Wikipedia:Tlatlahtoaloyan

Īhuīcpa Huiquipedia, in yōllōxoxouhqui cēntlamatilizāmoxtli

Inīn tlahcuilōltechpa 1 Nahuatl Classica 2 About Nahuatl spelling 3 Nahuatl source content 4 Administrador y bloqueo 5 Wikimedia Election Notice 6 Preparation of Fundraiser 2007

[ticpatlaz] Nahuatl Classica

I think that to avoid dialect problems, we should use Classical Nahuatl. It is not perfect for all Nahuatl speakers to understand, but it is also not recognising one dialect as better than the others. It also has a well-established literary history. Thus "Tlahtolmatiliztli" and not "Tlahtolmachiliztli".

I also think that perhaps we should make a few minor changes:

ci -> si
cu -> kw
ca -> ka
ce -> se
co -> ko
qu -> k
hu -> w
ch -> c
-u+iseltikakiztli -> -w+iseltikakiztli
j -> h (usually already done)

Thus the following sentence, "Naja nicnequi nicmartiz maquinohn tlayakanan icpanin tlin ninnekin ninchihuasque." would become "Naha nikneki nikmartiz makinohn tlayakanan ikpanin tlin ninnekin ninciwaske."

I think that the addition of new diacritical marks is too big of a change for people who might already be familiar with the classical orthography, and that even though syllable-final aspiration may not be distinguishable in writing from long vowels, fluent speakers will be able to tell this.

The changes I have proposed are mainly in the interest of one-to-one correspondences between phonemes and letters. I also think these changes are a good idea for any Native American languages that still use a hispanoform orthography, such as Quechua ("kecwa" in my proposed orthography), Guarani ("warani" in my proposed orthography), and Quiche [maya] ("kice" in my proposed orthography) It takes less space, and although the time it saves in reading may be just fractions of a second, it is easier for the brain to process (ie, instead of having to apply contextual rules to decide what sound a letter makes, the same letters always make the same sound).

---

Quechua has already replaced it's hispanoform orthography into a more logical and phonemic one. In the Quechua language you write nowadays 'warm valley' -meaning of quechua- as Qhichwa. The -qh- represents a typical quechua-sound, the 'e'-sound is an allophone in Quechua, so it is not logic to write 'e', but better to write down 'i'. But the use of 'ch' hasn't changed. Indeed, to write down just 'c' is better.

--Node ue 05:19, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[ticpatlaz] About Nahuatl spelling

I write better in English, but will attempt to translate to Spanish and Nahuatl soon. --Pablo/Paul

Nahuatl orthography still hasn't found a good standardization, mainly because most people don't realize all the contrasts that should be shown. Furthermore, different forms of Nahuatl have slightly different phonology.

One suggestion is currently at User talk:Netza. I see only one major problem with Carochi's system: what happens when a long vowel precedes aspiration (I assume saltillo means aspiration here), as in pähtli (medicine)? For that reason, and because aspiration behaves like syllable-final consonants, I recommend writing an 'h' or a 'j' for aspiration.

There are, definitely, no glottalized long vowels in Nahuatl. The /a/ vowel in pahtli (medicine) is well attested as short (pätli = something melted/dissolved, lacks glottal stop; pähtli is morphophonemically impossible in Nahuatl). Nevertheless, this is not to imply that specifying aspiration/glottal-stop as a diacritic on a vowel (as Carochi suggests) is "better" than specifying it as a separate consonant (as you recommend, but using <h> instead of <j>). Some Nahuatl scholars, such as Karttunen, recommend the latter on the grounds that it better reflects the underlying structure of the language. However, other Nahuatl scholars recommend the former on the exact same grounds. --Danakil

(es:) Definitivamente, en Náhuatl no hay vocales largas glotalizadas. La vocal /a/ en pahtli (medicina) está bastante atestigüada como corta (pätli = algo derretido/disuelto, no lleva paro glotal; pähtli es morfofonémicamente imposible en Náhuatl). Sin embargo, esto no quiere decir que la especificación de la aspiración/paro-glotal mediante un diacrítico sobre vocal (como Carochi sugiere) es "mejor" que la especificación mediante una consonante separada (como recomiendas, pero utilizando <h> en vez de <j>). Algunos estudiosos del Náhuatl, como Karttunen, recomiendan el uso de la consonante argumentando que así se refleja mejor la estructura subyacente del lenguaje. Sin embargo, otros estudiosos recomiendan el uso del diacrítico basándose en precisamente el mismo argumento. --Danakil

Here are general requirements I recommend for any writing in Nahuatl:

1. Please distinguish between short and long vowels! This can be done in a number of ways, most of which are probably acceptable:

Totally agree. --Danakil

(es:) Totalmente de acuerdo. --Danakil

1. • Place a macron over long vowels, viz: Nāwatl. This is the best looking, as macrons traditionally mark long vowels. However, it is hard to typeset on any computer I've seen, so is inappropriate for (among other things) Wikis.
   • Place some other kind of mark over long vowels, viz: Näwatl or Nàwatl. This is easier to typeset on most computers, especially Mexican computers. This is a good solution.
   • Place an acute accent over long vowels, viz Náwatl. This is almost as good, except that I've met native speakers of Nahuatl who think short vowels sound more like they have an accent. So this is not quite as good as the other answers.
   • Place a colon immediately after a long vowel, viz Na:watl. This is another good solution.
   • Write two of the long vowel, viz Naawatl. This is a bad solution, because doubled vowels contrast against long vowels. The first part of tlaalaxtik (está liso) is not like the first part of tlälli (tierra)
2. I recommend never to use the word saltillo because it is used by some people to mean glottal stop, and by others to mean syllable-final aspiration.
3. Syllable-final aspiration is just that. It may affect the sound of the preceding vowel, but it acts just like any other syllable-final consonant, and should be marked with either an 'h' or a 'j' depending on your preference.
4. Word-final aspiration is extremely confusing in Huasteca Nahuatl (and possibly in other Nahuatl languages). I do not have a good answer for how to represent it, quite yet.

I agree that a W should be used instead of an HU (as in classical orthography), trying to keep two letters where one is sufficient as well as more logical and efficient is just trying to keep a Hispanicized orthography where it doesn't really suit the language well. The same goes for using a J instead of an H. to mark aspirants. I would suggest replacing CH with TX (as it is more logical), but I don't know how well received that would be.

but there are alternatives to w: u and v. u is workable because there is no need for a /u/ vowel graph, as it is always an allophone of phonemic /o/. --Danakil

(es:) pero hay alternativas a w: u y v. u es posible ya que no hay necesidad de un grafo vocálico para /u/, ya que este sonido es siempre un alófono del phonema /o/. --Danakil

Also, I think that macrons are the best idea for long vowels. If we *do* decide to use macrons, you don't have to worry about the keyboard problem because I can create a Windows keyboard layout for the chosen orthography free-of-charge.

A colon is *not* a good idea, because it would conflict with punctuation and be very confusing because anybody trying to read Nahuatl is most likely either expecting some sort of diacritic above long vowels rather than colons after them.

What exactly is wrong with using an H for word-final aspiration if one uses it for syllable-final aspiration?

Best wishes, Node

Niltze Node! Welcome to Wikipedia in Nahuatl. Thanks for your suggestions. We really need long discussions to fix, in the better possible way, some of the current drawbacks of Nahuatl as a written language and it is good having different kinds of opinion on the many topics about it.

You mention the need to make distinctions between long and short vowels in Nahuatl. I agree that vowel length is a relevant feature of the language but I think we really need the opinion of fluent Nahuatl speakers on the matter. Diacritics are not usually welcome in general if the written language can do well without them: there are many cases of this; for example, in Amharic (a thoroughly written language of Ethiopia since the 19th century) they use double consonants in speech in a way that changes meaning of the words and situations, but double consonants never appear in the written language; in Arabic, vowels are necessary in spoken language but they are scarcely represented (generally they are used only in the Koran and dictionaries); in Spanish (my mother tongue) stress is a relevant feature but a vast quantity of Spanish-speakers can do quite well without using it when writing and the message is 99.9% perfectly conveyed... There are more cases like this.

Anyway, I am not against using some kind of diacritic to mark vowel length, but I think we should listen to the points of view of as many Nahuatl-speakers as possible before settling any general rule. They are the ones who should decide if it is worth doing or it is not. - Tochpapalotl (Piolinfax) 10:59, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

I would like to suggest that a new letter be invented and used for the "tl" sound, so that people will no longer be tempted to pronounce this sound like the tl in "turtle". I think that the misconception among both english and spanish speakers that nahuatl words are to be pronounced this way is unfortunate and that it should be countered before it become even deeper rooted among the many well meaning people who are learning nahuatl. Elias Huitzilyn Huitzilyn@hotmail.com

Noihuan nicnomachtica nahuatl ihuan niquintemoa occenquintin tlacah aquique quinequih quiyeyecoasque nahuatl nohuan. Tla aca cacicamati inin ma nechtitlani netitlanilistli nican Huitzilyn@hotmail.com

• Navajo uses TŁ (lowercase tł) for that sound (or at least for a similar one). However, in the Navajo Nation people who don't know any navajo commonly write placenames with an l instead of ł, so it ends up getting pronounced like l.

---

Naja nicnequi nicmartiz maquinohn tlayakanan icpanin tlin ninnekin ninchihuasque. Naja ta ihcuan nitzitzinin nihueli nan tlahtohli tlin otechcahuilitehquen tohtahnhuan.

tla itlan nihueliz ni mechpalehuiz, za nan nechtlahcuilohuilican. gelacio_mar@yahoo.com.mx

macehualtzin gelacio lazaro martinez

---

I think we should decide now which spelling we are going to use. We have 84 pages now, if we have 100 the Nahuatl Wikipedia will be listed on the English Wikipedia main page at 'Wikipedias with over 100 articles', it's best to have a standard spelling then. My vote goes for the 'classical' Nahuatl spelling. Perhaps it has some illogical parts, but still it's the most used. It is also used in Nahuatl loan words in other languages (in almost all languages it's Mexico and not Mexiko, chocolate and not txoclate and Quetzalcoatl and not Kwetsalkoatl.

Another idea may be having two Nahuatl Wikipedias, a Nahuatl Huiquipedia and a Nawatl Wikipedia.--Mixcoatl 11:58, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It has already been decided. The policy is now to use Yankwik Nawa:tl orthography instead of Nahuatl Classica. It follows the basic principle of 1 sound = 1 letter:

• sh -> x (this is already in Nahuatl Classica, but some people don't use it)
• ch -> tx
• qu -> k
• ci/e -> si/e
• ca/co/cu/c -> ka/ko/ku/k
• cua/cui/cue/cuo -> kwa/kwi/kwe/kwo
• coa -> kwa
• long vowels/vocales largas/iseltikakizweyakeh: vowel/vocal/iseltikakiztl + :
• j -> h
• hu -> w

• As far as tl, this is left unresolved in Yankwik Nawa:tl, and that is a decision we must make now. The choices are: tλ, tl (same as classical orthography), tĺ, tļ, tŀ, tł, ƛ, or λ̷.

My vote would be for λ̷, because it is a single letter (unlike all others except ƛ), and because it can be capitalised (ƛ cannot); when capitalised it looks like Λ̷. However, this might not be such a good solution because it is probably better to limit it to ASCII. Another option is tkl or tlx, however these are inaccurate phonetically. Probably the best option is tλ because even though the second character isn't ASCII, it can be typed easily using HTML character entities. Another possibility is using just λ. If we really need an ASCII solution, we can use something similar to λ instead of λ itself, for example v (capital λ upside down looks like a V).

So my vote is for either tl or v.

--Node ue 01:51, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Node Ue, you said: "It has already been decided. The policy is now to use Yankwik Nawa:tl orthography instead of Nahuatl Classica." Yankwik Nawa:tl is a clear system but may be not quite good to reflect the huge variety of dialectal Nahuatl, and Nahuatl is not yet an engineered language like many standarized ones previously were. Anyway who decided it? -[[User:Piolinfax|Tochpapalotl (Piolinfax)]] 11:40, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This policy has been decided on through e-mail by me and some fluent speakers who have either written some pages or have indicated on this or other pages that they are interested. The reason is because Yankwik Nawa:tl matches the SEA orthography which children are being taught at school and which is standard now, with a couple of exceptions, "tx" instead of "ch" (removal of an unnessecary extra), and using : to indicate long vowels instead of writing the vowel twice to remove ambiguities since in SEA orthography a double vowel is used to indicate both long vowels and two subsequent short vowels. Regarding dialectal Aztec, there *is* a standard which is modeled on the Classical form (not using the same orthography though). --Node ue 05:48, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That sounds interesting. Could you provide more information about it? Maybe it would be a good idea if you selected some relevant bits of your correspondence and added them here (maybe with a link to one subpage of your user's page or something like that). So far, Ken moikwiloa nawatl and/or Yankwik Nawatl seem to be preferable if they are being widely used. Anyway, choosing new spellings not widely used so far (e.g.: the spelling "tx") may be just "adding more noise to the confusing system". Besides, if we follow the policy 1 phoneme (better than one sound) + 1 letter it should be checked if Nahuatl speakers perceive this sound as one or two ("ch" in "chirp" may be perceived by an English speaking person as t+ʃ (en:IPA), but, for example, in Spanish "ch" in "nacho" it is perceived as only one [and actually is not the same the English standard (bi)phoneme; it's c+ʃ (en:IPA, c=palatal oclusive). The same may be true as well for "tz/ts". Do they perceive it as one only consonant or as two consonants put together? If they perceive one, one option would be "c" (as, for example, in Malay) for "ch/tx" and "z" for "tz/ts". Anyway, I don't like my last proposal either, I think that pushing the 1 phoneme = 1 letter policy (which I find to be a basically good one) to the extreme may not be a very useful thing. Personally, I find the using of the semicolon a bit awkward. Probably it would be a better option (when necessary) an easy diacritic that could be found in any Mexican standard keyboard. I don't think it is a good idea creating new spellings when there are already plenty of them (many quite easy and clear) to choose from. Probably is better to follow Ken moikwiloa nawatl and/or Yankwik Nawatl as much as possible- [[User:Piolinfax|Tochpapalotl (Piolinfax)]] 11:36, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I still can't totally understand what the problem with the spelling tl is. Of course it doesn't show a "real pronounciation" but the same happens with the spelling in most of the known languages: only one example(between several probable hundreds); does "ch" sound in Italian, English, Spanish or French like the addition of the typical sound of "c+h" in those languages? No. If I want to learn Welsh and I come across the spelling "ll", I may think that it is pronounced like an "l", like an Spanish "ll", etc. but unless I hear to people pronouncing it (on tapes or otherwise) or I can understand the phonetical guiding from my learning source I shouldn't assume any pronounciation guided by the mere look of it. The same should happen to anyone trying to learn Nahuatl: one should be aware that spelling is just a convention. Trying to change such a stable, easy and traditional option as tl on the phonetic grounds that it is misleading seems to me a little too much. Should we complain about the misleading (for us) spelling of some Inupiaq sounds? What about the misleading English spelling gh or oo. Is misleading that in Polish rz and ż are pronounced the same way? Historical reasosns are important. The spelling tlhappens to be one of the only spellings that seems to have been kept in most of the classical and current written Nahuatl texts (except in many linguistic studies were several phonetic scripts are used) virtually untouched. -[[User:Piolinfax|Tochpapalotl (Piolinfax)]] 19:59, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

As I noted before, an option is to use "tl", but the problem with it is it doesn't fit a principle of 1 letter = 1 sound. Since it is currently used in all daily-use orthographies and the sound can be approximated roughly by a "t" followed by an "l", it is probably not a good idea to drop it but this was suggested by one person in the group. --Node ue 05:48, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

> Anyway who decided it? That's a good question, I can't see where amd by who the 'nawatl' spelling was officially decided. --Mixcoatl 21:59, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have a good question too, do you know any Aztec at all? "Quetzalcoatl and not Kwetsalkoatl" (a quote of yours) indicates an imperfect understanding of the sounds of the language since it would be in YN as "Ketzalkoatl", WITHOUT a w. If it were to be converted as kwe, it would be written in classical orthography as cue, and I would find it hard to believe if you tried to say anybody ever wrote a word "cuetzalcoatl". Regarding loans in general though, why is this of concern if the primary use of orthography is for writing a language in an everyday setting? Speakers of a language should not be concerned about how foreigners have written words borrowed from their language when they write the language in an everyday environment. If this were a worry, many languages would be using very different orthographies today, for example the standard Mandarin romanisation system is now HanYu PinYin (pronounced like Spanish "jáñu pín-in", not "jañu píñin"), but English borrowings such as Tai Chi, Mao Tsetung, Kuomintang, Taipei, Lao Tse, etc. use Wade-Giles romanisation, also for example in Central/Southern Arizona, placenames from O'odham are spelled, for example, "Ak Chin", "On Auk Mor", "San Xavier del Bac", "Gila Bend", and even "Arizona", using different older orthographies (the first one uses Saxton orthography, all the others use much older orthographies, in modern orthography they would be: Ak Cin, Onk Akimel, Va:k Cekṣanĭ ["Cekṣanĭ" means "district", not "San Xavier del"], Hila Vi:n, and Al Ṣon). --Node ue 05:48, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm coming into this discussion a little bit late, but is there a good reason why the first letter of each sentence (and each individual's name, I guess) has to be capitalized? The difference between lowercase and uppercase characters being so marked, you'd think that its use could be better employed than it has it been.

And, for that matter, why use macrons to represent long vowels when you could just as well hold the Shift key down, and capitalize your vowels where you find them, so they come out in uppercase form, in the best and most appropriate place to pronounce them?

And as for the glottal stop, you could always use the backward 'c' character (admittedly not readily displayed in today's HTML-centric internet, but if you are in the habit of writing your own laserprinter fonts - a fairly easy thing to do if you avoid "Windows" like a plague - it's a piece of cake) to represent it. Or you could just use the uppercase H character to represent a glottal stop, and not worry about funny characters that HTML stumbles on.

So, if you want to mark your vowels 'long,' just hold the Shift key down. It is much easier (and that much more attractive) than using a macron, acute, or grave diacritical mark.

[ticpatlaz] Nahuatl source content

Source content from w:James Lockhart's "Nahuatl as Written" is now available on [1]; in particular, at the Nahuatl Main Page. We should probably decide on the right way to translate "Main Page" into Nahuatl, and apply that name both here and there. SJ 19:44, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[ticpatlaz] Administrador y bloqueo

Hola. Veo que no tenemos ningun administrador aquí [2] Alguń voluntario ?. Pienso que necesitamos al menos uno. También propongo que bloqueemos la portada hasta que tengamos más usuarios porque muchas veces se agregan enlaces a sitios feos. Qué opinan ?--Youssefsan 10:01, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Ya tenemos 4 administradores, User:Ricardo gs, User:Battroid, así como 2 stewards User:SJ (el original) y tu servidor, User:Drini. Drini 23:29 5 feb 2007 (UTC)

[ticpatlaz] Wikimedia Election Notice

If you are able, please translate this notice to as many possible languages and post it anywhere applicable.

The Wikimedia Election Committee is accepting candidates for the 2007 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election. Please see [3] for more information.

There is still time for a new candidate to be considered for election, and you may now endorse the candidate of your choice (up to 3 candidates) on the endorsements page, [4]. Please read the instructions carefully prior to endorsing. If you can translate the instructions, please do.

If you have any questions, please contact any member of the election committee, who are listed here [5].

Posted on behalf of the Election Committee,
Philippe

[ticpatlaz] Preparation of Fundraiser 2007

Hi, this is just a first introduction message to tell you: there is more to come. I am dealing with the Project Management of the Fundraiser 2007 and therefore will search for contacts of wikimedians who can help us to do our tasks on all projects. I am actually also building the structure for the fundraiser on Meta. We will need people who help to design buttons, translate texts of buttons, documents, sitenotices etc. Should you feel you want to co-operate please let me know. You can reach me on my meta user page or by e-mail at scretella (at) wikimedia (dot) org. If you wish to notify us that you would like to co-operate on translations, it would be nice if you used e-mail and copied the e-mail to me and Aphaia (aphaia (at) gmail (dot) com). Thank you for your attention and I hope to meet you soon! Cheers :-) -- 4 September 2007 Sabine