Talk:Norway/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The following subjects were moved from Talk:Norway on 16 January 2006 (see diff). For the original contribution history, see the history of the original page.

If you would like to start new subjects, kindly do so at Talk:Norway.

On names of counties, cities and municipalities

The Norway pages use the official name forms, for the following reasons:

The "English" forms" we have seen are bastards from a language point of view, translating parts of names and transcribing letters as seems fit.
No reliable standard nor historically founded tradition seams to exist for the quasi-English forms, leading to a number of variants of the same name. This is a big problem.
The reliable official forms are the only suitable means of cross referencing.
The CIA factbook uses the Norwegian names

EOD -- Egil 15:14 Mar 23, 2003 (UTC)

The reason the county list I added was partly anglicised was first of all because of Wikipedia's anglicisation policy. We have agreed to use English names and though this case is not specifically mentioned the general idea is that English is preferred and as such certain geographical terms can frequently easily be translated (primarily directions such as east, west, north, south or a simple conjunction like "and"). Contrary to your claim, this is most definitely an historic tradition in many languages, even if you may not have seen it applied to small Norwegian counties.

A second reason is consistency with the rest of the countries that have had the template applied to them (I've added the native forms next to the English forms where appropriate, but removed the capitals because of this). Though we initially use some of their information, we are not the CIA. The CIA Factbook clearly does not have an anglicisation policy, as almost all names used by them are retained in native form. As for these being "official" names, it is obvious that Norway has no authority over the English language so it's not compulsory for us to use the native names, especially since we mention them in the article anyway and redirects take care of the rest.

Thirdly, it would IMO be wiser to be as informative as possible, to both native and international readers. Since English is the vehicle used here it follows that English words are always clearer to readers than local names. Translating bits of a name that are not part of the proper name makes the list more informative. A foreign, non-native English reader likely will not know what "og" means, but he will known what "and" means.

Finally, I would like to point out that calling people "language POV bastards" is a sure-fire way to not being taking wholly seriously. Try to be a little more constructive and discuss things first before declaring "EOD". -Scipius 18:30 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)

I can assure you that the word "bastard" in this context was most specifically not meant about people, but about the invented names. They are a mix of a little bit of that and a little bit of that. The wording got pretty nonsensical, though, (I was in a hurry when I wrote it) which meant it could easily be interpreted either way. I've cleaned it up a bit.

We've tried the mixed forms before, and it ended up as a Babelesque confusion with many variants. The names you've put in are just inventions, with no relevance to any tradition. It doesn't really make sense to translate this way, just as it makes no sense to "translate" the name of a person (e.g. translating "Von" or "al-" to "of", for instance). And thanks, we've tried it before, and it just ends up in one grand confusion. The counties have proper names with an official status, and these are well defined. Exactly where and what is translated? Just name of counties? What else? Municipalities? Towns? Rivers? Fjords? Should "Storelvdal" become "Big River Valley"? How are you expecting people that does not know Norwegian to be able to find these locations on a map? What about Arabic names? Chinese names? Other languages? Do you think it is appropriate to translate parts of such names? Or you do think that part translations should only happen for languages with which you are familiar? -- Egil 06:55 Apr 24, 2003 (UTC)

I feel that the English translations of the county names are strange. They are names of entities that there is no tradition for translating. Even between bokmål and nynorsk there is no tradition for using any other name than the official one (Aust Agder is never Øst Agder and Sogn og Fjordane is never Sogn og Fjordene). And a name like Sogn and the Fjords is just plain stupid. No, stick with the Norwegian names, much like it is done with the French regions. -- Gustavf 07:44 Apr 24, 2003 (UTC)

Official language

Status of the Saami language

I am not sure how to best explain the status of Northern Saami language in a short overview. It is not an official language the same way as Norwegian (both Nynorsk and Bokmål), which is used in all branches of government. However it is used by the governemt in certain regions (in Troms and Finnmark). It seems a bit oversimplified to state that both Norwegian and Northern Saami are official languages. Other views are welcome :-) -- Gustavf 09:41, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to do it either, but here is what the law says: Lov om Sametinget og andre samiske rettsforhold (sameloven) § 1-5. Samisk språk: Samisk og norsk er likeverdige språk.

Wrong. Here is what the general law says:

Lov 1980-04-11-5 nr. 05 om målbruk i offentleg teneste, http://www.lovdata.no/all/hl-19800411-005.html

§ 1. Bokmål og nynorsk er likeverdige målformer og skal vere jamstelte skriftspråk i alle organ for stat, fylkeskommune og kommune.

§ 2. For statstenesta gjeld dei nærmare reglane i §§ 3 til 11 om plikt til å nytte bokmål og nynorsk.

§ 4. Tilsette i embete eller statstenestepost der skriftleg utforming er del av tenesta, pliktar å nytte bokmål og nynorsk etter dei reglane som til kvar tid gjeld for målbruk i statstenesta.

Which translates to something like "Saami and Norwegian shall be languages of equal status". However, the law gives further details in chapter 3. The Saami government area ("samisk forvaltningsområde") includes the municipalities Karasjok, Kautokeino, Nesseby, Porsanger, Tana and Kåfjord (there has been some talk about adding Snåsa with Southern Saami as the language), and the further regulations about the status of Saami language are limited to this area (or institutions covering at least these areas). But I am still not sure how to describe this. Perhaps something like "Norwegian (and Saami in some regions)" and to add a paragraph in the demographucs section? -- Gustavf 10:01, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Perhaps "Norwegian, with Saami in special regions"?

Sounds fine with me. -- Gustavf 11:01, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Looking at the Wikipedia definition of official language does Norway even have an official language? -- Gustavf 10:47, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yes, Norway have two official languages, bokmål and nynorsk (both are variations over the same language, and very close, bokmål almost similar, to Danish. Sami is not an official language of the state of Norway, but is equal to Norwegian in a very few kommuner (districts) in the fylke (province) of Finnmark, which was a colony until 1814.

And, I may add, there are only 6000 registrated Sami People (in Samemanntallet), but over 4 500 000 Norwegians in Norway.

I would like to point out that "Bokmål og nynorsk er likeverdige målformer og skal vere jamstelte skriftspråk i alle organ for stat, fylkeskommune og kommune. ( and the rest )" absolutely not translates to "Saami and Norwegian shall be languages of equal status" This is just plain bs, it is totaly wrong! It means that nynorsk og bokmål shall be equal languages, saami isn't even mentioned! Saami is not a official language of norway. thanks -from a Norwegian.

Regarding the difference between Bokmål and Nynorsk; Bokmål is in fact danish. It's a simplified version of danish. Nynorsk however is a gathering of norwegian dialects made into a language by Ivar Aasen in the 1800's. Nynorsk as it was originally would probably not be understood by norwegians today. Bokmål(danish) however would be understood by todays norwegians. Through a series of reforms following norways independce, the two languages came closer to each other, and are today fairly similar. Mostly the two languages share most words, and the way of building up sentences, but there are also words that are completly different from another. Because most people speak Bokmål, and because it is the most common used language in newspapers, TV and radio; people speaking Nynorsk dialects quite easily can speak and write Bokmål. However people speaking bokmål as a native tounge, might find it hard writing and even understand certain nynorsk dialects. Further on it is worth mentioning that most norwegians understands danish quite well, danish might find it difficult understanding norwegians. Cheers, Henrik

Bokmål and Nynorsk are written languages, and many spoken dialects are quite far from both Bokmål and Nynorsk. Only very few speak either of the two, so talking about "people speaking Bokmål" or "people speaking Nynorsk" is rather imprecise. For example I write Bokmål most of the time, but I speak a dialect that is closer to Nynorsk than to Bokmål. --Eddi (Talk) 19:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I have with interest read the debate here about official languages in Norway. The situation is comparable with the situation of the federal level in Canada. The status of Bokmål and Nynorsk are the same as with English and French in Canada. And the Saami language has the same status in Norway as the First Nation languages have in Canada. But you have forgotten Finnish. One community is officially trilingual with both Norwegian, Saami and Finnish all recognized as administrative languages there. Cato from Oslo.

Apart from the fact that Bokmål and Nynorsk are interintelligible while English and French are not – that is, not to those who haven't learnt both – the language situation may be comparable. --Eddi (Talk) 19:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Bokmål and Nynorsk

Hi, I have a question on the status of Bokmål and Nynorsk. According to the article, both are officially recognised languages.

But, Norwegian stamps (e.g. [1]) show only the Bokmål name "Norge" and not the Nynorsk name "Noreg". Does that mean that Bokmål is practically the first language and Nynorsk is the second? Everton 02:54, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

If it is the case that only "Norge" is used on stamps, it is probably because of a necessity for using the same name on all stamps (to avoid confusion). The state tries to enforce the equality of the languages as best they can. In such cases where they have to choose one over the other bokmål is probably (undoubtedly) the most frequent choice, though in some cases you might find nynorsk chosen. Your question does not have a definitive answer. The vast majority of the population use bokmål, and bokmål is the official language in most municipalities, so in this sense bokmål is clairly the first language in practice, but on state level I would say the equality exists also in practice, because in official state matters there is of course a high level of overlap between formal and practical status. In other words: They would probably issue 50% of the stamps with "Noreg" if they didn't have a good reason not to. I hope this was at least slightly helpful for you. :)

Kvaks 22:42, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

There are stamps with both Norge (bokmål) and Noreg (nynorsk) though not simultaneously in my long abandoned stamp collection, you've just been unlucky Everton. --Kaleissin 21:18:41, 2005-08-19 (UTC)

Kaleissin is right, there are stamps with both forms. Even money notes use both forms. All notes use Norges Bank on one side, and Noregs Bank on the other. Even the coins have two forms; The 20 and the 10 uses "Alt for Norge", the 5 uses "Kongeriket Noreg" and the 1 Norge. Cheers, Henrik

Start of edit war

I protected the page as you requested Gustavf. Ask someone to help you mediate if you can't solve your issue alone :-) Anthère

You have protected a page for a person (Gustavf) who is inserting wrong and political (not NPOV) information on Norway. Maybe some Saami fanatics will tell you that Saami is an official language of Norway, but most people will not. It's just co-official in a very few municipalities and is written by the Saami people - 6000 persons out of 4,5 million Norwegians, and should therefore be written as a footnote (see for instance Denmark, under Official language)

You should probably also have a look on the German, French, Danish, Swedish etc. wikis. Why are the English wiki telling you that Saami is an official Norwegian language, when none of the other wikis (and other encyclopædias at all) are? The answer is Gustavf.

I have contacted the Norwegian consulate in Washington D.C. and asked them to clarify the matter. This issue should be resolved shortly. --Dante Alighieri 18:18, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Excellent. They will tell you exactly what I've already told.

Very good. I assume everyone will accept them as an authorative source. -- Gustavf 11:52, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I will not comment on the attacks on my person from an IP address user. -- Gustavf 08:28, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

In the Norwegian passport 'Norway' is written in the two official languages, bokmål and nynorsk: Norge, Noreg. Not in Saami. Isn't that prove enough?

No, that is not enough. In my Dutch passport, I see "Koninkrijk der Nederlanden" in Dutch, with smaller English and French versions. Still, Frisian is an official language of the Netherlands (although only in Friesland), while English and French are not. Andre Engels 19:00, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Well, Saami is co-official in a few municialities in the northern provinces. It's not an official language of Norway (as a state). There is a difference. Therefore, Saami should be mentioned in a footnote, just like Inuktitut on Denmark and Danish on Germany.

I just spoke with the Norwegian Embassy in Washington. The way that it was explained to me (over a 5-10 minute conversation) was very detailed. I will try to summarize it briefly here. Norwegian (both Bokmål and Nynorsk) is the official language of Norway, in that it is the mother tongue of a majority of the population and is also compulsary to learn in schools in Norway. It would be "politically correct" (exact words of the woman from the Embassy) to list Saami as an official language as well, as it is the mother tongue of the Saami people who live in northern Norway. As the Saami people have been attempting to further their rights as indigenous peoples in the north, more and more credence is being given to the Saami language, at least politically. There are Saami radio stations, television stations, and newspapers. However, unlike Norwegian, Saami is not compulsary teaching throughout Norway. It is only taught in Saami communities in the north, and really only used in the same communities. It was likened to the situation in

Quechua

is the mother tongue of the indigenous peoples (as well as of the natives of Bolivia, Ecuador, northern Chile, et al.). For the record, I also called the Peruvian embassy and they told me that Quechua is also an official language. I'm updating the article on Peru now.

I think that the best way to express this in the article is to list Norwegian and Saami as the official languages in the article and to put a footnote marker by Saami. The footnote could explain that while it is listed as an official language, it does not have the same status as Norwegian (it isn't compulsary education) and is only spoken by a minority of the national population and only in Saami communities in the north.

Anyone who wishes to confirm this is free to call (202) 333-6000 (The Washington D.C. Norwegian Embassy) or any of the other embassy/consulate sites listed on this page. --Dante Alighieri 20:09, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)4

I still think Saami should be mentioned in a footnoote just like Inuktitut on Denmark and Danish on Germany. De jure is Saami not an official language of Norway, but just co-official in these municipalities, and there are only 6000 registrated Saami people (Samemanntallet) out of 4,5 million Norwegians, so the information is not so relevant for people who is reading about Norway. There are much larger language minorities than Saami in Norway (Urdu, for instance). The Saami area isn't even a part of the historical Norway, but had status of colony until 1814. Several languages are also spoken in the British Commonwealth, but they are not mentioned as Official languages on the top of the page in the article United Kingdom. Neither should Saami in the article about Norway.

Heine's suggestion

My suggestion:

Official language: Norwegian bokmål and nynorsk¹

[...]

(1) Saami is co-official in a few municipalities in the northern provinces of Finnmark and Troms.

We have now gotten an answer from someone that should be authorative and Isuggest someone from outside the edit war makes a decission. -- Gustavf 06:29, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Well, just remember that the secretary at the Embassy was asked what is official and correct de jure, not what is "politically correct" to say. This case is identical with the case on Denmark and Germany, and I think we should follow the style used on other articles.

No one told you she was a secretary or that she was asked "what is official and correct de jure". Please don't make statements about things that know nothing about as if you DID know something about them. Furthermore, if you sign your comments, people will probably take you more seriously. --Dante Alighieri 20:30, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Article 110a in the Norwegian Constitution states: "It is the responsibility of the authorities of the State to create conditions enabling the Sami people to preserve and develop its language, culture and way of life."

When I was talking to the woman at the embassy, I asked her if it would be appropriate to phrase it in the following way: Norwegian and Saami as official languages (with a footnote by Saami). The footnote would explain that Saami was not compulsary education (unlike Norwegian) and is only in use in certain communities in the North. I told her that our primary concern was factual accuracy, not political correctness, and she didn't say that it was incorrect to list Saami as an official language, so I'm inclined to think we ought to... especially since she likened the position to Peru (which lists Spanish, Quechua, and Aymara all as offical languages - check the temp page).

Still, I don't mind listing Norwegian only with a footnote about Saami, but I leave that up to the rest of you to decide. My work here is done. ;) As a bit of trivia, if anyone cares and didn't know, Norwegian and Danish are practically the same spoken language... they are mutually intelligible. --Dante Alighieri 17:32, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

This secretary in the USA should study the country she is working for some more. None of these languages she is talking about are official. 1) It doesn't exist a language called "Norwegian". The official languages of Norway are bokmål and nynorsk (both are Norwegian languages), and actually no one other!!!

Saami is used beside both bokmål and nynorsk in schools etc. in a very few municipalities in Finnmark and Troms. I does not make it an official Norwegian language ("Norway" refer to the state of Norway! For norskspråklige: merk forskjellen på statlig, fylkeskommunalt og kommunalt nivå. Bokmål og nynorsk er på statlig nivå, samisk på kommunalt). Saami is not used in the Norwegian passport, because it is not an official language of the state, but only of some municipalities.

To list Saami as an official language in the article Norway is a) wrong and b) it's no point in giving 6000 people so much attention, beside 4 500 000. What you could do, is to list Saami as official language in the article Kautokeino and other municipalities where Saami is used.

Again: Please have a look on "Official language" on Denmark and Germany, to see how cases like this are handled on Wikipedia.

By the way: Norwegian and Danish are not practically the same spoken language, but written Norwegian and Danish are very similar. Norwegian, Danish and Swedish are though mutually intelligible.

First of all, I gave you no indication that the person I was speaking to was a secretary. Are you assuming that a woman must be a secretary? This, of course, assumes you are using the normal AE definition of secretary, which I really don't know for certain. But, if you do mean Secretary (in the sense of an appointed official), please forgive me. Given the tone of your usage, howevr, I doubt you meant the latter.

I don't think you spoke to the Ambassador :-) Heine 01:38, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Make light as much as you want, I'm not the one sounding like a bigot. --Dante Alighieri 06:00, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Second of all, we ALL know that Norwegian is two languages, and not one, read the text above. Rather than typing Bokmål and Nynorsk OVER AND OVER we simply type Norwegian for convenience at times.

Furthermore, you can stop telling me to look at Denmark and Germany, I've already done so. Have you looked at Peru?

Lastly, my usage of "practically the same spoken language" was perhaps a bit of hyperbole. I just meant to indicate that the two languages were mutually intelligible... as they are, apparently, with Swedish as well.

--Dante Alighieri 20:21, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Here's a quote from "Innføring i lingvistikk" which was used for the introdutory linguistics course at the University of Oslo:

Vi har tre språk med offisiell status i Norge i dag: norsk (med de to skriftspråksvariantene nynorsk og bokmål), samisk, og norsk tegnspråk (NTS). (...) Mens norsk er majoritetsspråket, og brukes av langt de fleste språkbrukerne, er samisk og NTS minoritetsspråk som brukes av mindre grupper språkbrukere. (Det finnes også andre minoritetsspråk i Norge, men de har ikke offisiell status.)

That is: There are three languages with official status: Norwegian, Saami and sign language. (Possibly there is a difference between "official language" and "language with official status".)

It is wrong to say that bokmål and nynorsk are seperate languages. The language is called Norwegian, and bokmål and nynorsk are the two variants of written Norwegian. Fisk 23:14, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Kjære vene, hvor lenge skal dette holde på?? "Offisiell status" betyr ikke at det er et nasjonalt språk av den typen man lister opp i leksika. Samisk og tegnspråk har en formalisert posisjon på avgrensede områder, men har ingenting under "Official language" å gjøre. Det kan godt hende at engelsk tegnspråk har en formalisert posisjon også, men engelsk tegnspråk STÅR IKKE UNDER "OFFICIAL LANGUAGE" I ARTIKKELEN OM UK!!! Rettledende for hvilke språk som skal regnes som offisielle nasjonale språk, og følgelig listes under "Official languages" bør være hvilke norske språk som er brukt i det norske passet. PS: Bokmål og nynorsk er to forskjellige språk. EOD!

Kunn De gir en Engelsk oversettelse behager? Angela 22:29, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

It was meant for my Norwegian fellows, but of course: A kind of formal (f.i. protected by a law or something, like Danish in Germany) position is not the same as a status of official, national language which should be listed under "Official language" in encyclopedias. Other encyclopedias are not listing sign language and Saami as official Norwegian languages. I still think only the Norwegian languages used for instance in the Norwegian passport (bokmål and nynorsk) should be mentioned as official languages (and Saami in a footnote, of course). heine

I think that as Saami is co-official in some places, there is no problem with stating that in the main box as well as explanation of this fact. However, as it really an issue of formatting - the content will be the same as Saami will still be listed and it will still say that this is co-official - then I don't see the need for an edit war. Gustavf, what are your objections to listing it as a footnote? Angela 02:29, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yes, Saami is co-official of some (very few) municipalities, but not of the state of Norway. I think the German word Amtssprache best desribes what "Official language" in this case are referring to. No one will say Saami is an Amtssprache, or what we in Norwegian probably would call (statlig) forvaltningsspråk. Heine

I object to changing something that has been agreed upon on the talk page without even discussing it here. That is the reason for the edit war. -- Gustavf 06:34, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

"Agreed"? By exactly ONE person (Gustavf) plus an unsigned message? Do you think it is up to only you to decide? Heine

If I were you, Heine, I wouldn't point fingers about unsigned messages. --Dante Alighieri 08:03, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Mr Anonymous. Forget I said anything. Fisk 23:47, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with writing bokmål and nynorsk along with Norwegian, which seems to be what half the edit war was about. With regards to the Saami issue, I think that what was suggested above about saying "Norwegian, with Saami in special regions" is probably the best idea. This isn't claiming it is an official language throughout Norway and noting the fact it's used only in some areas. Heine, do you still have a problem with this? It's hard to tell when you write in Norwegian and don't sign your posts quite what you're thinking. Angela 23:57, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I still support this idea, just as I did when it was first introduced. -- Gustavf 06:34, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Conclusion

A summary of Heine's message: The German, French, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Polish and Norwegian Wikipedias do not list Saami as official. See [2] for the links to prove this. Angela 02:29, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Have a look on this english article on the homepage of the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs: "Norway: Small country with two written languages " http://odin.dep.no/odin/engelsk/norway/history/032005-990497/index-dok000-b-n-a.html

Especially: "Norway has two official written languages, Bokmål (Dano-Norwegian) and Nynorsk (New Norwegian)."

Maybe we now could bring this discussion to an end? Heine 22:06, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Change to my version Heine 00:14, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

So, unprotecting the page means that your version should be used? Would it not be better if we (the persons involved in the edit war) left the diting of "official language" to someone else? -- Gustavf 07:05, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Heine, are you happy with the latest compromise? Saami is clearly not being referred to as the language of the whole country. Both bokmål and nynorsk are mentioned too. Can you all stop fighting now? Any further objections? Angela 18:23, Oct 7, 2003 (UTC)

It seems fine with me. Heine 22:45, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

But there are several Sami languages in Norway, not only one - and they are as different as Bokmål and Dutch (Nordsamisk, Lulesamisk, Skoltesamisk, Sørsamisk etc. Sami is a group of languages! Jakro64 20:06, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)