Talk:Lwów dialect

A fact from Lwów dialect appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 November 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Lwów dialect was one of the first dialects of the Polish language to be properly classified?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/November.

Wikipedia

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ukraine Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Languages Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Name

Lwów dialect of Polish language is more appropriate, because people spoke and speak other languages also, not Polish only. These city dialects had and have their specific features. --Russianname 16:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but take a look at other articles on specific dialects. All of them have short names rather than long ones. //Halibu tt 16:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not go into other article's semantics. What's wrong with "LD of Polish language" as the article name? It is less confusing. --Irpen 16:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not consistent with other articles on dialects. Check Category:Dialects, Category:Dialects by language and Category:Dialects by location. Besides, the shorter titles, the better. //Halibu tt 16:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- You know, I`m not actually interested in waisting my time. You want to have ignorant article - please have it for your pleasure. Now you can rejoice Ukrainian iwiki with the article about Ukrainial Lviv dialect. Really great. I moved it out but ignorance is stronger. I wrote the article about this Polish dialect in Russian wikipedia but now I think it was a stupid thing to make something positive for people who do not bore themselves to make a few intellectual efforst. Bye, please do not write me anymore. --Russianname 16:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I beg your pardon? I read the Russian article and I admit it's great. I don't agree with your version of the title of this article, that's all. Is it a crime? Is it grave enough to make you lose your nerves? Besides, what's ignorant about this title? //Halibu tt 17:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Halibutt, there is no need to be so stubborn and refuse to give an inch. We had this discussions about your inability to compromise. Ever. The current title is bad. How would you call the article about the city dialect of Ukrainian? Do you mean that the reader would have to figure that from Lwow dialect vs Lviv dialect? And how would you call the article about the city variety of Yiddish? This article is already iwikied to the Ukrainian article about the city variety of Ukrainian. And this is all due to your stubborness and refusal to recognize that other languages also had their varieties pertaining to this great city. Please let one inch and try not to chase away contributors. The great Polish language won't suffer from this article being called the Lwow dialect of Polish language a least bit. --Irpen 17:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- OK, sorry, but you was not right and I got a bit crossed. I do not have any slightest anti-Polish POV. I just wanted to make clear that the article actually is about the Polish sociolect. But the Ukrainian language and Yiddish both had Lviv-Lwow dialects. And now a robot adds iwiki to the Ukrainian article about the Ukrainian dialect. Polish was not and is not the only spoken language in the city. And we must make clear that the article is actually about the Polish heritage. I do not think that the problem is worth of so many words. We could wrote more text to wiki articles meanwhiles. --Russianname 17:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AT LAST! At last you gave me some arguments in favour of your version! So far both of you presented me with plenty of arguments why Halibutt is a bad guy, but not a single argument on why should we move this article. Now I get your point. Why didn't you start with presenting your arguments and instead started writing of me, my alleged stubbornness, ignorance and so on?

Anyway, both titles seem fine to me. I prefer the shorter version, as there is no chance articles on Yiddish dialect of Lvov (there was none) or Ukrainian version of the bałak would be created any time soon (lack of sources; even the essay by Vynnychyk calls it the Ukrainian version, not a dialect on its own). However, if there indeed is a need to disambiguate between an article that does exist and two that do not - fine with me. But is there? //Halibu tt 17:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), there is no need to go into all the details in the title. Unless we need to disambiguate between Polish Lwów dialect and some other Lwów dialect, the current title seems fine.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 21:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The very point is that we need to. Have you read the discussion at all? --Irpen 21:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I expect that any Ukrainian dialect would be called Lviv dialect, not Lwów dialect. Disambig notes at the top of every article would ensure there is no confusion. So why are you attacking Halibutt instead of creating the discussed content?--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 21:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did I attack Halibutt? --Irpen 21:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Piotrus, that the title is fine for now. But if someone creates an article on the Ukrainian or other dialect of the city then it should probably be made clearer somehow. Ostap 22:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, let's drop this personal conversation for now, shall we? As long as there is no confusion, there is no need to disambiguate. Similarly, one day someone might create an article on dialectal forms of Russian language in 19th century Warsaw and we'll have to move the article on the Warsaw dialect somewhere. But for now that title seems fine as well. //Halibu tt 23:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have several point to make on this field. First, Lwów dialect of the Polish language is a local variety of the Polish language characteristic of the inhabitants of the city of Lwów (Lviv), now Ukraine. definition should be referenced with exact quotes. Second, can any body clearly state, by using linguistic sources, that this so called Lwow dialect is limited only to city itself, without broader region. Rereading discussion over name, I have to note that title misleads reader indeed, adding of Polish language may help. Besides if dialect is a live today in the city why use polonized city name? M.K. 19:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dialect

BTW, now that we're in linguistic society here, do you have any idea how to classify this dialect? In all publications it's named simply a dialect, without any details. Above one of you called it an sociolect, while I always thought of it as an ethnolect. Any ideas? //Halibu tt 18:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought... //Halibu tt 16:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

===============================

Hi! I'm from east of Poland (województwo Podkarpackie, powiat Lubaczowski). We speak here in polish, but we have some "our" words. There is no difference in grammar (just some plural forms we do by something like sound between "i" and "e"). I think, that it isn't "Lwów dialect", but dialect of "kresy". I hope, that it isn't going do extinct :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.164.189 (talk) 23:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lwów subdialect. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120209084934/http://balzatul.multiply.com/journal/item/1051 to http://balzatul.multiply.com/journal/item/1051

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) 03:20, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]