Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Folkspraak on Wikipedia

Expand Messages
  • The Jade Knight
    There is currently discussion to delete the Folkspraak article on Wikipedia. Feel free to enter the discussion here:
    Message 1 of 14 , Dec 29, 2005
      There is currently discussion to delete the Folkspraak article on
      Wikipedia. Feel free to enter the discussion here:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Folkspraak
      _language
    • Alan J Munday (Most Rev.)
      I had a bit of a job finding the relevant section where it was being discussed, although I realise that perhaps I did not copy the url from the previous
      Message 2 of 14 , Dec 29, 2005
        I had a bit of a job finding the relevant section where it was being
        discussed, although I realise that perhaps I did not copy the url from
        the previous message properly. However, if anyone else has problems,
        the section can be found at http://snipurl.com/l5gy .

        As a complete newbie to Folkspraak, I do not feel so competent to step
        in and say much, but I am getting the feeling that the discussion is
        missing the point at the moment as it follows the track of verifiability.

        If I remember rightly Folkspraak originated in a multinational community
        living in Denmark where a common language was needed among the
        participants. Since that time, although it seems to have been a
        minority interest perhaps, it has nevertheless been a genuine one. The
        fact that members of this list are seeking ways of developing it, and
        similar off the point comments, to my mind should not really be the
        focus of verifiability among the powers that be on Wikipedia.

        I would suggest that perhaps someone among us knowledgeable about
        Folkspraak and its origins, as well as its development and potential
        should revise the information. It seems to need more emphasis on the
        origin and real use of the language and mentioning appropriate source
        texts about the language. Also the different examples of proposed
        versions to me seem to be confusing and is drawing criticism. If
        Folkspraak is developing in different ways so that different versions of
        the Lord's Prayer, for instance can be written, I feel that defeats the
        whole object of developing it as a common language. There needs to be
        more convergence. On the other hand it the differing versions of
        Folkspraak are how it has developed so far, but there is a need to
        overcome the problem of divergence so that only one vocabulary exists,
        then perhaps an appropriate explanation of the different versions is needed.

        Please excuse me if my lack of understanding is showing above, but I am
        hoping that possibly my having come freshly to Folkspraak information
        might provide helpful input for your consideration. If it is not that
        helpful though I will quite understand.

        Wishing you all a happy 2006

        Alan
      • Alan J Munday (Most Rev.)
        Just a quick one following on from my previous message. I have just looked up the Glosa page in Wikipedia and would suggest that it is quite a good model for
        Message 3 of 14 , Dec 29, 2005
          Just a quick one following on from my previous message. I have just
          looked up the Glosa page in Wikipedia and would suggest that it is quite
          a good model for one on Folkspraak see -
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glosa . More information is invited and
          they do not give any examples of Glosa words, whereas the Folkspraak
          entry does, even if confusing.

          Perhaps something like that would satisfy the editors.

          Regards

          Alan
        • Evert Mouw
          Thanks for for comments. I ve added a few words to the discussion. Basically, they are dead right to delete the Folkspraak article, because Folkspraak is not a
          Message 4 of 14 , Dec 30, 2005
            Thanks for for comments. I've added a few words to the discussion.
            Basically, they are dead right to delete the Folkspraak article, because
            Folkspraak is not a language at all. The community is too divided. So I
            proposed to transform the article subject: it should not be about the FS
            language, but about the FS community, which is very much alive.
          • stefichjo
            ... because ... the FS ... I agree, Evert. I hope Ingmar is enjoying his vacations from FS and will be with us again soon. Take care, Stephan Schneider
            Message 5 of 14 , Dec 30, 2005
              --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, Evert Mouw <yahoo@e...> wrote:
              >
              > Thanks for for comments. I've added a few words to the discussion.
              > Basically, they are dead right to delete the Folkspraak article,
              because
              > Folkspraak is not a language at all. The community is too divided. So I
              > proposed to transform the article subject: it should not be about
              the FS
              > language, but about the FS community, which is very much alive.

              I agree, Evert. I hope Ingmar is enjoying his vacations from FS and
              will be with us again soon.

              Take care,
              Stephan Schneider
            • David Parke
              I m not sure what I do, to be able to add stuff to that Articles for Deletion discussion... Well if the issue is verifiability then, then surely the websites
              Message 6 of 14 , Dec 30, 2005
                I'm not sure what I do, to be able to add stuff to that Articles for
                Deletion discussion...

                Well if the issue is verifiability then, then surely the websites that
                the Wikipedia article are linked to are verification that there is
                truely a language called Folkspraak in development. This Yahoo! group
                and Tidingkonin are the primary source material for this. There is no
                complete language but a work in progress. Even if there is no language
                there is most definitely a movement or project to create an
                inter-germanic lingua franca and Folkspraak is the name under which most
                of the movement's participants have gathered. (Perhaps the Wikipedia
                article should mention Nordien and Intergermanisk as well as FS and
                Ingmar's Middelsprake+)
                Just so long as the Wikipedia article doesn't mention bullshit like how
                FS started in the 60s in an island off the coast of Denmark (The
                Folkbier myth). That ****ing Der Folkspraakinstitut site is still
                damaging the reputation of the movement. Some of the comments on the
                Articles for Deletion seem to indicated that that site was the first or
                only impression some of the posters had of FS.



                Evert Mouw wrote:

                >Thanks for for comments. I've added a few words to the discussion.
                >Basically, they are dead right to delete the Folkspraak article, because
                >Folkspraak is not a language at all. The community is too divided. So I
                >proposed to transform the article subject: it should not be about the FS
                >language, but about the FS community, which is very much alive.
                >
                >
                >
                >Browse the draft word lists!
                >http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                >http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                >
                >Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                >http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • theeldkatt
                ... As a Wikipedian, I should point out that those of you who are not normally involved with Wikipedia probably have a very limited ability to make a
                Message 7 of 14 , Dec 31, 2005
                  --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@w...> wrote:
                  >
                  > I'm not sure what I do, to be able to add stuff to that Articles for
                  > Deletion discussion...

                  As a Wikipedian, I should point out that those of you who are not
                  normally involved with Wikipedia probably have a very limited ability
                  to make a difference. Anonymous contributors or newly created user
                  accounts aren't likely to weigh heavily in a deletion vote, nor are
                  they likely to be able to convince others, particularly if they lack
                  experience with Wikipedia policy and guidelines. If you have good
                  arguments, you might give it a try, but no amount of faceless
                  anonymous "keep" votes will save it.

                  EldKatt
                  Erik Igelström
                • xipirho
                  Is there already an article on Germanic IALs? If not, I think it could replace the FS article and, as you say, include those other languages. Typing in
                  Message 8 of 14 , Jan 4, 2006
                    Is there already an article on Germanic IALs? If not, I think it could replace the FS article and, as you say, include those other languages. Typing in "folkspraak" could redirect to that page.

                    ----- Start Original Message -----
                    From: David Parke <parked@...>
                    To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [folkspraak] Folkspraak on Wikipedia

                    > I'm not sure what I do, to be able to add stuff to that Articles for
                    > Deletion discussion...
                    >
                    > Well if the issue is verifiability then, then surely the websites that
                    > the Wikipedia article are linked to are verification that there is
                    > truely a language called Folkspraak in development. This Yahoo! group
                    > and Tidingkonin are the primary source material for this. There is no
                    > complete language but a work in progress. Even if there is no language
                    > there is most definitely a movement or project to create an
                    > inter-germanic lingua franca and Folkspraak is the name under which most
                    > of the movement's participants have gathered. (Perhaps the Wikipedia
                    > article should mention Nordien and Intergermanisk as well as FS and
                    > Ingmar's Middelsprake+)
                    > Just so long as the Wikipedia article doesn't mention bullshit like how
                    > FS started in the 60s in an island off the coast of Denmark (The
                    > Folkbier myth). That ****ing Der Folkspraakinstitut site is still
                    > damaging the reputation of the movement. Some of the comments on the
                    > Articles for Deletion seem to indicated that that site was the first or
                    > only impression some of the posters had of FS.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Evert Mouw wrote:
                    >
                    > >Thanks for for comments. I've added a few words to the discussion.
                    > >Basically, they are dead right to delete the Folkspraak article, because
                    > >Folkspraak is not a language at all. The community is too divided. So I
                    > >proposed to transform the article subject: it should not be about the FS
                    > >language, but about the FS community, which is very much alive.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >Browse the draft word lists!
                    > >http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                    > >http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                    > >
                    > >Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                    > >http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                    > >
                    > >Yahoo! Groups Links
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Browse the draft word lists!
                    > http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                    > http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                    >
                    > Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                    > http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >

                    ----- End Original Message -----
                  • David Parke
                    The Folkspraak article is no long up for deletion on Wikipedia. Bafflingly and bizarrely there is new version of the article which has the Folkbier myth on it
                    Message 9 of 14 , Jan 6, 2006
                      The Folkspraak article is no long up for deletion on Wikipedia.
                      Bafflingly and bizarrely there is new version of the article which has
                      the Folkbier myth on it represented as fact! I can not ***king believe
                      this! This new version of the article belongs more on Uncyclopedia

                      xipirho wrote:

                      >Is there already an article on Germanic IALs? If not, I think it could replace the FS article and, as you say, include those other languages. Typing in "folkspraak" could redirect to that page.
                      >
                      >----- Start Original Message -----
                      >From: David Parke <parked@...>
                      >To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                      >Subject: Re: [folkspraak] Folkspraak on Wikipedia
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >>I'm not sure what I do, to be able to add stuff to that Articles for
                      >>Deletion discussion...
                      >>
                      >>Well if the issue is verifiability then, then surely the websites that
                      >>the Wikipedia article are linked to are verification that there is
                      >>truely a language called Folkspraak in development. This Yahoo! group
                      >>and Tidingkonin are the primary source material for this. There is no
                      >>complete language but a work in progress. Even if there is no language
                      >>there is most definitely a movement or project to create an
                      >>inter-germanic lingua franca and Folkspraak is the name under which most
                      >>of the movement's participants have gathered. (Perhaps the Wikipedia
                      >>article should mention Nordien and Intergermanisk as well as FS and
                      >>Ingmar's Middelsprake+)
                      >>Just so long as the Wikipedia article doesn't mention bullshit like how
                      >>FS started in the 60s in an island off the coast of Denmark (The
                      >>Folkbier myth). That ****ing Der Folkspraakinstitut site is still
                      >>damaging the reputation of the movement. Some of the comments on the
                      >>Articles for Deletion seem to indicated that that site was the first or
                      >>only impression some of the posters had of FS.
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>Evert Mouw wrote:
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>>Thanks for for comments. I've added a few words to the discussion.
                      >>>Basically, they are dead right to delete the Folkspraak article, because
                      >>>Folkspraak is not a language at all. The community is too divided. So I
                      >>>proposed to transform the article subject: it should not be about the FS
                      >>>language, but about the FS community, which is very much alive.
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>Browse the draft word lists!
                      >>>http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                      >>>http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                      >>>
                      >>>Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                      >>>http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                      >>>
                      >>>Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>Browse the draft word lists!
                      >>http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                      >>http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                      >>
                      >>Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                      >>http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                      >>
                      >>Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >
                      >----- End Original Message -----
                      >
                      >
                      >Browse the draft word lists!
                      >http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                      >http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                      >
                      >Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                      >http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                      >
                      >Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • David
                      I noticed that a new article on FS has gone up recently on Wikipedia. It originally started out with the bullshit story about folkbier. It s since then been
                      Message 10 of 14 , Jan 19, 2010
                        I noticed that a new article on FS has gone up recently on Wikipedia. It originally started out with the bullshit story about folkbier.
                        It's since then been corrected to something mostly accurate, although a little sparse. But what can really be said if there's no much of substance agreed on?
                        I notice that along with the article being corrected (loosing the folkbier BS), it's come to the attention of the quality control. The article has once again been flagged as lacking notability, so it could be deleted again.

                        My personal wish-list for the Wikipedia article, would be to have some sample text other than the Pater noster. I don't think that it's really a good text to quickly sample the flavour and nature of a language. It's got very small vocab, full of ancient words and and preserves a weird syntax inherited from whatever ancient languages that prayer first came from from.
                        I personally prefer comparing the Universal declaration of human rights. We could have the first 2 sentences of that text -- in a few dialects. Of course we need to show some variety of dialects, to show the extent of disagreement (and how close they are are!)

                        Also maybe a piece of text that isn't so well known. This gives an opportunity for those interested to attempt to decipher it. This can show the relative amount of mutual intelligibility with English or other languages.
                      • Richard B
                        Thanks for the information, David.  I copied and pasted the Folkspraak version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights sentences which I found at
                        Message 11 of 14 , Jan 19, 2010
                          Thanks for the information, David.  I copied and pasted the Folkspraak version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights sentences which I found at onmiglot.com to the Wikipedia article.  I'm not very fluent in Folkspraak yet, so I don't know exactly which dialect it's it.  Perhaps others know.
                           
                          Richard
                          Do one thing every day that scares you.
                           Eleanor Roosevelt




                          ________________________________
                          From: David <parked@...>
                          To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Tue, January 19, 2010 2:38:59 PM
                          Subject: [folkspraak] Folkspraak on Wikipedia

                           
                          I noticed that a new article on FS has gone up recently on Wikipedia. It originally started out with the bullshit story about folkbier.
                          It's since then been corrected to something mostly accurate, although a little sparse. But what can really be said if there's no much of substance agreed on?
                          I notice that along with the article being corrected (loosing the folkbier BS), it's come to the attention of the quality control. The article has once again been flagged as lacking notability, so it could be deleted again.

                          My personal wish-list for the Wikipedia article, would be to have some sample text other than the Pater noster. I don't think that it's really a good text to quickly sample the flavour and nature of a language. It's got very small vocab, full of ancient words and and preserves a weird syntax inherited from whatever ancient languages that prayer first came from from.
                          I personally prefer comparing the Universal declaration of human rights. We could have the first 2 sentences of that text -- in a few dialects. Of course we need to show some variety of dialects, to show the extent of disagreement (and how close they are are!)

                          Also maybe a piece of text that isn't so well known. This gives an opportunity for those interested to attempt to decipher it. This can show the relative amount of mutual intelligibility with English or other languages.




                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • David
                          So are you the one who wrote the Wikipedia article for Folkspraak? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Omniglot was written by me -- a few years ago.
                          Message 12 of 14 , Jan 19, 2010
                            So are you the one who wrote the Wikipedia article for Folkspraak?

                            The Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Omniglot was written by me -- a few years ago. I'd probably do it somewhat different nowadays. My own dialect of Folkspraak has evolved considerably over the years. And I have more than one dialect.

                            I'd write the UDHR currently as follows:

                            "All menschen are geberd fri ond gelik in werdighed ond rejten. Dee are begifted med ferstand ond gewitt ond schulde behandele elken in en gest aff broderschap."

                            Or in my "Frenkisch" dialect as:
                            "All menschen sinde geboren fry ond gelyk in werdigheid ond rejten. Dei sinde begifted mid ferstand ond gewitt ond scholde behand'le eilkein in en geist af brouderschap."

                            --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, Richard B <rboylern@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Thanks for the information, David.  I copied and pasted the Folkspraak version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights sentences which I found at onmiglot.com to the Wikipedia article.  I'm not very fluent in Folkspraak yet, so I don't know exactly which dialect it's it.  Perhaps others know.
                            >  
                            > Richard
                            > Do one thing every day that scares you.
                            >  Eleanor Roosevelt
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > ________________________________
                            > From: David <parked@...>
                            > To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Tue, January 19, 2010 2:38:59 PM
                            > Subject: [folkspraak] Folkspraak on Wikipedia
                            >
                            >  
                            > I noticed that a new article on FS has gone up recently on Wikipedia. It originally started out with the bullshit story about folkbier.
                            > It's since then been corrected to something mostly accurate, although a little sparse. But what can really be said if there's no much of substance agreed on?
                            > I notice that along with the article being corrected (loosing the folkbier BS), it's come to the attention of the quality control. The article has once again been flagged as lacking notability, so it could be deleted again.
                            >
                            > My personal wish-list for the Wikipedia article, would be to have some sample text other than the Pater noster. I don't think that it's really a good text to quickly sample the flavour and nature of a language. It's got very small vocab, full of ancient words and and preserves a weird syntax inherited from whatever ancient languages that prayer first came from from.
                            > I personally prefer comparing the Universal declaration of human rights. We could have the first 2 sentences of that text -- in a few dialects. Of course we need to show some variety of dialects, to show the extent of disagreement (and how close they are are!)
                            >
                            > Also maybe a piece of text that isn't so well known. This gives an opportunity for those interested to attempt to decipher it. This can show the relative amount of mutual intelligibility with English or other languages.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            >
                          • Stephan Schneider
                            I tried to keep the german article from being deleted. It was like boxing a glacier. Criteria for artificial languages were created and the article was deleted
                            Message 13 of 14 , Jan 19, 2010
                              I tried to keep the german article from being deleted. It was like boxing a glacier. Criteria for artificial languages were created and the article was deleted anyway. The guy that seemed to have the opinion that anything related to artificial languages should be wiped off the planet's surface, even tried to erase the user page I created from scratch. It survived.

                              http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Stephan_Schneider/Germanische_Plansprache

                              The topic is "Germanic Auxilary Language". I think, that's what we're trying to do here. By adding other GALs the article should increase in notability.

                              I didn't finish the article, though. I guess I didn't want to try going through the "deletion hell" again (in German "Löschhölle").

                              Regards,
                              Stephan



                              ________________________________
                              Von: David <parked@...>
                              An: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                              Gesendet: Dienstag, den 19. Januar 2010, 23:38:59 Uhr
                              Betreff: [folkspraak] Folkspraak on Wikipedia


                              I noticed that a new article on FS has gone up recently on Wikipedia. It originally started out with the bullshit story about folkbier.
                              It's since then been corrected to something mostly accurate, although a little sparse. But what can really be said if there's no much of substance agreed on?
                              I notice that along with the article being corrected (loosing the folkbier BS), it's come to the attention of the quality control. The article has once again been flagged as lacking notability, so it could be deleted again.

                              My personal wish-list for the Wikipedia article, would be to have some sample text other than the Pater noster. I don't think that it's really a good text to quickly sample the flavour and nature of a language. It's got very small vocab, full of ancient words and and preserves a weird syntax inherited from whatever ancient languages that prayer first came from from.
                              I personally prefer comparing the Universal declaration of human rights. We could have the first 2 sentences of that text -- in a few dialects. Of course we need to show some variety of dialects, to show the extent of disagreement (and how close they are are!)

                              Also maybe a piece of text that isn't so well known. This gives an opportunity for those interested to attempt to decipher it. This can show the relative amount of mutual intelligibility with English or other languages.




                              __________________________________________________
                              Do You Yahoo!?
                              Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen Massenmails.
                              http://mail.yahoo.com

                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Stephan Schneider
                              Here is my Sprak version of it, from http://de.wikibooks.org/wiki/Sprak/_Beispiele#Algemen_Erklaring_ov_de_Menschrechten_.28Artikel_1.29 All menschen werd
                              Message 14 of 14 , Jan 19, 2010
                                Here is my Sprak version of it, from
                                http://de.wikibooks.org/wiki/Sprak/_Beispiele#Algemen_Erklaring_ov_de_Menschrechten_.28Artikel_1.29

                                All menschen werd geboren fri ond gelik mid wert ond rechten. De er begifted mid ferstand ond gewitt, ond schull live ene mid de andere in en gest fan broderlikhed.

                                Regards,
                                Stephan



                                ________________________________
                                Von: David <parked@...>
                                An: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                                Gesendet: Mittwoch, den 20. Januar 2010, 1:07:46 Uhr
                                Betreff: [folkspraak] Re: Folkspraak on Wikipedia




                                So are you the one who wrote the Wikipedia article for Folkspraak?

                                The Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Omniglot was written by me -- a few years ago. I'd probably do it somewhat different nowadays. My own dialect of Folkspraak has evolved considerably over the years. And I have more than one dialect.

                                I'd write the UDHR currently as follows:

                                "All menschen are geberd fri ond gelik in werdighed ond rejten. Dee are begifted med ferstand ond gewitt ond schulde behandele elken in en gest aff broderschap. "

                                Or in my "Frenkisch" dialect as:
                                "All menschen sinde geboren fry ond gelyk in werdigheid ond rejten. Dei sinde begifted mid ferstand ond gewitt ond scholde behand'le eilkein in en geist af brouderschap. "

                                --- In folkspraak@yahoogro ups.com, Richard B <rboylern@.. .> wrote:
                                >
                                > Thanks for the information, David. I copied and pasted the Folkspraak version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights sentences which I found at onmiglot.com to the Wikipedia article. I'm not very fluent in Folkspraak yet, so I don't know exactly which dialect it's it. Perhaps others know.
                                > Â
                                > Richard
                                > Do one thing every day that scares you.
                                > Â Eleanor Roosevelt
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > ____________ _________ _________ __
                                > From: David <parked@...>
                                > To: folkspraak@yahoogro ups.com
                                > Sent: Tue, January 19, 2010 2:38:59 PM
                                > Subject: [folkspraak] Folkspraak on Wikipedia
                                >
                                > Â
                                > I noticed that a new article on FS has gone up recently on Wikipedia. It originally started out with the bullshit story about folkbier.
                                > It's since then been corrected to something mostly accurate, although a little sparse. But what can really be said if there's no much of substance agreed on?
                                > I notice that along with the article being corrected (loosing the folkbier BS), it's come to the attention of the quality control. The article has once again been flagged as lacking notability, so it could be deleted again.
                                >
                                > My personal wish-list for the Wikipedia article, would be to have some sample text other than the Pater noster. I don't think that it's really a good text to quickly sample the flavour and nature of a language. It's got very small vocab, full of ancient words and and preserves a weird syntax inherited from whatever ancient languages that prayer first came from from.
                                > I personally prefer comparing the Universal declaration of human rights. We could have the first 2 sentences of that text -- in a few dialects. Of course we need to show some variety of dialects, to show the extent of disagreement (and how close they are are!)
                                >
                                > Also maybe a piece of text that isn't so well known. This gives an opportunity for those interested to attempt to decipher it. This can show the relative amount of mutual intelligibility with English or other languages.
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >




                                __________________________________________________
                                Do You Yahoo!?
                                Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen Massenmails.
                                http://mail.yahoo.com

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.