Talk:Singdarin

Singapore Mid‑importance

	Singapore portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore 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.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

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 articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article seems irrelevant. It's more like a case of code-switching than being a creole language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.78.248.57 (talk • contribs)

Well can you suggest how it is any less "relevant" than Singlish? And how can "relevancy" be compared between articles, when there is nothing to measure "relevance" against? What are articles supposed to be relevant or irrelevant to? I don't understand what you're implying. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 13:18, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can see where the user's comment is coming from. Singlish is a well-documented variety with its own distinct phonology and grammar. By the looks of this article, Sindarin seems like plain Mandarin with words and phrases from English and Singlish mixed in. How does it differ from code-switching? What makes it more of a creole than, for instance, the kinds of Mandarin CBCs might speak? Answering these questions would help a lot. --Euniana/Talk 15:51, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Creole!?!

I am curious who came up with the idea that Singdarin is a creole. This seems to be completely unsupported. Perhaps someone reading the Singlish article thought that Singdarin was just the same thing but with Mandarin? It's not. Here's why. Singlish originated as a pidgin language when people from different linguistic backgrounds (and sometimes the same linguistic background) who were not native speakers of English and who had not completely learned English used what they knew of English as a form of communication within their communities. This, combined with the usage of syntactic, grammatical, phonetic and lexical elements from their native languages to fill the gaps in their English proficiency, resulted in the formation of a new linguistic variety. Singlish became a creole language when these people, who were not native speakers of English, raised children with Singlish as their first language (= Chinese/Malay/Indian/etc parents speaking to their children in "English", really Singlish, rather than a Chinese variety or other native language).

How did Singdarin form? It's not comparable. Many people who were already proficient in other Chinese varieties were familiarized with Mandarin through school, society, government and media. However, since many of these people are multilingual and feel more comfortable expressing certain concepts in English, what is known as code switching occurs. In addition, there is some lexical borrowing (from Hokkien, Malay, etc) and calquing, but this falls short of creolization (which usually requires a complete grammatical and syntactical restructuring, for example zero copula or modal particles in Singlish).

This is Singlish

It has loan words from other major and minor languages of singapore.

The grammar structure is a same mix match of English and other major and minor languages of singapore.

Thus it is merely a facet of singlish.

Does it require its own wiki page?

Most damning of all is that this is a term unheard of by native singaporeans.

The article tries to argue as fact that it is a legitimate language yet offers no citation, showing that it is merely an opinion.

Kindly evaluate the legitimacy or even necessity of this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.247.133.35 (talk) 08:02, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Singdarin. 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) 15:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]