Talk:Archanta

From OpenGeofiction Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article has been a featured article of the month. Featured articles are considered to be the best articles in this OGF wiki. Before being listed as a featured article, articles are reviewed as featured article candidates for accuracy, neutrality, completeness, relation to mapping and style according to the standards set for featured articles.


Southwestern Peninsula of Archanta

I would like to propose a name for a supernational feature of the continent of Archanta, which is home to my country Ardispheric Federation. The southwestern extension of the northern half of Archanta (http://opengeofiction.net/#map=6/-23.745/123.442) is clearly a subcontinent in search of a name. We could also name the bight or sea south of this subcontinent by the same name.

Unless someone has a counter-proposal, I would like to name these two features Au (which is the name I have given to a major river that flows into the Bahia Negra in the southern part of my country. Hence "Au" is the name of the river, the subcontinent, and the sea. I do not feel strongly about this and I am open to other suggestions, but I think these features need names.

You mean all the southwestpart of North-Archanta, south fo Zylanda? O.k., why not a name for this. But only "Au"? My suggestion is "Gwynian" or so. Too because the eastern sea of Mecyna is "East Archantian Gulf" so it is logically, that the western part is "Western Archantian Gulf". --Histor (talk) 07:34, 7 August 2014 (CEST)
Yes that is the part I mean. "Gwynian" is fine - I just wanted to have a name. I chose "Au" because it's the largest river in my country, which would make it a central river for the subcontinent. What is your idea for the meaning (origin) of "Gwynian"? Since F.A. (my country, Federacion Ardesferica) is hispanic, the name Gwynian would have to be hispanized as, perhaps, Güiniano? Güinano? Güinense?
"Gwynian" seemed to be welsh. What do you mean about "Gynian"? Has an intermediate sound, but enought latin. --Histor (talk) 09:18, 7 August 2014 (CEST)
Yes, "Gwyn" means "white" in Welsh. Hmm... I suppose I could hispanize in translation, as "Blanca / Blanquiana" or something like that, too. I like that idea... Gwynian is English name (via Welsh) and Spanish name is peninsula blanquiana. And the sea nearby could be "White sea" / "mar blanco" ?

Smallest state

You've stated that the smallest country is AR053, but I'm pretty sure Meridonia is smaller than that (and possibly the smallest country in the world)--Sarepava (talk) 00:21, 27 March 2015 (CET)

Okay let's change it. I added some information and rewrote some excisting texts to make them sound more eloquent. Some of the information I used to rewrite this page might no longer be correct. When I tried to devide the countries into subcontinents I could not find all the countries mentioned in the article on the map...
@TRJ, I like what you've done with this page, especially the names Astrasia and Archanta Minor - they're cool. One thought... "Archanta Minor" implies a minor part attached to a main part, but it seems to be the "main part" (i.e. the largest). Proposal: what if we restrict the term "Archanta Minor" to the northeasternmost region, including Commonia and the countries to its southeast (like Chionova, Chastechek etc.), while "Archanta Major" (or just "Archanta") is the central mass of the north, including AR009 down to Mecyna and west to the countries north of Zylanda? Just a thought. Also, please try to remember to "sign" your comments by typing "--~~~~" at the end of them.--Luciano (talk) 01:11, 27 March 2015 (CET)
Peritan City flag.svg Peritan City in Uletha is the smallest country in the world and is much smaller than Meridonia flag.png Meridonia. --Boge (talk) 01:13, 27 March 2015 (CET)
When I was writing about the smallest country, I just looked at the map in browser and checked few countries that was small. Measured them in JOSM and that's how I missed Meridonia :) There was my comment when I made this change: "smallest one. you can check, maybe I'm wrong" Currently all countries have been officially measured and I saw them somewhere on Luciano's page. --Zniwek (talk) 02:54, 27 March 2015 (CET)
Either way, it looks like Graenakkur is actually smaller than Meridonia now, which is understandable since it was created long after Meridonia... -Asparagus 17:07, 10 April 2015 (PST)

"Minor" I changed in "major", because that is the biggest part of Archantia. Astrasia is indeed a good name for the land south of the Mecyna-canal. --Histor (talk) 01:55, 27 March 2015 (CET)


Languages in Astrasia (and Archanta)

For the most part I agree with the name of Astrasia. There is however the language of High Astrasian, spoken in Forrintia, which resembles Dutch (if I understood correctly), that may gain extra status by the similarity of the names; people may assume that (High) Astrasian is the most important or perhaps the only language of Astrasia, the first of which cannot be determined until all (or most of the) countries have been filled in and developed, and the second of which it is obviously not. It would be like calling e.g. German, Greek or Polish 'European'. Would there be a solution for this? --Rasmus Rasmusson (talk) 08:08, 27 March 2015 (CET)
Well I do not necessarily concur with that. First of all it is not only spoken in Forrintië, but also in the Maurician Republics and Naobania, three different countries created by three different users. Secondly, in the real world languages named after a continent or subcontinent are not unheard of. Take for example Afrikaans (African), coincidentally a daughter language of dutch, which is named after a whole continent, but only spoken in South-Africa (name of the language is older than the name South-Africa) and Namibia. Another example is Southern Oceanic that, although named after the spread-out island region with a population of over 36 million, is only spoken in Vanuatu and New Caledonia. The same is true for Western Oceanic, which is only spoken on the Solomon Islands and the smaller islands of the west coast of Papua New Guinea. These three examples are, although named after a larger region, not the dominant language of the regions they are named after. Furthermore the distinction High in High Astrasian leaves room for a Middle and Low Astrasian. High, Middle and Low Astrasian, like High, Middle and Low German, should be considered a geographical reference to where these languages originated. We, the users of Forrintië, the Maurician Republics and Naobania, were planning to add some mountain ranges to Astrasia (or at least to our own countries) to make the continent more structurally correct from a tectonic point of view. Since we three are all geology students, we liked the idea of language groups influenced by geomorphology (although I must admit that we also picked "High" because it sounded nice).
The name Astrasian, like the distinction between high, middle and low, is more of geographical reference to where the language originated, than a claim of being the one and only language in the subcontinent. Other countries like Vega have shared languages (in this case Castellanese) with other nations that are in completely different parts of the map, it is therefore not very likely that this language originated within Astrasia. I believe the remaining Middle and Low Astrasian leave enough room for new users to create a language and a unique country within the subcontinent. Languages that could be used for Middle and Low Astrasian could be German, Scandinavian or even a English based language, since all three of them are quite closely linguistically related to each other in the real world. Since most of the countries surrounding our three countries are still unoccupied I would welcome new users to join our Astrasian language group. Joining in would have the immediate benefit of intertwining the countries on a linguistic and cultural level and create the need for deliberation on these subjects between users, which would lead to a more, for the lack of a better word, plausible cultural, linguistic and historic background of these countries. All in all it seems to me that having a language called High Astrasian in three countries in the continent of Astrasia is possible without claiming some kind of superiorty over the subcontinent and the other languages found within it. However if it really bothers the other users in Astrasia my friends and I will change it, though it would be much appreciated if we could keep it, because comming up with a name that all three of you agree with is kind of difficult :P
Finally I think, and I hope you will not consider it impolite from someone who has just joined your ranks, that we should strive for a more coherent language system, not only within the continent, but in all of opengeofiction. A lot of countries have their own language here and I think we should try to create more shared languages between countries of different users. Because even in the linguistically very fragmented Europe a lot of nations share the same language, or at least have languages that are closely related (think for example of German, Dutch and Lëtzebuergesch or the Scandinavian languages (without Finland that is)). I know that the language you choose for your country is quite heavily depended on the native tongue of the user, but for example seeing a German based language next to a Spanish based language without a (colonial) history to explain that is kind of weird. I understand that that creating a linguistically logical landscape within Archanta is next to impossible, because everyone preferably wants his/hers own language, and of course should be allowed to have that, but we could try to create a historic framework that explains the differences in the languages between the nations of Archanta. Sorry for the long story...--TRJ
I agree with you on trying to somehow standardize the OGF language system. For example, my own country has its own language, Wiwaxish, which to be honest, instead more properly should be Wiwaxian-Ingerish. Sort of like Australian English or Brazilian Portuguese. But then Astrasian should probably be Astrasian-Dagelandic. Although as you've pointed out, Afrikaans is a Dutch dialect, and it doesn't have Dutch or Nederlands in its name. Which is to say, it aint gonna be easy. Look how hard it was for just the three of you to come to an agreement!
One thing we could definitely highly encourage is to not use the real-world names such as English, Dutch, Swedish etc., and instead Ingerish, Dagelandic, Skanderish (not sure what the language is in Skandmark but I would assume that's OGF's equivalent to Swedish) - I think these real-world names bother me as much if not more than a profusion of OGF languages that might or might not be related or even the same --Demuth (talk) 16:31, 27 March 2015 (CET)
No problem with the long story :) - Afrikaans I would consider an exception, as it is a relatively recently named language and perhaps just short for 'Afrikaans-Nederlands' (African Dutch), from when it was still considered a dialect of Dutch. The Southern Oceanic languages seem to be more a language group than one coherent language, and this name was proposed only in 2002. Older language names are often based on much smaller scale phenomena (the people by which the language is spoken (e.g. French), some environmental feature (Dutch (Nederlands), Icelandic), insults (the Slavic names for German), etc.
It would sound plausible to me if High Astrasian would be short for (High) Astrasian-Dagelandic, as Demuth suggested, (unlike Dageland, Astrasia or even Astrasië/Astrazië doesn't really sound Dutch to me; if I had to guess without having heard what kind of language it is, I would say that the word had e.g. Latin origins) but that would mean that Forrintia, Mauricia and Naobania were populated by Dagelanders at some point, or that they chose Dagelandic as their national language for another reason.
I agree that it would be better to have everyone get together in order to dicsuss at least some linguistic coherence, but I fear that this won't be so easy. Linguistically, this planet is extremely fragmented, and as you suggest yourself, I'm not sure that each user would want to change the language in his/her country. Since there are countries where the same language is spoken, who lie far apart from each other and don't seem to have colonised each other, there could be other, perhaps less violent reasons that it is the way it is. A language map would be nice, if it doesn't exist yet!
(By the way, personally I would favour avoiding existing languages, especially earth's larger languages, but that would probably discourage participants who aren't interested in creating conlangs. Apart from Řotsnan, which has no morphological relation to any earth language, as far as I can tell (and otherwise it is a coincidence; sadly, I'm not familiar with all >6000 of them), I introduced Wiscothic, a slightly altered version of earth's extinct Gothic language, which I guessed that despite the fact that it was spoken on earth, wouldn't be a probable choice for the majority of the OGF participants. --Rasmus Rasmusson (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2015 (CET)
So I should change English to Ingerish in "infobox"? Maybe someone creative will invent OGF names for all (or well-known at least) languages if somebody in future would like to use them in their country?--Zniwek (talk) 19:54, 27 March 2015 (CET)
I do agree about the more coherent language distribution. Neighbouring countries do generally have related languages which have either evolved locally or been imported by colonists. I've tried to imply that central northern Archanta (Archanta Minor?) has a Ugric language family native to the region, which survives in Karolian (and regional dialects) and Aratar, but also Romance languages have somehow evolved in the region too. So if anybody else creates countries in this region, at least consider using a non Indo-European grammar, it's quite interesting and the speech sounds nice. Bear in mind that neighbouring languages don't have to sound similar or even use the same alphabet, only to have a common grammatical root (eg English can be traced back to Sanskrit).--Sarepava (talk) 19:30, 27 March 2015 (CET)
This discussion was run soon one year ago. From the beginning each user of OGF had taken the language for his land, as he want. There are at first only few contries and around them many free space. So the evolution was locical a patchwork of languages. Isleño then draw a language-map, but this try of systematic was never an officical rule.
Indeed here the freedom of choice a language for every user is contraire to a systematic linguistic devellopement "worldwide". If you want more systematic, one question can be: "Why dutch in southern Astrasia?" If you want more systematic, the free countries should have a given language-key. Is that chain wished? Is not the question of a "locical" worldwide linguistic devellopement the wish, to set own ideas, how the world has to speak, over the individual idea of others?
Most here are used indoeuropean languages. May be for the fact, that most user here speak one of them. But there are not real existing languages too in use (most of indigene people, before the "europeans" make theyr "colonies").
So til now each land can choose his own language - one or more in one country. I do not think, that we should change this freedom. O.k. - we have then a patchwork. So what?
On the other hand is clear, that two or more countries in the neigbourhood can make an private and individuel agreement of a common language in theyr countries. Nothing to say against this agreements. But its end at the boundary of this countries. --Histor (talk) 20:36, 27 March 2015 (CET)
When I first came here I was strongly reprimanded by several users for using Earth's language names, so I started using "Ingerish" and coined "Castellanese" and "Gohangukian". I have no problem with it, although to me it feels like a "kludge" rather than a coherent solution. I agree that we need a more coherent approach to languages, but every time I have made any attempt, I have found it much more challenging than trying to make the geography coherent - people tend to have strong opinions about language that aren't always amenable to coherence. From my personal perspective, from near the beginning I firmly believe that the only explanation for the OGF linguistic map is that all the "earth" languages (especially indo-european) in OGF have to be fairly recent immigrants from who-knows-where. Many users have been comfortable to imagine Indo-European to be from northwest Uletha, but even that region does not have a particularly coherent or "natural" linguistic picture. I think with users taking countries at whim and random, as histor points out, it's inevitable that it will be this way. I think it is pointless to try to impose linguistic coherence on users, as the price of attempting to do so would be a lot of users abandoning the community, since as Rasmus points out, not everyone wants to make a conlang or adopt a language they aren't comfortable with for their country.
I disagree that neighboring languages necessarily have to show genetic (and especially grammatical) relationships: in fact, that pattern in Europe is more the result of the specific patters of conquest that evolved in that region, and the more "typical" or "natural" pattern is a "patchwork" of mostly unrelated languages: look at Caucasus or Native-American or Central Asian patterns of language distribution - large swaths of three or four major but unrelated language families, interspersed with all kinds of isolates and distant relatives of far-away families.--Luciano (talk) 22:27, 27 March 2015 (CET)
Indeed - what is the problem with mixed-languaged countries or continents? Too in Europe are islands of non-indoeuropaeic languages (like basquian, hungarian, finnish) with no relation to the languages in the neighbourhood. On the other hand: a country can have different "dialects" so as the offical hi-german and the spoken folk-languages (niederdeutsch, bayerisch, schwäbisch etc.) as near releted languages. We have countries with strong linguistic minorities (catalan in Spain, sorbic in Germany, frisian (not lower-german) in Germany), we have Belgium with three languages (dutch, french and german) and and and. Why we shall here in OGF have more system as in reality? --Histor (talk) 22:55, 27 March 2015 (CET)
True, reality is often weirder than fiction :) But as I said; there can be good reasons for the linguistic situation on the OGF planet. Maybe it's the same reason why a majority of all the countries so far are rather rich first world countries... --Rasmus Rasmusson (talk) 00:12, 28 March 2015 (CET)
Most lands are drawn from people of more or less "rich" first world countries. And I think, the most draw the land as an "ideal". --Histor (talk) 00:59, 28 March 2015 (CET)

Pronunciation of 'Archanta'

How is 'Archanta' pronounced? I haven't mentioned the name out loud yet, but in my head I always pronounced the 'ch' as in Scottish loch, Dutch schaap or German Buch, but it could also be pronounced as 'ch' in technology, French or chamber (in the last possibility, the sound would be too intrusive, in my opinion). (Btw, it's not that I want to have this settled immediately; I'm just curious.) --Rasmus Rasmusson (talk) 17:43, 24 July 2015 (CEST)

"Arch..." is greek orign ("old") - so I think, it is to speek in the first manner --Histor (talk) 19:51, 24 July 2015 (CEST)

I always thought it was "ar-chan-tuh" with the "ch" from chip--Tâmyña (talk) 21:41, 24 July 2015 (CEST)

Being primarily a speaker of American English and Spanish, I have always given the name Archanta the hispanized pronunciation IPA /art͡ʃanta/, following the fairly straighforward Spanish pronunciation rules. However, I actually can see some appeal in a Greek-style pronunciation /arxanta/. That being the case, however, I think the Castellanese spelling would be "Arcanta", pronounced /arkanta/, cf. arcáico <- ἀρχαῖος, since Greek "χ" regularly becomes /k/ in Spanish etymology. I would have to edit a lot of objects in the Ardisphere to "fix" the Castellanese spelling. Perhaps we can assume there are many different pronunciations. That's totally realistic, after all.--Luciano (talk) 23:29, 24 July 2015 (CEST)

In portuguese language, the words with greek prefix "Arch" in its origin, are pronounced as/ turn in "Ark". Examples in "modern" Portuguese: Arquidiocese, Arquiduque, Arquinimigo, etc. So, I always pronounced "Arkanta", hehehe. But I agree with Luciano about so many different pronunciations around the world. Everybody says "Europa" but germans says "Oyhopa", and it is not wrong ;-) -- BMSOUZA (talk) 23:38, 24 July 2015 (CEST)
Nothern germans often say "Oirooba". ;-) And at every time I see this tricots, I do not think "Naikii" but "Niike". After all - there are many diffent speaking for the same word. In german normally they speak "Ar-chan-taa". But that must not be the last step of truth. --Histor (talk) 00:28, 25 July 2015 (CEST)
For "Europe" it's even a combination of different pronunciations and spellings ("Europa", "Euroopa", "Eiropa", "Jeropa", "Evropë", "Ewrop", "Avrupa", "Avropa", "An Eoraip", "Evrópa", "Evropa", "Európa", "Европа", "Європа", "Европӕ", "Еуропа", "Еўропа", "Ευρωπα", "Եվրոպա", "ევროპა"...). The same could be the case for Archanta; in Řotsnan the word is Rakant (also based on my presumption that Archanta was pronounced /arcanta/ or /arxanta/).
But as said: I was just curious about the pronunciation and the answer so far has been that there isn't a fixed one. --Rasmus Rasmusson (talk) 9:46, 25 July 2015 (CEST)
Hehehe, its true, Rasmus! I just mentioned germans because they write "Europa", but the pronounciation is so much different, as our "problem" with spelling Archanta but pronouncing "Arkanta"/"Arshanta"/"Artshanta"/etc :-). Regards! -- BMSOUZA (talk) 10:09, 25 July 2015 (CEST)

Disculpen hermanos de Archanta (Sorry Archanta's brothers)

No pedí su consentimiento sobre Archanta Nations Organization, ya que solo pensaba reunirnos, durante mi vida en OGF he "Arado en el mar" y no he hecho mucho bien, en nombre de la desorganizada Abunadi, porque no sé como construir bien ciudades porque no me explicaron, y quisiera que alguien me ayudara al respecto. Si desean unirse, envíenme un mensaje. Disculpen por hacerlo sin su consentimiento. He sido regañado por admin, y comprendo porqué, pero si alguien sabe quien me puede ayudar con eso, por favor. El "error de OGF", Dereck Barroso