Talk:Langues d'oïl

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 09:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I think this should be moved back to "Langues d'Oïl". It's the term (even in English) that I have seen more frequently.

A google search reveals 28,700 hits for "Langues d'Oïl", and only about 15k for "Oïl languages". Furthermore, "Oil Languages" is a misspelling.

Anyone oppose? The Jade Knight 01:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

This page used to be at Oïl languages. We also have the fairly superfluous List of Oïl languages. I was (and still am) quite content with Oïl languages, as that's what I say in English myself. What I do not say in English is Oil languages - not only a misspelling but a mispronunciation. Man vyi 07:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

And, of course, this page is still in Category:Oïl languages! Man vyi 11:28, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, the argument that diacritics are not used in English (and so that therefore the Oïl languages should be renamed in English Wikipedia) hardly stands up when one looks at:

• Franco-Provençal language
• Provençal language
• Niçard
• Māori language
• Mócheno language
• Pfälzisch language
• Na-Dené languages
• Bokmål
• Meänkieli
• Võro language
• Luiseño language
• etc

Man vyi 11:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Let alone words like "naïve" and "fiancé". The Jade Knight 19:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Okay but ...

I made the same search for Langues d'Oïl and many of the results were in French so I'm not sure your conclusions are accurate.

It is a shame that people are starting to use diacritics in English because English is one of the few languages that uses the Latin alphabet without diacritics. Yet they are starting to creep in. For example, the American Heritage dictionary now says "Noël" is the preferred variant of Noel. The etymology says it was spelled "Noel" in Middle English. In French it is spelled "Noël." I see little reason to start using diacritics in English other than to impress. However, the term Oil Languages is misleading so I reluctantly concede this point but only when referring to other languages as all your Wikipedia examples do. I think "naive" and "fiance" are fine without the pretension of diacritics.Tim Q. Wells 20:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Diacritics in names are not pretentious (although let's make an exception for self-conscious typographic tomfoolery like Mötley Crüe, but then Wikipedia accepts it because that's the name of the band). But that aside, do we now have consensus for returning the article to any of:

1. Oïl languages
2. Langues d'oïl
3. Langues d'Oïl
4. Oïl language family
5. another option (non-oily)? Man vyi 22:32, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Borrowed words into English regularly retain diacritics. This certainly makes much more sense from an orthographic point of view. I am actually of the opposite opinion of your own, Tim Q. Wells, and it bothers me (from a pronunciation standpoint) to see "fiancé" spelled without the accented "é". Italisize borrowed words, if you like, but at least spell them correctly.

Back to the task at hand, a google search of "'Oil languages'" offers less than 600 results (almost in all cases it appears to be the acronym OIL, as in ontology interface layer). Clearly this is non-standard usage, even in English. Again, searching google, "'langue d'oïl' -daml" results in 49,100 English results. "'Oïl language' -daml" results in less than 11,000 English results, and "'Oil language' -daml" in less than 700 English results. I suggest we use what is clearly more common (Langue/Langues d'oïl). As for whether or not to capitalize the O, I do not know, and do not particularly care. The Jade Knight 01:06, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

"'Language of Oïl' -daml" actually seems to be the least common form of this term, yielding 265 English hits on Google. Google is usually a pretty good indicator of usage. The Jade Knight 19:12, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Languages of Oïl → Langues d'Oïl – It is inconsistent with other articles whose titles are about language groups. (copied from the entry on the WP:RM page)

[edit] Voting

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

• Support. Despite being in principle against non-English titles and diacritic creep, Langues d'Oïl seems to be the correct title. A pure English title would be the somewhat confusing "Yes Languages." LuiKhuntek 19:01, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Tim Q. Wells 19:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support with one proviso: "Langues d'oïl" (uncapitalized) appears to be near-universal. I suggest we go with the lowercase form for this reason. The Jade Knight 01:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 10:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC) - as for caps or lower case - go with most common usage.
• Support I studied French for 8 years and I've always found Langues d'oïl. GhePeU 10:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support "Langues d'oïl" - with the diacritic and a lowercase "o". Saintamh 22:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support (agreeing with JK and Saintamh) Tamfang 06:26, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

"Language of Oïl"? Is that what is spoken at OPEC?

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.