| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Serbian language article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
,_early_1900s,_Central_Africa,_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo,_Pende_people,_wood,_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG){kind=small}
 | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting, and read through the list of highlighted discussions below before starting a new one:
|
Sociolinguistics
editI'm removing the link to Abstand and ausbau languages from See also since I see no obvious connection to the lemma. If anything, then I'd assume Serbian is a dachsprache, but I'm no expert on sociolinguistics; maybe someone else can contribute their knowledge and improve the article in this regard. ◅ Sebastian 04:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Spelling alphabet
editWhile the "Avala Beograd Cetinje" is indeed the standard(ized) spelling alphabet for Serbian, having roots in Yugoslav People's Army times, it is virtually unknown outside of military and radio amateur circuits (and barely there). Therefore I challenge its inclusion on the WP:Due weight basis. Apart from the cited standard, I can't find much sources devoted to its use and popularity, and I'm sure it is not universally taught even in today's army. Here's a nice overview of the subject https://qrz.com.hr/sricanje-slova/ – not a reliable source but a radio amateur blog, stating that the spelling alphabet is basically obsolete. For what it's worth, here's an extensive list of spelling alphabets worldwide, but I'm doubtful whether that stuff is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia; Category:Spelling alphabets contains only a handful. Perhaps the best place to keep that material is next to wikt:Appendix:German spelling alphabet. No such user (talk) 09:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- I didn't look through it carefully when I undid my revert, but the Члан 24. of this official reference has an updated spelling alphabet that's not from JNA times (i.e. doesn't contain Yugoslavia-wide place names), should that one be added? I don't have a preference of whether it should be included or not. -Vipz (talk) 09:46, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- I did not look carefully either (no further than letter C), but my point about weight still stands. I think the alphabet is too obscure for inclusion in encyclopedia, particularly in the main language article. If one would write a textbook on Serbian, would it be included? Since the answer is resounding "no", I don't think we should either. Perhaps it could be split to separate Serbian spelling alphabet but I'm not sure it would pass and AfD on the notability basis. No such user (talk) 07:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- For a separate article I don't think so, it's merely a list and nothing else, they're already contained at Spelling alphabet#Table of other language additions. If it's not notable enough to be included in this article, it's hardly notable enough to have its own article. @Heffalump1974: please see this discussion, might apply to other language articles as well. -Vipz (talk) 13:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- I did not look carefully either (no further than letter C), but my point about weight still stands. I think the alphabet is too obscure for inclusion in encyclopedia, particularly in the main language article. If one would write a textbook on Serbian, would it be included? Since the answer is resounding "no", I don't think we should either. Perhaps it could be split to separate Serbian spelling alphabet but I'm not sure it would pass and AfD on the notability basis. No such user (talk) 07:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
History of Serbian language?
editWhy there is no section regarding “history”?!
In Serbian version of same article there is quite nice section of history. So why english speaking visitors are deprive from this informations? Calimero (talk) 06:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Miscitation under section “Writing system" > “Usage”
editIt quotes an article[1], saying that the listed statistics about the use of Cyrillic and Latin apply to the whole population. while the cited article mentions those same statistics for people between ages of 20 and 29.
Additionally, the last paragraph of the article says that the data was acquired through a telephone survey of 1011 people. Which might be too small of a sample size to give any useful information. --Mikister2012 (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- Mikister2012: I don't think it's miscited. The lede states that "poslednje istraživanje koje je pokazalo da 47 odsto stanovnika Srbije piše latinicom, u odnosu na 36 odsto onih koji koriste ćirilicu.", while the sidebar referring to the population 20–29 gives a different piece of data (latinicu koriste čak 47 odsto više nego ćirilicu).
I'm not a statistician, but a sample of 1,011 is actually quite large, and if selected properly, should provide a very accurate picture of the overall distribution. For example, election polls are often conducted on less. See opinion poll#Potential for inaccuracy. No such user (talk) 09:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)- You're right, it seems I'm the one who didn't read carefully enough. Also thanks for the link, I wasn't aware that 1k+ is considered a large sample size for polling. Mikister2012 (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Language
editThe language is also spoken by Montenegrins. At the beginning of the article you must say that it's a standard variety mainly spoken by Serbs and the majority of Montenegrins. Also you must add "majority of Montenegrins" in the "ethnicity" cell.
s variety mainly spoken by Serbs and the majority of Montenegrins. 79.106.124.205 (talk) 14:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)