Re: About pt_BR and pt_PT translations
> pt_PT is the Portuguese used in Portugal, pt_BR is the Brazilian
> Portuguese used in Brasil. We have several differences in the language
> context, specially in the computer area.
Let me add a comment and please note that this comment only reflect my
own opinion and that only.
The pt/pt_BR thing has always annoyed me.
First of all, this is not pt_PT vs pt_BR.....thie is "pt" vs
"pt_BR". Even though Portuguese is mostly spoken in Portugal and
Brazil, there are other places in the world where the language is
alive and used, and there are other pt_* locales in glibc.
Up to now, I have always hear and read from Portuguese and Brazilian
users that both languages are different.
This is actually NOT what all ethnological data mention (see
www.ethnologue.com for instance). Even though it is often mentioned
that the way to speak the language differs in BR and PT, the language
is itself always considered as the very same language. ISO 639 has no
special code for "Brazilian" while this standard often makes very
specific differences in languages variants, especially when it comes
at ISO 639-3 (just count the various English or French creoles in the
standard).
So, I have always regretted that the translation effort is currently
splitted in two teams. The Spanish speakers *did* manage to go through
their cultural differences between Spain and Latin America and they
continue to work with only one team and one translation set, even
though they sometimes have hard times to agree on terminology.
The cultural background is probably the same here with some remainings
from a colonial past which induces strong feelings and doesn't help.
Anyway, I'm afraid that we'll never see a single Portuguese
translation in Free Software (also not in commercial software) but in
that case, people, just work for international standards to recognize
"Brazilian" as a different language and bring it its own ISO code.
But, in the meantime, I don't really see the point in splitting things
more than they are. There are areas where both translation teams work
together and it seems to me that this is better than a total split.
Reply to: