Talk:Naic languages
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Proposal: Modification of section "Lidz (2010)", to new section "He and Jiang (1985)"
[edit]An entire section is devoted to presenting the viewpoint expressed by Lidz (2010). But Lidz (2010) is essentially a synchronic reference grammar of Yongning Na: Lidz, Liberty. 2010. A descriptive grammar of Yongning Na (Mosuo). Austin: University of Texas, Department of linguistics. https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/ETD-UT-2010-12-2643/LIDZ-DISSERTATION.pdf.
It does not seem to be the right place to look for diachronic discussion, especially not issues of phylogenetic affiliation, which involve comparison across languages.
The author did not conduct fieldwork on all the dialects mentioned. They clarify that the viewpoint on classification presented in the PhD is based on earlier work by He Jiren and Jiang Zhuyi (1985). It would seem to make better sense to refer back to that classification and present it in some detail, as that is an important reference, widely cited, and influential in the field.
AlexisMichaud (talk) 08:25, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, since this is tagged as a High-importance article, I thought I'd repeat the statement made above nine years ago. Liberty Lidz's work is good and solid and super-important to the field, no doubt of that. But the classification of dialects in the reference cited is taken up (with due credit given where it's due) from Chinese scholarship. It is not the outcome of original research reported in the reference cited. So, put bluntly, the reference provided is not the right one for this specific topic (dialect classification).
- In case someone gives me a green light I can volunteer to do the necessary editing here -- with due attention to carrying out the work in candid, non-personal academic style, not in a spirit of self-promotion. Maybe I should clarify that I have taken part in diachronic research within teams, but am not centrally working on Sino-Tibetan reconstruction or such. I'm saying this in case there were strong worries about potential 'point of view pushing' over here on Wikipedia.
- Best wishes to all, AlexisMichaud (talk) 21:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)