Should "Japonic" include korean?

[hashi]

Well as the topic subject suggests, should Korean be included in the "Japonic" section on wikilang?

It is detested whether or not the languages are actually related, but it is my personal belief they are. For this reason, they have been grouped together on wikilang.

If you think differently and can explain why, do so

[maggy]

I have no doubt that they are related. The little I know about them is already enough to confince me of that, not to mention that no-one in the region acts the way they do. Nonetheless, is Korean "japponic"? As in does the Japponic family refer to things outside of jap and its dialects or not? Cos then we'd need to have a new lang family name.

[hashi]

I have no doubt that they are related. The little I know about them is already enough to confince me of that, not to mention that no-one in the region acts the way they do. Nonetheless, is Korean "japponic"? As in does the Japponic family refer to things outside of jap and its dialects or not? Cos then we'd need to have a new lang family name.

What other things outside of Jap is there? Ainu doesn't count as Japonic, it's an isolate on it's own and theres very few similarities between that an Japanese. The only other thing is Ryukan and Okinawa which are based on Japanese anyway (iirc).

The only thing is really Japanese and it's dialects. The dialects are close enough to Japanese anyway. They use the same grammar for the most part and all come from the same origin (as far as we know) so I don't see why not. Some dialects in the west like Yamaguchi and Kyuushuu are even quite heavily influenced by Korean and I imagine the same would be true in parts of Korea. It's really a matter of saying, yes, Korean and Japanese clearly share the same roots.

[ILuvEire]

What other things outside of Jap is there? Ainu doesn't count as Japonic, it's an isolate on it's own and theres very few similarities between that an Japanese. The only other thing is Ryukan and Okinawa which are based on Japanese anyway (iirc).

The only thing is really Japanese and it's dialects. The dialects are close enough to Japanese anyway. They use the same grammar for the most part and all come from the same origin (as far as we know) so I don't see why not. Some dialects in the west like Yamaguchi and Kyuushuu are even quite heavily influenced by Korean and I imagine the same would be true in parts of Korea. It's really a matter of saying, yes, Korean and Japanese clearly share the same roots.

Essentially, the family splits into Japanese and Ryukyuan. Ryukyuan is a group of similarish languages that are grouped together, really there are different languages on each of the islands, Okinawan being one of those islands.

As I've said a couple times before, no one really cares what we think. The current prevailing linguistic opinion is that Korean is a language isolate, even if that's total bullhockey. For ease of navigation, Korean should be a language isolate.

[邪悪歌]

I feel that they also are related and likely came from similar roots.  Ease of navigation aside (is it really that difficult to find a language?) regardless of whether people care what we think, if anybody doesn't like it being listed as Japonic, they can make their own damn site. 

[Kevinnar]

Some similarities are shared by them, like:

• SOV structure
• The question particle is very similar.
• Many cognates

So, I do believe that they should share a language family.
(But not with a name like Japonic. That's too Japanese and not enough Korean.)

[hashi]

Some similarities are shared by them, like:

• SOV structure
• The question particle is very similar.
• Many cognates

So, I do believe that they should share a language family.
(But not with a name like Japonic. That's too Japanese and not enough Korean.)

Hmm, I actually follow the theory that Japanese is somehow involved with the Austronesian group. There are a lot of cognates and some grammatical morphemes which are similar too.

[Covered]

korean people don't agree that both languages are of the same family