romansh-speakers
Is it accurate to call the Romansh-speaking peoples of Switzerland and Italy "Romansh people" when designating their ethnic group, or would they better be considered Italian people, or something else? Static Sleepstorm 08:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Italians? Certainly not, if you do not want to offend them. I have heard the term "Bündnerromanen" used (i.e. Romanic people of Graubünden) and I suppose "Romansh people" would be a good English translation. Unoffensive text or character 08:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
