Talk:Leti language

Languages High‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indonesia Low‑importance

	Indonesia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I've got van Engelenhoven's book out from the library for another month or so, so if there's anything particular that should be added to this soon would be a good time to point it out. 4pq1injbok (talk) 02:03, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A quarter or a half of the speakers?

In the article I read: "Fewer than 1% of Leti speakers are literate in Leti, though between a quarter and a half are literate in another language.".

I am not quite sure whether this wording is correct or desirable. My first impression was that neither a quarter speaker nor a half speaker could be literate at all, because they are not complete and alive at all.

How about changing the sentence to: "Fewer than 1% of Leti speakers are literate in Leti, though between 25% and 50% of them are literate in another language."?Redav (talk) 15:58, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Redav: I wouldn't have misunderstood the sentence in that manner, but if you feel there is some potential for misunderstanding, your suggested rewording is the perfect solution to it. –Austronesier (talk) 20:11, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does lèta mean language or does lir?

In the article I read: "('lèta language', lèta meaning '(walled) village') and lirkòta ('city language')". It seems that the first mention of 'lèta' given should be changed to 'lir'. Any objections?Redav (talk) 16:09, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Redav: This is a misunderstanding (lir(a) means language), which could be avoided with a different placement of parentheses. I'll change it to make it clearer that lirlèta means "language (= lira) of the lèta ("walled village")", while lirkòta is the "language of the kòta ("city")". –Austronesier (talk) 20:23, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Austronesier: I am afraid lèta is still indicated once as meaning language (and once as meaning walled village). I will change it according to your (understood) intention.Redav (talk) 21:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Redav: I am afraid this is another misunderstanding. lèta is the Leti word for a certain type of village, so "lèta language" stands in contrast to "city language". This is what the original wording (not mine, anyway) intended to say, and which I hoped to have clarified by another pair of parentheses. If you prefer a full parsing of lirlèta, that's fine, but you should then apply it to lirkòta as well for stylistic consistency. –Austronesier (talk) 22:17, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Austronesier: I am not sure with whom you suspect the misunderstanding lies. A fact is that after your - well-intended, I am sure - edit, both lèta were shown as if meaning both language and (walled) villa; it read: "Tutukei itself divides into two sociolects, lirlèta ('lèta language' (lèta meaning '(walled) village')), and lirkòta ('city language')." [bold type Redav] I agree on your suggestion and will edit the text accordingly.Redav (talk) 23:35, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Redav: Well, you have interpreted «..."lèta language"...» as if "language" was the gloss to lèta (which would be the correct reading if it was spelled «...lèta "language"...»), whereas in fact "lèta language" originally was intended as a composite noun like "city language" (thus equivalent to ad hoc-formations like Dutch "lèta-taal", German "Lèta-Sprache etc.). In any case, your choice of "village language" instead of the potentially ambiguous "lèta language" works well, so I will just simplifiy the glosses, and add single quotation marks for consistency with the following paragraph. –Austronesier (talk) 09:21, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Austronesier: 1) I am glad you are keeping our exchange focused on the case and the facts, and are discussing (assumptions about) behaviour in a factual and non-judging way, rather than giving qualifications about the person of your discussion partner. (I have seen otherwise, and did not like it a lot.) 2) I am by no means knowledgeable with respect to Leti, so if you know relevant things I do not (seem to) know, please put them forward. 3) I do, however, seem to be able to spot inconsistencies, (apparent or seeming) contradictions, lacks of congruence, inconsistencies (but see the next sentence), and the like, that I stumble upon. 4) I have to admit that I have had trouble, by whatever cause, to pay attention to the intricacies of quotes and italicized writing in the article. 5) Your latest remarks have spurred me on to use a search engine to find out if indeed lèta means 'village', and I found a 1997 paper by Van Engelenhoven (capitalized Van as per Dutch spelling rules, which seem to apply in this case, certainly if English spelling rules are disregarded) at https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/15966/A.T.P.G.%20van%20Engelenhoven%20-%20Notes%20on%20parallelism%20in%20Leti.pdf?sequence=1 . In that paper lirleti is indeed glossed as 'Leti language', so - disregarding the grave accent - my proposal translation 'village language' should have been replaced by this ... if leti did not also mean 'village', that is. 6) As things turn out to be, though, both the original author of the phrase we have been discussing for a while, and my original interpretation of the word lir(a) as meaning 'language', both seem to be correct, as can be gleaned from another paper by Van Engelenhoven found at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279274343_Lirasniara_the_sung_language_of_Southwest_Maluku_East-Indonesia . 7) But the gloss 'Leti language' for lirleta seems to be equally defendable.Redav (talk) 21:28, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Redav: It is good that you approach this article from a careful non-specialist (i.e. non-specialist in linguistics) viewpoint. For someone who regularly reads linguistic articles, certain conventions appear self-explanatory, such as a) using italics for text in the studied language b) putting glosses in quotation marks c) using italics in glosses whenever an original term remains untranslated (such as lèta). But for the common reader, these are of course not self-explanatory. So this guided cleanup will certainly be to the benefit of our readers. As for my knowledge in the Leti language: I am not an expert at all, I have just done some reading of the relevant lit – Jonker's grammar and of course Aone van Engelenhoven's publications. From what I know: leti and lèta are distinct words. Leti is the name of the island, while lèta can be roughly translated as "village" (cf. footnote 4 in the article you cite at 6: «"village" does not fully encompass the meaning of lèta»); lirleti and lirlèta are thus quite different things. –Austronesier (talk) 22:16, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]