Talk:Biloxi language

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Indigenous peoples of North America This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Languages This article 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 articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

To-do list for Biloxi language: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2019-03-06 speak about the livelihood of the speakers address the sources available on Biloxi elaborate on classification relation to proto-Siouan? add info and citations for more recent work on Biloxi (e.g., Kaufman 2006, 2008, 2011 in Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics [KWPL])DKaufman (talk) 19:44, 9 November 2011 (UTC) Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Split : maybe make a seperate Biloxi grammar article?

1. You should tell a bit more about the livelihood of the speakers of this language.

2. It needs to be explained why the grammar you are using was written several dozen years after the last native speaker had died. You should address the sources available on this language in general.

3. If possible, you could say some words about the classification of the language. G Purevdorj (talk) 21:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'll add this info to the article. To make things clear, the reason I'm using Einaudi is because she is basing her analysis on a number of different sources (Dorsey, Matthews, Haas) who my impression is all only give part of the big picture and have their own inconsistencies. Mo-Al (talk) 20:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]