Talk:Uralic languages
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Uralic languages article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Importance scale
[edit]@Tpbradbury @TylerBurden is there a reason for the discrepancy between the importance assessment rating of this page and Talk:Finno-Ugric languages? Logically, Uralic languages should be a more important topic than Finno-Ugric languages, the latter being either a disputed subbranch of Uralic or an imprecise synonym for Uralic. Stockhausenfan (talk) 08:48, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
- it often depends on which project is being referred to, this is part of 4 projects, and the other 5. you'd expect this to generally be marked as less important. i added importance ratings a year ago as they were blank but feel free to change them. top for Russia seemed too high, and high for languages might be too low but i'm not an expert in that project. it's perhaps more that the finn-ugric page is marked too high, Tom B (talk) 09:11, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
Samoyedic
[edit]@Vofa, standard reference works such as the Oxford Guide to Uralic languages classify Samoyedic as Uralic[1]. But I am curious, why would you want to deny this? Do you have a source which tries to make this controversial? (As it is not considered a controveroversial grouping in the works I know 84.251.164.143 (talk) 01:26, 30 April 2025 (UTC) Edited 13:50, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, hey!
- Unfortunately I did not see the ping despite being pinged as frequently happens. I will try to cite a few abstract publications and blogs on the topic of Samoyedic languages to show that its classification within Uralic is disputed.
- https://copius.univie.ac.at/intro/slides_samo.pdf
- „The classification of the Samoyedic language is not clear“
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- https://blogs.helsinki.fi/language-diversification-and-spread-north/files/2023/01/interdisciplinary_presentation.pdf
- “Samoyedic, in particular Northern Samoyedic, are famous for substratal linguistic features and non-Uralic toponymy“
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- (To clarify, I did not deny the Oxford‘s Guide to Uralic languages. I wanted to make it clear that Samoyedic language branch classification is still disputed among scholars, prompting me to remove unsourced claims)
Vofa (talk) 14:10, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- Neither of these slideshows support the claim that Samoyedic is disputed. The first one has a geneological classification on slide 3, which shows Samoyedic descending from proto-Uralic. The second shows the Uralic family tree (both the traditional model and the rake model) on slide 2. 84.251.164.143 (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class language articles
- High-importance language articles
- WikiProject Languages articles
- C-Class Russia articles
- Mid-importance Russia articles
- Mid-importance C-Class Russia articles
- C-Class Russia (language and literature) articles
- Language and literature of Russia task force articles
- C-Class Russia (demographics and ethnography) articles
- Demographics and ethnography of Russia task force articles
- WikiProject Russia articles
- C-Class Finland articles
- Mid-importance Finland articles
- All WikiProject Finland pages
- C-Class Hungary articles
- Mid-importance Hungary articles
- All WikiProject Hungary pages