This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Polynesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Polynesia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolynesiaWikipedia:WikiProject PolynesiaTemplate:WikiProject PolynesiaPolynesia
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
As I said on the talk of the Hawaiian language article, I am having a problem with the classification of Hawaiian on the main article. It places the language into the Tahitic subfamily of the Polynesian language family. Hawaiian shares 56% of its basic vocabulary with that of Nuku HivaMarquesan (Marquesic), and only 46% with that of Tahitian (Tahitic). Although exceptions in Rarotongan are found, it is not due to close genetic relationship, but instead to conservativism in retaining old vocabulary in both languages, according to Larry Kimura in his article Native Hawaiian Culture. Should a re-categorization be discussed? -Ano-User (talk) 03:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A couple days ago, I put a [dubious-discuss] citation mark after the classification of Hawaiian as a "Tahitic" Polynesian language. As I recently changed the classification of 'Ōlelo Hawai'i as a Marquesic language, I may change the classification on this one as well. I'll give a few hours for discussion on the classification if the original authors of this article would like, but after a few hours I will have to reclassify the language. -Ano-User (talk) 14:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've done an alternative classification of the Eastern Polynesian languages right below the original classification. I have not deleted the original because I recently found (to my embarrassment) that the Austronesian Basic Vocabulary Database does have, on a figure template, what the article was saying about probabilities and whatnot. It is still open for discussion though! -Ano-User (talk) 15:41, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - I run the Austronesian Basic Vocabulary Database and did those analyses. You're quite right, our results place Hawaii incorrectly - this is very probably the result of unidentified loan words in our database. We're currently trying to clear this up. The orthodox accepted grouping places Hawaiian in Marquesic. If there are any other questions, don't hesitate to ask! - Simon (talk) 08:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Mr. Greenhill! I had no idea that you had a connection with Wikipedia! I was going to cite you, or Robert Blust, as the creator of the template at first, but it doesn't have any copy rights by anyone, so I just put "courtesy Austronesian Basic Vocabulary Database" in the references of the main article. But its good to know that someone is following this article and I am not alone in trying to critique it. I've always known Hawaiian to be primarily Marquesic with Tahitian influence, per the legendary voyages of Pa'ao, and its good to know you agree with me, haha. :) -Ano-User (talk) 08:46, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
