217.235.208.116 (talk) No edit summary |
Derek Ross (talk | contribs) How to get your viewpoint (ie "THE TRUTH") added to this article. |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Jniemenmaa: PLease DO NOT REVERT THIS PAGE. CAN't you tolerate the truth? PLease read below. |
|||
Grunt |
|||
== Version of the family tree == |
== Version of the family tree == |
||
The following tree was recently added to [[Uralic languages]]. I moved it here, for incorporation by experts. |
The following tree was recently added to [[Uralic languages]]. I moved it here, for incorporation by experts. |
||
Line 94: | Line 91: | ||
:: This is a brutal way, used by people, who use their fists ar arguments. |
:: This is a brutal way, used by people, who use their fists ar arguments. |
||
::: I agree with you. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
|||
However it is not necessarily the best way nor particularly in accordance with the Neutral Point Of View. If there is or has been any academic support for the viewpoint being expressed by (217.235.200.226 and 217.235.199.203), then they should give a reference for it. |
However it is not necessarily the best way nor particularly in accordance with the Neutral Point Of View. If there is or has been any academic support for the viewpoint being expressed by (217.235.200.226 and 217.235.199.203), then they should give a reference for it. |
||
:: I am arguing, using simple arguments, that any person can understand. |
:: I am arguing, using simple arguments, that any person can understand. |
||
::: That is not enough. You must also be arguing for a view which other people besides yourself hold. Wikipedia is not a place for personal theories. It only accepts theories which have been described elsewhere by someone notable. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
|||
Their view can then be incorporated in the article by attributing it to those who espouse it. Even if the theory has been shown to be false, that fact can be incorporated into the article along with the reference to the Helsinki University website. That is what it means for an article to be written from the Neutral Point Of View: it's supposed to show all viewpoints if there are two or more. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 08:04, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
Their view can then be incorporated in the article by attributing it to those who espouse it. Even if the theory has been shown to be false, that fact can be incorporated into the article along with the reference to the Helsinki University website. That is what it means for an article to be written from the Neutral Point Of View: it's supposed to show all viewpoints if there are two or more. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 08:04, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
||
:: I argue, you just delete (revert) my argumentation. Is this the way you are arguing? |
:: I argue, you just delete (revert) my argumentation. Is this the way you are arguing? |
||
::: I have never deleted your argumentation. Why do you say that I have ? However from now on I will move personal comments to this talk page because they do not belong in the article. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
|||
Note particularly that the Helsinki University article states that "Seriously speaking, these answers represent the so-called Finnish mainstream Finno-Ugristics." which suggests that there are alternative non-mainstream viewpoints to which, no doubt, (217.235.200.226 and 217.235.199.203) belong. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 08:11, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
Note particularly that the Helsinki University article states that "Seriously speaking, these answers represent the so-called Finnish mainstream Finno-Ugristics." which suggests that there are alternative non-mainstream viewpoints to which, no doubt, (217.235.200.226 and 217.235.199.203) belong. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 08:11, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
||
:If you want to you could edit the additions into something more NPOV. I couldn't find anything useful about this theory through Google. Most hits were about |
:If you want to you could edit the additions into something more NPOV. I couldn't find anything useful about this theory through Google. Most hits were about Hungarian being related to Sumerian. -- [[User:Jniemenmaa|Jniemenmaa]] 09:24, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
||
:::Not everything can be found on Google. It may be necessary to do some library research on this topic to discover whther this is a valid minority viewpoint. In the meantime we should give it the benefit of the doubt. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
|||
::Not only related, but identical. Antropologically and in language, too. Also identical to Skythas, Huns, Awars. |
::Not only related, but identical. Antropologically and in language, too. Also identical to Skythas, Huns, Awars. |
||
Line 118: | Line 123: | ||
::Please avoid the enumeration of url-s and books. Two simple questions- two simple answers. Thank you. |
::Please avoid the enumeration of url-s and books. Two simple questions- two simple answers. Thank you. |
||
I find it somewhat disgusting, that grunt reverts the page in 5 minutes after editing. Cannot Grunt bear arguments? Is grunt really so primitive? :-(( |
I find it somewhat disgusting, that grunt reverts the page in 5 minutes after editing. Cannot Grunt bear arguments? Is grunt really so primitive? :-(( -- Anonymous editor |
||
⚫ | |||
:The above comments are simple insults. How do they help to improve the article ? Wikipedia requires contributors to be civil to each other. If you wish to have fun insulting people, please contribute to UseNet. On the other hand if you wish to have your view added to Wikipedia, please read the article on the [[Neutral Point Of View]] and on [[WikiLove]] to see how to do it in an acceptable manner. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross | Talk]] 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ |
Revision as of 20:54, 11 November 2004
Version of the family tree
The following tree was recently added to Uralic languages. I moved it here, for incorporation by experts.
- Uralic languages (was: Finno-Ugric)
- Samoyed
- Forest Nenets - 2,000
- Enets (obsolete: Yenisei Samoyed) - very few
- Nganasan (obsolete:Tavgi) - 1,000
- Selkup (obsolete: Ostyak Samoyed) - 1,700
- Kamass (extinct since 1989)
- Ugrian
- Khanty (obsolete: Ostyak) - 13,000
- Mansi (obsolete: Vogul) - 3,000
- Hungarian -14.5 millions
- Finnic
- Permian-Finnic
- Komi - 350,000
- Permyak or Permian Komi
- Komi (obsolete: Zyryan)
- Udmurt (obsolete: Votyak) - 500,000
- Komi - 350,000
- Volga-Finnic
- Mordvin
- Erzya - 500,000
- Moksha - 250,000
- Mari (obsolete: Cheremis)
- Meadow Mari - 500,000
- Hill Mari - 42,000
- Mordvin
- Lapp
- South Sámi - 500
- Ume Sámi
- Pite Sámi
- Lule Sámi - 2,000
- Kemi Sámi (extincted)
- North Sámi - 30,000
- Skolt Sámi - 500
- Akkala Sámi
- Ter Sámi - 500
- Baltic-Finnic
- Livonian - very few
- Estonian - 1 million
- Votian (or Vote) - very few
- Finnish - 5.5 million
- Ingrian - 300
- Karelian
- Karelian Proper - 35,000
- Lude (may be a dialect of Karelian) - 5,000
- Olonetsian or Livvi - 25,000
- Vepsian or Veps - 6,000
- Permian-Finnic
- Samoyed
Mikkalai 20:04, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
I extended the thread. Information Centre of Finno-Ugric Peoples omit grouping Permian-Finnic, Volga-Finnic, Lapp and Baltic-Finnic under the same group (Finnic) as this three does. // Rogper 19:11, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Paragraph moved from Finnic
Maybe the following ought to be put in this article?
- There is an old beliefe that there have been a proto-Finnic-Samic language group much like an artificial proto-Germanic group, but recent research shows it is not necessary, just like the proto-Germanic case.
/M.L.
- Maybe this could be elaborated a little, like why the idea was abandoned (Kalevi Wiik, diffusion theory etc)? --Oop 21:24, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
Why was this moved?
Why was this moved to Finno-Ugric language from Finno-Ugric languages? None of the other language groups at Language_families_and_languages seem to be in the singular. -- Jniemenmaa 09:09, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Maybe that wasn't one of the wiser things I've done here, but I believe Wikipedia to have a preference for singular in titles, and also that North Germanic language have been in the singular for some time, at least[1].
I agree that a title in the plural would seem motivated for article covering a group of languages.
--Ruhrjung 13:51, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I've studied Estonian philology for years and I have never heard about the 'Finno-Ugric language' in singular. It is a group entity and should be in plural. Nowadays, most people don't even postulate the hypothetical protolanguage any more, so this looks like having 'pant' instead of 'pants'. --Oop 21:21, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
Finno-Ugric legend
Dear Editor, Please do not revert this page. There is NO Finno-ugric language group, and this fact should be pointed out. If you think, there exists such a group, please argue. Deletion of pages will not make false things true. Thank you.
Explanation: I'd like to point out, that he Finno-Ugric legend was founded in the 18-th century by non-Hungarian, non-Finnic and non-Estonian people. Since the languages, artifically put into this group, have very few similar words, and the grammar is also quite different, except the agglutination, which is also characteristic for Basque, Etruskian, Sumerian, Turkish, Armenian, Persian and other languages, this proves, that this language group does not exist in reality. This is a non existing, pseudo-scientifical, phantasy language group.
No "finno-ugric" university faculty professor could answer the simple question, what is common in this "group" except agglutination, that is also part of Basque, Etruskian, Sumerian, Turkish, Armenian, Persian, etc... Therefore this group is a non-existent group, result of malevolous phantasy and pseudo-scientific fraud. -- 217.235.200.226 and 217.235.199.203
- Well, according to [2] The linguistic kinship of the Finno-Ugric peoples was discovered by János Sajnovics (1733–1785), a Hungarian scholar, at the end of the 18th century.
- Sajnovits was an astronom. Christian, the Danish king invited him to lappland. He found the lappic people sympathetic, and wrote a rather stupid study, in that he tries to prove, that lappic is very similar to Hungarian. He wanted to help the Lapps with that, and he caused immense damage to Hungary and the whole sdcience. However, probably, he did not know, that this would be taken ever seriously. He lists for example 110 "similar words". Some lappic endings are similar to Hungarian, and if he found one "similar" word, with the "similar endings he extended each word to ten ones.
Also see [3] and the heading "Is it true that "the theories about Finno-Ugrian language relationship have been shown to be false"?"-- Jniemenmaa 07:43, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Deleting this opposing view is one way to go about writing this article.
- This is a brutal way, used by people, who use their fists ar arguments.
- I agree with you. -- Derek Ross | Talk 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
However it is not necessarily the best way nor particularly in accordance with the Neutral Point Of View. If there is or has been any academic support for the viewpoint being expressed by (217.235.200.226 and 217.235.199.203), then they should give a reference for it.
- I am arguing, using simple arguments, that any person can understand.
- That is not enough. You must also be arguing for a view which other people besides yourself hold. Wikipedia is not a place for personal theories. It only accepts theories which have been described elsewhere by someone notable. -- Derek Ross | Talk 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
Their view can then be incorporated in the article by attributing it to those who espouse it. Even if the theory has been shown to be false, that fact can be incorporated into the article along with the reference to the Helsinki University website. That is what it means for an article to be written from the Neutral Point Of View: it's supposed to show all viewpoints if there are two or more. -- Derek Ross | Talk 08:04, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
- I argue, you just delete (revert) my argumentation. Is this the way you are arguing?
- I have never deleted your argumentation. Why do you say that I have ? However from now on I will move personal comments to this talk page because they do not belong in the article. -- Derek Ross | Talk 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
Note particularly that the Helsinki University article states that "Seriously speaking, these answers represent the so-called Finnish mainstream Finno-Ugristics." which suggests that there are alternative non-mainstream viewpoints to which, no doubt, (217.235.200.226 and 217.235.199.203) belong. -- Derek Ross | Talk 08:11, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
- If you want to you could edit the additions into something more NPOV. I couldn't find anything useful about this theory through Google. Most hits were about Hungarian being related to Sumerian. -- Jniemenmaa 09:24, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Not everything can be found on Google. It may be necessary to do some library research on this topic to discover whther this is a valid minority viewpoint. In the meantime we should give it the benefit of the doubt. -- Derek Ross | Talk 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
- Not only related, but identical. Antropologically and in language, too. Also identical to Skythas, Huns, Awars.
- I do not doubt at all the similarity of Hungarian to Finnish and Estonian. Due to the agglutination there are clear similarities. BUT: the same similarity exists between Hungarian, Basque, Turkish, Sumeric, Armenian, Persian, etc... Therefore the existence of a finnougric group is a pure phantasy-child.
- If you believe, that there is a finnougric group, please answer the following 2 simple questions:
- 1. What are the similarities in the finnougric group by in words and grammar? Please only such identical words and grammatic rules (except agglutination), that are identical in ALL languages. No Finnish-Estonian similarities, also no Mari-Nenetz-xyz or whatever.
- 2. If you found the answer to question 1: What are the DIFFERENCES between Finnougric group and the Turkish language group? (except the words).
- Please avoid the enumeration of url-s and books. Two simple questions- two simple answers. Thank you.
I find it somewhat disgusting, that grunt reverts the page in 5 minutes after editing. Cannot Grunt bear arguments? Is grunt really so primitive? :-(( -- Anonymous editor
- The above comments are simple insults. How do they help to improve the article ? Wikipedia requires contributors to be civil to each other. If you wish to have fun insulting people, please contribute to UseNet. On the other hand if you wish to have your view added to Wikipedia, please read the article on the Neutral Point Of View and on WikiLove to see how to do it in an acceptable manner. -- Derek Ross | Talk 20:54, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
Same about Hippophaë. No diskussion just revert. Why? Primitiveness? Malevolence? -- Anonymous editor