John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:
"Bihari" and "Himachali"Probably. It was the 639-3 analysis (in fact, Peter Constable's) who showed that these names represented not languages but collections. See http://www.ethnologue.com/14/show_iso639.asp?code=bih and http://www.ethnologue.com/14/show_iso639.asp?code=him for details. This set of URLs is an excellent set of resources showing the (sometimes obsolete) 639-3 view of various 639-2 codes.
Excellent they are. Among other things, they show those of us who don't know Indian languages that the "-i" ending in "Bihari" and "Himachali" essentially means "languages." This implies that any proposal to change these descriptions to "Bihari languages" and "Himachali languages" should first be reviewed by the Subcommittee on Redundancy Subcommittee.
-- Doug Ewell * Arvada, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://www.ewellic.org http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.