Misplaced Pages

Talk:Swahili language: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:50, 28 January 2013 editAfricaTanz (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers3,903 edits You shouldn't delete others' talk page comments. If you don't understand the "point", ask the contributor first.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:08, 21 December 2024 edit undoGnomingstuff (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers44,744 edits rv test edits 
(243 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{WP Languages|class=C|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Africa|class=C|importance=Top|Uganda=yes|Uganda-importance=Top|Burundi=yes|Burundi-importance=Top|Kenya=yes|Kenya-importance=Top|Mozambique=yes|Mozambique-importance=Top|Rwanda=yes|Rwanda-importance=Top|Somalia=yes|Somalia-importance=Top|Tanzania=yes|Tanzania-importance=Top|Democratic Republic of the Congo=yes|Democratic Republic of the Congo-importance=Top|Comoros=yes|Comoros-importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Western Asia|class=C|importance=Low|Oman=yes|Oman-importance=Mid}} {{WikiProject Languages|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Africa|importance=Top|Uganda=yes|Uganda-importance=Top|Burundi=yes|Burundi-importance=Top|Kenya=yes|Kenya-importance=Top|Mozambique=yes|Mozambique-importance=Top|Rwanda=yes|Rwanda-importance=high|Somalia=yes|Somalia-importance=Top|Tanzania=yes|Tanzania-importance=Top|Democratic Republic of the Congo=yes|Democratic Republic of the Congo-importance=Top|Comoros=yes|Comoros-importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Western Asia|importance=Low|Oman=yes|Oman-importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Anthropology|oral-tradition=yes}}
}}
{{archive box|auto=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 5
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Swahili language/Archive %(counter)d
}}


== Number of users ==
*] (up to Feb 2005)
*] (up to May 2006)


A requester in ] has asked for changes, that there are 200 million speakers of this language per this refernce: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379702. — ] <sup>]</sup> 13:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
== Diphthongs ==


:I concur, that is a far more recent reference than the one cited in the article. I noticed that it was updated but changed back by @]. @] any particular reason why? ] (]) 07:44, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
In the -vowels- sections it was said that in Swahili there are no vowels. What is it then, the -wa- in Swahili???
::it was changed because it's an over estimate and Ethnologue source is being used because first off there is not a large number of second language speakers of Swahili in the DRC so it wouldn't be possible for there to be 200 million speakers of Swahili also Ethnologue estimate of second language speakers is accurate because not all the inhabitants of these countries speak swahili as a first or second language. ] (]) 14:01, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
:::Doesn't seem likely that it's an over estimation. Tanzania alone has a population of and (over 37 million) of Tanzanians speak Swahili as a first language. Kenya, in 2019, had a population of and (over 12 million) of Kenyans speak Swahili as a first language. Uganda has approx. Swahili speakers. And this is not counting Burundi, DRC, Mozambique etc.
:::The Ethnologue source simply isn't accurate ] (]) 14:49, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
::::Uganda doesnt have 34 million speakers your estimate is not accurate in fact because you have no source to cite it. Since Ethnologue takes its data from census and other data provided by its users its more reliable. The Ethnologue estimation will be used for now. ] (]) 16:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
::::According to Ethnologue Uganda has 4.3 million second language swahili speakers and only 4,340 first language speakers. So where did you get your figure of 34 million speakers of Swahili in Uganda from? ] (]) 16:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
::::According to Ethnologue's source from the 2019 census there were only 111,000 first language speakers of Swahili in Kenya and 19 million second language speakers so where did you get your figure of 12 million from? ] (]) 16:34, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
:::::All figures I've cited are referenced in my reply from recent reliable sources (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics, Statistica, USAID).
:::::Also, the UNESCO source cited by @] above is recent and reliable and also gives the overall number of speakers at 200 million ] (]) 17:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
::::::Hi ] care to weigh in? I've found this other source. I'm inclined to make a good faith revert of ]'s edit to reflect these other more recent sources but I would prefer some level of consensus before I do. ] (]) 12:28, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
:::::::I'm not really interested in this topic, only was here to provide information from the VRT request in passing. — ] <sup>]</sup> 11:27, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
:::::::@] I just came across this. I seriously doubt 200,000,000 is an accurate estimate. It seems to be a maximalist claim similar to claims that English has 2 billion speakers. If you add up anyone who might have studied any amount of Swahili, maybe you get 200 million, but as an accurate estimate of L1+L2 speakers, no. The UNESCO document you've linked is not an academic study and gives no sources to document its claim as to the number of speakers, so it should not be used. Ethnologue is IMO much more reliable. ] (]) 03:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
::::::::You should be aware that there's a strong impulse on the part of speakers and advocates for a given language to inflate speaker numbers. Academically-oriented sources are very important for this reason. ] (]) 03:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::] There are important RS sources that contradict the Ethnologue numbers. If speakers (primary and overall) from just three countries alone (see the other sources above but happy to recite) add up to 83 million (I should add that even this number is likely an underestimation since the Kenya census was conducted over four years ago and the estimates for Kenya and Tanzania are just for primary speakers alone) without including speakers from countries such as Burundi, DRC, Mozambique, Somalia etc then the >200 million number becomes likely (perhaps even evident).
:::::::::I'll also look for more RS sources on the number of speakers in the other Eastern Africa countries and L2 speakers in Kenya and Tanzania. ] (]) 05:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
::::::::::@] I don't have time to argue with someone who sounds rather biased but I will just point out you're essentially conducting OR by trying to add up the speakers from countries like Burundu, DRC, etc. where Swahili isn't widely spoken. I have been to Kenya and quite a lot of people there don't speak Swahili (Tanzania is different, everyone speaks Swahili as it's the national language, whereas de facto English functions in this role in Kenya). I also have a Ph.D. in linguistics and no axe to grind here. The UNESCO source you provided is not a reliable source for this stuff as its claim isn't backed up by any citations. You need to find an actual reliable source that says 200+ million L2 speakers (since the number of L1 speakers is ~ 15,000,000) and not try to add stuff up yourself by picking and choosing sources. Ethnologue is a reliable source that provides such an aggregate, and the fact that you have no interest in even presenting differing views in the lede about speakers but have only chosen the maximalist claim shows your bias. ] (]) 08:45, 26 November 2023 (UTC)<br>
] Just stop. If you "don't want to waste your time" engaging, that's fine. And if you disagree with my point of view, that's fine too. But don't ascribe bias just because I disagree with you. You don't know me anymore than I know you. So stop.


But just in case you still do want to engage on the merits, I'm happy to have your perspective; I just don't agree with it for reasons I've stated (and referenced) above but I'll add to here; , , , and all quote Swahili speakers at atleast 200 million. The fact is, there is a preponderance of reliable sources that contradict the Ethnologue source, which is why I don't consider it having an accurate estimate of Swahili speakers. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small>
I've arranged it talking about semivowels. Please, someone with a better knowledge than me, look at it and improve it, specially the IPA symbols that I've copied form another page but that I cannot see at all. --] 11:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


{{ping|Cookiemonster1618|Benwing|Benwing2|Thuralt}} Hi, all. I have rewritten the section following ], to incorporate more reliable sources and note the general range of figures, since in general when reliable sources give a range of figures we should acknowledge that and not cherry-pick a figure, particularly from one extreme of the range. ] (]) 01:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
I know nothing about Swahili, but with a good Phonetics background I'd say the part about no diphthongs in Swahili should be deleted and that it should perhaps say that diphthongs are only formed with the approximants /j/ and /w/ or something like that.--] 04:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


:Hi ] fine with that. Seems reasonable. I, however, don't seem to understand why 150 million has been stated as the highest extremum, when the , and all quote figures starting at 200 million.
*The article says ''Swahili has no diphthongs'' and then about three lines later ''Swahili has also two semivowels ... used to make diphthongs''. Diphthong '''can''' have subtlely different meanings, but consistency would be good! ] 19:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
:I should add that the BBC page indicates that it was written/updated in February 2022 and the SOAS Swahili Programme page indicates that it was written/updated in June 2023. ] (]) 02:13, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
::The body (]) gives the full range, "Estimates vary widely, from as low as 50 million to as high as 200 million, but generally range from 60 million to 150 million." For the summary in the lead of where the estimates "generally rang", I looked at where most of the higher-quality estimates fall, and what gives as the range: ~60 to 150. ] (]) 03:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
:::] I would contend that Harvard and the University of London (maybe even the BBC) are equally credible RS sources. And also for consistency, it would seem reasonable to put the full range throughout the article instead of picking a single range from one source. ] (]) 03:28, 28 June 2024 (UTC)


== Contradictory Ethnologue Numbers ==
I take swahili in college and sometimes we separate the two vowels, as in chui like the example, but other times, such as the different pronouns for "their" (zao, chao, yao, wao) it's a dipthong. another example is chai (coffee) (sorry i don't want to deal with the IPA right now. --] (]) 22:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


First of all, the infobox for this article says the numbers are for (2019-2023), yet each source says 2024 for its date.
== ''Ki-'' ==


Secondly, the L1 number here is 5.3, while https://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_languages_by_total_number_of_speakers lists 16 million for L1, yet this article combines multiple varieties of Swahili, so should be higher. Both articles give Ethnologue as their source. Please fix this contradiction. ] (]) 13:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
I think that we should move the article to 'Kiswahili' not only for preserving the language's native name, but for consistency. We keep the ''ki-'' on both ] and ]. Why not here? --] 01:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
:This is a matter of habit. Kiswahili is the name in Swahili or Kiswahili if you prefer. Some linguist prefer it to Swahili as to differentiate between Swahili (the people) and Kiswahili (the language), although this is useful I don't think this is necessary. Should we have ''Français'' and ''langue française''? I think appending the term ''language'' is more than enough, and would be redundant if we had the ki- prefix. As for consistency with Kinyarwanda and Kirundi, it's irrelevant. Many bantu languages have a ki- prefix but many don't or have another prefix. Should we have ], ], ], ], etc. I personally prefer the usage without language specific prefixes, but I cannot generalize this. --] 08:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


:The figure of 16 million first language speakers is from the 26th edition for 2023, unless there's another cited source. The recent population estimates were taken from various sources and used in Ethnologue, as you might be aware that Ethnologue uses different sources and methodologies to provide speaker populations. ] (]) 05:49, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
:We've been gone through this many times before (see above, and the archived talk). Basically, the argument for keeping it at ''Swahili language'' is that the ] prescribes use of the most common terms in article names; and arguably in English, Swahili is more common than Kiswahili. Additionally, the MoS registers a preference for English terms (where available) above terms in other languages, and Swahili is the English term for what in Swahili is called ''Kiswahili'' (are you with me?). Those two points also account for things like Yoruba being located at ] and not at ] and Zulu being located at ] and not ]. This applies to some of Moyogo's examples too. Lingala, of which the li- part is usually analyzed as the ''li-'' noun class prefix, is located at ] simply because Lingala is the most common name in the English literature. &mdash; ] ] 11:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


== Orthography section needs work ==
:: There's a long article explaining why the word is "Swahili" when speaking in English at this page on the . Lakini ukisoma ], jina la makala kuhusu lugha ya ] ni "]," na makala kuhusu lugha kutoka ] ni "]," siyo "English." ] 11:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


The orthography section currently discusses the disused Arabic orthography in far greater detail than is needed for this page. Conversely, it barely discusses the Latin orthography at all. Readers are given no indication what sounds the Latin letters represent. It's just noted that digraphs exist, but not what they are used for.--] (]) 20:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
:::On second thought, I do think that it is redundant to say 'Kiswahili language', but I still prefer 'Kiswahili'. But it seems that this has already been throughly discussed and opposed. --] 15:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

::::I agree that Swahili and other Bantu language names are best anglicized by dropping the noun class prefix. The same standard should also be applied to the 'dialect' names listed in this article; e.g. "Unguja (''Kiunguja'')" instead of "''Kiunguja''". ] 14:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

==Swahili literature and poetry==
(Crossposted from the Africa-related regional noticeboard) I just discovered that we have practically nothing on Swahili literature and poetry. ] alerted me to his creation of ], one of the earliest known literary works in Swahili (1728), and upon expanding it a little I noticed that we didn't even have categories like ] and ] (I have since created the first). Is there anyone else who feels like creating at least some stubs on Swahili literature? As a small start, I wrote '']''. Asante sana! &mdash; ] ] 12:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

On a sidenote, Knappert (1982) describes four genres: the tale ('']''), the song ('']''), the epic ('']''), and the proverb ('']''). &mdash; ] ] 13:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

== Swahili and Sanskrit ==

The Swahili word for "Lion" is "Simba",

the word for "Lion" in ancient Sanskrit is "Simha".

Interesting!

Are there any older sources (books, oral records) for Swahili that can be compared with Sanskrit?

:You might want to check out ]. &mdash; ] ] 22:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I just did...but that doesn't apply here since the Swahili language is described on this page as having influences from India.

:It does, since an Indian origin is effectively ruled out by the fact that cognates are found throughout the ] language family (see Bantu Lexical Reconstructions I-III). &mdash; ] ] 20:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

== kiSwahili in the African Union ==

Is it possible to provide some clarification and reference for the status of kiSwahili in the African Union? In ] it is mentioned as an official language, separately from the other African languages. It seems that there was an effort to promote the language in the "OAU 1st Conference of African Ministers of Culture 1986, Port-Lous Mauritius. (...) This conference adopted two important documents: (...) Resolution N° 16 on the adoption of Kiswahili as an OAU working language. (...) Unfortunately: * the resolution on the use of kiswahili has never been implemented by the OAU, nor by any other African intergovernmental organization;" . Probably, we have to distinguish between what is going on in paper and in practice. ''In paper'', all African languages (kiSwahili included) and Arabic, English, French and Portuguese are working languages. ''In practice'', only Arabic, English, French and Portuguese are working languages - see for example the languages available in the . So, it seems there was an effort to do the same for Kiswahili, but in vain. How can we have a straightforward account of this subject? --] 22:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

== Number of speakers? ==

"It is spoken by over 50 million people, of whom there are approximately five million first-language speakers and thirty to fifty million second-language speakers" Huh? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP -->

: Native speakers: 800,000, not five million. Since 1960, a mystique has grown up around this one language. ] 07:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

: The statistics from Tanzania quoted by SIL which I think is what Lutz is quoting are based on census data. These data assume that a person's stated ethnic origin is synonomous with the related language being the person's first language. The Tanzanian census data do not capture "first language". My own experience in Tanzania is that increasing numbers of children have Swahili as their first language even if this is not their "Mother" tongue as such. Therefore Lutz's estimate of the number of first language Swahili speakers is probably an underestimate rather than an overestimate. ] 17:14, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

:In Kenya too maybe three-quarters of the population speak some form of Swahili as their first and often only language. Really all public life that isn't middle-class is conducted in Swahili, including most public media, almost all state communication and all religious instruction in urban centres where close to 50% of the population live. Add in another 30% who live in ethnically cosmopolitan areas and upto 80% of Kenyans speak Swahili as a first language.] (]) 11:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

::What sort of mystique? Why? —] 05:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

::In any event, the estimates in the article's first paragraph differ from the estimates in the language box. These should be harmonized, and the article should explain how these numbers were arrived at. ] (]) 00:37, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

== does BAKITA regulate Swahili? ==

Is it really correct to say that ] is in charge of "regulating" the Swahili language? I've always thought the council was formed to promote and try to standardize the language, but not to act as some sort of arbitrating body that regulates what is and isn't Kiswahili Sanifu. ] 20:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

== OVERVIEW ==
"As in English, the proportion of loan words changes as the speaker is communicating at a "lower" or "higher class" situation. In English, a discussion of say, body functions, sounds much nicer if you use Latin-derived words with occasional French terms rather than Germanic-derived words (so-called four-letter words); an educated Swahili speaker will likewise use many more Arabic-derived words with English terms in polite circumstances, though the same phrase could usually be said in Swahili using only words of Bantu origin." <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 23:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

This is definitely a biased absurd generalization and should be removed. Considering the fact that English is a Germanic language makes this statement completely ridiculous.

:Not at all… The fact that English is a Germanic language illustrates it perfectly. It’s poorly written, but it’s a good analogy to explain ] vis-à-vis Arabic-derived words vs. Bantu words.
:Unless, of course, the situation in Swahili doesn’t work like that. —] 05:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

== Most widely spoken language in Africa? ==

The Article states that Swahili is the most widely spoken langauge in Africa with 50 million speakers. That is wrong, there at least twice as many native speakers of Arabic. I also suspect that there are also more speakers of French in West Africa. Somebody should fix that statement. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 02:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

: In most of the second half of the last century, the most widely spoken indigenous language in non-Arabic Africa is Hausa, with over 25 million native speakers and a few million more second language speakers. But the combined population of Kenya and Tanzania is over 70 million, and the population of Uganda is about 26 million. Swahili is an official language in the first two and it was made a required grade school subject in Uganda within the last ten years. Not nearly everyone in Kenya and Tanzania speaks it; but in 20 years, if even 25 percent of those two countries speak it, and if the Ugandan mandate is observed, then Swahili will be head and shoulders beyond Hausa, Fulani, Igbo, and Yoruba. But it still will be spoken by just five to eight percent of non-Arabic Africans. ] 07:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

== Appropriate illustrations ==

I've changed the caption to the picture of the Lord's Prayer that was added to this article, and also moved it from the section on noun classes (!). However, I think it should be replaced with an image that is both clearer and more relevant. It would be nice, for example, to show an old Swahili text in Arabic script. ] 20:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

== Revisions of January 2006 ==
This article needs a thorough rewrite. Linguistically, it has numerous false statements. Some of its sources are popular encyclopedias that "haven't done their homework". It seems to have quoted liberally from several university Web sites without attribution (e.g., the Language Resource Center at Columbia University), and they too seem not to have done their homework, with their talk of the "Sabaki subgroup" and other remarks. The article's tone is consistently boosterish, naively enthusiastic.

One deleted passage ran, approximately, "Swahili is NOT largely a blend of non-Bantu languages. In fact, the proportion of loanwords in Swahili is only about as high as the proportion of Latin, French, Greek, etc. in English". This writer clearly didn't realize that the combined percentage of Latin, French, and Greek loanwords in English is at least 65 percent!

There needs to be an entire section added on the history of how the British colonialists created the widespread use of the language of a tribe constituting not quite one percent of the combined population of Kenya and Tanzania. ] 07:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

== "Poopie sticks" ==

In the OVERVIEW section lies: Overview

"Swahilian, '''poopie sticks''', spoken natively by a tiny, politically insignificant ethnicity". Is this at all necessary? --] 21:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

== Population ==

I've taken what I'm sure will be an unpopular step of deleting the population figures in the info box. But we've gone ''years'' without getting a credible figure; maybe this will motivate someone to do the necessary research. 40M native speakers is completely unrealistic; that's the entire population of Tanzania, and there are still people there who can hardly hold a conversation in the language. But 700k as in Ethnologue is also difficult to believe. Anyone actually know? ] 05:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

==language request tagging==
To add a Swahili language request to an article, put <nowiki>{{Arabic|Swahili=yes}}</nowiki> on the talk page. ] 19:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

== Swahili in the D.R. of Congo (Kinshasa) and more ==
The map showing the areas where Swahili is spoken is rather wrong.
First, Swahili is spoken and understood by a wide range of people all over the eastern part of Congo, i.e. the whole eastern part of the Orientale province (The provincial capital Kisangani being on the borderline between two lingua franca's of Congo, Lingala -Western Congo's lingua franca- and Swahili), the provinces of North-Kivu, South-Kivu, Maniema and Katanga all have a popultation fluent in Swahili (as a second or third language). In all these provinces you can communicate with people in Swahili, even in very rural areas.
Second, in the Republics of Rwanda and Burundi the language is less important. The exception being the capital of Burundi, Bujumbura, on the shores of lake Tanganyika, where the common language used every where and by all is Swahili, but once you go in rural areas the language people speak and understand is Kirundi (which is NOT very similar to Swahili). In Rwanda the use of Swahili is even less important and not at all official. (Kinyarawanda, the mother tongue of all Rwandese is nearly the exact same as Kirundi. people of both language communicate with each other without any problem). Of course, in both republics you'll have less trouble finding someone who speaks Swahili than French or English.
Third, quiet the same thing could be said for Uganda, where you'll easely find someone to communicate with in Swahili rather than Englsh (in rural areas) but where Swahili is much less implemented than in Kenya, Tanzania or Eastern Congo.

'''Swahili in Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda.'''
With these three countries being members of the East African Community they have taken it upon themselves to spread the use of Swahili and in fact Burundi introduced Swahili as a language to be taught in school as a cdompulsory subject. Thus while for now the language may not be widely spoken it would be wrong to say it does not hold any importance in those countries.

'''Swahili in Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda.'''
I was recently in Uganda. Swahili is not common all over the nation. In the regions along lake Victoria and in the South West people speak their local languages next to English, i.e. Lusoga, Luganda, Kinyankole, and others ... Certainly in Buganda and Busoga the use of Swahili is not always appreciated, and you better start speaking English on a Kampala market than Swahili (I was really surprised about that, in the 70's everybody spoke Swahili on a market in Kampala...)
although the younger generations, influenced by music comming from Tanmzania and DRC tend to know some Swahili.
Once you are in the East, past the town of Jinja, the use of Swahili becomes more and more common. In the town of Mbale everybody could communicate in Swahili. In the north Swahili is the common communication lamguage. Along the borders with the DRC many people know some Swahili. But once again, when you're in Jinja, Kampala or Mbarara you are better of speaking English. (Older) People tend to associate Swahili with the terrible regime of Idi Amin. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 11:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

'''Swahili spoken in the Middle East.'''
I would like to add onto the main page that Swahili is spoken in Oman by a third of the population as well as in the UAE and the Yemen. Is it possible to update this information to include the numbers of people that speak the language in the Middle East. Also considering that the Indian Ocean trade occurred with the E.A. Coast and the Middle East I would imagine that a high amount of people from those countries speak the language. Especially in Oman which was once united with Zanzibar and the EA Coast under one ruler.
] 11:44, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

:Oman and Yemen yes but the UAE has a very insignificant number of Swahili speakers.

'''Pidgin-Swahili'''
Pidgin-Swahili is a very wide spoken language, as far as in southern Sudan, Zambia, Malawi, northern Mozambique, Somalia, poeple speak it. Kiswahili is a trade language al over the eastern part of Africa, in which people learn enough to exchange greetings, bargain in markets and ask for directions, when they don't speak a common native language.

'''Kiswahili in the Central African Republic'''

I have it from a good source (a central African Citizen) that swahili is widely spoken and understood in this state. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Atlantic Congo? ==

In the descent from Niger-Congo Atlantic-Congo looks wrong. ] 09:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
:Wrong how? Other than the fact that not everyone is going to agree with all the details of the Ethnologue classification, that is. ] 09:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

:: Yes, that was it. I suppose would be nice if the template had an ability to refer to alternate classifications. ] 10:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

:::Ethnologue leaves a lot to be desired, but I imagine we might get into a lot of arguments over classification otherwise, and if we go individually it could require a huge number of edits every time we change some detail of a classification, unless there's some way of automating it from a master list. ] 16:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

:::On the other hand, the Ethnologue classification for Khoisan was so bad that we abandoned it entirely. But this is a discussion for ], not here. ] 18:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

== hakuna matata ==

In article ], meaning is said as "no worries". I thought it meant "forget past". Which is correct? can anybody help? ] 08:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

:''Hakuna matata'' is Kenyan Swahili for "no problem". ''Matata'' means "trouble", or "fix" as in to get into a fix. ] 09:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

::Thanks a lot, kwami! ] 10:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

:Hakuna is the negation of kuna, which is "there is/are" ] (]) 12:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

== Noun classes ==

The list of noun class examples should include classes 15, 16, 17 and 18 which are referred to in the introduction but not listed in the examples. Also, the class 11 example "uani" is derived from "ua" with the locative suffix -ni which shifts it from class 11 into class 16. As a result you get for example "Ua wangu" (my backyard) but "Uani kwangu" (in my back yard). ] 17:44, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

What happened to Class 13? ] (]) 19:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

== incorrect map ==

Why keep the map that is labeled 'incorrect map'? ] 13:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
:Better than nothing. I haven't had time to correct it, and have been hoping having it under people's noses would spur someone else to do it. ] 20:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
::Didn't work. It's been replaced with another map with the same errors. ] (]) 07:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, the new map, with different green colors, is rather correct, although for Uganda it isn't really like that, just in the eastern part bordering Kenya and the whole northern half of the country uses Swahili as a communication language. In the rest of the country it'd be better colored light green. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 11:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Thanks for making the map. Another thing is that there are plenty of native Swahili speakers in regions outside of that narrow band along the coast. For example in many areas in mainland Tanzania people speak Swahili as a first language. Maybe that band could be relabeled as the region where the language originally developed.<small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Uganda is med. green cuz it's official, but I made a comment about Baganda. Changed 'native' to 'indigenous' for dk. green. ] (]) 22:11, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

== Imzadi in Star Trek? ==

In the "In non-African popular culture" section it says "Also, the word Imzadi used in Star Trek: The Next Generation is derived from Swahili. It means "beloved"."

Beloved is "mpenzi", isn't it? and Imzadi comes form mpenzi????? --] (]) 17:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

== Somalia? ==

i am baffled as to why somalia is included in the list. to my knowledge no body speaks it there. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 23:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Swahili time ==
Under the section for ], it has the phrase “East African.” Does this imply that the same is true for other East African languages? Or that Swahili speakers outside of East Africa don’t follow this convention? Someone please clarify. —] 05:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)<br />
It is certainly the case for other East African languages that I have come across, particularly in Uganda, eg Luganda, Runyankole (both Bantu), ngaKarimojong, aTeso and Luo dialects (all Nilotic). I'm pretty sure members of African diaspora who speak Swahili maintain this way of referring to time. ] (]) 07:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

== Bot report : Found duplicate references ! ==
In , I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
* "marten" :
** <nowiki>L Marten, "Swahili", Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd ed., 2005, Elsevier</nowiki>
** <nowiki>L Marten, "Swahili", Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd ed., 2005, Elsevier </nowiki>
] (]) 05:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

== Semantics for noun classes ==

The article has a large section about how in Swahili the noun classes are more semantically motivated than in Indo-european languages. I don't think that this is the concensus amongst Bantuists. For other Bantu languages Demuth has argued IIRC that children pay only a limited amount of attention to semantics when they are learning the noun class system, and in most Bantu languages (including Swahili) semantics plays a very limited role in determining what noun class a noun should be in.In my opinion the semantic motivation outlined in the article is not in heads of native speakers of Swahili. Also, I doubt some of the extensions mentioned (such as frog being a not fully a land animal and thererore being only marginal an animal.

There are a few cases where there is a clear semantic component in determining what noun class a word is. For instance, languages all belong to noun class 7. But the same is true for Indo-European languages. In my native language Dutch all languages are Neuter. And if we would use these extentions we might find that the genders in Indo-European languages are equally semantically driven.
--] (]) 13:42, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

== Swahili in Somalia ==

We're getting into an edit war over the Swahili in Somalia, because (of all things) the CIA ''World Fact Book'' doesn't mention them. A couple sources:

''Ethnologue'' says, "The Mwini live in Baraawe (Brava), Lower Shabeelle, and were scattered in cities and towns of southern Somalia. Most have fled to Kenya because of the civil war. The Bajun live in Kismaayo District and the neighboring coast."

Swahili place names between Barawa and Mogadishu, including the old town of Mogadishu itself, though only Barawa is still Swahili speaking. See also If Derek Nurse said in 2007 that Swahili is spoken in Somalia, you're going to need a very good ref. to show he's wrong. ] (]) 04:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
:I agree. (] (]) 05:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC))

:You have got to be kidding. First of all, the first source above is from 1985 -- twenty three years ago -- and all it says is that "except for the small Miini-speaking population in Barawa, none of this population is Swahili speaking today". The second link shows a map for the Swahili diaspora, not Swahili city-states, and it references the past, not the present. Does the fact that a Nigerian diaspora exists in Britain make native Briton's 'Nigerian'? I beg to differ. The third source is from 1961 and mentions that some of the Bantu riverine tribes in Somaliland at the time (the source is so old it still refers to southern Somalia as 'Somaliland'!) adopted it. Wow. That's a truly contemporary Swahili society right there. The fourth link is from fifteen years ago, right after the ] broke out, just like the Ethnologue entry you reference from 1992. As such, these sources have no bearing whatsoever on the current linguistic situation in ] especially since the handful of Bajunis that spoke Kibajuni have long since fled from the country. On the other hand, the -- that you predictably call a 'joke' simply because it doesn't identify the Bantu Swahili language as being spoken in Somalia and certainly not by Somalis -- is from this very year. I therefore strongly suggest you unlock the ] page and fast because you are quite blatantly violating Misplaced Pages's policy on ]:
:<blockquote>"Conflict of interest/non-neutrality/content dispute — Administrators should not use their tools to advantage, or in a content dispute (or article) where they are a party (or significant editor), or where a significant conflict of interest is likely to exist. With few specific exceptions where tool use is allowed by any admin, administrators should ensure they are reasonably neutral parties when they use the tools."</blockquote>
:Since you are the other party involved in the dispute, you cannot abuse your administrator privileges as you've . Either you unlock the page this instant and stop abusing your administrator priviliges, or I promise you I'll take this to AN/I. ] (]) 05:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
::There is a serious distinction between linguistic sources and non-linguistic sources. The CIA handbook is not a linguistic source. Derek Nurse is. If Derek Nurse said in 2007 that there were Swahili speakers in Somalia, then that should close the matter. He is the worldwide acknowledged expert in the languages and linguistic situation in East Africa. He is the voice of authority on the issue, not some spook in the CIA. (] (]) 05:35, 17 December 2008 (UTC))

:::lol One doesn't need to be a 'linguistic authority' to know whether or not Kibajuni is spoken in Somalia in 2008. One just needs to survey the country, which the CIA, like it or not, is more than qualified to do. ] (]) 06:16, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

:::And the Nurse source is from 1985, not 2007. ] (]) 06:21, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
::::The CIA doesn't conduct linguistic surveys. Should we rely on a Texaco road map for targeting nuclear weapons? (] (]) 06:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC))

:::::That's absurd. The CIA conducts surveys on an entire country's makeup: its people, politics, religion, language, etc. All of it, and up-to-date. It also obviously hires people qualified to do so. Sorry if this bothers you. ] (]) 06:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
::::::Actually, the CIA does not conduct linguistic surveys. It extrapolates data and simply relies on government sources for information of that nature. The CIA does not hire people qualified to conduct linguistic surveys since that is an extremely minor part of the survey material. Look at the Somali pages. There are exactly five words associated with the label "languages": Somali (official), Arabic, Italian, English. It is not a survey. It completely ignores the Oromo dialects, Boni, Swahili, and Mushungulu. A true linguistic appraisal of the country would include population figures, etc. The CIA does '''''not''''' hire linguistic surveyors. It hires experts in government and economics. The rest it gets from other sources. And the last Nurse source Kwami lists is from 1993 (Swahili and Sabaki), not 1985. Here are some other references to Swahili in Somalia: David Appleyard, 1994, "The languages of Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia and Jibuti," ''Atlas of the World's Languages'', Ed. Christopher Moseley & R.E. Asher, Routledge, pg. 274, map 77. The Nurse and Atlas references '''are''' the most recent references because it has been impossible to conduct proper linguistic surveys in Somalia since the late 1980s. The CIA does not conduct linguistic surveys. (] (]) 07:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC))

:::::::Your word that the CIA does or does not conduct enough research to know whether or not a given language is spoken in a country is of zero interest to me, and in no way invalidates the CIA World Fact book's claim to being a modern, reliable source. The source Kwamikagami quotes above ''is'' from 1985; it says so right there when one clicks on the "" link. And even if it were from 1993 as you incorrectly claim (no longer 2007, I see), it would still be ''fifteen years old'', a ninth grader's entire life. The Appleyard source from 1994 likewise also dates from the early days of the ], and in no way reflects the current linguistic situation in Somalia on the eve of 2009 regardless of what it states. By contrast, the CIA -- which is a US government institution -- does have the ability to conduct entire, up-to-date country surveys in even the most precarious of circumstances, including the lay task of finding out which languages are spoken in a given country. Your attempt to make it seem like only a seasoned linguist can figure out what languages are spoken in a given country are laughable, to put it mildly. ] (]) 07:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

::::::::Check other countries, and you'll find that half of their languages aren't mentioned. Japanese is the only language mentioned for Japan, for example. That hardly means the rest of the world's languages don't exist. Now, it's entirely possible that the entire Swahili-speaking population of Somalia has fled, but if so you should be able to provide a reference. Your assumption that this is so is OR and inappropriate in an encyclopedia.

::::::::Orwin at SOAS, writing in 2006 for the ''Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics'' (2nd ed., p. 10,012) remarks of the Bantu languages in Somalia that, "to what extent these languages are still represented in these areas is not known given the displacement of persecuted populations in Somalia and the small numbers of speakers." However, your CIA ref give Bantu at 15% of the population at the same time it fails to mention any Bantu languages, so it is obviously either incomplete or dated or both. ] (]) 09:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

:::::::::No, what's POV is your refusal to accept that Swahili is no longer spoken in Somalia (a country I'd bet my last dollar you know absolutely nothing about). And that when it was, it was only spoken by a handful of Bantu/Bajuni minorities despite my having supplied a governmental source ''from this year'' which doesn't include Swahili among the languages spoken in Somalia. The Bantu minorities in Somalia principally speak the Maay-Maay dialect of Somali; the rest speak Standard Somali. A tiny minority speak Bantu languages (typically Kizigua, not Swahili), but because Bantus live in the south where the violence is based, are non-Somali visible minorities, and are classfied as priorities by the US government and UN alike for resettlement, that tiny minority has left the country. Furthermore, the does not give a 15% figure for Bantus. It gives a 15% figure for ''all'' non-Somali minority groups, be they Arab, Bantu, Indian, etc. combined. And like the Somali majority, almost all of these various minority groups speak the Somali language. ] (]) 10:04, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

That could all very well be true, and I'll be happy to accept it all as soon as you supply reasonable evidence that it is so. Since we've supplied references that Swahili '''is''' spoken in Somalia, it's up to you to supply evidence that they're wrong. Come on, this is common sense. We can't just take your word for it, and ] is not acceptable.

Also, ''Ethnologue'' states that "Most of the Arabic and all of the people from India and Italy have left", so that 15% must be primarily Bantu. And yet the CIA still lists Italian as a language spoken in Somalia. Not even ''Ethnologue'' lists Italian. ] (]) 10:17, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

:lol You've supplied evidence that dialects of Swahili used to be spoken 15+ years ago by a handful of non-Somali minorities in a few towns in southern Somalia, and all dating from before or around the time of the start of ]. I've supplied direct proof via the authoritative World Fact Book that Swahili is not among the languages spoken in Somalia in the here and now in 2008. Again, I know it's a challenge, but learn to deal with it. ] (]) 10:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

:You're also very choosy with what you quote from . You don't, for example, mention the fact that it states (referencing its ancient 1992 source) that it's the tiny Mwini/Bajuni community in Somalia that spoke Swahili but that, at the time of writing way back in 1992, most had "fled to Kenya because of the civil war." What do you think happened in the sixteen violent years since then? And Bantus do not and have never represented 15% of Somalia's population. They were at most a miniscule 1-2% way back when; one can only imagine now. It's also not hard to believe that minorities represent 15% of modern Somalia's population (including Arabs, Indians, and Italians) when one considers the fact that many among the Somali majority have also fled! ] (]) 10:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Are you joking, or do you really not understand what "proof" means? As for ''Ethnologue,'' there were 40,000 in 1992, and "most" have fled because of the war. "Most" does not mean all. If "most" had fled ''prior'' to 1992 ''(Ethnologue'' is silent about the relative timing), then 40,000 would be what's left. However, they could have meant that most fled ''after'' the population estimate of 40,000, which would also suggest that some Swahili are left. QED. Either way, we have no evidence that the population has been eliminated.

You write, "Bantus do not and have never represented 15% of Somalia's population." However, that's the figure from your "authoritative" CIA source, which according to your own argument constitutes "proof" that the Bantu '''are''' 15% of the population of Somalia as of 2008. You can't eat your cake and still have it: either the CIA is reliable, in which case 15% of the population is Bantu, or it is not reliable, in which case there's no point trying to read anything into the lack of mention of the Swahili. ] (]) 11:11, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

:Okay, either you have serious trouble reading or you're completely unacquainted with telling the truth. Again, the profile on Somalia from 2008 states that minority ethnic groups combined make up 15% of the total population of modern Somalia. I already explained this to you when I wrote above that "it gives a 15% figure for ''all'' non-Somali minority groups, be they Arab, Bantu, Indian, etc. combined". Please do not pursue this matter any further because you'll only succeed in making yourself look worse. Moreover, on Kibajuni from 2005 -- almost four years ago and before the rise to prominence of the ] and the subsequent ] in 2006 -- already indicates that by that time, Bajunis had "moved or are moving to northeastern Kenya". I don't see your point in continuing to insist that Swahili is spoken in Somalia when it it so obviously is not. ] (]) 11:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

:And if that wasn't enough, also indicates that the Mwini and Bajuni are "reported to have come centuries ago from Zanzibar." In other words, they aren't even native to Somalia, but immigrated there recently from the actual Swahili-speaking portions of East Africa i.e. the ''Bilad al Zanj''. ] (]) 12:47, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

::To quote your trademark patronizing response: Lol! I haven't actually laughed out loud until now. We all know Swahili is a recent language over much of its territory. Or all its territory, for that matter. So what? I suppose we shouldn't list English as spoken in the United States, or Arabic in Egypt, because they're not native. As for your earlier points, once again, I think it's very possible you're correct. But you have yet to provide evidence for more than it's a possibility. I'd be happy to add a citation that numbers have decreased and the current status of Swahili in Somalia in not clear, but not to remove it unless you demonstrate this is true. ] (]) 13:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

:::This is truly pathetic. I quote for you an official, current, governmental source from the indicating that Swahili is not spoken in Somalia at the present time in 2008, and you complain. I explain to you that the few non-Somali Swahili speakers that lived in the country have long since left due to being visible minorities in a civil war environment, and you insist that all I have to do is provide proof of this and all is peachy keen. And when I do just that and supply a source from the indicating that the Bajuni have indeed left Somalia and another from pointing out that they're not even native to Somalia but recent arrivals there, you still find something to gripe about! It's beyond clear at this point that this is a very personal issue for you. For whatever reason, you need (or need others) to believe that Swahili is spoken in Somalia despite all evidence to the contrary. The fact that you'll even put your administrator privileges and reputation on the line for this is most telling. But don't you worry; fate has a lovely way of dealing with those who don't know the meaning of fair play. Especially the ones in positions of authority that think the rules don't apply to them. ] (]) 14:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
::::Middayexpress, your tone is inappropriate for Misplaced Pages. You started this discussion being insulting and rude. Linguistic surveys are not something that CIA operatives know anything about. They are trained to count military vehicles, estimate oil flow, etc., not to ask people what language they speak. They stand in the markets and hear Arabic or Somali spoken around them, but they don't go into every village along the coast and survey the population as to what language they speak when they are not selling bananas in the market to all the Somali speakers. The CIA doesn't really care about such things because the languages of minorities in a given country is not relevant to their mission. That's why no linguistic survey has been conducted in Somalia since the late 1980s. There just isn't a single drop of accurate information available to us for language usage in Somalia. This being the case then we must rely on the last accurate information and date it as such. I am with Kwami, we can add a statement that the number of speakers of Swahili in Somalia may be lower, but until you supply an actual linguistic reference that states that Swahili is gone, then your claims are unreferenced. Here's the level of linguistic accuracy found in the CIA fact book: "English 82.1%, Spanish 10.7%, other Indo-European 3.8%, Asian and Pacific island 2.7%, other 0.7% (2000 census), note: Hawaiian is an official language in the state of Hawaii ". That's the entry for the U.S. Wow, what about all the Native American languages? Sure there are not many speakers, but "other"? And notice their source of information--a 2000 census. This is the 2008 edition of the CIA Factbook, but their linguistic information is '''''not''''' derived from "CIA sources", but from governmental sources--the 2000 census--and it's '''''eight years old'''''. That shows you the level of "accuracy" for the linguistic information in the CIA Factbook. Here's another one: "Nepali 47.8%, Maithali 12.1%, Bhojpuri 7.4%, Tharu (Dagaura/Rana) 5.8%, Tamang 5.1%, Newar 3.6%, Magar 3.3%, Awadhi 2.4%, other 10%, unspecified 2.5% (2001 census)" for Nepal. Notice the source of information--a 2001 census. The CIA is not conducting linguistic surveys, but relying on local government information. Those entries seem fairly accurate, but here's the information for a country that is of major strategic importance to the U.S.: "Portuguese (official and most widely spoken language); note - less common languages include Spanish (border areas and schools), German, Italian, Japanese, English, and a large number of minor Amerindian languages"--Brazil. Notice that this is not accurate information (no percentages based on actual censuses), but just an impressionistic list of names. The CIA Handbook is not a tool for linguistic reference. It gets its information from various sources (including Ethnologue in the absence of official surveys) and does not really evaluate the quality or accuracy of those sources. Linguistic accuracy is not the mission of the CIA. Find a '''''linguistic''''' survey and reference for your assertions. The only problem is that linguistic surveys are generally luxuries in a country and are most often done by missionary organizations like SIL. Getting food and medical care to a country like Somalia take priority and even this is not being done because of the inherent danger to foreigners (not to mention the danger to locals) in that war-torn land. (] (]) 14:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC))
:::::I just read your UN source (which you had not listed before) and it states: "According to the professor of Linguistics, two varieties of Swahili, including "(Ci) Mwiini" or "(Ci) Miini" and Bajuni are, or were, spoken in Somalia by approximately 15,000 natives of the town of Barawa or Brava (3 Nov. 2005). In the case of Bajuni, it is a "cross-border" language spoken in both Somalia and Kenya (Professor of Linguistics 4 Nov. 2005). He also explained that, in the past, the Bajuni used to live "on the coast and offshore islands of Somalia and Kenya" while today, Somali Bajuni have moved or are moving to northeastern Kenya (ibid. 3 Nov. 2005). According to the SPRAKAB business manager, Kibajuni is spoken "on the islands outside Somalia and on the coast of Southern Somalia" as well as on "the coast of Kenya around the river Tana up to the Somali border...by a small number of people," while Swahili is spoken in many East African countries (7 Nov. 2005)." Not a single one of these people say that Swahili is completely gone from Somalia. This reference actually completely contradicts your statement that Swahili is gone and contradicts the "holy CIA" that you keep citing. (] (]) 14:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC))
::::::One more place where you are wrong, Middayexpress, is that Kwami has ''two'' references to Nurse, not just one. The first is to his 1980s book, "The Swahili"; the second is to his 1993 book, "Swahili and Sabaki". So the 1993 reference to Nurse is correct. (] (]) 15:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC))
:::::::I could've sworn I already told you that I have no interest in your word that the CIA does or does not conduct enough research to know whether or not a given language is spoken in a country. It's funny how above you profess an interest in sources yet have no qualms whatsoever about not producing any to back up your own claims. I've said it before and I'll say it again, your opinion on this issue (because that is what it is, an ''opinion'') in no way invalidates the CIA World Fact book's claim to being a modern, reliable source. The source Kwamikagami quotes above still dates from 1985; it still says so right there when one clicks on the "" link. But you're right; his second book is from 1993 (not 2007 here too) as I believe I already mentioned in my very first post in this absurd 'discussion'. And it's still of course ''fifteen years old'', a ninth grader's entire life. Like it or not, the Appleyard source from 1994 still likewise also dates from the early days of the ], and still in no way reflects the current linguistic situation in Somalia on the eve of 2009 regardless of what it states. By contrast, the CIA -- which still is a US government institution -- still has the ability to conduct entire, up-to-date country surveys in even the most precarious of circumstances, including the lay task of finding out which languages are spoken in a given country. Your attempt to make it seem like only a seasoned linguist can figure out what languages are spoken in a given country is still as preposterous and unsourced as when you first put it forth. You also insinuate that the CIA's entry on languages in Somalia dates from 2000/eight years ago, although it doesn't state that anywhere in the country profile. To support your opinion, you mention the fact that the CIA doesn't list the myriad of languages spoken in the 50 US States or among Native Americans and even in Nepal. The problem with this (and you'd already know this if you were actually familiar with Somalia) is that aside from the Somali language which just about everyone in the nation at least understands if not speaks, there are only handful of minority languages spoken in there. Furthermore, that you should complain about anything being "inappropriate" is also beyond ironic given your conspicuous and lingering silence in the face of Kwamikagami's confirmed administrator abuse. Four separate administrators that got wind of the case all noticed it right away. I wonder why not you Taivo? You also write that the source I reference somehow "completely contradicts statement that Swahili is gone and contradicts the "holy CIA" that keep citing". lol Besides sounding suspiciously like sarcasm (which would kind of make your opening gripe to the effect that my "tone is inappropriate" something approaching hypocrisy), it's also a classic example of fuzzy logic since you state triumphantly (?) that "not a single one of these people say that Swahili is completely gone from Somalia", all the while ignoring the fact that what the paper does state in no uncertain terms (and way back in 2005, almost four years ago and before the rise to prominence of the ] and the subsequent ] in 2006) is that the non-Somali minorities in Somalia that actually do speak a dialect of Swahili, the Bajuni, have fled to Kenya! But of course, this testimony from an actual linguist that has actually lived in East Africa 'contradicts' a statement by one unusually authoritative 'business manager' from a private company in next-door Scandinavia (so much for the all-important ''linguist'') who mentions that it's spoken by people "on the islands outside Somalia and on the coast of Southern Somalia" as well as on "the coast of Kenya around the river Tana up to the Somali border" -- reciting the stock answer of where the Bajuni used to live prior to their displacement. Yep; the CIA source indeed is as relevant as the year it was published. ] (]) 19:17, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
::::::::You continue have a serious problem understanding basic discussion. First, my comment about the CIA information is that the CIA's information for the US is from 2000 (eight years old), the CIA's information about Nepal is from 2001 (seven years old), neither is from CIA research but are both copied from local government censuses, the information from Brazil isn't even properly referenced as to its origin and is therefore just impressionistic. The Somali CIA information is equivalent to the impressionistic Brazilian comment--no citation as to source or date of information and no level of detail. Show me the evidence that the CIA actually conducts linguistic surveys. You can't because they don't. The CIA's language information is '''''always''''' from secondary sources. You also did not read the UN document because 1) the linguist says that the tribe was moving, but he made no comment that it was a complete move; and 2) the other source still states that they are in Somalia. You still have presented absolutely no reliable linguistic source to indicate that there are zero Swahili speakers in Somalia. You have presented evidence that at least part, perhaps even most, of the Swahili-speaking population has left, but no conclusive evidence that it has completely left. (] (]) 20:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC))

:::::::::Taivo, we're wasting our time. M sounds like Bush: he "proves" his point by asserting it's true, and if you disagree you're either recalcitrant or stupid. There's no reasoning with such an attitude. ] (]) 01:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

:::::::::I added a couple of our refs both for Somalia and the uncertainty over who remains. We don't go into that much detail for other countries, but eventually we should, so this is a good start. Also, I don't know if the Swahili in southern Arabia are recent immigrants, or if communities remain from the Arab trade era. (There's still a strong feeling of ethnic kinship between Zanzibar and Oman.) Do you know? ] (]) 02:50, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::I just read your addition to the article and it is right on target. There are other linguistic links between Kenya/Tanzania and Oman. Ethnologue puts Omani Arabic in Kenya and Tanzania as well as in Oman. The Kenya/Tanzania coast, of course, was the main trading port for ivory all the way back at least into Roman times, so with the collapse of European trade through the Red Sea after the fall of the Roman Empire, then the next natural trading partner for ivory was Persia and the Arabic world through the Persian Gulf. Oman would be the first Arabic landfall by ships leaving Zanzibar and cutting across the Arabian Sea and vice versa. (] (]) 05:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC))

==Correction needed==
I am not sure how to correct something here. Perhaps someone can help. The first two footnotes are in reverse order (#2 precedes #1). Additionally, there is an error in the citation.
The entry for footnote #2 reads "L Marten, "Swahili", Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd ed., 2005, Elsevier". In fact, the book is dated 2006. Also the author's full name is Lutz Marten. Additionally, I am not sure that Marten's numbers are accurate. The Ethnologue (with data through 2000) indicates that only 772,642 speak Swahili. At the least, it would be advisable to indicate that some debate exists on the subject.

Could someone correct this please? Thank you.

By the way, my vote would be for maintaining the name Swahili rather than Kiswahili. It seems to me the more common name and the correct name is indicated in the text of the article.
-- David A. Victor, Ph.D.
Eastern Michigan University <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 17:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

== Where Swahili is Spoken ==

I replaced the entire list of countries where Swahili is spoken with a '''''referenced''''' list from a reliable linguistic source. If you don't know what a reliable linguistic source is and is not, then read the discussion above. The CIA Factbook is not a reliable linguistic source. (] (]) 05:33, 2 January 2009 (UTC))

:Also Comoros, Oman, etc. If we're going to include expat/immigrant communities like S. Africa, why not also the USA? ] (]) 07:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
::This is a list of referenced countries only, that is, only the countries that are mentioned in the references. Too many of these language lists are becoming scenes of edit wars because of unreferenced places. South Africa is specifically listed in Ethnologue; the US and Oman, etc. are not. Middayexpress is on a rampage on the ] page, but keeps talking about the Swahili page instead. It's better to have only solidly referenced countries. Comoros is not Swahili, but Comorian. Mayotte is part of Comoros. (] (]) 08:03, 2 January 2009 (UTC))

:::Ethnologue ''does'' list USA for Swahili, as well as Oman and UAE, but not DRC. But Ethnologue is not a very reliable ref. (Tho obviously better than the CIA.) The language map covers Comorian as part of Swahili, so that's already established in the article. As far as Ethn. is concerned, it's as much Swahili as Congolese Swahili is. ] (]) 08:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
::::(Yes, I know that Oman, the UAE, and the US are listed in the text of the Ethnologue Tanzania entry for Swahili, but without details. It's better to have only the overtly listed countries with details in their entries whenever there is a dispute. None of the other cited references mentions these three countries as places where Swahili is spoken. Of course nearly every language in the world could list the US as a place where it is spoken.) (] (]) 08:12, 2 January 2009 (UTC))
:::::I wouldn't mind removing the DRC, but since most references say that Congo Swahili is clearly recognizable as Swahili, but list Comorian separately... Ethnologue is not the best source always, but none of the other sources list the US, the UAE, or Oman. I don't have heartburn over Comoros, unless there is a separate article for Comorian. However, only Mayotte is usually listed for the Comoros locale for Swahili. (] (]) 08:16, 2 January 2009 (UTC))
:::::Comorian is treated ] so Comoros should not be included here except as Ethnologue and one of the other sources specifically mentions Mayotte. (] (]) 08:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC))
:::::Congo Swahili, however, is specifically included in the Swahili macrolanguage in ISO 639-3, so the inclusion of DRC here is appropriate. (] (]) 08:22, 2 January 2009 (UTC))

::::::You're not really following the refs. Is the ISO now the deciding factor? (This isn't reliable either. Comorian is both one ISO3 code and three.) If you wish to exclude Comorian, then please redraw the map to fit. If you're going to add SA, then also add the UK, US, UAE, Oman. ] (]) 08:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Comorian is an ISO and Ethonologue entry that I am not adding in here since it has its own article. This article only covers Swahili and Congo Swahili. Ethnologue does not have entries for Swahili under Oman, UAE and US. I am following the cited refs precisely on what they include in Swahili. The only exception is the undocumented and undetailed listing of Oman, UAE, and US in Ethnologue's Tanzania entry. (] (]) 08:31, 2 January 2009 (UTC))
::::::::Comorian is not included in the Swahili macrolanguage--only Swahili and Congo Swahili are. ] has its own article here. (] (]) 08:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC))
:::::::::Current wording works for me. (] (]) 09:01, 2 January 2009 (UTC))
I'm also coming across refs that Swahili is spoken (by small numbers) in Sudan & occasionally Ethiopia, such as . The Joshua Project counts 20k Waswahili in Sudan, but doesn't say if they're recent migrants, spillover from the Kenyan border, or remnants of the Swahili trade network. This would be nice to verify. ] (]) 09:58, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:I would suspect that they are urbanized traders since Swahili doesn't show up on any of the linguistic maps in Sudan. But it's also not usually shown on linguistic maps of Uganda either. (] (]) 16:28, 3 January 2009 (UTC))

== List of Swahili prefixes needed ==

Could someone add a link to a comprehensive list of Swahili prefixes and infixes?

I think the main article could be improved by sending the interested reader to a list of Swahili prefixes. ] (]) 05:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

:Yeah, should get to this. Also note that in Nairobi, all non-human subj/obj prefixes are i-/zi-, except (sometimes) ku- for infinitives. ] (]) 10:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

:Started a concord table. I expect others will expand it over time. ] (]) 23:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

==Nish Patel==

See the first line of the article. This is... odd. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== External links ==

I went through all of the external links and removed non-functional, overly commercial or otherwise inappropriate links. "Otherwise inappropriate" includes things like blogs, personal websites and websites that do not provide content that is sufficient in quality or quantity to justify their inclusion. Some of the dictionary sites may be questionable, but I kept those that appeared to provide good content and were not overly commercial. I removed the translation section entirely. Three out of the four links were to the same website, which was non-functional. The last link was to Google Translation, which people probably do not need help finding and is a commercial site. If someone wants to put it back, I will not object. As for the overly commercial links, I removed those websites that were simply trying to sell something, such as lessons on how to speak in Swahili, and did not provide free, good quality content. In the future, please do not add links to websites that you are somehow associated with. This includes not just the owner, manager or designer of the site, but also a relative or friend of the owner or a contributor to the site. If you believe that your website might be useful to readers of this article, you can use this talk page to recommend it. If you wish to talk to me for some reason, please use my talk page, as I do not watch this article or its talk page. -- ] (]) 13:11, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

== Whether Revision 333091159 was Unnecessary ==

I believe it's removal wasn't personal, but I suggest a discussion on whether a separate article should be formed (I don't know how to form new ones aside from using red links, which I haven't done). As a Michael W. Smith fan of well over a decade, I believe it may interest those who wonder if the portions of the song mentioned was in Swahili. The references may collectively have enough notability (and I've read the criteria for that) to justify restoration. I also don't know how to start a talk page for myself, but I'll check back here from time to time. --] (]) 18:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


== External links to on-line dictionaries ==
Should there be an external link to http://africanlanguages.com/swahili/, a Swahili/English online dictionary?

*'''Please place your comments in your own section, and avoid threaded discussions in others' sections. Thanks.'''
Could we move the discussion as to whether or not to include the link to the following site:
*
to this page, rather than 'discuss' through edit summaries? Also please note ]. ] (]) 17:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Gladly! Arguments as follows; the content linked is: (a) COMPLETELY free to use online at the linked website (b) the second-largest online Swahili Dictionary with over 16000 entries (c) the best-quality online Swahili Dictionary. It's thus a large, high-quality, completely free-to-use Swahili resource --- how can such a thing NOT be relevant for anyone interested in Swahili? The only thing that is not free on the site is the *downloadable* (software installable) version of the dictionary, and that is completely optional, you can use the entire dictionary for free without this at the very link. If that is commercial, then so is kamusiproject.org, as they also sell things off their website; either both are relevant or neither. I think that R.Schuster is MISTAKENLY thinking that the "buy now" links imply that the linked dictionary requires you to pay, but he is mistaken and is not looking properly. This is obviously an incredibly useful Swahili language resource for anyone who needs a Swahili dictionary. If in doubt, it is trivial to do a bunch of searches and you'll see it's completely free to use, anyone can test this with five seconds of trying. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:40, 17 June 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Is the largest such dictionary also linked? If not, why not? Perhaps links to both? ] (]) 21:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
::The largest such dictionary is also linked, yes - that is kamusiproject.org (it's by far the largest but the quality is generally a bit worse). Kamusiproject.org also sells things from their website but are also totally free to use. So now we have one that remains linked, while the other gets deleted (and yet even other still smaller Swahili dictionaries remain), that is clearly unfair and makes me wonder if the user doing the deleting is a contributor to kamusiproject.org and thus maybe biased. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::To clarify, I definitely think kamusiproject.org should remain (as also the africanlanguages.com/swahili one) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::Without arguments to the contrary I'm inclined to agree with its inclusion. ] (]) 22:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
::::Just a PS I did try discuss the issue with the user on his user talk page rather than create an edit war in the first place, but he seemed to either ignore that, or didn't see it. ] (]) 22:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::I did note that which is why I suggested that the discussion be moved here. Best to get the views of as many interested editors as possible on disputes related to content. ] (]) 22:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
:As you said: It's just ''“the second-largest online Swahili Dictionary”''! So where is the added value for this link? See ]:
:: The largest one is kamusiproject.org, which is better in that it's bigger but worse in that it's much lower quality because it isn't created by professional academics and linguists, while the africanlanguages.com/swahili one is; the africanlanguages.com/swahili one also has a final editor that arbitrates quality, and is properly proofread, while the kamusi one has no such quality checks ... it therefore provides a lot of additional value for users. This argument has already been made. Size in number of entries is not the only thing that determines the value of a dictionary, and that should be incredibly obvious. Furthermore, if size was, as you claim, the ultimate determiner, why not delete all the OTHER links for even smaller dictionaries - why delete only this one in particular? Why are you the arbitrator of how much value this link adds for other people? You are just afraid to admit that you are wrong. ] (]) 14:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
:::I should add, the africanlanguages.com is the only one of the linked dictionaries that is professionality edited and quality-controlled ] (]) 14:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
:“Some external links are welcome (see "What should be linked", below), but it is not Misplaced Pages's purpose to include a lengthy or comprehensive list of external links related to each topic. No page should be linked from a Misplaced Pages article unless its inclusion is justifiable according to this guideline and common sense. The burden of providing this justification is on the person who wants to include an external link.”
:So as long this justification ist not given, the links has to stay outside. --] (]) 13:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::There are four on-line dictionaries already linked. An editor has expressed the view that this is a particularly good one , and that it is the second largest. Why the determination to exclude this particular one rather than others? ] (]) 13:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

:::There are already 4 and this is already much too much. There should be 0 to 1 dictionaries. And, just the editor (owner) of this site stated that it's a good one, no one else. So absoultely no need to include it. --] (]) 14:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

::::If the issue is that there are too many links, then why not delete small low-quality dictionary links like kamusi.co.tz or the freeweb.hu one, rather than the second most popular and second-largest? You obviously have some kind of bias here, you are unable to provide a good reason to delete this PARTICULAR link - and you can't, because there isn't one. ] (]) 14:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::Why not just a single link to this site , collated by what appears to be an independent third party? At least that way we are not seen as directly endorsing one over another. ] (]) 14:38, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::If there really is a rule that be "0 or 1 links", then I'd be in support of this. ] (]) 14:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::::I'm not aware of any such 'rule', just trying to break the impasse. ] (]) 14:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::::If there are no such rules or guidelines (i.e. the '4 is already much too much. There should be 0 to 1 dictionaries' claim), then it seems to me the number of links should not be a determining factor, but rather the relevance of the links. And a simple relevance test would be to ask oneself, 'if I was learning Swahili, would I want to know about this resource' ... the answer would certainly be yes to both kamusiproject.org and africanlanguages.com/swahili and anyone seriously learning the language will almost certainly regularly be using both of these. I had a look at a few other language pages and many have many more dictionary links, e.g. the Catalan Language page has 9 links just for dictionaries. If Swahili should be limited to '0 or 1' then surely so should all the language pages. I also found absolute proof that R.Schuster made a mistake in his original assessment of africanlanguages.com/swahili and has changed his argument now to something else (presumably due to pride and not wanting to admit he made a mistake) - in the history of the Swahili Language page one of his earlier deletes of the link is commented by him as "Rm ad-link", in other words, he thought he was removing an advertisement for a commercial resource, which is not the case. I don't think it's right to pander to someone just because they're being stubborn and are changing their own argument because they don't want to admit they made a mistake, and then come up with their own "rules" about how many dictionary links are relevant on a language page that they try impose on the whole of Misplaced Pages just to backtrack. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:11, 18 June 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::::::::The other editor has apparently signed out for the moment. I would give him/her a chance to respond. My temporary revert was in no way an endorsement of either position, just allowing for a chance to discuss this in a civil way. A little patience costs nothing, and is more likely to result in a stable resolution. Your arguments are well put and I think reasonable. ] (]) 19:25, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::::::Hello. ], the article is about the swahili language and not a collection of links to all available online-dictionaries. See also ]. ''“Some external links are welcome (see "What should be linked", below), but it is not Misplaced Pages's purpose to include a lengthy or comprehensive list of external links related to each topic.”''. If you are not happy with these guidelines, please go to the appropriate places and try to change the rules first instead of vandalizing this article. --] (]) 13:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::::::P.S.: Since it seems that the author missed the earlier mentioned rule: ''“'''No''' page should be linked from a Misplaced Pages article unless its inclusion is '''justifiable''' according to this guideline and '''common sense'''. The '''burden of providing''' this justification is on '''the person who wants to include''' an external link.”'' (], I've highlighted the important parts). --] (]) 13:55, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::::The attempt by the IP to include this link most certainly is not ]. Also ]. There is no breach of policy in this case, and as far as I can see, no valid reason why this link cannot be included. The IP is not insisting on ''all'' online dictionaries to be linked, in fact suggested reducing their number. Your rationale for the exclusion of ''this'' link specifically is not convincing. If you wish to seek another neutral opinion, please do so in ]. ] (]) 14:20, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::::::::Hello RashersTierney. No shift of the burden of proof, please. I am not the one who is supposed to proof why the link should not be inserted, the IP is supposed to proof why it should. And I didn't shout, I just highlighted the important parts of the rule, as it seems to be overseen. Anyhow, I support the substitution of all dictionary-links with a neutral one, or even with a simple google link. Everyone who should need a dictionary is able to search for it at google. --] (]) 14:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::::::::: "Everyone who should need a dictionary is able to search for it at google" By that argument of yours, it follows that no Misplaced Pages language page should have any dictionaries linked at all. Good luck with that policy of yours; I wish you luck deleting all dictionary links from all Misplaced Pages language pages. A dictionary is *the* most definitive and extensive reference for a language, yet you're suggesting it has no relevance. Again, that makes no sense. ] (]) 12:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Finally we seem to be getting somewhere. Remember, consensus need not be unanimous but the number of contributors here is pretty poor and I think this discussion might benefit from the opinions of uninvolved editors, if any are watching. I suggested above a link to an apparently neutral third party which includes both primary dictionaries. We do not link to searches as a rule. ] (]) 14:46, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::::::::::{{Pro}} multilingualbooks.com. Seems to be not biased, even if it is a commercial site, too. But better one single commercial site than giving a justification for adding more and more links. --] (]) 16:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::"Adding more and more links'? That argument also doesn't make any sense, because in fact it is the africanlanguages.com/swahili link that has was one of the earliest, oldest and longest-running of the dictionaries linked from the Swahili languages wikipedia page, it was linked for many years, and in fact it was most of the *other* links that were the "more and more" added much later --- the very links that you thought were perfectly acceptable to keep. If the argument is against "adding more and more links", then surely, by your own argument, the earliest links should remain, and the later ones be removed (especially if they are much smaller too, e.g. you seem to have argued that a dictionary with 2000 words is more relevant than one with 16000). Furthermore, in all the six or so years (cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Swahili_language&oldid=6793492) that link has been on there, pretty much nobody else felt it should be removed *except you*, and only because you mistakenly thought it was an ad-link. If the link were so irrelevant and wrong and offensive, it would have been removed multiple times before by others, and it never has. I think I have made more than a commonsense and convincing argument for the relevance and inclusion of this link, you have not managed to rebuke my points other than to make vague hand-waves about there being 'too many links' (by some subjective measure of your own), you've contradicted yourself and you keep changing your argument. I think it would be in principle wrong to essentially compromise an article's integrity apparently for little reason other than to sooth your ego. I'm willing to accept the compromise only as a temporary measure, but think that the only way forward is to try get some additional 3rd-party opinions - is there a way to do that? I would also insist that you stick to your guns and go delete most of the 9 Catalan Language dictionary links if you really believe in this "principle" of yours, and indeed any other language page with multiple dictionary links --- either you stand behind your principle and apply it to all language pages (and put up with what would probably be hundreds of similar debates), or admit that you haven't managed to make much of an argument at all. My suggested minimum compromise point that I think is acceptable is to move the africanlanguages dictionary link lower in the list to lower its prominence; the kamusiproject.org, being the biggest and oldest Online Swahili Dictionary, should have first position in the list. ] (]) 11:45, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::In six odd years of the link being online, the only other user who deleted it was around Dec 2009 while doing a 'broad sweep' of link deleting on that page (that is why I was re-adding it), I contacted that user and they *also* do not object to the link being put back, see http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:41.7.4.240 ... so firstly that is another third-party opinion 'OK'ing' adding the link, and secondly it means that, R.Schuster, you are not only the only one who wants that link gone, you are also the person who in effect wants to delete a link that was on the page for six years, surely the burden of proof is then on the person who wants to delete a link that was on a page for such a long time. I was never trying to add a new link in the first place, I was only trying to put back a link that had been there for six years. You've also not explained why you have such a problem with that particular link. ] (]) 14:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

===Arbitrary break / new comments below this please===
<s>Since this is a slow burner, I think its only reasonable to give some time for the IP to respond. Failing that, I'm happy to go with this compromise.</s> ] (]) 22:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

* Well, so '''no consensus''', <s>but 2 in favour and 1 against the replacement of all dictionary-links with a single, neutral one, or do I miss something?</s> --] (]) 16:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
* '''Support direct link''' My support for the compromise was a default if the IP didn't respond. I'm actually in favour of including a link directly to the website, but have asked for additional comments from uninvolved editors. My main concern initially was to stop the edit war which was only going to make a bad situation worse. ] (]) 16:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:<small>The edit-war could easily be stopped by blocking the user or blacklisting the link, which is what usually happens with spammers. --] (]) 08:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)</small>
*'''Support link''', but somewhat reluctantly. Although the online dictionary is free to use online, there is a great big ad right on every page encouraging users to buy the local-use version, and I find that off-putting. On the other hand, every page at the Kamusi Project has an ad encouraging users to buy the Swahili clock, and I do think the link to the Kamusi Project should be kept. So if Kamusi gets a link in spite of its ad, I suppose the other online dictionary should too. +]] 17:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:<small>You can't compare the Kamusi Project with this site. That's the same if you compare google with a home-brewn search-engine. --] (]) 08:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)</small>
:JFYI: The Kamusi Project is a (two) non-profit organization and was initalized by the Yale University some 15 years ago. That's what I call unique significance. The other link is, well no one knows excactly, but let's say a hobby project of our friendly IP here with the main aim of selling their Microsoft-only plugin.
:Disclaimer: I am not involved in the The Kamusi Project or any other dictionary project. It's just because I support a non-commercial wikipedia. --] (]) 08:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
::So you will be removing all links to websites run by companies from all over Misplaced Pages then? Further, I'd like you to back up your claims about the stated aims of the africanlanguages.com/swahili organisation - do you have inside information or facts, or are you just making it up? Citation please - extraordinary claims require at least *some* evidence. ] (]) 10:46, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh Come on! I mean who actually SPEAKS Swahili? Do we really need to direct an external link for the minority? Misplaced Pages's an encyclopedia for all and therefore, it seems to be a bit biased to add an additional link for those (few in number) who speak the language. ] (]) 19:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)J.J

:It also takes me wonders that the IP gets the permission here for advertise his project. Until today I thought, wikipedia does not support commercial advertisment. (I hope, he made at least a donation to wikimedia) Be sure, there will be no usefull edits of this IP, beside of inserting his ad. There are many, many more irrelevant online dictionaries out there and be sure, the links for them will be inserted (not by me, of course), since ''we'' allow this by default now. Please delete ] as a next step, since no one seems to know it and no one cares for it. Five links to dictionaries that's simply ridiculous. --] (]) 07:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
::Thanks for your acknowledgment of consensus, despite the reservations you have outlined. I hope we can consider this issue resolved and 'normal service can resume'. Best. ] (]) 10:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:::There is no consensus, and this is far from being resolved. --] (]) 14:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
::If you believe Misplaced Pages should be 'non-commercial' and 'not support links to companies',:: why did you suggest a link to Google, another corporation who advertises on their search site and generates massive amounts of profit? Why aren't you crusading against the existence of massive 'ad' pages like http://en.wikipedia.org/Microsoft? It looks like your purportedly moral "agenda" hypocritically only involves picking on small, weak targets. ] (]) 10:46, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:::Can we please drop this and move on. The matter is settled and there is no prize for having the last word. ] (]) 10:58, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
::::IP, I don't care if you are a "small, weak" company or not. You got your free advertisment here, so be happy and quiet, and least for the moment. --] (]) 14:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

* I saw the notice of this discussion at the ]. I do not think that this article benefits from having links to four online dictionaries. Zero or one sounds about right to me. In instances like this, ] suggests using ] or another link to a webpage that links to multiple websites, and I think that type of option should replace ''all'' of the direct links to dictionaries. ] (]) 23:43, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for the input. I'm not really sure how this resource is usually linked. A search of ''Swahili'' there gives which looks very comprehensive and includes the two main dictionaries that have been discussed here. My understanding is that we don't link to searches, but in this case it would appear to be a good remedy. Whither now? ] (]) 00:04, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

== Support of spam? ==
Since this is the first time in my wikipedia carreer, that spam got support from other wikipedia users, I'd like to remind to two important guidelines which are in place:

* ]
* ]

After reading the above please explain, which valid reasons are given from these guidelines to insert 5 (five!) links to dictionaries to an article, which is not about dictionaries at all.

Further I'd welcome a valid reason, why you are not willing to follow #3 of ]:

''“Long lists of links ]. A directory link may be a permanent link or a temporary measure put in place while external links are being discussed on the article's talk page. The ] is often a neutral candidate, and may be added using the {{tlx|dmoz}} template.”''

So long, and thanks for all the fish, --] (]) 06:45, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
:The consensus is for the inclusion of this link. The template you have just added to the article belies that fact. ] and frequently isn't. If you believe there is a breach of policy regarding spamming, you may take your observation to ] or similar. ] (]) 11:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

::Adding the template seems like a rather blatant attempt to bypass and override consensus. "which is not about dictionaries at all" It is about Swahili though. ] (]) 15:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Gosh, what a palava over one small link. Don't have time to read it all, but thought it may be useful to clarify a few points: (1) 41.* is not anyone associated with us (nor were we aware) (2) The proejct is non-profit, we don't actually make money from it but indeed sponsor it, at a loss to ourselves because we believe in the importance of work like this for Africa. All contributors have sunk in a lot of their own time and money and the sales of the electronc version are only to attempt to recoup a tiny portion of the costs (like kamusiproject's clock, probably), and don't come close to covering the costs i assure you (3) There are several major contributors, all highly credentialled and respected, and the founder of the project is one of the top and most respected academics in the field of lexicography, and possibly the leading bantu lexicography expert alive today (http://tshwanedje.com/members/gmds/cv.html) with impeccable academic credentials. The project has been comletely free from the start, we put our time and money into this, and in return we have not even so much as put our company logo on the website! (that is what Mr Schuster calls 'spam'? a sponsored non-profit project that doesn't even promote the name of the company?) so I find it sad and strange that some individuals will work so hard to spread lies and work destructively against such important projects. OTOH I am impressed at the other wiki editors putting so much time and patience in handilng this so rationally.] (]) 16:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
:Hello. The excessive insertion of links to this article is what I call ''spam'', not if there is a logo on your website or not.
:@RashersTierney: This not a matter for ANI anymore, since the current '']'' supports the link. Maybe you noticed that I undid my removal because of this. It is a matter of interpretation of guidelines, which I thought I understood until these days, so maybe for ]. That's why I've inserted {{tlx|External links}}.
:I just wonder where are all the dictionary links in major languange articles, eg. ]. There it is, as it is supposed to be: 1 link to the major <s>directory</s> dictionary and 1 link to dmoz.org, together with this significant remark:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=German_language&action=edit&section=45 <nowiki><!--========================({{No More Links}})============================
| PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS IN ADDING MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. WIKIPEDIA |
| IS NOT A COLLECTION OF LINKS NOR SHOULD IT BE USED FOR ADVERTISING. |
| |
| Excessive or inappropriate links WILL BE DELETED. |
| See ] & ] for details. |
| |
| If there are already plentiful links, please propose additions or |
| replacements on this article's discussion page, or submit your link |
| to the relevant category at the Open Directory Project (dmoz.org) |
| and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template. |
=======================({{No More Links}})=============================--></nowiki>]
:So what actually confuses me is the fact, that all of a sudden other guidelines seems to be in place for Swahili. --] (]) 07:31, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

JFTR: I asked for further opinions in ]. --] (]) 19:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

== First-language speakers ==

I was going to do something about the ], which, unlike most other language versions, references Ethnologue and claims less than one million first-language speakers. Now, having discussed the subject with a few scholars doing research on languages in East Africa (which is not my area at all) at my university, I'm reasonably sure Ethnologue is wrong here, but I can seem to find anything about "5-10 million people speak it as their native language" anywhere in Lutz Marten's article in ''Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics'', which is where this article turns to support its numbers. He does write "spoken by over 50 million (first- and second-language) speakers" and "Swahili is increasingly the first language of younger Tanzanians and Kenyans", but having read the article twice, I can't find anything which supports the five to ten million first-language speakers claim. Am I blind, or is it not there? /] (]) 02:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
:Okey, having looked at the article history, the reference to Marten's article has been in the article for quite some time. However, with , something which had -- for good reasons, since it's not in the article -- not been supported by Marten earlier was suddenly using that reference. Do we have a good source for number of first-language speakers? Because the one we are currently using actually doesn't seem to say anything about that. /] (]) 14:52, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Vowels ==

In the vowel pronunciation section, I changed the example word for "A" from "father" to "pasta." Some English speakers, myself included, pronounce "father" with the IPA vowel rather than . A similarly imprecise example confused me when I was first learning Swahili.

I also believe that the Swahili "O" should be corrected to , or at least to . seems pretty wrong to me. ] (]) 19:58, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

==Lingua Franca of Africa (proposed)==

Reliable sources have informed me that as at the time of typing (September 2011) there have been plans to make Swahili the
] of ]. If any knows about this, perhaps this should get prominent mention in the article. ] (]) 22:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
::I just came here to request the same thing. ] for example see Swahili as a Pan-African language. The Diaspora largely sees Swahili as a first choice.--] (]) 18:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

There are no such plans. Swahili is expanding: It has been officially adopted by Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi, and there are plans to introduce in into South Sudan. It is probably gradually spreading in DRCongo as well. But outside that region it has no influence, and even within it is often a 2ary language: in Kenya, for example, it is 2ary in prestige to English. (You only speak Swahili if you're not well educated.) The Diaspora may well see Swahili as a first choice, but how many of them actually learn it? — ] (]) 19:11, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
::Not enough unfortunately, but it has been a language associated with Diaspora Pan-Africanism. Kenya is a good colonial victim so that is their issue with Swahili. I think it is the only African working language of the AU. --] (]) 20:47, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

:::Yes, it is that. I'd forgotten. As for Kenya's problem being neo-colonial, maybe. But there's also the factor that half the population are Nilotes, for whom Bantu languages do not come readily, whereas in Tanzania, where they take their Swahili seriously, nearly everyone is Bantu.
:::I do know that if I have a Swahili book in the US, it brings out smiles in people that other African languages don't. But people sometimes think they can learn it to travel to Ghana. — ] (]) 22:34, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
::::Thats funny (Ghana). So do you think we can mention Working language (AU)in the lead and the popularity with the Diaspora? Children books etc. (if it is not already in the article).--] (]) 05:34, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

== translation help ==

Hi Swahili experts. I'm putting this here because I can't find a relevant wikiproject. In any case, can someone help with an English-to-Swahili translation over at http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#poster / http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#poster.2Fsw Thank you. ] (]) 15:56, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

== Old Swahili dictionaries, grammars and stories ==

Dictionaries and vocabularies

http://books.google.com/books?id=J7NFAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IWs4AAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=tgIDAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=k6gTAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=QV4UiqNI_6QC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=laITAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=xqYTAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=sbMtAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA307#v=onepage&q&f=false

French english swahili

http://books.google.com/books?id=5IoMAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZPw0AQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

German swahili

http://books.google.com/books?id=q7oxAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Grammars

Exercises, introductions, handbooks, readers

http://books.google.com/books?id=8okCAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=g60SAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=iBgOAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=UKUTAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=CosOAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=bVkRAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


http://books.google.com/books?id=XvcnAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=saMwAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=qY0NAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=s40NAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Stories and aphorisms

http://books.google.com/books?id=sBUCAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=osgpAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=APYnAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=jD8YAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=sAoUAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=qaYTAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Bible related materials

http://books.google.com/books?id=O_cnAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=YfcnAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=EY4NAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=ogkoAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=TdYWAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA339#v=onepage&q&f=false

Swahili hymn book in arabic letters

http://books.google.com/books?id=mgkoAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Dialects

http://books.google.com/books?id=O-o8AAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Congo languages

http://books.google.com/books?id=RIAOAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=S_YUAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Bantu languages

http://books.google.com/books?id=vgKDAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=O1D52VjPAk4C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

] (]) 23:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

== Script ==

http://books.google.com/books?id=CosOAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=oYhrCkGaxyUC&pg=PA343#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=6lQTPxdYx8kC&pg=PA73#v=onepage&q&f=false

] (]) 19:16, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:08, 21 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Swahili language article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This  level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconLanguages Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconAfrica: Burundi / Comoros / DRC / Kenya / Mozambique / Rwanda / Somalia / Tanzania / Uganda Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Burundi (assessed as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Comoros (assessed as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Democratic Republic of the Congo (assessed as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Kenya (assessed as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Mozambique (assessed as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Rwanda (assessed as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Somalia (assessed as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Tanzania (assessed as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Uganda (assessed as Top-importance).
WikiProject iconWestern Asia: Oman Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the WikiProject Western Asia, which collaborates on articles related to Western Asia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Oman (assessed as Mid-importance).
WikiProject iconAnthropology: Oral tradition
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
???This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.
Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4


This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Number of users

A requester in ticket:2023082210010407 has asked for changes, that there are 200 million speakers of this language per this refernce: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379702. — xaosflux 13:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I concur, that is a far more recent reference than the one cited in the article. I noticed that it was updated but changed back by @Cookiemonster1618. @Cookiemonster1618 any particular reason why? Thuralt (talk) 07:44, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
it was changed because it's an over estimate and Ethnologue source is being used because first off there is not a large number of second language speakers of Swahili in the DRC so it wouldn't be possible for there to be 200 million speakers of Swahili also Ethnologue estimate of second language speakers is accurate because not all the inhabitants of these countries speak swahili as a first or second language. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 14:01, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Doesn't seem likely that it's an over estimation. Tanzania alone has a population of over 61 million and 61.4% (over 37 million) of Tanzanians speak Swahili as a first language. Kenya, in 2019, had a population of over 47 million and 27.1% (over 12 million) of Kenyans speak Swahili as a first language. Uganda has approx. 34 million Swahili speakers. And this is not counting Burundi, DRC, Mozambique etc.
The Ethnologue source simply isn't accurate Thuralt (talk) 14:49, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Uganda doesnt have 34 million speakers your estimate is not accurate in fact because you have no source to cite it. Since Ethnologue takes its data from census and other data provided by its users its more reliable. The Ethnologue estimation will be used for now. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 16:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
According to Ethnologue Uganda has 4.3 million second language swahili speakers and only 4,340 first language speakers. So where did you get your figure of 34 million speakers of Swahili in Uganda from? Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 16:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
According to Ethnologue's source from the 2019 census there were only 111,000 first language speakers of Swahili in Kenya and 19 million second language speakers so where did you get your figure of 12 million from? Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 16:34, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
All figures I've cited are referenced in my reply from recent reliable sources (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics, Statistica, USAID).
Also, the UNESCO source cited by @Xaosflux above is recent and reliable and also gives the overall number of speakers at 200 million Thuralt (talk) 17:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi Xaosflux care to weigh in? I've found this other BBC source. I'm inclined to make a good faith revert of Cookiemonster1618's edit to reflect these other more recent sources but I would prefer some level of consensus before I do. Thuralt (talk) 12:28, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm not really interested in this topic, only was here to provide information from the VRT request in passing. — xaosflux 11:27, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
@Thuralt I just came across this. I seriously doubt 200,000,000 is an accurate estimate. It seems to be a maximalist claim similar to claims that English has 2 billion speakers. If you add up anyone who might have studied any amount of Swahili, maybe you get 200 million, but as an accurate estimate of L1+L2 speakers, no. The UNESCO document you've linked is not an academic study and gives no sources to document its claim as to the number of speakers, so it should not be used. Ethnologue is IMO much more reliable. Benwing (talk) 03:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
You should be aware that there's a strong impulse on the part of speakers and advocates for a given language to inflate speaker numbers. Academically-oriented sources are very important for this reason. Benwing (talk) 03:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Benwing There are important RS sources that contradict the Ethnologue numbers. If speakers (primary and overall) from just three countries alone (see the other sources above but happy to recite) add up to 83 million (I should add that even this number is likely an underestimation since the Kenya census was conducted over four years ago and the estimates for Kenya and Tanzania are just for primary speakers alone) without including speakers from countries such as Burundi, DRC, Mozambique, Somalia etc then the >200 million number becomes likely (perhaps even evident).
I'll also look for more RS sources on the number of speakers in the other Eastern Africa countries and L2 speakers in Kenya and Tanzania. Thuralt (talk) 05:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
@Thuralt I don't have time to argue with someone who sounds rather biased but I will just point out you're essentially conducting OR by trying to add up the speakers from countries like Burundu, DRC, etc. where Swahili isn't widely spoken. I have been to Kenya and quite a lot of people there don't speak Swahili (Tanzania is different, everyone speaks Swahili as it's the national language, whereas de facto English functions in this role in Kenya). I also have a Ph.D. in linguistics and no axe to grind here. The UNESCO source you provided is not a reliable source for this stuff as its claim isn't backed up by any citations. You need to find an actual reliable source that says 200+ million L2 speakers (since the number of L1 speakers is ~ 15,000,000) and not try to add stuff up yourself by picking and choosing sources. Ethnologue is a reliable source that provides such an aggregate, and the fact that you have no interest in even presenting differing views in the lede about speakers but have only chosen the maximalist claim shows your bias. Benwing (talk) 08:45, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Benwing Just stop. If you "don't want to waste your time" engaging, that's fine. And if you disagree with my point of view, that's fine too. But don't ascribe bias just because I disagree with you. You don't know me anymore than I know you. So stop.

But just in case you still do want to engage on the merits, I'm happy to have your perspective; I just don't agree with it for reasons I've stated (and referenced) above but I'll add to here; BBC, Harvard, SOAS, University of London, The East African and Citizen newspapers all quote Swahili speakers at atleast 200 million. The fact is, there is a preponderance of reliable sources that contradict the Ethnologue source, which is why I don't consider it having an accurate estimate of Swahili speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ] (] • ])

@Cookiemonster1618, Benwing, Benwing2, and Thuralt: Hi, all. I have rewritten the section following this WP:RSN discussion, to incorporate more reliable sources and note the general range of figures, since in general when reliable sources give a range of figures we should acknowledge that and not cherry-pick a figure, particularly from one extreme of the range. -sche (talk) 01:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi -sche fine with that. Seems reasonable. I, however, don't seem to understand why 150 million has been stated as the highest extremum, when the Harvard African Language Program, The SOAS (University of London) Swahili programme and BBC all quote figures starting at 200 million.
I should add that the BBC page indicates that it was written/updated in February 2022 and the SOAS Swahili Programme page indicates that it was written/updated in June 2023. Thuralt (talk) 02:13, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
The body (Swahili_language#Overview) gives the full range, "Estimates vary widely, from as low as 50 million to as high as 200 million, but generally range from 60 million to 150 million." For the summary in the lead of where the estimates "generally rang", I looked at where most of the higher-quality estimates fall, and what the one reference that acknowledges estimates vary gives as the range: ~60 to 150. -sche (talk) 03:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
-sche I would contend that Harvard and the University of London (maybe even the BBC) are equally credible RS sources. And also for consistency, it would seem reasonable to put the full range throughout the article instead of picking a single range from one source. Thuralt (talk) 03:28, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Contradictory Ethnologue Numbers

First of all, the infobox for this article says the numbers are for (2019-2023), yet each source says 2024 for its date.

Secondly, the L1 number here is 5.3, while https://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_languages_by_total_number_of_speakers lists 16 million for L1, yet this article combines multiple varieties of Swahili, so should be higher. Both articles give Ethnologue as their source. Please fix this contradiction. 84.78.248.230 (talk) 13:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

The figure of 16 million first language speakers is from the 26th edition for 2023, unless there's another cited source. The recent population estimates were taken from various sources and used in Ethnologue, as you might be aware that Ethnologue uses different sources and methodologies to provide speaker populations. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 05:49, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Orthography section needs work

The orthography section currently discusses the disused Arabic orthography in far greater detail than is needed for this page. Conversely, it barely discusses the Latin orthography at all. Readers are given no indication what sounds the Latin letters represent. It's just noted that digraphs exist, but not what they are used for.--Ermenrich (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Categories: