Talk:Baden-Württemberg

Swabian

How does this go in the Swabian dialect (schwäbisch)? In my experience it would sound something roughly like \ˈbaːdəˈvʊʁdəbʊʁk\, and (in German) might be transcribed something roughly like Bade-Wurtaborg. (Locals please correct this!!)

Can that be explained perhaps within the 'German' entry? As far as I know, currently there's no 'Swabian' Wiktionary, right? Not sure that it would make sense to split the Swabian pronuncation off as a separate "language" for this entry??? No idea where the Swabian spelling best belongs, at present!

—DIV (1.145.103.186 12:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC))

Cross-wiki post: de:Diskussion:Baden-Württemberg#Auf_schwäbisch. —DIV (1.145.103.186 12:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC))

Hi,

maybe https://als.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baden-W%C3%BCrttemberg can help you, Swabian is a kind of Alemannic (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alemannic_German) the wiktionary is https://als.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wort:Houptsyte lg --Zase Wieder (talk) 13:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Nice! So the Alemannic spelling is actually Baade-Wiirdebäärg.

(Not sure how formalised/standardised the spelling — and indeed pronunciation — would be, nor whether it'd be consistent among the various dialects in the Alemannic group though.)

Presently there's no entry in either the English or the German Wiktionary (de:Baade-Wiirdebäärg).

As you can see in this discussion https://als.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Baden-W%C3%BCrttemberg (section Baden-Württemberg auf Badisch und Schwäbisch) they got the problem themselves how to spell it correctly. I think there isn't one solution for the spelling of Baden-Württemberg even among the Swabian, so I think it will be hard to prove the usage in the German wiktionary. By the way, in de:Baden-Württemberg already exist an entry for a Swabian (Schwäbisch) translation but it's different from the Alemannic spelling... it's really confusing :). lg --Zase Wieder (talk) 12:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Ah!

Yes, in a weird coincidence I just noticed that discussion myself.

Also, I simply didn't notice the Swabian entry on the German Wiktionary: I looked under the headings (German, Catalan, and Swedish), and the "Übersetzungen" (translations); I didn't see the miniature section "Dialektausdrücke" (Dialect Expressions), which has the spelling Bade-Wirttebärg, and is redlinked within the de namespace. It's weird to me to place that section so far down: I would have put it either up top as a spelling variant, or just before the translations, or even within the translations. But apparently they've followed the appropriate guideline.

For the benefit of others, the above-linked als:WP discussion includes allusions to (Alemannic) spelling as inter alia:

• Bade-Württeberg / Baade-Württeberg
• Bade-Wirtteberg / Baade-Wirtteberg
• Bade-Wirdeberg / Baade-Wirdeberg
• Bade-Wiirdeberg / Baade-Wiirdeberg
• Bade-Wirttaberg / Baade-Wirttaberg
• Bade-Wirdaberg / Baade-Wirdaberg
• Bade-Württebärg / Baade-Württebärg
• Bade-Wirttebärg / Baade-Wirttebärg
• Bade-Wirdebärg / Baade-Wirdebärg
• Bade-Wiirdebärg / Baade-Wiirdebärg / Baade-Wiirdebäärg
• Bade-Wirttabärg / Baade-Wirttabärg
• Bade-Wirdabärg / Baade-Wirdabärg

(I speculate that the als:WP article's URL uses de spelling in recognition of such variation.)

It is also mentioned in the same discussion that the als:WP article is written in a variety of dialects.

Separately, I found some information on en:WT's classification of languages versus (dia)lects

• Wiktionary:Language_treatment
• Wiktionary_talk:About_German/Archive_1#High_German_dialects

However, for en:WT I haven't yet found explicit advice on where dialect is supposed to be handled.

• Pronunciation is supposed to include "regional variation".
• Translations has no indication that dialects would be included (nor excluded, for that matter).

So from that, it seems it's more disposed to flagging dialect status of a word in Pronunciation?

—DIV (1.145.99.63 03:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC))

Should those entries be created???

—DIV (1.145.103.186 08:21, 17 March 2023 (UTC))

And how about the list of translations? Should dialects be included there???

—DIV (1.145.103.186 08:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC))