Talk:Yucatec Maya language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Mesoamerica, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, its civilizations, history, accomplishments and other topics. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.

Resources and guidelines for editing Mesoamerica-related articles:

NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritising and managing its workload.

Start

This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.

High

This article has been rated as high-importance on the Project's importance scale.

WikiProject Mesoamerica priority open tasks: (click "show" to expand)

	This article is part of WikiProject Central America, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to the Central America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Move proposal (Aug 2006)

An article rename is proposed for this page and a number of other Mayan language articles. Please see and comment at the centralised discussion for these at Talk:Mayan languages.--cjllw | TALK 05:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Per the consensus arrived at (see link to talk above), this article now moved to ALMG orthography, Yukatek.--cjllw | TALK 09:04, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Move and move back, 24 December 2006

As the page was moved to "Yucatec Maya language" without discussion nor consensus, I have moved it back. -- Infrogmation 18:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I did that, sorry if it broke norms. I thought that since there was no particular discussion, the relevant norm was WP:BOLD. I still think the move is the right idea, but I am definitely sorry, Infrogmation, if I rained on your yuletide.

So: let's discuss this. First: Infrogmation, do you have a specific opinion about this move, or were you reacting to the improper way it was carried out? If you do think it's a bad idea, please explain why?

Yes, my chief objection and the reason for the revert was due to the fact that there was no discussion here first, and that the previous dicussion above favored the "Yukatek" title. If there is consensus to move it back, I do not object. I request we give it a week to see if anyone else cares to comment; I believe CJLLW who was an important contributor is on an internet break for the hollidays. No need for major apologies, but in the future, explaining the reason for a proposed page move on the talk page and giving time for replies is a good policy (except in the case of an obvious typo). Cheers, -- Infrogmation 04:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

OK. Just in case my new years resolution is "no more wikipedia" I should explain that you didn't totally fix my move, the usage and text over at Mayan languages still favors Yucatec, so whatever is resolved a week from now should be applied there too. --Homunq 15:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Then, here's the relevant discussion from Talk:Mayan languages...

Changing back Yukatek to Yucatec

I needed to comment on the switch from "Yucatec" to "Yukatek". I studied and speak Yucatec Maya (as a scholar, but not a native speaker). However, I have lived and worked with the Maya people for nearly two decades. And I must say that this Wiki-Meso decision to switch to the modern revisionist Guatemalan spelling is surprising. I fully understand if a linguist would like to "purify" the spellings in their own articles. But for an encyclopedia, isn't the goal not to "break new ground" but to "inform the public"? All modern Yucatec speakers who know how to read or write use the "C" for non-glottalized consonant and the "k" for the glottalized consonant. Yucatec has two non-glottalized consonants, and therefore should be spelled with the letter "C". But, honestly, let's forget the details (which I would gladly provide more of). The hundreds of thousands of Maya who are now going online and getting higher educations... They did not go to the conference in Guatemala where someone decided to re-define how they should write their language. Please remember - their health education pamphlets, their government documents, the signs that tell them about their own past at all archaeological sites, and heck, EVEN THEIR OWN NAMES are written with the standard orthography (C not K in "Yucatan"). To allow such a revision in an encyclopedic resource would be to say that Wikipedia supports the complete revision of their current and living orthography. This is not just an academic issue. It is a cultural issue. Allow Wikipedia to be accessible to all. It is not the proper place for radical revisions of entire languages. Chunchucmil 04:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I did not know that the practice was different for Yucatec and that both c and k was used. Now that you say that for Yucatec the k represents the ejective you convince me that although it will be somewhat of a mess to change back all the links we should do it. Do you know anything a bout the orthography used for wastek? I know that it is also not governed by ALMG but that both spellings exist - is there any considerations towards the speakers them selves that would suggest using one over the other?Maunus 04:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I can say that the switch was made without the kind of input you're giving here. Based on what you say - and given that I'd bet Yucatec is the language with the highest literacy rate (percentage or absolute) of any of them - I have no reservations in switching it back, and even adding some of this info to the article. --Homunq 05:25, 24 December 2006 (UTC) ps. If you have any other Yucatec perspective to add to the article - particularly the Literature section - that would be great.

OK, this change is done. This needs to go into the map and tree, but Madman, I suggest you wait a week to see if anyone squeals. --Homunq 06:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

You were a little quick to do that Homunq. There are a whole bunch of redirects to the Yukatek Maya language page I hope you have time to start fixing those as well (I don't at the moment and will not have much time for editing untill after new year). Chunchumil: I hope you will read the article through and add anything you find missing and suggest changes and additions where they may be necessary -TRhe past weeks we have worked towards bettering the page a great deal but the more with a knowledge of Mayan working on the page the betterMaunus 06:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I hadn't been here for a week - didn't notice until after that the discussion was only hours old. But I fixed the double-redirects, and the article itself (which actually had one "Yukatec" as it was). There are 22 pages that go directly to Yukatek Maya Language and 19 that go directly to Yucatec Maya Language; most of the redirects are Yucatec something not Yukatek something; and Google gives exactly 10 times the hits for Yucatec as for Yukatek (225000 vs 22400); so I feel that this change is not as hasty or as messy as it may have seemed.--Homunq 13:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

This morning (yes, this is what I'm doing on X-mas eve - my family is rolling their eyes at my stack of books while they watch x-mas movies) I just pulled down all of my books to re-check common usage on Maya spellings, and found a good summary of how I think this project should best proceed. Bear with me... Maya signage and common literature (such as health brochures, religious pamphlets and bibles) do still use the "c" vs "k" convention, as does one of my phrase books, and two colonial dictionaries. However, most of my modern scholarly dictionaries have generally agreed to use the K vs K’ spellings agreed upon in the "Cordemex" (edited by Alfredo Barrera Vasquez), including the latest dictionary published by the University of Yucatan. Now, the question is… which to use in Wikipedia? I personally think the best rationale was put forth in the introduction to John Montgomery’s Maya phrasebook. He uses the new standardized spellings (K and K’) for vocabulary entries, except for all place names and proper nouns. For these, he conforms to the spellings that have dominated the literature for over a century. This same rationale is also expressed in the U. of Yucatan publication (notice they didn’t change the name of their state or their university, just because they revised the spelling of “dog”). Otherwise, we would need to change the names of villages, towns and cities, archaeological sites, and even peoples’ names (which obviously would be extreme).

Thus, I suggest Wikipedia use spellings such as Yucatan and Yucatec Maya and Dzibilchaltun as opposed to the revised Ts’ibilchaltun. Since most of the time Wikipedia authors be using proper nouns as headings (not writing the articles themselves in Maya), revised spellings will not be necessary for most entries. Remember, users will be looking up words in Wiki that they see in other sources like archaeological textbooks and Lonely Planet guide books. These sources have all kept the original orthographic conventions, because they are place names and other proper nouns. Chunchucmil 13:33, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

My excuse is that my family is still asleep :) (except my 2-year-old daughter, who is feeding me play-doh tortillas with avocado and salt). I added a note summarizing your analysis above to the writing systems section - if you could add the reference of the U of Yucatan dictionary there, that would be great. --Homunq 14:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reversed C

It is requested that an image be included in this article to improve its quality, if possible. This image request is for Yucatec text with a reversed C.

Cen we see a piece of text with that reversed C? Is it in Unicode?

It is — U+2180 ↄ LATIN SMALL LETTER REVERSED C — albeit for a different purpose (see Claudian letters). --Ptcamn 10:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the Claudian letters article says that we are not sure of how Claudius designed them.

Looking around I find at the Yucatán Uni:

Sergio Quezada, Papeles y Documentos del Linaje Xiu, 1580-1780, 1996, 175 Págs.

[...]La versión paleográfica de los textos mayas se realizó respetando su ortografía original, las puntuaciones y la división de los párrafos originales. No obstante, modificamos las siguientes grafías que fueron adaptados por los frailes españoles a la fonología maya: ch herida (ch), p herida (p) y c invertida ( ), que representan las fonemas /ch'/, /p'/ y /tz'/ respectivamente, son escritas como: cb', p' y dz. [...]la conjunción maya: yetel que casi siempre aparece como y herida.

I don't know what herida means in this context. It would be good to mention these forms and show some samples of old Maya text.

The Arte of Pedro Beltrán mentions ç and h with stroke. It seems it has been transcribed for web publication.

--84.20.17.84 13:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The 'reversed c' has been used by just about all authorities and dictionaries for transcription of [ʦ’] in (Yucatec) Maya, from the earliest (Coronel 1620, San Buenaventura 1684, Beltran 1746, the Motul and San Francisco dictionaries, Perez 1866-77) up to and including Tozzer 1921 (who uses it with a ’ for [ʦ’], and on its own for [ʦ]). Later 20thC and modern works have generally used dz or tz'.

In the context of the above quote, I think "letras heridas" is used in spanish to indicate what might otherwise be termed fortis or ejective consonants.

According to Tozzer, Beltran's original 1746 Arte uses z for [s]. In the reproduction of Beltran's Arte on FAMSI linked to above, when Beltran talks about ç (section 10) I think he is explaining why he's chosen z for [s] over the ç which was used by his predecessors San Buenaventura and Coronel( "...pongamos en su lugar la .z. desterrando de nuestro arte dicha .ç."). Modern orthography uses s (and neither z nor ç).

Beltran uses ħ only as part of a digraph, writing tħ for [t’] (modern orthog. t' ) and cħ for [ʧ’] (modern orthog. ch' ). I think the main difference in David Bolles' webpage transcription of Beltran's Arte on FAMSI is the use of dz for the 'reversed c' in the original.

Agree it would be good to have a facsimile img of some Colonial Yucatec text using reversed c, there should be some PD reproductions about someplace. Also agree that it would be great to expand upon the orthographical history in the article, when I or someone else has the chance. For now I'll add in a couple of refs which could be used for the (future) expansion.--cjllw | TALK 05:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Why don't we just use the IPA font for the reversed ɔ?·Maunus· tlahtōlli 08:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

FAMSI also has a scanned version of Beltran's Arte: here's the page on the alphabet. --Ptcamn 18:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, nice find, Ptcamn- I should have looked in the obvious place! I see they also have a scan of the 1859 second edition, which Tozzer says mistakenly omitted e and ch from the abcedario- but looking at the 1759 scan, these appear to be missing here as well(?)

We probably could use the IPA symbol for ɔ, although we'd need to enclose it in a {{IPA}} template call so it displays on most folks' systems (without it it doesn't come up on mine). --cjllw | TALK 23:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I work for FAMSI, if you need me to ask for image persmissions. However, I suggest separating "orthography" as a new heading, as this is not appropriate for an intro paragraph on WikipediaChunchucmil 16:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Chun. I was thinking that maybe we could reproduce an img of a page from Beltran or some other work which illustrates colonial Yucatec orthography. In my non-professional understanding of copyrights I would say that scans of these original works would be in the Public Domain, and could be used here (with an acknowledgement of the source); however if you're in a position at some point to check with the FAMSI folks to see if there'd be any objections then that would be great.

On your second point, I've begun to rearrange the existing text into appropriate subsections- there is of course plenty more to be added and expanded (whole topic areas are missing), but it's a start which can be further worked on.--cjllw | TALK 00:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../y/u/c/Talk%7EYucatec_Maya_language_1467.html"