Talk:Reforms of Portuguese orthography: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 10:27, 5 June 2007

Portugal Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal

???

This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Portugal To-do:

Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.

Improve key articles to Good article

Improve

Review

Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there
Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box).

Requests

See Requested articles

Assess

Help assessing articles.

Need images

Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia

Wikify

Vote:

Watch this list — Edit this list

Brazil Unassessed

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Dates concerning Brazil

The dates of spelling reforms in Brazil need to be checked. FilipeS 21:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency of the Orthographic Agreement

The orthographic agreement allows the double spelling for example of "tónico" and "tônico" based on differences in European and Brazilian pronunciation. Given that the "e" in "idéia" is uniformly open in all Brazilian dialects (though not always in Portugal), a similar argument would justify keeping two separate spellings, i.e. "idéia" and "ideia", respectively in Brazil and Portugal. However, the agreement scraps the Brazilian spelling "idéia" and accepts only the European variant "ideia" as correct. That seems inconsistent/contradictory to me !

It makes sense if you notice that the difference between ô and ó is phonemic, but the difference between final -éia and final -eia is not phonemic. FilipeS 22:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concepção

I deleted the concepção-conceção example since in BP concepção is still used(and the p isn't mute). The original poster probably confuse concepção with concessão(which sounds exactly like conceção, but has a different meaning).Also, I think that in BP molhada only means wet, so I'm not sure if this example should stay in the article.200.233.140.116 03:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Table corrections

The spelling "aspeto" is not used in Brazil. Brazilians write "aspecto" and pronounce it [aspɛktu] or [aʃpɛktu] (the latter pronunciation is found mostly in Rio de Janeiro and a few other major cities, e.g. Belém do Pará). 200.177.5.94 10:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Legal status of the 1990 reform

I am confused about the current legal status of the 1990 orthographic agreement. The article seems to imply that Brazil, Portugal, Cape Verde, and perhaps São Tomé and Principe (?) have already ratified it. Furthermore, the article also says that, following the adoption of the new 2004 protocol, the spelling reform can go into force immediately in those countries where the agreement has already been ratified. However, the article also mentions that there will be an unspecified "transition" period before the reform is fully implemented. As of today then, is it already legal to print books/newspapers using the new spelling rules in countries like Brazil where the agreement has already been ratified ? Shouldn't we consider using the new orthography as the standard in the Portuguese language Wikipedia ?

Following up on the topic above, it is worth noting that, eve though the French language Wikipedia has not sanctioned yet the 1990 "Rectifications orthographiques du français", the administrators in the French Wikipedia have nonetheless compiled a list of French language articles whose titles would be changed under the new orthography. Shouldn't the Portuguese Wikipedia administrators do the same in preparation for the possible future implementation of the Luso-Brazilian orthographic agreement ?

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 ==Legal status of the 1990 reform==
-I am confused about the current legal status of the 1990 orthographic agreement. The article seems to imply that Brazil, Portugal,and Cape Verde  have already ratified it. Furthermore, the article also says that, following the adoption of the new 2004 protocol, the spelling reform can go into force immediately in those countries where the agreement has already been ratified. However, the article also mentions that there will be an unspecified "transition" period before the reform is fully implemented. As of today then, is it already legal to print books/newspapers using the new spelling rules in those countries where the agreement has already been ratified ? Shouldn't we consider using the new orthography as the standard in the Portuguese language Wikipedia ?
+I am confused about the current legal status of the 1990 orthographic agreement. The article seems to imply that Brazil, Portugal, Cape Verde, and perhaps São Tomé and Principe (?)  have already ratified it. Furthermore, the article also says that, following the adoption of the new 2004 protocol, the spelling reform can go into force immediately in those countries where the agreement has already been ratified. However, the article also mentions that there will be an unspecified "transition" period before the reform is fully implemented. As of today then, is it already legal to print books/newspapers using the new spelling rules in countries like Brazil where the agreement has already been ratified ? Shouldn't we consider using the new orthography as the standard in the Portuguese language Wikipedia ?
+:Following up on the topic above, it is worth noting that, eve though the French language Wikipedia has not sanctioned yet the 1990 "[[:fr:Rectifications orthographiques du français|Rectifications orthographiques du français]]", the administrators in the French Wikipedia have nonetheless compiled a [[:fr:Catégorie:Graphie de 1990|list]] of French language articles whose titles would be changed under the new orthography. Shouldn't the Portuguese Wikipedia administrators do the same in preparation for the possible future implementation of the Luso-Brazilian orthographic agreement ?