User talk:Apapa

Hi. I'll do my best to reply promptly, either here or on your own talk page, but I am often rather busy, so can't quite promise...

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia Apapa (if you are new it it). REX 09:26, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Apapa, I find the fact that you find Wikipedia, the experiment in social interaction more facinating, than its content rather nice. I used to feel that way. You will find that each "user" seems to have a personality of its own. For example, Theathenae is a rather pushy and sarcastic character,MATIA is the pompous "holier than thou" character, I am the innocent placid peace-making character who thinks ill of nobody and who is still trying to save the world. You seem to be the enthusiastic new user who is going full spead ahead to make the best damn articles the world has ever seen (I also used to be like that). But soon, things will change. You will find that you will be tearing your hair out soon out of frustration because people are rejecting your edits (however many sources may be backing them) for no reason whatsoever. Welcome to Hell. loooooooooooooool! (this is just a joke message) Also, do I refer to you as a he or as a she? REX 09:05, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello REX. I am enough of a 'Wikiskeptic' to keep from going "full speed ahead" with contributions on this. In fact, as you can see, I have submitted very little so far, though I have read the content and observed 'the experiment' for much longer. The experiment is much less vulnerable to bad-faith editors than the content, because destructive users are necessarily a part of it. Well, that choice of focus is at least one way to protect oneself from disappointment. :) Nevertheless, it's a waste of time participating even in user talks if you've lost all hope in the other interlocutors. Simply withdrawing seems more sensible. So, while I may well get there at some point, I will refrain for now from giving any opinion on other users. [Thankfully, there are plenty of dry, technical areas in Wiki., free of any controversy. One can always take refuge there.] Apapa 18:55, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Apapa, could you please tell me if you can understand this? Please be honest, it is just something I am curious about, it has nothing to do with the Greek extremist revert war on Arvanites. REX 20:26, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, of course! Except for the liberal use of the diacritical marks to indicate stress (which is not typically done in Albanian), i.e. especially if you read this out to yourself, it seems barely distinguishable from the speech of the Albanian south, to the point that if someone read it out to me, I would not necessarily guess it came from outside the country. (It has more diffs with Literary Albanian, but very little with the spoken Tosk of those areas.) The one thing that maybe stands out is the use of 'dashurimi', which in modern Albanian means the act of loving or falling in love, whereas 'desire' as meant here is 'deshira' (whereas 'will' is properly 'vullnet', as in the Geg version of this). In fact, you can see this difference for yourself in the Tosk Albanian version of the prayer. Apapa 21:58, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Really? That is most ineresting. Thank you so much for your time. I wish I could speak Albanian better, but I only know are a few phrases. REX 22:43, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Even without knowing much Alb., you can do the comparison yourself (visually) with the Tosk version (at the top of the page) Apapa 23:16, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hello

Good evening Apapa. I liked the data you provided about the language changes in the '70s. I've read somewhere that Shqipe is not 100% Tosk but also has some Gheg elements (10% perhaps). If you know more about this, please add the relevant information.

Let me also say that you may want to consider improving the phrase are mutually intelligible depending on the level of speakers' literacy and proficiency in standard Albanian. In their purest vernacular forms, Gheg and Tosk are inherently unintelligible, rather than replacing it with are mutually intelligible, except in their more extreme forms. MATIA 15:48, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matia; hi Rex. You are absolutely right, Matia, Standard Albanian is not 100% Tosk but does incorporate elements of Geg, esp. of the literary Geg tradition. (I am not sure how to quantify the proportion of each dialect's contribution.) I think that section can be improved and expanded significantly, which I might attempt to do, if the page proves to be a stable and constructive medium. (I can also establish a grammar page and link to it, along the lines of the Latin grammar page.)

It is true, btw., that a certain measure of linguistic 'violence' was inflicted upon Geg speakers and their dialect, and that this was in large part due to the fact that the Communist elite, who emerged as winners of the WWII power struggles, were in large part southerners. But it wasn't all arbitrary. Phonetically, and lexically etc., Standard Albanian is closest to the Elbasan variant, which is on the boundary between the two dialects. So, it is very different from many of the southern Tosk regional variants and much closer to Geg than any of them. I think it's a good compromise, but more importantly, it was a natural choice, because this region produced many of the early influential scholars who established the study and teaching of the modern language. Moreover, many writers had already made this choice long before the Congress of 1972 formalized it. Elbasan is, then, to Albanian what Tuscany is to Italian.

As for the intelligibility phrase, I can honestly say that I did think about it long and hard, before altering it. The problem with the phrase is that it's quite concise and specific and therefore leaves hardly any room to maneuver. There are two factual claims there: a) that the mutual intelligibility is dependent on the mediation of Standard Albanian and b) that the 'pure' versions are inherently unintelligible. Now, I personally would not care much whether these points were in fact true or not; one outcome does not please me more than the other, as an Albanian or a student of languages or history etc. It just so happens that the statement is incorrect and I will probably call the attention of the Ethnologue people to it, so they can fix it. a) is easy to see because Standard/Literary Albanian was codified only in the early '70s, and if you go further back in time and pick an average Geg and an avg Tosk, they'd communicate just fine, with the occasional raised eyebrow (and with each probably laughing silently at the other's funny accent). b) this part suffers from this notion of 'inherent unintelligibility' - besides the problem of 'purity', which is thorny because you have regional variants even between Geg and Tosk, yet none of them can be considered to coincide with a 'pure' Geg/Tosk. But, in fact, because the divergence has only been going on for about a thousand years and over a relatively small area, that 'recent' common root and the area of change dictate an inherent intelligibility, which can be occasionally marred or obscured by regional 'flavors', but is far from being obliterated. That's why I felt that the pithy EB formulation of Prof. Hamp, which I paraphrased, was best at conveying this fact - which is evident to Albanians - to foreign readers. I hope I am expressing myself clearly.

In any case, if I get the time to contribute in more detail about the features of each of the dialects (to a separate, linked page and perhaps with transcribed examples of several Geg and Tosk variants from different regions of Albania), the degree of closeness would become apparent, through visual inspection, even to non-Albanians. Apapa 23:59, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should copy these comments on Talk:Albanian language, they are interesting, and perhaps other people would like to read them too. I'm guessing that Ethnologue talk about more archaic versions of Tosk and Gheg (perhaps before 1900, or something similar). As for the percentage (90% -10%) I've mentioned it because I hoped you knew more than me about it. Maybe we 'll find something in the long run. MATIA 08:36, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Beslidhja Skaut Albania

Beslidhja Skaut Albania has been proposed for renaming (along with other foreign-language Scouting article titles) to bring it into compliance with the spirit of both WikiProject Scouting - Rules Standards, Article names and Wikipedia:Naming conventions.

The discussion about this is currently taking place at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting/Translations#Proposed_article_name_changes. No one involved speaks Albanian. Since you speak Albanian, could you please help out? --evrik ^(talk) 15:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]