Philipp Reichmuth wrote:
> - Tajik: better remove the [3], there have been plans to reintroduce
> Arabic script as well; in addition, it should be noted that Tajik and
> Farsi are so closely related to each other that I am not sure whether
> listing them separately makes sense
Linguistically, closely related languages Tajik, Dari (one of two official
languages of Afghanistan) and Farsi are further to each other than Swedish,
Norwegian and Danish. They are approximately as close to each other as
Russian, Belorussian and Ukranian: people undestand each other well, but
first sentence is enough to tell where it is from.
Most Europeans (including Russians) and American specialists in Iranian
languages consider Tajik to be a standalone language from Farsi. Sometimes
for some socio-linguistical reasons Tajik, Dari and Farsi are claimed to be
one
language. Many Iranian and Tajik linguists support this approach. This point
of view is also respected. So, discussion will continue.
To my mind listing Tajik, Dari and Farsi separately will make sense. Systems
that can distinguish more cathegories are usually better.
What is [3] in the citation above? Unfortunately I have lost sight of the
beginning
of the discussion.
Thank you,
Vladimir Ivanov
