Re: [Ltru] "X" vs. 'X (macrolanguage)"

["Mark Davis" <mark.davis at icu-project.org>]

Sorry. What I mean is, when you look at the list I sent out, there are lots of duplicate names, like Mari, Konkani, Kare, etc. Some of those have macrolanguage relationships (like Mari), and some don't (like Ainu). There are 4 possible classes of duplicates:

1. They have no genetic relationship, thus there is no macrolanguage (Ainu)
2. They have a genetic relationship, but neither was in 639-2, so there is no need for a macrolanguage (Tonga?)
3. They have a genetic relationship, and one was in 639-2, so there is a macrolanguage (Mari)
4. They have a genetic relationship, and one was in 639-2, so one of them should be a macrolanguage but isn't. (??)

I wanted confirmation that #4 was empty.

Mark

On Dec 8, 2007 11:35 AM, Peter Constable < petercon at microsoft.com> wrote:

You're going to need to clarify that question for me to understand what you have in mind.

 

Peter

 

From: mark.edward.davis at gmail.com [mailto:mark.edward.davis at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 11:31 AM
To: Peter Constable
Cc: Doug Ewell; LTRU Working Group

Subject: Re: [Ltru] "X" vs. 'X (macrolanguage)"

 

I suspected as much. Is that the case for all the other duplicates that have one of them defined in 639-2?

Mark

On Dec 8, 2007 11:24 AM, Peter Constable < petercon at microsoft.com> wrote:

It is coincidental that an Altaic language spoken in China and an unrelated isolate language spoken in China both happen to have "Ainu" as their English name.

 

Peter

-- 
Mark
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru