Template talk:alv-kro

FWIW, Bilby describes Kromanti as "not a functioning language, but rather a highly fragmentary ritual 'language' consisting of a number of set phrases and expressions". I don't think that disqualifies it from having a code and entries, though. Consider that we have a code for and entries in Pictish and Khazar! - -sche (discuss) 04:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * But Pictish and Khazar are more clearly distinguished. I'm beginning to have second thoughts; perhaps we can shove it under after all. Depends how much the orthography varies, really. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * True. Storch repeats the following extremely short wordlist from Alleyne: paki (K), apaki (A) [small calabash]; kamfo (K), nkamfo (A) [type of yam]; anansi (K), anansi (A) [spider]; aprako (K), prako (A) [yam]. I'll see if I can find more examples. - -sche (discuss) 04:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I was so focussed on whether or not to distinguish Kromanti from MSL that I wasn't thinking of whether to distinguish it from anything else. (I need to take a wikibreak.) An analogy between Kromanti vis-à-vis Akan and liturgical Latin formulae vis-à-vis the Latin Romans spoke seems appropriate. - -sche (discuss) 05:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, the analogy breaks down in that Ecclesiastical Latin tends to respect Classical orthography but diverge in phonology, grammar, and vocabulary, whereas Kromanti seems to keep the grammar and vocabulary conservatively but show slow phonological shifts marked in the orthography. I only hope that you come back soon if you do decide to do that. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've now merged the one Kromanti entry I had created, deleted the category and left a note on Template talk:ak. - -sche (discuss) 05:40, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

New problem: what if there are English (or maybe Patwa) words derived specifically from this dialect? If Kromanti: is created and gets an etymology, it will probably point back to Kromanti, I would assume. Do we need an etyl: code? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:06, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I suppose it can't hurt to have one. - -sche (discuss) 06:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * And as you may have noticed, I created . —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)