Talk:Nahatʼeʼiitsoh bikéyahdę́ę́ʼ biyázhí neiyéhé

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Eirikr in topic RFV discussion: April 2021–February 2022
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RFV discussion: April 2021–February 2022[edit]

Latest comment: 2 years ago15 comments6 people in discussion

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

Navajo names for various animal neologisms

I have brought up an RFV entry similar to this just for Navajo names for foreign canids (archived at Talk:mąʼii bikʼiizgi hadzíjiní and Talk:mąʼii bighą́ąʼgi hadzíjiní).

more to come as I find them... --Корсикэн-Уара (юзэр толк) 20:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Okay, here's more:

That's just the mammals. Birds will have to be a separate RFV... --Корсикэн-Уара (юзэр толк) 14:52, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

User:Corsicanwarrah This section was so massive it literally caused a module error from all the template usage it added. How do you expect humans to follow up on all of these? Chuck Entz (talk) 15:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
What about starting with the attestion of any of these? If the first is attested, the provided source might attest more. And then one could also ask for better RFVs like asking for an additional "and this term is not in source". — This unsigned comment was added by 2003:DE:3724:7F03:8D93:2892:3262:F0F0 (talk) at 11:43, 24 April 2021 (UTC).Reply
  • As has come up before, 1) Navajo is an WT:LDL, with very little in print, and extremely limited resources available online; 2) the largest online corpus is probably the NV WP; 3) one of the most active admins and editors there has self-reported in the past as a second-language speaker of Navajo with community ties to other speakers (User:Seb az86556, see also thread at Talk:nahatʼeʼii); 4) no one involved in the recent EN Wikt discussions of the Navajo terms speaks the language.
None of us are equipped to make any sensible judgment on the validity of these terms. We can research whether these terms appear online, and whether they appear in whatever print media to hand. However, as non-speakers, we are unlikely to know where else to look. In the past, Μετάknowledge mentioned Young and Morgan, whose descriptions of Navajo were some of the seminal works describing the language in depth in English; I note that their works are decades old, and much has changed in the meantime. Our stated goal is to document language as it is actually used, but none of us know enough to say.
I am deeply concerned at any wide-scale removal of Navajo entries without at least involving someone who speaks Navajo. Move them to an appendix if you must, but I cannot support just deleting them when we do so from a place of ignorance. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
Eirikr, why are you pinging me if you're going to continue ignoring both me and the CFI? We already went over this at Talk:mąʼii bikʼiizgi hadzíjiní. You already know that this isn't about "validity", but about attestation, and you know that the creators of Navajo Wikipedia have been open about their practices in coining new terms to describe organisms which had not before been written about in Navajo. We don't have an appendix for protologisms any more, and I don't see the point in creating a new one just for Navajo. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Μετάknowledge, I actually don't know "that the creators of Navajo Wikipedia have been open about their practices in coining new terms to describe organisms which had not before been written about in Navajo". If you have a link to a discussion where the Navajo Wikipedia editors say as much, I'm all ears, as it were. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:18, 28 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Eirikr: I'm really taken aback that you didn't know that, after years of discussions. Just look at w:nv:Choyoołʼįįhí bichʼįʼ yáshtiʼ:Stephen G. Brown/archive3, where you can see Stephen coin the word Mííanmáa, where Seb is happily surprised to discover that łeeyiʼ bitiiní, which he had thought he coined (he says "I pulled that out of my arm") and turns out to be attested, and other adventures in coining terms for nv.wiki. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:33, 29 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the link. I haven't had had occasion to view Stephen's NV WP page much (perhaps ever?), so this is not anything I've previously been aware of.
I'm disappointed in what I see there. I would hope for, and had mistakenly understood that there was, more dialog with members of the Navajo-speaking community, reaching out and asking folks what things are called, rather than non-native speakers deciding by themselves what might parse well.
In light of this new (to me) information, I withdraw my opposition and strike my comment above. Thank you again @Μετάknowledge for the link. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Metaknowledge, Eirikr, Stephen G. Brown: So just nuke everything? I've googled some of them and gotten nothing but Wiki projects and mirrors. The link posted by Metaknowledge is pretty damning evidence that they're just making stuff up over at that Wiki. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 00:19, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • @Fytcha: Considering that some of these might actually be attestable (like the łeeyiʼ bitiiní example that Meta mentions above), I'm not sure if the "nuke them from orbit" approach would be appropriate. That said, I recognize that it's a lot to go through, and we (the EN Wikt community) currently lack in Navajo-language expertise. I'm not sure how best to proceed. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:58, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • @Fytcha: You can nuke everything. Contrary to what Eirikr said, this list was compiled by hand based on looking for animal names that wouldn't be known to Navajo people and then checking them against Google, so the vole example doesn't apply here (and isn't in the list). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Μετάknowledge, thank you for the clarification. @Fytcha, nuke away.  :) ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:05, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

RFV-failed. Well that was boring. @Metaknowledge I also suggest having a quick look at the entries chʼosh bikágí ntłʼizí, Shádiʼááhdę́ę́ʼ atsátsoh, hakʼaz ayání bighaaʼ as well as the derived terms in bitseeʼ, shash, łóóʼtsoh, łéʼétsoh bitsiiʼ, dootłʼizh, dlǫ́ʼii, yiyání. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 01:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Re: hakʼaz ayání bighaaʼ (“muskox wool”), that's arguably SOP anyway, as hakʼaz ayání (“muskox”, already deleted as an apparent neologism) + bighaaʼ (“(its) wool”). ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)Reply


Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nahatʼeʼiitsoh_bikéyahdę́ę́ʼ_biyázhí_neiyéhé&oldid=65760939"