Talk:Karaim language

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Endangered languages, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Endangered languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Endangered languagesTemplate:WikiProject Endangered languagesEndangered languages

Languages

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Ukraine High‑importance

	Ukraine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

comment

While it is true that the Lithuanian Karaims esp. claim to not be Jews, that's a 1940's phenom, and not universal for all Karaims. TShilo12

It is universal for all Karaims, you are confusing Karaims with Karaite Jews.Kaz 08:10, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

It is universal for all Karaims by ethnicity. We sholud distinguish Karaims by ethnicity (Qarays), and Karaites by religion. It is no doubt that the majority of Karaites by religion now residing in Israel are Jews. Before moving to Israel, when living in diffenet countries of the Middle East, they spoke Arabic, Persian, etc., now they speak Hebrew, and they never spoke Karaim Turkic. But Karaims by ethnicity - the only one group that ever spoke Karaim language - never considered themselves to be Jews. There are only three communities of Qarays - Crimean, Lithuanian and Ukrainian (the latter is almost extinct). And all insist on their Turkic ancestry. And it's not a 1940 phenom, as they were not Jews in the Russian Empire and before this in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Don Alessandro 17:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your assertion, while commonly asserted by some Karaim, is simply a historical fallacy. See, e.g., Blady's Jewish Communities in Exotic Places; Yaron's Introduction to Karaite Judaism, et al. The practice of some Crimean Karaites to deny any connection to other Jews is largely a nineteenth century phenomenon pioneered by Avraham Firkovitch and his colleagues. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 03:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are also confusing Karaims (Karaimlar) with Karaite Jews (Ha-Yehudim Ha-Qaraim). Karaim is a singular noun and adjective word in the Karaim language, while Qaraim is a plural Hebrew word. Two different languages, two different words, one singular the other plural. The hostile Russian authorities accepted Firkovich's evidence as valid proof that Karaims are not Jews. Except for the clergy, Karaims are not circumcised for a start.Kaz 08:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Brian is correct. I misspoke. Firkovitch first invented the idea that the Karaims were not Jewish in order to avoid the oppressive taxes and conscription-cum-forced-conversion practices of the czars. What I was referring to was the Lithuanian Karaims' use of the Czars' dispensation distinguishing between the Jews and the Karaims as "proof" to the Nazis that they really weren't Jews (which the Nazis viewed with a great deal of skepticism and only marginally accepted). It was the Lithuanian Karaims' willingness to sell out their fellow Jews that caused the ultimate rift between the communities in the 1940s, when the Lithuanian Karaim leaders, basically selling their souls to the Devil (if you believe in such a thing), complicitly told the Germans who were and were not Karaims, thus leading to the deaths of thousands of Rabbinic Jews who sought refuge among the Karaim. What's really pathetic, in my mind, is that the Lithuanian Karaims seem to think that this action on the part of their leadership is a laudable decision, rather than one deserving condemnation [as the UN and YV have done]. <pontification>Happily, it was only the Lithuanian Karaims who tried to advance themselves by selling their brethren to their deaths, and I have no doubt that's why they're as irrelevant today as they are. The Crimean Karaims chose to hide their Rabbinic cousins in their homes, and today are flourishing as they hadn't since the 1200s. The fact remains, however, that regardless of how the Lithuanian Karaims view themselves, they're not only "not the sole heirs" to the tradition they claim as their own, but they're its reprobate bastards, and, again "happily", very much in the minority.</pontification> "Tell us how you really feel, Tom e r ^talk 09:26, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very confused mess and Nasty propaganda you've written there Tom, you should b e ashamed of your ignorance. Kaz 08:23, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The prominent Karaite enlightener Alexander Mardkowicz (died in 1944) in his "Aj jaryhynda" (unfortunately never translated into other languages) told in details about a fierce discussion about Karaite origins (including Turkic one) inside of Karaite community in present-day Western Ukraine one century before Firkovitch. 194.187.151.87 (talk) 19:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See my thoughts here Talk:Crimean Karaites

Don Alessandro 11:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS

Unfortunately, Crimean Qaray community is not flourishing now. Yes, its condition is much better than in was during the Soviet era, but its is much worse tha it was before the Russian revolution of 1917. You can believe me - I often visit Crimea and I can see it myself.

another thing- i don't know if this can be changed, but the suffix -im in hebrew, as you prob know, is a pluralizer. to say karaim leanguage is very akward, and even more so karaims. maybe that's what they were called, i don't know, it was wrong then. 72.93.211.242

The Plural Hebrew suffix has nothing to do with the Karaim language. Karaim is a singular Karaim word and adjective. It is not Hebrew. The plural suffix in Karaim language would be -lar. It seems We have really confused Hebrew speakers over the years.Kaz 08:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flicker- Karaim language in Arabic script near Menorah (Hanukkah) - Trakai Island Castle - Lithuania1.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Flicker- Karaim language in Arabic script near Menorah (Hanukkah) - Trakai Island Castle - Lithuania1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Flicker- Karaim language in Arabic script near Menorah (Hanukkah) - Trakai Island Castle - Lithuania1.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:45, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Karaits vs Karaims

Dear User:Yoshiah_ap after extensive search I could find no reference to back up your insertion except sites which quoted directly your insertion in this article. I found a quote directly to the contrary, but it says Karaits not Karaims. However Libor Valko seems to equate Russian Karaits with Karaims, so I inserted the references even though this seems wrong. But do you have any evidence to the contrary which might show that Karaims and Russian Karaits are indeed two completely distinct people? If so please feel free to revert my edit. YuHuw (talk) 10:18, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Endangered or extinct

I have just finished an initial clean-up of the article and notice a cibtradiction between whether the crimean dialect is endangered or extinct. If anyone has more info on this please comment or add refs. Thanks! YuHuw (talk) 13:11, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I am not Talking to myself

"no thanks" is not an appropriate response to a request for discussion. Consensus means something we can all agree on besides something which is RS or good grammar which are things which must stay regardless. So I am asking you and your Tag-team to re-consider the group tactics you are currently employing (harassment and bullying). Instead, let's all engage in constructive discussion to improve these frankly horribly messy articles which your unfathomable protectiveness has gotten me extremely curious about. YuHuw (talk) 07:58, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no tag-team. There is a consensus.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:07, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is something that everyone agrees on. We are clearly not there yet. YuHuw (talk) 12:24, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Consensus says "Consensus on Wikipedia does not mean unanimity".-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:42, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Correct but it does say about unanimity that "although an ideal result, is not always achievable); nor is it the result of a vote. Decision-making involves an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines." Let's see if we can work together on trying to reach that ideal and discuss in detail the issues which might bring an obstacle to that ideal. YuHuw (talk) 21:17, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK I see, so your response to a request for you to engage in discussion to establish a concensus on the sources is to "attack" me with a sock-puppet investigation instead. That seems very bad faith of you. Making a fake case to prevent their own editing being examined. I will have to mention this of course. Everyone familiar with the history of this case will realize that your claim is not relevant to sock puppetry. I just want to ping someone here to see the chronology of events if you have time user:wbm1058. YuHuw (talk) 12:27, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So that [1] is your only response. I see. YuHuw (talk) 20:01, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing you have discussed in this section, is that you perceive yourself as a victim. Nobody else shares your perception.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than calling me a victim, would you care to comment on the sources issue please? This is the 5th time in this section that I have asked. YuHuw (talk) 05:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Karaim language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:25, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No /l/ in consonant table, but in the examples

as stated by the title, there is no o /l/ in consonant table but L's in the various scripts and as part of the linguistic examples in morphological transcription --- simply forgotten to add it in?

188.192.37.76 (talk) 09:05, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The apparent omission is still there. On https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karaïm the /l/ is mentioned, but not the /w/. There are a few other differences as well.Redav (talk) 15:29, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: The Study of Language

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 1 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MingzeGaojmart460, Frenchsilkpie, IntrepidError, Sduran2, Ak24000 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: MystifiedMysti, Cbries2, Nataliawrobel3, Muh tee us?, Omaralattar23, Maradeleonm, Zbernier12, Sote2, Adia09, Coolisschool123.

— Assignment last updated by IntrepidError (talk) 19:03, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Karaim speakers' citation added

In the sub-section of language ecology, Distribution of Karaim speakers. I added a citation to Crimea, Lithuania, and Poland to show that there are Karaim speakers in that country according to the 8th reference being Csato. IntrepidError (talk) 20:37, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiEd Students: Respond to Feedback

16:15, 1 November 2022 (UTC)UICLing (talk)Students: Respond to your peer feedback by posting what changes you will make and what should be made to the article based on your peers' suggestions. Click "reply" below to respond.@MingzeGaojmart460, @Frenchsilkpie, @Sduran2, @Ak24000 UICLing (talk) 16:19, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the peer reviewer's suggestions, I intend on adding more citations and hyperlinks to the missing parts of the article (each section is missing at least one), specifically "Hebrew" and "Crimea." I already added a few, but I plan on adding more. I will also look into the possibility of adding specific examples about phonology, morphology, and syntax and some images about the language, which may be a little challenging but I will look into it. Also, the article could use less wordy sentences in order to be more clear and concise, I plan on reading through the article again and using the peer reviewer's examples of wordy sentences to see if I can shorten or clean them up a little. Additionally, finding information that is up to date about how many individuals are left speaking the language could be added in order to improve accuracy. Present sources that I have found are not peer-reviewed and/or are out of date. If I am unable to find available sources stating the current number of language speakers, then unfortunately, I may not be able to revise this suggestion. Overall, the need for citations, updating citations that are in the "further reading" section, adding missing or updating incomplete ideas into the article, and being more concise are main themes in the peer reviews that I hope and aim to improve the article with. Frenchsilkpie (talk) 17:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The changes that I plan to make based on the peers' suggestion as well as overall would be to add citations. Since the article is missing citations in different sections of the article. As well, adding examples for the syntax, morphology section. Also making sure to re-read the article and making sure is concise and not to wordy for other people that is reading the article. Sduran2 (talk) 02:38, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the peer review suggestions that have been noted would be that the entire section could use a lot more citations to certain areas such as morphology, syntax, or phonology. Other things that could be added to the article would be a few images as the lack of them kind of makes the article a bit bland to look at. For changes to be made on the article it would be best to make some sections seem a lot less wordy to read. IntrepidError (talk) 19:16, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Karaim Language Citation Added

In the subsection "Language Contact", I added a citation to the term code-copying that was from a textbook. Ak24000 (talk) 20:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trakai Island Castle Further Reading

Found a reading about the Trakai Island Castle and how Karaim is being used. Added the source to Further reading and added some sort of citation to the end of the section found in the intro. IntrepidError (talk) 20:54, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Google Preview

Not sure if this is editable from Wikipedia itself, but when one googles Karaim as a language the preview of the Wikipedia page says "Karaim is a Turkic language closely related to Yiddish and Judaeo-Spanish, spoken by Crimean Karaites in Lithuania, Poland, Crimea, and Galicia." Obviously, it's linguistically completely unrelated to Yiddish and Judæo-Spanish except for the presence of Hebrew in the lexicon, which developed independently in all three languages. Is there a way to fix this? Maybe something like "Karaim is an endangered Turkic language spoken by Karaims of Ukraine and Lithuania." Thanks! Njj2100 (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]