Updates to Athabaskan notes

[Gary Holton]

James,

I've had some luck both adding and subtracting (collapsing) codes in
Alaska. The key (besides nagging people like Gary Simons) is providing
documentation that reflects widespread agreement among the community.
This makes language varieties like Middle Tanana problematic, for
while one can make a clear linguistic argument for distinguishing MT
as a distinct language, the linguistic community is not of one mind as
to how to evaluate that argument. Where controversy remains the
existing classifications prevail.

Gary


On Dec 29, 2010, at 14:17, Bill Poser <billposer2 at gmail.com> wrote:

> There is actually a process for correcting classifications in the Ethnologue/ISO listings. I'll have to check the current status, but there was a round of it a year or two ago in which they called for submissions and had forms to fill out and so forth. SSILA had a committee that worked on this. Further information can probably be obtained at the LSA/SSILA meeting.
>
> The Ethnologue has, by the way, corrected the old classification in which Babine-Witsuwit'en was included in Carrier. The problem at this point is the opposite: the Ethnologue and ISO recognize a "Southern Carrier" language distinct from "Carrier". The information they give as to what they mean by "Southern Carrier" is inconsistent (and the term has been used in several ways), but it seems that what they mean are what I call the Blackwater dialects. In my opinion, not only do these varieties not constitute a distinct language, but they actually form half of what I call the "Southern" group of Carrier dialects. That is, I think the subgrouping is:
>
> Stuart/Trembleur Lake (Nak'azdli, Tl'azt'en, Yekooche)
> Southern
>    Fraser/Nechako
>         (Cheslatta, Stellako, Nadleh, Saik'uz, Lheidli)
>    Blackwater (Red Bluff, Nazko, Kluskus, Ulkatcho)
>
>