作者 slovea (LukeSkyFucker)標題 Re: [問卦] 現在講台語的人，是不是越來越少？時間 Sat Apr 11 01:06:08 2026
: → CCY0927: 你硬要扯 ISO 639-3 就等同不存在上海話 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:53
: → CCY0927: 或溫州話等語言名稱，只能叫吳語，而上海 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:53
看到你最後的回應，我終於懂你的邏輯了。你的認知是：
「上海話是獨立語言，『吳語』只是它的分類。」
「台語是獨立語言，『閩南語』只是它的分類。」
哇嗚
邏輯自助餐ㄟ
按照你的神邏輯：
柴犬也不是狗了因為柴犬有自己的長相、毛色（像你說的語言差異），所以柴犬是獨立物
種。
「犬科」或「狗」只是它的分類，不代表柴犬就是狗。
你覺得這種說法在生物學界會被當成天才還是笑話？
在語言學裡，wuu (吳語) 或 nan (閩南語) 被定義為 Individual Language (個體語言)
。
上海話或台語，在學術本質上就是這個個體語言下的變體。
聽不懂沒關係我簡單跟你解釋
你心愛的台語就是閩南支語的分方言而已，不管是上海話還是台語
大家都是支語，不要分那麼細好咪
可憐
:
→ CCY0927: 話、溫州話是可溝通的方言變體。不管是研 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:53
: → CCY0927: 究論文，或是該語言使用族群，應該不會同 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:53
: → CCY0927: 意這類看法。 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:53
: → CCY0927: 有獨立 ISO 639-3 代碼，但彼此卻可溝通 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:53
: → CCY0927: 的語言案例不少：東干語（dng） vs. 官話 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: （cmn）、捷克語（ces） vs. 斯洛伐克語 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: （slk）、白俄羅斯語（bel） vs. 烏克蘭 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: 語（ukr）、印地語（hin） vs. 烏爾都語 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: （urd）、馬來西亞語（zsm） vs. 印度尼 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: 西亞語（ind）、保加利亞語（bul） vs. 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: 馬其頓語（mkd）、塞爾維亞語（srp） vs. 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: 克羅埃西亞語（hrv） vs. 波士尼亞語（ 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: bos） vs. 蒙特內哥羅語（cnr）…… 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: ISO 639-3 代碼和系屬分類是兩回事，並不 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: 是說有代碼就表示兩種語言不能溝通或是不 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:54
: → CCY0927: 同系屬。鍵盤「閩南語」大師別太執著於代 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:55
: → CCY0927: 碼和系屬分類之間的關係，特別是現階段漢 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:55
: → CCY0927: 語系統底下的語言，在代碼上並沒有一個良 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:55
: → CCY0927: 好的對應關係。 111.255.109.20 04/07 22:55
哇嗚開始否認ISO639-3了，悲傷第一階段？
我們先複習一下你先前的精彩表現，先是拿出2014年就廢除的ISO639-6來槓臨時抱佛腳被
抓包，問AI起碼也做查證好嗎？
接著又在那邊跳針維基百科沒有寫台語的分類
笑死，拿維基百科來質疑ISO639-3，就問你誰？
真的很好奇你所謂的研調是在哪裡做的？暖暖蛇嗎？
你要不要看你列舉的大部分案例都是實質分裂獨立出去的國家
這叫Ausbau language
指一種語言因社會或政治需求，透過人為的標準化（如制定語法、拼寫、辭典）從方言發
展而成的獨立語言。
即使與其他變體結構相似、可互通，但因發展出獨立的書面系統而被視為另一種語言
這種情況下當然可以互通因為他們是政治因素分裂出去的「獨立語言」所以它有獨立代碼
。
問題你台語目前不適用這些案例啊，你又沒獨立，你主子自己都說中華民國已經是主權獨
立國家了不需要獨立。
那只能從另一種情況試
Abstand language
指兩種語言因結構、詞彙差異過大，即便沒有政治或文化干預，雙方母語者也無法互相理
解（即不具備互通性）。這是基於語言客觀差異的分類，例如漢語與英語。
問題你台語就沒有足夠的研究文獻能證明自己跟閩南語落差大到無法互通可以獨立
賓州大學的論壇有針對這起申請展開討論
July 27, 2024 @ 5:56 am · Filed by Victor Mair under Classification,
Standard language, Topolects
previous post | next post
[Serendipitously, right while we are in the midst of energetic discussions
over the classification of and terminology for the languages of Taiwan, I
received a communication from the international body that is charged with
such matters for all the languages of the world, namely, an arm of the ISO.
The following (after the page break) is a guest post by Janell Nordmoe,
Registrar of ISO 639-3 Language Coding Agency. For those who are not
familiar with it, "ISO 639 is a standard by the International Organization
for Standardization (ISO) concerned with representation of languages and
language groups." (source)
There have been significant changes with the publication of 639:2023,
including that the decision on CRs rests with the Maintenance Agency, not SIL
as Language Coding Agency for 639-3.
This link describes the four sets within ISO 639, the Maintenance Agency.
At the link to the info about the 639 standard, the public reports link is
the bottom of the page under Public Reports from the Maintenance Agency.]
——————————————————-
New language code proposals for Taiwanese
While researching Taiwanese, I encountered your work in several places
including Language Log, which led me to write to you. The short question I'm
requesting your comment on is, how is Taiwanese distinct from Min Nan
Chinese/Hokkien [nan] in terms of literature and ethnolinguistic identity?
The long version: In 2021 the Registration Authority for ISO 639-3, SIL
International, received two requests to create codes for Taiwanese in the
comprehensive set codes for world languages. They can be found at Taigi
2021-044 and Taiwanese 2021-045 (part of an 11-way split of [nan] Chinese,
Min Nan) proposal. The consideration of these two requests was delayed due to
the expected revision of ISO 639 (which was finally completed at the end of
2023) and is now underway.
Both change requests lack sufficient evidence from scholarship with regard to
the creation of a new language code for Taiwanese as distinct from [nan] Min
Nan Chinese, which both Ethnologue and Glottolog currently list as dialects
of [nan] (in the case of Glottolog, Taipei Hokkien is a sub-dialect of
Quan-zhang dialect).
According to the ISO 639:2023 standard, the distinction between a language
and a dialect is based on the criteria below. In the case of Taiwanese, we
have not found scholars making the case that Taiwanese is not intelligible
with Hokkien/Min Nan/[nan] as in (a). The best case seems to rest on the
distinct identity and distinct literature basis of criterion c.:
Two related language varieties are normally considered to belong to the same
individual language if speakers of each language variety have inherent
understanding of the other language variety at a functional level (they can
understand each other based on knowledge of their own language variety
without needing to learn the other variety)
Where spoken intelligibility is marginal, the existence of a common
literature or common ethnolinguistic identity with a central language variety
that both speaker communities understand is a strong indicator that they
should nevertheless be considered varieties of the same individual language
Where there is enough intelligibility between language varieties to enable
communication, they can nevertheless be treated as different individual
languages when they have long-standing, distinctly named ethnolinguistic
identities coupled with established linguistic normalization and literatures
that are distinct
Would you care to comment, for the benefit of the 639 Set 3 Language Coding
Agency and for the 639 Maintenance Agency (MA) voting members, on the
distinctiveness of Taiwanese from [nan] Min Nan in terms of
Literature
Ethnolinguistic identity
Articles and blogs describing Taiwanese tend to compare with Mandarin, or
lack distinction. between Taiwan and mainland China where [nan] is spoken.
Selected readings
"Taiwan(ese) Taiwanese" (7/22/24)
Taiwanese, Mandarin, and Taiwan's language situation
July 27, 2024 @ 5:56 am · Filed by Victor Mair under Classification,
Standard language, Topolects
Permalink
重點：
這兩份變更請求都缺乏足夠的學術證據，足以證明台語應作為一種獨立於閩南語 [nan]
之外的語言來建立代碼。目前，《民族語》（Ethnologue）與 Glottolog 均將台語列為
[nan] 的方言（在 Glottolog 中，台北話被歸類為泉漳片下的子方言）。
哭啊你台羅仔到是給力一點拿出說服人的證據啊，不要整天窩在台灣自嗨騙自己人好嗎?
怎麼關鍵時刻軟腳了？
笑死
國際認證
台語=支那閩南語
Get a job, okay?
--
https://imgur.com/wLaaniA
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 36.235.218.44 (臺灣)
※ 作者: slovea 2026-04-11 01:06:08
※ 文章代碼(AID): #1fsIu5HD (Gossiping)
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Gossiping/M.1775840773.A.44D.html
※ 同主題文章:
Re: [問卦] 現在講台語的人，是不是越來越少？
04-11 01:06 slovea
→ bicedb: 所謂的台語也才加幾個日語發音，數量比香港話語廣東話還少，基礎文法根本沒變1F 180.176.208.45 台灣 04/11 01:09
推 mrcat: 白馬非馬，靠詭辯騙自己3F 1.169.85.154 台灣 04/11 01:15
推 iLeyaSin365: 裝睡的人叫不醒，閩南的臺灣國的子民們各種凹也不是真的在乎這些...他們只是不顧一切的想要獨立，所以無論怎麼證明，他們的邏輯始終很扭曲。
國際學者這些還肯按照常理判斷台北話只是泉漳片下面的子集，真有學養。4F 223.141.170.145 台灣 04/11 02:02
--