Talk:Faihriem
RFV[edit]
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
Rfv-sense: "The Tibeto-Burman language spoken by these people" (the Faihriem). Enough of the 13 Google Book hits seem to justify the tribe sense, but none of them seem to mention a language. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:34, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- No hits on Ethnologue ([1] (didn't let me link directly to the results)). Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 14:46, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- I found one book that called it a dialect; that's all I can find. (Thanks for moving the cites page. SB's caught me creating cites pages in the main namespace sometimes, too. Sorry!) - -sche (discuss) 20:16, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Found a second one: google books:Faihriem dialect yields two consistent results. See the last paragraph of this page. — Xavier, 22:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- We may be seeing different pages (I had to use a bit of trickery to get Google to show me the content you link to), but what I see (on page 117) is: " […] 21 clans. They are Biete, Changsan, Chawrai, Darngawn, Faihriem, […] and Zote. The past tradition suggests that each clan had a dialect of its own but nowadays a common dialect used by the Hmar people was developed by Christian missionaries." That only establishes "Faihriem" as the name of a tribe that has a dialect, not as the name of the dialect. (In fact, I already used that quotation under the "tribe" sense.) - -sche (discuss) 00:02, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- You are right. I just wanted to stress the consitency of two different results: one book that states that the Faihriem tribe has its own dialect (the paragraph you cited above) and another that names the dialect (the quotation in the article). I agree that we don't have our three quotations (yet) but I'd say that we have enough to attest the existence and name of the dialect.
- BTW, by "trickery" you mean that you don't have a direct access to the page preview? I'm located in France and I have no problem reading the page anonymously. I assume it depends on your location. — Xavier, 00:24, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- I mean that when I clicked on the link, it told me in French "you have reached your viewing limit" (which often happens when I try to view pages via links from here); I had to start a fresh search for the book, and then search within it for the word. - -sche (discuss) 00:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- We may be seeing different pages (I had to use a bit of trickery to get Google to show me the content you link to), but what I see (on page 117) is: " […] 21 clans. They are Biete, Changsan, Chawrai, Darngawn, Faihriem, […] and Zote. The past tradition suggests that each clan had a dialect of its own but nowadays a common dialect used by the Hmar people was developed by Christian missionaries." That only establishes "Faihriem" as the name of a tribe that has a dialect, not as the name of the dialect. (In fact, I already used that quotation under the "tribe" sense.) - -sche (discuss) 00:02, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Found a second one: google books:Faihriem dialect yields two consistent results. See the last paragraph of this page. — Xavier, 22:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- I found one book that called it a dialect; that's all I can find. (Thanks for moving the cites page. SB's caught me creating cites pages in the main namespace sometimes, too. Sorry!) - -sche (discuss) 20:16, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Mostly RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 23:35, 13 March 2012 (UTC)