Talk:өлм

RFV discussion: November–December 2015
Per Hunnic language, Hunnic is supposed to have disappeared without a trace a couple of centuries before the invention of Cyrillic, and to have had only personal names and three nouns attested- so where did this come from? Chuck Entz (talk) 02:41, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ... Let alone have reconstructed pronunciations. And even the attested words are controversial (one of them could even be Proto-Slavic). I suspect the editor is making this up, or confusing the name of another language with Hunnic. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:44, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe this is the same guy who was adding translations of modern concepts in Gothic and some barely-attested Italic language. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:48, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No, this one smells like a Pan-Turkist to me Chuck Entz (talk) 03:00, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


 * All so-called Cyrillic Hunnic entries RFV-failed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds

ꙉүмбығ
As above.Chuck Entz (talk) 03:00, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

мори
As above.Chuck Entz (talk) 03:00, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

балꚇуум
As above.Chuck Entz (talk) 03:00, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

ꚇул
As above. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:00, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

хаған
As above. 03:00, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I apologise for my mistake, although I don't believe it is a mistake! It may constitute original research and there may be an unintentional conflict of interest as the words I added are from a Siberian language that the speakers call "Hunnic" and who call themselves "Huns". I totally understand the skepticism, but the deeper into the language and culture one dives, there seems to be an increasing level of "old age" to it. Of course I'm not naïve enough to think that there is no political agenda involved, as I've come across quite a lot of people particularly in Russia who claim near-mythical ancestry to legitimise their secessionist movements and such, but this seems more clear-cut than any of those.

HunnicHistor (talk) 03:06, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Is that a modern language?? Is it known by another name? — Ungoliant (falai) 03:13, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure there is another name for it, but the people who speak it in eastern Irkutsk and Sakha call it "Hunnic". If there's a way to preserve a language, even if accomplished by mislabeling it, I think it is worth it. HunnicHistor (talk) 03:26, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * If we are to keep it we need a way to distinguish it from the Hunnic of the ancient Huns, like we distinguish ancient Ligurian from modern Ligurian. — Ungoliant (falai) 03:29, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The only Turkic language in eastern Irkutsk and Sakha that Ethnologue has heard of, and thus that has an ISO 639-3 code, is Yakut. Is it a dialect of that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:18, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh! Oh... I'm so embarrassed right now. It isn't Yakut, but I see how blind I was because I didn't associate "Hun" with Attila's Huns when I added the words in the category but instead the general term "Hun". Facepalm. Thank you Ungoliant and Angr, I would at best have wasted my time and at worst uneducated people by this major miscategorisation! It definitely isn't the language of Attila and I apologise for my mistake, however as I said before, I don't know any other name for the language and that brings an obstacle... I still feel that adding the language on wiktionary is the best way for documentation and to hopefully raise the interest of linguists, but you're absolutely right that it is misleading to categorise it Hunnic despite the endonym. Perhaps an unfortunately crude temporary solution could be to include a note that it is not the extinct Hunnic language and should be recategorised with an appropriate exonym as soon as possible? HunnicHistor (talk) 15:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * What source are you using for these words? Remember all the words listed here have to be verifiable; for little-used languages like this one, a single mention in a published source like a dictionary or a linguistics article is sufficient. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:53, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, that applies to wiktionary too? That's a much bigger obstacle then, because I'm not aware of any published sources - and that's a major part of the reason why I started adding words here - and the "source" I'm using is just a notebook that I used for a dictionary with the people, writing down words and notes of the language. It's my hobby to travel and document the most obscure languages and cultures, especially when they're ones with no recognition. I've been told that this is not how linguists work because it encourages hoaxes, that people will "tell you what they want you to hear" because "they will profit from it", but I don't believe that. I'm not naïve but I don't believe that people in small towns just put on a show every time visitors come and switch to a fake language and tell fake stories of their history and fake folklore. They won't accomplish anything by doing that. People say it reinforces their "separatist agendas" and brings them undeserved fake tourism and they profit from the suffering of real minorities, but I have never heard of that happening...


 * I also hear people say that my personal biases influence the process of documentation and that I contribute to the hoax even if it's only subconsciously because of my political views, that I support their separatist agendas because I don't support the Russian government... Even if they had separatist agendas, even if I supported them, why would it matter? Even if they used a fake language to reinforce their separatist agendas, why would that matter? They still speak it, don't they? However as I said already, I know there are minorities with active separatist agendas and some of them really do intentionally change their language for "purism" and the ignorance of the majority is powerful fuel for this kinds of groups, but I don't believe this is a case of that. The people who call themselves "Huns" and speak this language that they call "Hunnic" were really nice and they didn't seem to care about politics, they could translate any word to their language without hesitation so I can't believe they were making it up. It also seems like an old language, too much different from other languages of the region to be just a dialect of any of them and has Turkic and Mongolic features in addition to some words and grammar that don't seem like either. Many very different very little-used languages exist in Russia and neighbouring countries just like everywhere else, and I believe their documentation is important even if it is done by non-professionals, even if it is "dubious" or "supporting separatist agendas".


 * If wiktionary is not the appropriate form for this, what would be? I have even thought about registering on forums used for constructed languages to get the languages on the Internet but haven't out of respect for the people who speak them because they probably wouldn't want to be associated with such autistic teenagers. HunnicHistor (talk) 19:17, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know what a better place would be, but as it stands, we have no way of ascertaining whether this is a real language or merely your conlang. As it seems that you cannot identify this language with the (effectively exhaustive) Ethnologue list and there are no sources, it cannot be distinguished from a falsification (assuming, of course, that it is not a falsification) and is inappropriate for Wiktionary. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:04, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The appropriate way to do it would be to become a graduate student in linguistics at an accredited university, learn there how to do fieldwork in such a way that it does not encourage hoaxes, and publish your results as your dissertation. Work that is peer-reviewed and published under your own name and under the auspices of a reputable university will always be considered more reliable (and not just here at Wiktionary, but everywhere) than work made available by "some dude on the Internet". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:55, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I could never get anything published or I would have done so concerning everything already a long time ago. I've tried, once, twice, again and again but finally I realised that it isn't about me; there isn't anything I can do to get anything published because the problem is not mine to fix. I can't change the world, I can't change the perception that those who "belong" to it have of it. Why do you think war, famine, drought, hatred, earthquakes, floods, dictatorships, rape and murder still exist? And why do peace, plentitude, flourishing, love, stability, equality and happiness exist? They're all a part of the world. All the languages that are, used to be and will be spoken in the world are a part of it, too. If you want to change the world, to destroy the parts of it that you don't like, you can try but you will fail. Do you know why? There will always be more more than less. Parts may vanish, but they will never be destroyed. Languages may die with the people that speak them, the cultures become forgotten, but the essence lives on and it will be reborn; culture and language are not personal possessions. You can kill a culture, you can silence a language, you can monger as much genocide as you want and isolate yourself and your culture and language from the world in fear or disgust of those you don't like and their influence, but one day you, your culture and your language will die. Cover your eyes and you won't see when death comes, cover your ears and you won't hear the screams of those that die before you, cover your mouth and you won't scream when it comes. That doesn't mean you're going to live forever. As much as you and I and everyone else may hope that they will live for as long as possible and our deaths be as peaceful as possible, the truth is that nobody really knows until the time comes.


 * By covering your eyes, ears and mouth, you're not only blinding, deafening and muting yourself from influencing others and keeping them from influencing you, you're also isolating yourself from the influence of life and exposing yourself to the influence of death. That can have a positive impact on you or it can have a negative impact on you. The sooner you expose yourself, the larger the impact will be. You may have a long way to go, you may thrive and gain everything in life that you could ever dream of, but in death you will lose it all. There are many solutions to the problem, but only one of them can bring you the absolute despair, and that is the slow death alone in the barren scape without an exit, without knowledge yet without ignorance, and without light and without darkness, that goes on forever inside you and that you can't escape from because you've become so trapped in it that there is nothing left of you but a spot within which there is an infinity of nothingness. That's the death that comes if you lose yourself in an internal feedback loop of your increasingly intense isolation, and it's not fun. I don't want anyone to experience it, but countless people experience it all the time. The least you can do is not let yourself fall that far down, and I hope that you see the world for the beautiful place it is and life for the interesting thing it is in spite of all the gris and death.


 * I don't know about you but I for one consider languages to be on the positive side of the spectrum. HunnicHistor (talk) 23:47, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you should take a look at Wikiversity. I'm not very familiar with that project, but I know they allow original research, so maybe they will be more agreeable to the addition of this kind of never-before-published material. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 23:53, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I can't help escaping the impression that this is a known language with some other name that we would know it by, : any ideas? I've seen some references in Google Books to a West Hunnic and East Hunnic branch of Turkic, so it's not implausible that a local speech community would use such a name for themselves and their language. : could you look at the Appendix:Swadesh lists, firstly to see which of the languages there is closest, and, failing a match there, give us a list here of some of the words you know for definitions in the list? that way, we have a better chance of identifying the language at least to language family. It may even not be Turkic- it might be Tungusic, or some other family found in that general area. Looking at the words added so far to see which ones have affinities to one family or another:
 * Mongolic: хаған [xɑ.ʁɑn] (ruler)- It goes back a long way in both Turkic & Mongolic, but WP says it's Mongolic.
 * Turkic: өлм [øɫm] (death), ? ꙉүмбығ [ðʐʉm.bɨʁ] (rain)- Kazakh looks closest
 * Uncertain: ꚇул [tʃʼul]| (mouth,lips, tongue)- Mongolian is a possibility, балꚇуум |[bɑl.tʃʼuːm] (storm, thunder), мори [mo.ri] (horse)- close to both Mongolian  and Manchu (Tungusic)
 * As you can see, this small sample is not enough to tell us much (especially without knowledge of the historical linguistics of the groups involved), though horse and ruler are more likely to be loanwords than death and rain, so Turkic has the edge here. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:42, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * and maybe you are both right. Right now I'm with a friend from Yakutia and his language is very similar. But it's called Bajir and is grouped in Bashkir, not recognised as a language. Alphabet is also different. Here is some vocabulary of his, starting with corresponces to HunnicHistor's posted:
 * морі [mori] (horse)
 * ҡаған [qaʁan] (leader)
 * өлүм [ølym] (death)
 * җамбыр [ʑambɯr] (rain)
 * ағыз [aʁɯz] (mouth)
 * ҡіл [qil] (language, tongue)
 * өмүр [ømyr] (life)
 * от [ot] (fire)
 * ус [us] (water)
 * тубраҡ [tubraq] (earth)
 * аға [aʁa] (air)
 * кізі [kizi] (human)
 * адам [adam] (man)
 * ҡатын [qatɯn] (woman)
 * бала [bala] (child)
 * тағ [taʁ] (mountain)
 * дала [dala] (plain, field)
 * урмон [urmon] (forest)
 * ағаш [aʁaʃ] (tree)
 * тэҥэр [teŋer] (sky, heaven)
 * дээр [deːr] (sky, atmosphere)
 * тәҥір [tæŋir] (god)
 * көл [køl] (lake)
 * ҡөл [qøl] (hand)
 * адаҡ [adaq] (foot)
 * өрүш [øryʃ] (river)
 * эт [et] (meat)
 * өҥөһ [øŋøh] (bone)
 * алдын [aldɯn] (gold)
 * көмүш [kømyʃ] (silver)
 * мөс [møs] (ice)
 * мөһәббәт [møhæbbæt] (love)
 * ҡөрөш [qørøʃ] (hatred)
 * доғор [doʁor] (friend)
 * дашман [daʃman] (enemy)
 * өшкі [øʃki] (goat)
 * әжә [æʒæ] (mother)
 * адға [adʁa] (father)
 * уул [uul] (son)
 * ҡүз [qyz] (daughter)
 * аҥҗы [aŋʑɯ] (hunter)
 * өйөм [øjøm] (shaman)
 * йүбул [jybul] (high)
 * цай [tsaj] (place)
 * Йүбул Цай [jybul tsai]; a mythic kingdom on top of a sacred mountain
 * былыт [bɯlɯt] (cloud)
 * діш [diʃ] (tooth)
 * ҡараҡ [qaraq] (eye)
 * ҡулғоҡ [qulʁoq] (ear)
 * ҡүн [qyn] (sun)


 * Example sentences.
 * Доғорлар җаҡын, дашманлар цөр җаҡын ҡадғаш. (Keep your friends close, your enemies closer.)
 * Былытларда алдынд көртэб, ҡар сээҡ бул, ҡөлдіңӿа дээрға ҡөлің жэлэб. (You may see gold in the clouds, but be careful, the sky can eat your hand.)
 * He says it's a Turkic language, the government however don't recognise it and suppose it's a dialect of Bashkir. I won't butt on that because I don't know anything about Bashkir and I'm not a linguist, yet. Is this the same language of HunnicHistor, and is it Bashkir? AliHautala (talk) 07:31, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you sure you're not HunnicHistor, AliHautala? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 07:52, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Lolwat? I don't know why you would think that? suggested it has another name, and maybe it's Bashkir or its dialect, that might be its own language. I don't speak either so I can't answer that, but my friend does so that's why I asked him to list some words. I can ask him to make an account if you want the direct source... AliHautala (talk) 19:42, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Wow! In Kazakh, it mean "a khagan". It's a Mongolian loanword.--83.149.19.125 15:44, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I think the term "хаған" is Kazakh, a misspelling or alt. form of . There are some hits in plain Google searches in Kazakh. Apart from Kazakh, "ғ" is used in Bashkir and Tajik but this word is neither Bashkir or Tajik. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:53, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * While I appreciate the effort and the honesty of the contributor, if this are uncitable they have to go. Just what is the proper place for them, though? User namespace I suppose. User's own website and/or blog. Renard Migrant (talk) 11:23, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Looking through some Bashkir resources, the above languages do seem like they could well be related lects, and I’m inclined to believe they do exist; on the other hand, I’d assume the »Hunnic« is recorded in HunnicHistor’s own invented alphabet: the use of Old Cyrillic djerv ꙉ, especially as /ð/, seems otherwise inexplicable. In any case, as others have said, without attestation to confirm these words there’s not much we can do. Vorziblix (talk) 00:33, 16 December 2015 (UTC)