Talk:E language

Native name

The page does not mention the native name of the language, but ISO 639:e states that the native name is E. Could somebody confirm? Thank you. Lmaltier (talk) 20:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

It is pronounced something like "eughh"... Wikipedia's auto-capitalization of article titles may have caused confusion - "E" is the sound, not the latin letter. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 11:28, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Ergh, according to Chinese Wikipedia, that's for they call 'I' as 'E 55'. Like the Hak-ka-fa(Hakka), some people call it as 'ngai language'(涯話), for they call both '涯' and 'I'(我) as 'ngai'(with different tone). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.248.134.97 (talk) 13:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:E language/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 16:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll take this one. Looks both easy and a nice change from VG-related articles. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Review

And... actually there is nothing I can see particularly wrong with it. It's a very nice read. This merits an Instant Pass. Congrats. --ProtoDrake (talk) 12:04, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Columns

Can someone unmerge the back column of the vowel chart and add a central column for a [ä] and [ə]? It’s transcluded from somewhere and I don’t know how to deal with that mess. 66.87.124.207 (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Congrats and broken refs

Congrats on GA! I see there are some broken refs; would you like me to fix them? Notice how clicking on Edmondson 1992 in the Notes doesn't do anything (it should lead the reader to its citation further down in the References). Prhartcom (talk) 20:52, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

I went ahead and upgraded the reference format a bit. Hope you like it; if not, feel free to revert. Please double-check my work. (I notice the Infobox template generates footnotes 1 and 2: I saw in the template doc a way to suppress that if needed.) Nice job on the article. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 22:28, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Translation of Wusehua

I'm fairly new to studying Chinese but if I'm not mistaked the first character in Wusehua (五) is the number 5, making the name translate to "5 colours language". Can anyone who knows the language confirm?BobBobtheBob (talk) 11:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Good article reassessment

E language

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted due to original research concerns outlined below. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:28, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

As what I've just found, there are original researches for the contents citing the source "Greenhill, Blust & Gray 2008", and the article may not meet the second good article criterion: "Verifiable with no original research" (Criterion 2c. "It contains no original research…"). Σανμοσα^{The Trve Lawe of free Monarchies} 02:21, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

• Delist, agree with Sanmosa. Additionally, some information given in the article is even wrong, and some are collected in irrelevant sources. The corresponding page in zhwiki has improved a lot during June, I believe that volunteers can translated those contents into enwiki. TongcyDai (talk) 09:48, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
• Delist, agree with Sanmosa n' TongcyDai. —— Eric Liu_{（Talk．Chinese userpage）} 09:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
• Comment could some details of the OR and inaccuracies be given? No one has edited this article or the talk page since the GAR was filed. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Filelakeshoe: For example, the source "Greenhill, Blust & Gray 2008" is just a list of 210 words, but the paragraph using this source said that "E morphology is primarily analytic", I believe that this is a typical original research. Another example, the lead section mentioned "(E language) contains a few rare phonemes: voiceless versions of the more common nasal consonants and alveolar lateral approximant", and the phonology section, "However, it contains a few unusual consonants ... All are voiceless versions of consonants that, in most languages, are always voiced". That is the editor's own summary with bias, since voiceless sonorant are actually common in Kam–Sui languages. Speaking of the language's phonology, the consonant table and the vowel table were inducted from the word list by the editor, but how can you guarantee if all the phonemes of the language coincidentally appeared in these 210 words? Plus, you can find the consonant /tɕ/ in the list, but it is not in the table; the list contains the consonant cluster /kw/, the editor changed it into a single consonant /kʷ/, yet left /ŋw/ and /hw/ unchanged. Let alone the tone contours table is wrong. Above all, I think this article does not meet the standard of Good Article. TongcyDai (talk) 12:02, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Northern Tai, not a mixed language

E/Wusehua can be safely considered to be a Northern Tai language. I have seen word lists of E, and the basic vocabulary words are clearly of Kra-Dai origin, even though it does have many more Chinese loanwords than neighboring Zhuang dialects. Proportionally, E has just about as many Chinese-origin words as Biao does, but Biao has not been explicitly mentioned as a mixed language. Lingnanhua (talk) 13:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)