Talk:Linguistic purism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Languages, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, and easy-to-use resource about languages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
There is no such thing as High Icelandic. While there may be people who have personal enthusiasms for removing all foreign words from Icelandic, there is no popular movement to do so. There is an established language council that ensures Icelandic remains distinct and most foreign words are modified in Icelandic without a purist movement. There are no books or regular publications made in High Icelandic and it is not taught in any schools.
[edit] Other forms
Should the "Other forms" be listed here at all? Judging from the article's history, it seems that they go back to Jozef Braekmans (User:Timburhelgi), who also seems to have invented them. Considering Wikipedia's No Original Research and Neutral Point Of View policies, and also considering that these terms do not seem to be used by anyone except Jozef Braekmans (and possibly his followers), I'd say that they don't belong in the article at all.
Thoughts? -- Schnee (cheeks clone) 02:58, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
- Go ahead and remove them, the worst thing that can happen is that User:Timurhelgi aka nl:User:Maximiliaan aka User:Fronkrakki aka a few anonymous IP's threatens you with death Special:Contributions/Fronkrakki... It is indeed Original Reseach, his own invention and a word he invented himself, so it should be removed from this article... --LimoWreck 13:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, one of the big things missing from this page is any coverage of the social expression of purism. There's no mention of purist groups and movements, the extent to which purism is official or unofficial, the whole sociology of purism. So, I don't think that High Icelandic is out of place because it doesn't belong, but because it's part of a side of the topic which isn't addressed. --Pfold 13:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I found the term 'regressive purism' on the following page. The term does exists. http://inet.dpb.dpu.dk/infodok/sprogforum/Espr19/Jogvan.pdf (see page 42 at the top of the page) And since High Icelandic is accepted by the Icelandic wiki community, ultrapurism exist and should be mentioned.
[edit] Icelandic never died
I'm surprised to see Icelandic categorized as "Archaizing purism" along with sanskrit, in my mind it would be closer to patriotism category. What is the basis behind that classification? --Stalfur 16:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
