AndThenTheyRan
Joined 17 August 2011
Latest comment: 12 years ago by AndThenTheyRan in topic Bunwurrung language etc.
Welcome
edit
|
Bunwurrung language etc.
editFor the citation tags, the ref is Dixon (2002). I'm not sure he's a good reference, though. Would you happen to have an up-to-date classification of Kulin languages available? — kwami (talk) 07:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply! I haven't seen any new classifications for any of the Kulin languages other than that, and so far the only place I've seen Boon Wurrung referred to as under the Woi Wurrung heading is here, with that same ref. Do you have any more information on it, like the ISBN? That way I could see if it's in any collections near me and check if it's a good source. Thanks, AndThenTheyRan (talk) 00:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- [1] Dixon certainly qualifies as a RS; the problem is that few other Australianists agree with him on very much. Since he's so reticent about accepting relationships (he doesn't accept Pama-Nyungan), I thought he'd be good as a conservative check on overly ambitious lumping, but it turns out that he lumps together poorly known languages that other people do not accept as related, even though they otherwise accept dozens of families that he does not. — kwami (talk) 20:17, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry about the time between replies. I've added that ref to the page's infobox, but I couldn't think of how to work it in to the actual article, especially as there aren't many people who agree with him & the page doesn't have much content to begin with. I know you're probably really busy, but if you ever come across any more info on Boon Wurrung from a reliable source, could you add it to the article or let me know so that I can? Thanks very much for your help, AndThenTheyRan (talk) 11:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- [1] Dixon certainly qualifies as a RS; the problem is that few other Australianists agree with him on very much. Since he's so reticent about accepting relationships (he doesn't accept Pama-Nyungan), I thought he'd be good as a conservative check on overly ambitious lumping, but it turns out that he lumps together poorly known languages that other people do not accept as related, even though they otherwise accept dozens of families that he does not. — kwami (talk) 20:17, 22 May 2012 (UTC)