Talk:Kabardian language

Old talk

Ubykh actually has 26 fricative phonemes, and thus outstrips Kabardian by 4. I'll change this in the article. thefamouseccles 00:27 27 March 2004 (UTC)

More old talk

Who edited this page last? Most linguists, and the Kabardians themselves, accept that Kabardian is a different language from Adyghe; for a start, Kabardian only has two phonemic vowels, whereas Adyghe has three. Have a look at [1], the Ethnologue entry. Both are part of a Circassian subfamily, but I and others would argue strongly that Kabardian and Adyghe are not the same language. I'm changing this back until I hear from this author, and will add some detail to this page soon. thefamouseccles 05:01, 02 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sir, this is NOT true. No Kabardian in the world considered or consider it as a different language. Moreover, in Kabardian dialect, the name of their language is simply "адыгэбзэ" (Adyghe language). Besides, the ethnologue entry link that you put above for us to have a look is not even the correct link for Kabardian (code: KBD), but for Kabyle (code: KAB) which is extremely irrelevant. I feel very sorry that I saw this message of yours ELEVEN years after you wrote it. Yet, it is never too late. Sincerely, Listofpeople (talk) 14:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Kabardian language template

If you are a native speaker of Kabardian then you can help translate this template into your own language:

kbdМы нэбгырэм адыгэбзэр и ныдэлъфыбзэщ.

To the template

--Amazonien (talk) 04:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

"One vowel" discussions among linguists

Might add to the article that Kabardian gained a certain amount of notoriety in some scholarly circles when it was proposed that it has only one underlying vowel or vowel phoneme (an analysis rejected by other linguists)... AnonMoos (talk) 13:22, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Ejective consonants

I think that the Ejective consonants in the Phonology chart and Orthography chart have to be change to velarized ejective consonants. the Adyghe people and the Kabardian people pronounce the Ejective consonants as velarized ejective consonants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamsa123 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Sure thing. Source? — kwami (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

How Kabardians related to Adyghe

The Kabardian people aren't closely related to the Adyghe people, they are one of the Adyghe people. the Adyghe people are the twelve Adyghe tribes : Abadzekh, Besleney, Bzhedug, Yegeruqay, Zhaney, Kabarday, Mamheg, Natukhai, Temirgoy, Ubykh, Shapsug and Hatuqwai. They all speak the Adyghe language (Adygabze) each with its own dialect for example the Kabardian people speak the Kabardian language, the Shapsug people speak the Shapsug language. the Kabardian people see themselves as Adyghe too and not something different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.179.238.18 (talk) 05:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Belatedly, thank you very much for bringing this into attention back in 2012. We are in 2016, and I'm still dealing with fixing the extremely false content in the article. Indeed, there is no single Kabardian in the world who consider Kabardian as a separate language. Undoubtedly, Kabardians, one of the twelve tribes of the Adyghe, speak Adyghe language. Sincerely, Listofpeople (talk) 02:10, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

so true! It would've been better actually if you guys changed the name of the article into the "kabardian dialect" or "kabardian literature dialect". It would've been so much better. Elarxux (talk) 01:00, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Also:

““Kabarda”, “Kabardian” in the language of the Kabardians are geographical concepts, and not the name of a nationality or language. From ancient times, Kabardians have called themselves “Adyghe”, and their language - only Adyghe.”

["Kabardian folklore", G.P. Broido.] Elarxux (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Ergative or Accusative?

The article mentions that Kabardian has an ergative case and is ergative-absolutive, but the gloss of one sentence includes NOM - nominative case. Mistake? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.230.175.53 (talk) 01:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

vowels

I completely rewrote this section based on actual sources. Note that all except Halle's article are generally available online (Halle's article is only on JSTOR, i.e. you need access to a university). I deleted some stuff on Cyrillic representation of vowels because (a) it's already present in the general table; (b) it confuses phonemic notation (//) with surface phonetic notation ([]). If the Cyrillic writes ко, that means [ko] like you'd expect. /kʷa/ is the underlying phonemic analysis, but this should be obvious given the current text in the section on vowels. Benwing (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

...

This page seems to have been done by someone who is largely unqualified to write the article. His classification of vowels is TOTALLY of the wall. His transcriptions of consonants are not IPA standard. Kabardian isn't a dialect of the Adyghe language, but a separate language. ЦIыху means person, not woman. Woman is цIыхубз. The treatment of the verb is TOTALLY INADEQUATE, covering only Stative verbs. In general the Wikipedia in Kabardian is becoming a mixed-up mess, representing a jumble of two languages, Kabardian and Adyghe. There should be two versions, one for each language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.76.30.67 (talk) 13:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

On the misleading content

Unfortunately there are a lot of issues in this article. First of all, its content is extremely misleading. I could fix it on my own, but such changes might seem radical to those who cannot speak Kabardian dialect or who does not have an adequate knowledge (other than reading the current problematic version) about this dialect. I feel sorry that I need to discuss all those issues on this talk page that slow the process while the problems in the article are of a kind that should be fixed immediately. Finally the title (Kabardian dialect) is in a quite acceptable form though I believe that Kabardian Adyghe dialect would also be the most appropriate title for this article, but both are okay and we can keep the current one which is also shorther in length. When I have time, I hope to be here to discuss each of the issues one by one. If I keep editing today, my version would still be much better than the current one, but I really do not like temporary solutions. I should edit it when I have much free time. I am also very sorry that I did not take notice of such errors until recently. I am afraid false information is already spread all over the internet (or beyond that). I see that some previous commentors on this page were already aware of the issues, but it seems many users, including myself, do not often check talk pages. Listofpeople (talk) 20:33, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

The thing is that you are not alone on Wikipedia, which means you'll have to cooperate with other editors. Your views about what Kabardian is are not the consensus among scholars, which means you'll most definitely have to discuss your views with others. Presenting evidence for your claims is especially important if you want to convince others (and is just as important to writing good articles). --JorisvS (talk) 20:50, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

When it comes to evidence, it's worth pointing out that what this implies isn't the kind of evidence you might use when drawing on your knowledge of Kabardian or your own analysis of the facts. That would be original research (WP:OR), something we do not do on wikipedia (after all, we aren't here to do the work that scholars and academics do, but use their output to build an encyclopedia). We have to rely on sources that are already published – it's worth taking a peek at WP:V and WP:RS. Uanfala (talk) 21:06, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, I am ready to cooperate with other editors to fix a misleading content which has been on Wikipedia for years, and has been source for many other websites. I don't know which other editors I should discuss the issues, though. Since there are many academic articles to support the non-personal views that I will mention below, I believe that you both can also improve/correct this article.

First of all, let me tell you tell you this: When speaking in Kabardian dialect, if you ask the speaker what language he speaks, he would tell you that he is speaking "адыгэбзэ" (адыгэ+бзэ), meaning Adyghe language although "бзэ" does not literally mean "language", but "-ish" (in the context of language only). There is no alternative to this. Surprisingly, it is already written in the current article that it is called "адыгэбзэ" in native. In addition, if you want to specify which dialect or sub-dialect of this language (Adyghe) you speak, you can say "къэбэрдей адыгэбзэ" (Kabardian Adyghe). Similarly, if you would like to particularly specify a name for the Shapsug sub-dialect of West Adyghe (Circassian) dialect of Adyghe (Circassian) language, you would say "шапсыгъабзэ". Unfortunately most people here does not know the difference between a dialect and a sub-dialect.

To make you more familiar with the dialects and sub-dialects of Adyghe language, let me put it this way: There are 12 main Adyghe tribes (large clans) with their own self-determined tribal names (with numerous alternative spellings in English that was used by different people though some are grammatically incorrect). These 12 tribes, each representing a star on the Circassian flag and each having a seat on the historical assembly of Circassia, are:

including in the paranthesis both correct alternative spellings and technically false spellings (some)

• Abzakh (Abadzekh, Abdzakh, etc.), second largest Adyghe tribe in the world
• Besleney (Beslenei, Beslaney, etc.)
• Bzhedug (Bjedug, Bzhedugh, etc.)
• Hatuqwai (Hatukay, Khatukai, etc.)
• Kabardian (Kabartwai, Kebertei, etc.), largest Adyghe tribe in the world
• Mamkhegh (Mamhig, Mamkhyag, etc.)
• Natukhai (Natuhwai, Notkuadzh, etc.)
• Shapsug (Shapsig, Shapsugh, etc.), third largest Adyghe tribe in the world
• Temirgoy (Kemguy, Temirgoi, etc.)
• Ubykh (Wbih, Upekhi, etc.)
• Yegeruqwai (Yegerukay, Edzherikuai, etc.)
• Zhaney (Zhane, Janei, etc.)

As I said, they were very large clans (some are not so today) enough to be regarded as tribes by themselves, they are all same people who gave themselves or were given by other Circassian tribes a tribal name, like Shapsug (those with pointed hat), Natukhai (those with greyish-blue eyes), Besleney (those of Beslan — son of a Kabardian prince), Kabardians (those living in Kabarda), etc. All those tribes had their own style of speaking because amongst Circassians, there were even hunting languages, children's languages, women's languages, though they are not languages in linguistic way, they were part of language game. Besides, each of these tribes (large clans or extended, big families), same in origin, had their own speaking styles that were changed both deliberately (secret language for fun and other) and naturally over the course of time due to geographical reasons (mountains) in their homeland and due to loandwords from neighbours. Historically, due to geographical proximity, a Besleney could be best understood by a Kabardian; a Shapsug (especially Hakuchi Shapsugs) could be best understood by an Ubykh, and a Zhaney could be best understood by a Natukhai. However, to the eye of non-Circassian linguists and present-day Circassian speakers (rather than historical ones), you can group three and two different ends, respectively.

By the way, I read that JorisV mentioned about the fact that there is no consensus amongst scholars. I hope you are not refering to some Soviet scholars who were exhorted by the regime who aimed to divide the unity of Circassians as much as possible. To put it very simply, after the Russian Empire expelled c. 90% of Adyghe people from their homeland, its successor, the Soviet Union, had to do something about this remaining c. 10%. The Soviet built three titular Circassian republics: Republic of Adygea, Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria, Republic of Karachay-Cherkessia. You might ask: Why not a single a single district of Circassia and a single Karachayevo-Balkaria? Well, it was the Soviet designation. if you were an Adyghe of Temirgoy or Bzhedug tribe, for instance, who happened to live in the present-day Republic of Adygea, you were called Adyghe according to the Soviet; If you were an Adyghe of Kabardian tribe who happened to live a bit eastwards of the so-called Republic of Adygea; you were called Kabardian (as if not Adyghe); if you were an Adyghe of Shapsug tribe who happened to live in present-day Krasnodar Krai (a bit southwards of the so-called Republic of Adygea), you are called Shapsug (as if not Adyghe); if you were an Adyghe of Besleney tribe, who happened to live in the middle between the Temirgoy Adyghe in the north and Kabardian Adyghe, you were called "Cherkess" (as if they are not Adyghe and as if others are not Cherkess) — the funniest of all perhaps, because the word Cherkess is the Turkish and Russian word for Circassian. So, would you ignore the self-designation of the Circassians themselves, and pay regard only to the Soviet designation that aimed to divide them geographically using different political unit names (because they could not divide Circassians based on any other thing)? If you do so, we would have a brand new four different ethnic group (?), speaking 2 different language (?). By the way, those Soviet linguists based the literary for the so-called Adyghe language as well as the so-called Shapsug language on the Temirgoy tribe's way (because they were the majority of the remaining tribes in the early 20th century, although being one of the minority of the worldwide Adyghe population), the literary for the so-called Kabardian language as well as the so-called Cherkess language on the Kabardian tribe's way, so you have three different people with two literary languages. Thank God, they did not divide into more pieces. Well, I may not be capable to intervene into these administrative unit names, but I am capable to write a Wikipedia article the way that it should be.

I don't know for what reason another user changed the title from "dialect" into "language". The new title was almost the only correct thing about this article, not it's gone, too. If there is really not a consensus, why do not we start making the title "Kabardian" simply without the terms "dialect" or "language", as in the case of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantonese, until we three or others reach a consensus?

Meanwhile, I saw these two articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastphalian_dialect and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westphalian_language

Do you think that "language" is better wording for Westphalian, whilst Eastphalian is a "dialect"?

Adyghe (both singular and plural) in Circassian = Circassian[s] in English = Çerkes[ler] in Turkish = Черкес[ы] in Russian = Tscherkess[en] in German

Temirgoy

Temirgoy

Adamey

Yegeruqwai

Makhosh

Besleney

Kabardian

Kuban Kabardian

Hatuqwai

Bzhedug

Adele

Zhaney

Natukhai

Natukhai

Abzakh

Abzakh

Ubykh

Shapsug

Shapsug

Mamkhegh

Shegak

Abazin

Tapanta

Abkhaz

Anapa-----

Novorossisk-

Gelendzhik-

Tuapse-----

Sochi-----

Gagra-----

class=notpageimage|

Approximate location of Circassian tribes, Tsutsiev's Atlas

Sincerely, Listofpeople (talk) 01:57, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to a discussion that is relevant to this page

I've reverted some recent edits to this page, and explained myself in here. The discussion concerns many articles, so I thought it would be a good idea to keep it central. I hereby invite everyone who is interested to join the discussion on Talk:Northwest Caucasian languages. Thank you

Vito Genovese 13:41, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kabardian language. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080425145640/http://www.adyga.org/ to http://www.adyga.org/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.audio.adyga.org/

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) 22:25, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Change the title to dialect

If someone can, please change it to "Kabardian dialect" Elarxux (talk) 04:56, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

It’s not a dialect, it’s a separate language. And you screwed up the page and the talk page, and now it is difficult for me to move it back to Kabardian language and Talk:Kabardian language. Revert your edits please. Fdom5997 (talk) 05:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Nah, it's not a separate language,we Kabardians know better. Also, as I can see, you already reverted everything. What's the problem? Elarxux (talk) 07:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Talkpage out of sync

@Fdom5997 Hi - I see that you reverted the article move. Could you please move this talkpage back to Talk:Kabardian language as well? It's currently out of sync with the article. It feels like these moves were done in an intentionally awkward way, to make it difficult to revert them, so I'd appreciate your help with this. Thanks. Theknightwho (talk) 05:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Sure. Weird because I thought it automatically moves the talk page with the language page. Fdom5997 (talk) 05:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Yeah for some reason I am trying to move the talk page to Talk:Kabardian language, but it’s not working. Fdom5997 (talk) 05:43, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

They seem to have been decoupled by an earlier move of just the talkpage, which meant your reverts ended up reinstating a redirect. We'll need someone with deletion rights to fix it, I think (which I suspect was the intention of the mover...). Theknightwho (talk) 05:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

We really need to get someone to undo this. This can’t be overlooked! Fdom5997 (talk) 05:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

why even bother reverting it back if you're unable to do it properly? A person with a nickname "Listofpeople" explained pretty well why this article has a lot of issues and why the title is misleading (mind you, it was stated back in 2016). And yet noone bothered to change the title. I didn't see any reasons to keep it (no one argued about it and no one could bring any valid statements as to why we should keep it), that's why I changed it. Elarxux (talk) 07:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

the only thing you need to undo is your last edit and everything will be fine. I don't get it. If you want this talk page to have the same title as the main article, just change the article's title back. Elarxux (talk) 07:22, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Which edit do you want me to undo? Fdom5997 (talk) 07:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

@Elarxux which edit should I undo? Fdom5997 (talk) 15:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I think you still can change title back to match the Talk page Elarxux (talk) 16:29, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

No I can’t. It’s not letting me. Thanks a lot you, for screwing this up! Fdom5997 (talk) 17:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

literally no one asked you to revert it back. When I changed the title, the topic's title was changed as well. When you did it, everything got screwed. If you want to blame someone here, blame only yourself. Elarxux (talk) 19:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Well I wasn’t the one who dumbly decided to move the page to “Kabardinian dialect” in the first place without *any* discussion whatsoever.. Fdom5997 (talk) 19:39, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I already said that there was a discussion, and no one disagreed with a man who suggested to change the title. Thats why I decided to change it . It is clearly made as a rip-off of the russian article called "кабардино-черкесский язык", which doesn't make any sens and is misleading in so many freaking wayse If you want I can try reverting back my edit, but then we should try changing the title. That's what I suggest. Elarxux (talk) 19:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

It turns out I can undo my actions only till the moment where I already changed the title of talk page.

It would be wise for now to try changing the Title and talk page Title into something different from "Kabardian language" and "Kabardian dialect"/"Kabardian Dialect", because it won't let me or you edit it. Elarxux (talk) 20:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

No it would not. The opposite is true! And hopefully you changed the name of the talk page. Now leave it alone! Fdom5997 (talk) 20:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Hmm...it seems like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fdom5997 doesn't want to cooperate and tries to push his agenda here. Elarxux (talk) 20:12, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Obviously because you’re to blame, and you screwed up the page in the first place all because you don’t even know what you’re doing. And now you have the audacity to point fingers at me and anyone else, as you’re literally an inexperienced user who calls a simple translation of a page as a “rip-off”. And no, you did not try to change the talk page back to “Talk:Kabardian language” like you should have done. You screwed it up, so you started it, now shut up. Fdom5997 (talk) 20:15, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I see.

Well, yep, I agree on that part completely. I started this and I'm not the most experienced editor. But I refuse to elaborate till I see why exactly my dialect, as a Kabardian, should be classified as a different language. Almost no one among circassians considers it a different language.

Again, you either talk like a person who tries to reach some conclusion here, that would make the overall experience more unbiased, or just stop whining like a crybaby who lost his temper in seconds. I won't change it till I see a better reason to do so than "do it, because I said so". Elarxux (talk) 20:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

It is a different language. Circassian is a subgroup of languages, not its own language. Not sure where you get that info from. Fdom5997 (talk) 20:37, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

No, it isn't. It was classified as a different language by Soviet/Russian Empire scholars, and western scholars based their interpretations of this language on soviet/russian works, so it's not a surprise that in the west people believe that Circassian is a group of languages, but no, it's not. The group of languages is Adyghe-abkhaz group, which splits into adyghe language, abkhaz (apsua), abaza language and ubykh language. They can be called and considered a different languages, because by caucasian standards they're distinct enough. But even scholars such as Dumezil or Colarusso stated that Kabardian is not a different language and although it has a lot of differences by european standards, it can be still considered a dialect. Circassians understand each other better, than russians understand ukrainians. Also, the method by which we define what can or cannot be considered a "dialect" or a "language" is not universal at all. Usually it depends on people's ethnic identity and self-awareness. If people consider themselves a different ethnic group, usually scientists would say that they have a different language (like ingush language for example, their language is almost indistinguishable from chechen).But in our case it can and must be considered a dialect, because first of all, we understand each other pretty well when we speak with other circassians (especially besleney, abdzakh and chemgoy). And second, in our language it is called the same as in west circassian (адыгэбзэ). If needed, I can bring alot of evidence as to "why" it can be considered a dialect. Elarxux (talk) 20:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Also, mind you, if you consider Kabardian a different language, you should also by all means consider a shapsug and chemirgoy dialects of west circassian to be different languages. Elarxux (talk) 20:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Opposing your undiscussed move that lacked any consensus is not an "agenda". It's simply how Wikipedia works. Theknightwho (talk) 22:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, I can refer to the discussion that was done in 2016 and that people changed the title back to "Kabardian language" without any consensus too (I saw it when I was moving the page). This works in both ways. There wasn't any consensus to change the Wiki article title to "language". At least, I didn't see it. The opinions are divided, and the article itself shows it pretty well. It happens sometimes, it's a normal thing. It doesn't have to be a consensus, that's why I suggested to change the Title to just "Kabardian". It would've been the best option in this situation.

And if this is how Wikipedia works, then people should've discussed this a long time ago, when this page was first created (mind you, they somehow did! The problem is, the guy who provided the most important takes and info on to "why we should change Title to dialect" was just ignored for literally years).

Also, if you've read closely what https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fdom5997 wrote, you'll see that he didn't even provide any points or counter-thesis. He just tells me to keep it and the only thing he got to say is "trust me, bro". That is my problem with all of this, please understand. Elarxux (talk) 00:42, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

also, here's a link to John Colarusso's interview. He's basically the grandfather of modern circassian linguistics. He literally specializes in this, it's his main interest (mind you, he's not a kabardian or circassian himself, so talking about his bias is not really possible).

To put it simply, he states, that there is one Circassian language and that people speak different dialects of it, and that the line drawn between them by scholars sometimes is very formal. Elarxux (talk) 04:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Also, replying to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Theknightwho, I want to assure you, that it wasn't done intentionally in awkward way. I just didnt see any reasons to keep it as it is. That's all. Elarxux (talk) 20:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Still you screwed it up, and you should be ashamed, because now there’s not an easy way to change everything back! Fdom5997 (talk) 20:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

im not ashamed at all, because I still don't see the reasons why we should keep it. You're wasting time.

Rather, I suggest changing it again, but just to "Kabardian". Not a language or a dialect. It would make the most sense here. Elarxux (talk) 20:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)