vracaracc
Buduća legenda
- Poruka
- 38.315
Juče je Internacionalna Organizacija za Standardizaciju ISO - radna grupa ISO 639, glasala protiv ubacivanja crnogorskog jezika u svoju listu jezičnih kodova. Library of Congress će poštovati ovu odluku, što znači da će se i dalje koristiti kod srp za srpski jezik kao jezični kod za knjige i časopise koji izlaze na "crnogorskom" jeziku. Nakon nekoliko meseci diskusije ova radna grupa je došla do zaključka da nema potrebe od ubacivanja ovog jezika u listu zvaničnih jezičnih kodova. Na ovom linku http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/codes.asp?order=639_3&letter=a možete videti listu svih kodova sa ISO 639 u tri različite tabele: deo 1, 2 i 3.
Evo sta kaže ISO 639 sta je individualni lezik:
Individual languages
In this part of ISO 639, most identifiers are assumed to denote distinct individual languages. Furthermore, it is a goal for this part of ISO 639 to provide an identifier for every distinct human language that has been documented, whether living, extinct, or constructed, and whether its modality is spoken, written or signed.
There is no one definition of "language" that is agreed upon by all and appropriate for all purposes. As a result, there can be disagreement, even among speakers or linguistic experts, as to whether two varieties represent dialects of a single language or two distinct languages. For this part of ISO 639, judgments regarding when two varieties are considered to be the same or different languages are based on a number of factors, including linguistic similarity, intelligibility, a common literature, the views of speakers concerning the relationship between language and identity, and other factors. The following basic criteria are followed:
Two related varieties are normally considered varieties of the same language if speakers of each variety have inherent understanding of the other variety (that is, can understand based on knowledge of their own variety without needing to learn the other variety) at a functional level.
Where spoken intelligibility between varieties is marginal, the existence of a common literature or of a common ethnolinguistic identity with a central variety that both understand can be strong indicators that they should nevertheless be considered varieties of the same language.
Where there is enough intelligibility between varieties to enable communication, the existence of well-established distinct ethnolinguistic identities can be a strong indicator that they should nevertheless be considered to be different languages.
Some of the distinctions made on this basis may not be considered appropriate by some users or for certain applications. These basic criteria are thought to best fit the intended range of applications for this standard.
Ovde negde se verovatno krije i glavni razlog zasto crnogorski jezik nije dobio svoj jezični kod.
Evo sta kaže ISO 639 sta je individualni lezik:
Individual languages
In this part of ISO 639, most identifiers are assumed to denote distinct individual languages. Furthermore, it is a goal for this part of ISO 639 to provide an identifier for every distinct human language that has been documented, whether living, extinct, or constructed, and whether its modality is spoken, written or signed.
There is no one definition of "language" that is agreed upon by all and appropriate for all purposes. As a result, there can be disagreement, even among speakers or linguistic experts, as to whether two varieties represent dialects of a single language or two distinct languages. For this part of ISO 639, judgments regarding when two varieties are considered to be the same or different languages are based on a number of factors, including linguistic similarity, intelligibility, a common literature, the views of speakers concerning the relationship between language and identity, and other factors. The following basic criteria are followed:
Two related varieties are normally considered varieties of the same language if speakers of each variety have inherent understanding of the other variety (that is, can understand based on knowledge of their own variety without needing to learn the other variety) at a functional level.
Where spoken intelligibility between varieties is marginal, the existence of a common literature or of a common ethnolinguistic identity with a central variety that both understand can be strong indicators that they should nevertheless be considered varieties of the same language.
Where there is enough intelligibility between varieties to enable communication, the existence of well-established distinct ethnolinguistic identities can be a strong indicator that they should nevertheless be considered to be different languages.
Some of the distinctions made on this basis may not be considered appropriate by some users or for certain applications. These basic criteria are thought to best fit the intended range of applications for this standard.
Ovde negde se verovatno krije i glavni razlog zasto crnogorski jezik nije dobio svoj jezični kod.
..jer ja prvi ne razumem Peškova lupetanja.....
.pazi na sjebe..
.da se ne sjebeš......
