|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Icelandic language article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4|
|This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of June 7, 2007.|
|This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
|This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 19Diana81. Peer reviewers: Sarahaubrey13, Angelali98.
Unclear: "The same applied to the Allied occupation of Iceland during World War II."
Don't know what this means. Here's how the paragraph reads:
The language of the sagas is Old Icelandic, a western dialect of Old Norse. The Danish rule of Iceland from 1380 to 1918 had little effect on the evolution of Icelandic, which remained in daily use among the general population except for a period between about 1700 and 1900 where the use of Danish by common Icelanders became popular. The same applied to the Allied occupation of Iceland during World War II.
Does this mean that during WW2 the Icelanders stopped speaking Icelandic in daily use and spoke Danish instead, and then after the war they resumed speaking Icelandic? This seems unlikely. If someone knows what this sentence means, I suggest it be fixed to make it clear. Omc (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Peer Feedback for LING 110
As someone who knows nothing about the Icelandic language, I find this Wikipedia article well structured and organized and easy to understand. The pictures and tables accompanying the writing is relevant to the topic and further help readers comprehend topics such as the phonology of the Icelandic language. In addition, the writing sounds neutral, the content is well balanced, and the sources are reliable and mostly up to date. Regarding the number of Icelandic speakers in the United States, I noticed the information was taken from a census from the year 2000, which I think may be a little outdated. Also, I noticed that some sections like "Grammar" and "Cognates with English" are in need of citations, but perhaps that may be due to the fact that those sections come from other articles. I am not sure, but it is always good to double check.
"Icelandic has very minor dialectal differences phonetically." Well, that seems to be true, and I'll readily assume that these differences are not very interesting compared to those found within Swedish or German. Even so, I think the article should mention these differences. If we know that Icelandic has only minor dialectal differences, this has probably been researched, and this research can be used to write a paragraph about Icelandic dialects/regional accents. Steinbach (talk) 20:19, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
The map shows the interior of Iceland as not speaking the language. I realise it is largely uninhabited, but for all intents and purposes it must be the dominant language there, i.e. which signage is written in, plus it is administered by Icelandic speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 10:05, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
History section needs revision
The current history section only talks about the written language and nothing about the historical development of the spoken language. It also has only one source for one tiny thing. I think it's best to rewrite the section entirely, and with sources this time and give more attention to the actual spoken language.12:42, 19 October 2023 (UTC)