Talk:List of ISO 639-2 codes

Ferrarese
I noticed that 82.48.39.192 added the "Ferrarese" language. I'm not clear if this was serious or a joke (perhaps the language Ferrari owners speak?) as this language is not listed in any of the ISO 639 references I was able to find, so I reverted her edits. If anyone finds out that this is a real language and that it does belong in 639, please undo my reversion and put it back in the list! Dweekly 08:29, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd guess it's what people around Ferrara use(d?) to speak. I wonder whether 82.48.39.192 just made the code up.

Special codes
Can anybody explain the difference between  and  ?

Is one of the two codes for strings of characters that bear a meaning in more than one language (for example ‹is› which occurs in English, Afrikaans, Dutch and others, or Chinese character words) where context does not indicate which of these languages is meant, and the other one is for situations such as when you have a list of words from different languages, but you're too lazy to mark items individually? Wikipeditor


 * Good question. In my understanding of en, "miscellaneous" in has the connotation of a rather random, arbitrary order, while "multiple" just means many. i guess mul could be e.g. for a text in the 13(?) national languages of India, while mis would include a couple of indic languages, a south american tribal language, bantu, and swiss french. In the latter case, there's no obviously simple pattern. Or maybe the two are equivalent. :P  Maybe search in RFC's or other historical documents... Anyway, section 4.1.2 of http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/normtext.html argues against your interpretation of 'mul'. Sorry. :P  The question remains open... Boud (talk) 23:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that link, Boud. After reading that, I think that:
 * : "mul (for multiple languages) should be applied when several languages are used and it is not practical to specify all the appropriate language codes.", which includes the last situation Wikipeditor mentioned.
 * : und (for "undetermined language") indicates text apparently in a single language, but we can't figure out which language it is.
 * : mis (for "uncoded language") indicates text in a single language, and we know exactly what language it is, but that language does not yet have a ISO639 code -- such as text in elvish or the "Minoan" Linear A or the mysterious Rongorongo.
 * How can we improve this article so readers like Wikipeditor get a correct understanding of these special codes?
 * --68.0.124.33 (talk) 15:14, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Acehnese / Achinese
Standardized the name to Acehnese, which is the correct modern spelling. Eagleswings 13:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Not ISO 639-2 languages
Bishnupriya Manipuri(bpm), Aromanian (rup), North Frisian (frr), Mazandarani (mzn), Otomian languages (oto), Sranan Tongo (srn), Tulu (tul) are not ISO 639-2 languages, so I removed them from the list, since at the top of the article it writes “The following list of ISO 639-1 and ISO 639-2 codes......” --Hello World! 16:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I have checked that List of ISO 639 codes is already a complete list of ISO 639-1 and 639-2 languages. Hence No other languages should be added.

Franco-Provençal language is not one of the ISO 639-1 or ISO 639-2 language. So I intend to remove it from the list.--Hello World! 11:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

(1) Duplicate entries for 'div', 'ota'. (2) Is 'Belarusian' a misprint?
I notice that 'div/dv' appears twice, for both Divehi and Mahl. Are these different names for the same language?

'ota' also appears twice: once for 'Ottoman Turkish language', and again for 'Turkish Ottoman (1500-1928)'.

Is 'Belarusian' a misprint for 'Belarussian'?

139.143.5.160 10:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * No, see Belarusian language. Wikipeditor 15:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * ota = Ottoman Turkish (1500-1928); oto = Otomian languages --Hello World! 10:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

B/T codes?
Anybody know what these refer to? —Steve Summit (talk) 03:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Aha. Answered my own question.  It looks like the "B code" is an abbreviation of the English name of the language, while the "T code" refers to the language's name for the language (the "autoglossonym"). —Steve Summit (talk) 03:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * See Talk:ISO 639-2 --Hello World! 16:24, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

2 letter codes missing!!
Why is there no 2letter code for sign languages?? :( And why isn't there a separate code for each sign language, just as there is for oral languages? :( I can say "en" and "eo" for English and Esperanto, then for ASL I have to say "sgn-asl"? --Sonjaaa 17:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Some languages simply don't have 2-letter codes. Sorry, take it up with the ISO ;o) — OwenBlacker 17:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Linking codes?
Why are the two and three-letter codes being linked to the language articles, when there's a column for the language name which is also being linked to the language articles? Why the duplicate links? Fagstein 01:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

ISO 639-3 TRANSLATIONS & LINKS
Hello, would those who contribute to this page (translating or linking articles) also please add their translations to the new ISO 639-3 pages. Thanks. Iancarter 06:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Efik
Efik redirects me to Ibibio, but Ibibio (according to its page) is listed under bnt. I can't seem to find a Wikipedia article about language "efi". Should there be one at all? Thanks. Mnlg (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Serbian language
I noticed that Serbian language is mistakingly represented with only one symbol: sr (српски језик). However, Serbian language uses two concurrent scripts (just like Serbocroatian), and there should be a clear difference between the two. Also, "српски језик" should also include "srpski jezik" as its Latin counterpart. Sergivs (talk) 13:59, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Alpha-2 vs Alpha-3 - what is the recommended standard?
The 639-1, 639-2, 639-3 and Alpha-2, Alpha-3 notation is initially confusing to readers, since if you don't check what 639-1 is, then you can guess that "639-2 = Alpha-2" and "639-3 = Alpha-3", since at least at first sight it seems to make sense. However, a little more careful reading shows that this is wrong. Since the first paragraph starts with 639 in general, this helps in the confusion.

Shouldn't we say something a bit clearer in the first paragraph? My suggestion:


 * ISO 639 has three code lists. The following is a complete list of ISO 639-2 codes, including the corresponding ISO 639-1 codes where they exist. The ISO 639-2 codes include an Alpha-3 code in all cases, and in many cases include an Alpha-2 code. Both the Alpha-2 and Alpha-3 codes listed here are considered valid ISO 639-2 codes. The codes are sorted by language name in the third column. The DIS/ISO 639-3 codes are not included.

If there are no complaints/corrections/discussion within one week, then i'll assume that there's consensus for this change. Boud (talk) 23:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Need check of this edit
Can someone have a look at this and verify it or not? I could not find the code on sil's web site. Thanks... -- ArielGlenn (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * According to the official list there is no separate code for the Cypriot dialect; likewise in these references/lists, ,  it seems to use the language code of the standard dialect.  So I'm going to revert the edit for now. -- ArielGlenn (talk) 14:42, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

List is incomplete
The following are valid ISO 639-2/T codes and are on SIL, but are missing from the table. Are they intentionally omitted, or were they adopted by ISO after this list was compiled? – RossJ81 Talk/Cont 15:42, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Ignore above. These are ISO 639-3 codes. – RossJ81 Talk/Cont 15:45, 9 February 2023 (UTC)