Talk:Hawaiian Pidgin/Hawaiian English

Note

 * The article Hawaiian English has been redirected to Hawaiian Pidgin. This talk page is left as evidence of the reasoning behind that decision.
 * (and if someone can find an appropriate template to indicate that, go ahead and replace my statement above.) &mdash; Arthur Rubin |  (talk) 05:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Huh?
I have to wonder whether it's a good idea to call "Hawaiian English" one of the official languages of Hawai'i, when the State Constitution at http://www.hawaii.gov/lrb/con/conart15.html just calls it English. I think it is reasonable to make the point that it may constitute its own dialect, but until that dialect is named by the state government in its constitution, it's probably unwise to say it's an "official" language. Bugmuncher 03:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Absolute NONSENSE
I strongly agree with Bugmuncher. Whoever wrote the line that "Hawaiian English" is an "official" language under "state law" needs to either (1) quote the law, or (2) delete the deliberate deception. (Writing is not accidental; it is deliberate.)

Speaking as a person who holds a Ph.D. in Linguistics, the claim that the alleged mandatory use of okinas and kahakos effectively creates a dialect of American English is absolute NONSENSE. It's equivalent to claiming that ee cummings created a dialect of American English by merely writing in all lowercase.

This article is an embarrasment to Wikipedia. It should be swiftly deleted. Agent X 20:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Instead of putting in a citation needed stamp after every phrase, I think it would be clearer just to put a box at the top. It's a little jarring to read the article with all those stamps and, to be honest, after reading your comments, it sounds like it was done out of spite. Perhaps that was not your intention, but that's how it came out. I'm going to remove the little tags and put one at the top of the article.--Stella luna 16:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * First, I did not put a tag "after every phrase". So you have misrepresented what I did. I put the tags at specifically selected points where a supporting citation is needed. It so happens that the article/stub lacks even one citation, and it makes numerous unsupported (false) claims.


 * Second, it is not "clearer just to put a box at the top", in terms of knowing exactly where supporting citations are needed. The box fails to pinpoint any specific claims, and for that reason, is inferior to the use of specifically placed tags.


 * As for "spite", that's an irrelevant, subjective perception on your part. Nonsense and false claims should not masquerade as a Wikipedia article, nor stub. Agent X 21:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Constitution of the state of Hawaii, Article XV, Section 4
The relevant text is quoted here:

"OFFICIAL LANGUAGES

Section 4. English and Hawaiian shall be the official languages of Hawaii, except that Hawaiian shall be required for public acts and transactions only as provided by law. [Add Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]" (italic added for emphasis)

1. As correctly noted above by Bugmuncher, there is NO SUCH THING as "Hawaiian English" in "The Constitution of the State of Hawaii". It is "English", NOT "Hawaiian English", that is an official language of the State of Hawaii. The stub/article makes a FALSE statement and misrepresents the law.

2. Hawaiian language is NEVER REQUIRED in any State of Hawaii activities UNLESS specifically "provided by law". There are NO STATE LAWS requiring the use of Hawaiian language. The stub/article makes another FALSE statement, and again misrepresents the law.

3. The mere optional use of a macron and an opening single quote (so-called `okina), by certain enthusiasts (zealots), does NOT create a "dialect" of English.

4. The claim that use of the two marks is preferred by the majority of Hawaii's people is the DELUSION of an "okina lunatic".

5. The stub/article uses the word "Standard" to describe "Hawaiian English". There is NO SUCH THING as "Standard Hawaiian English". Where are the alleged "standards"? Where are they published? Who has the authority to fabricate such "standards"?

6. The stub/article has NOT ONE reference, and NOT ONE citation. According to Citing Sources, "any material that is challenged and has no source may be removed by any editor". According to Verifiability, "The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to keep the material, not on those seeking to remove it."

Agent X 09:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Citecheck needed for Further Reading section
I checked a few of the resources that were helpfully added to the Further Reading section a few days ago. The ones I was able to find with my university library access were talking about Hawaiian Creole English or a Pidgin dialect, rather than the subject of this article, which supposedly differs in only a few minor ways (accent when speaking and use of native phonic symbols when writing) from standard American English. Because of this, I have removed those citations and will now add them to the appropriate article, where they may be more useful. I suggest that the rest of the Further Reading be checked by those with access to resources I do not have. Andrew Levine 23:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy and justification for removing content
The policy states: In accordance with Wikipedia policy, I am challenging and removing content from this stub/article which lacks citations to reputable published sources. Agent X 13:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The following content was removed by me. Agent X 13:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Hawaiian English is the standard of the English language as used in the U.S. state of Hawaii.

The following content was removed by me. Agent X 13:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Under Hawaii state law, Hawaiian language words and names (including the name of the state) are represented in full Hawaiian phonics when written in an English context, including the okina and the kahakō in spelling. Otherwise, it is the same as the American English of the continental United States. Hawaiian English is not to be confused with Hawaiian Pidgin, a dialect that developed among multi-ethnic local residents since the 19th century.


 * As a written standard, English with Hawaiian phonics is used in all state publications and widely in regional magazines and newspapers. It has a somewhat lesser impact as a spoken language standard, as a portion of Hawaiian residents&mdash;particularly those who were not born in, raised in, nor have roots in the islands&mdash;speak Hawaiian words and names with a more anglicized pronunciation more common to the continental United States. However, Hawaiian English still has an accent which is noticeably different from that of general American English.

The following content was removed by me. Agent X 13:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * English dialects by continent
 * 
 * de:Hawaiisches Englisch
 * ro:Engleza hawaiiană
 * fi:Havaijin englanti