Talk:Trans–New Guinea languages

Languages High‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indonesia Mid‑importance

	Indonesia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Melanesia: Papua New Guinea Mid‑importance

	Oceania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Melanesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Melanesia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MelanesiaWikipedia:WikiProject MelanesiaTemplate:WikiProject MelanesiaMelanesia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Papua New Guinea (assessed as Mid-importance).

list organization[edit]

hi. i would like to have this list split into a few more sections. i would do this myself; however, i am not sure of the difference between some of the terminology. like the differences in superstock vs. phylum vs. stock vs. superphylum. super- refers to the number of languages? or amount of branching? – ishwar (speak) 08:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, the distance of the relationship, repsumably as shown by % of cognate vocab. But keep in mind that the entire classification will likely prove spurious. kwami 23:23, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

title[edit]

Moved back to en dash, Trans–New Guinea, where it's been stable since March 2009. This follows the MoS, style guides such as the Atlantic Monthly, and several WP:RSs. (Ross uses a space, "Trans New Guinea", but that is generally avoided for prefixes.)

(Note that en dashes often don't show up in Google Books because they are not generally recognized by OCR. Also, hyphens are used as a substitute by people using typewriters and non-professional typesetting programs such as Word.) — kwami (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason not to extend this to the various branches of TNG? — kwami (talk) 01:23, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trans-New Guinea classification POV[edit]

I see that Engan, Madang, etc. have been removed from Trans-New Guinea, following Usher. However, this is not universally accepted; we should at least put "Trans-New Guinea (?)" and not follow Usher in every single article. We need to synthesize and look at Wichmann's, Hammarstrom's, Pawley's classifications, etc. and discuss how they are different from Usher's. — Stevey7788 (talk) 19:27, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Problem with the Maps[edit]

I just realized the Australia is coloured white on almost every map, when that colour is meant to represent uninhabited areas. If someone else doesn't fix it I'll get to that eventually. -MToumbola (talk) 11:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hyphen vs. en dash[edit]

Why is this article name written with an en dash rather than a hyphen? We generally use hyphens for prefixes, cf. Indo-European and Proto-Germanic (and Trans-Neptunian object), but en dash when two names are combined, e.g. Tupi–Guarani languages or Niger–Congo languages. Is there a reason for doing this differently in this particular name? (@Sagotreespirit:, @Kwamikagami:) --Lundgren8 (t · c) 14:34, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe @Kwamikagami: had named this article with a dash. I also support using a hyphen rather than a dash. — Sagotreespirit (^talk) 23:55, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this follows the MOS for hyphenating a phrase, as in "pre–World War II". With a hyphen, "Trans-New Guinea languages" would literally be the trans-new languages of Guinea. Okay, no-one would misread it that way, but by being consistent, readers can understand that when we use a hyphen we actually intend it to be a hyphen. — kwami (talk) 03:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 March 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved — Wug·a·po·des 23:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trans–New Guinea languages → Trans-New Guinea languages – Per @Lundgren8:: We generally use hyphens for prefixes, cf. Indo-European and Proto-Germanic (and Trans-Neptunian object), but we use dashes when two names are combined, e.g. Tupi–Guarani languages or Niger–Congo languages. Trans-New Guinea involves prefixing rather than compounding. — Sagotreespirit (^talk) 00:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. Jerm (talk) 14:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per the MOS. 'Trans' modifies the phrase 'New Guinea', not just the word 'New'. This is analogous to "pre–World War II" rather than to "trans-Neptunian object" (where 'object' is 'trans-Neptunian'). — kwami (talk) 03:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I was not aware of this distinction but it makes sense. Where in the MOS is this described? --Lundgren8 (t · c) 07:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:PREFIXDASH. –Austronesier (talk) 16:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd still like to know more about the justification for this rule in MOS. Most existing literature on Papuan languages uses Trans-New Guinea with a hyphen, not a dash. — Sagotreespirit (^talk) 00:28, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW Andrew Pawley and Malcolm Ross even spell it "Trans New Guinea" without hyphen/dash, but then they also drop the hyphen in "Proto Trans New Guinea". "Proto" without hyphen somehow is an Austronesiansts' thing (I do it myself unless forced to do otherwise by an MOS). –Austronesier (talk) 11:19, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many texts also do not distinguish between - and –, writing both Indo-European and Niger-Congo as opposed to Niger–Congo. --Lundgren8 (t · c) 18:16, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's true not just of language families but of anything. Many sources use hyphens for page and date ranges, for example, while we use dashes. For WP, p. 3-4 means chapter/section 3, page 4. There are occasional complaints from ppl who aren't used to making the distinction (I wasn't aware of it either), but it can be useful, and to be useful it's best to be consistent. We also distinguish hyphens from minus signs in mathematical contexts, where most people don't bother. — kwami (talk) 08:57, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.