Talk:Q113129799

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Autodescription — Lovara song (Q113129799)

description: oral tradition in Burgenland, inscribed in the Unesco ICH Austrian inventory in 2011
Useful links:
Classification of the class Lovara song (Q113129799)  View with Reasonator View with SQID
For help about classification, see Wikidata:Classification.
Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
⟨Lovara song⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1)
Generic queries for classes
See also


instance of oral tradition

[edit]

@Susannaanas: I'm not sure about making this an instance of oral tradition. I just moved the P31 oral tradition (Q209815) to distribution format (P437) (I spotted it at Ibonia (Q5984364) and found it quite clever). But this gives another constraint and yes - it is dubious if oral tradition (Q209815) is a distribution method in the strict sense. Maybe we could just set the genre to traditional folk music (Q235858), which implies that it is part of oral tradition? @Moebeus: (maybe there exist already similar cases I'm not aware of) Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:12, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My statement was made based on the UNESCO classification at Inventory of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Austria (Q113085118). I think more precise types are more than welcome, but we should check if we can guarantee a subclass of (P279) hierarchy up to oral tradition (Q209815) for at least one of the types. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 07:42, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Susannaanas! I don't think we should use oral tradition (Q209815) as a type of work or other product. oral tradition (Q209815) (and its counterpart written tradition (Q42412341)) is not really about a type of work / product but about the way this was passed down. If you think of it: a traditional song and a composed song (in the strict sense; e.g. there is a certain composer) don't differ in that the one is "oral" and the other is "written": also the song from oral tradition can be written down and v.v. They differ in that the one has been passed down orally (has been used in/for oral tradition) and the other has been passed down in written form. Maybe we could use a different property, e.g. has characteristic (P1552)? We also have verbal folklore (Q109810464) that could be used as a class. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:48, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After some thought: I see that this is also used for the thing that was passed down orally as almost everything may be used for the act and the product :(. But do we need to use this as a class? As some of the instances are dialects: should most dialects be an instance of oral tradition (Q209815)? I still tend to prefer using it with has characteristic (P1552) and see it as the way this has been passed down. It seems that the instance of (P31) mirrors the section of the UNESCO inventory but I'm still not convinced of using it as a type. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just found other items that could be modeled differently: e.g. Burgenland Romani (Q113129786) and The Ötztal Dialect (Q113129764) seem to be actually about languages or dialects. At least this is what the pages describe. Maybe we should make them an instance of dialect (Q33384) (or a similar language). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:20, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think it a bit of a stretch to use distribution format this way, but I might just be lacking imagination :) My main gripe here is the p31, as this is not a specific song, so :musical work/composition is not accurate.
Our resident expert on musical traditions is User:Solidest, maybe he has some qualified opinions. Moebeus (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As to distribution method: I agree :) I think has characteristic (P1552) will be a better property. I will set it on Ibonia (Q5984364), too. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The hierarchy of traditions seems a bit messy on WD so far (it's p31, p279, p1552, etc in different places), but in general I also support the idea of putting it in p1552. The item itself is more like a regular traditional musical genre of a small ethnic group - I've reworked it that way. Solidest (talk) 00:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree! Please join thinking about this at Wikidata:WikiProject_Intangible_Cultural_Heritage! It is focusing on the inscribed elements on UNESCO lists and national inventories, and not so much the traditions themselves, but it would be good to work on some general guidelines about that as well. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 07:47, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Oral Tradition" in inventories of Intangible Cultural Heritage

[edit]

I went through all the instances of oral traditions I found. Just a recapitulation of what I found and what I added/changed:

I moved instance of (P31)oral tradition (Q209815) to has characteristic (P1552)oral tradition (Q209815): Even though you can view "oral tradition" as referring to the product of the process of "oral tradition" I still don't think it is a good instance of (P31): it is not really a "defining characteristic". Via has characteristic (P1552)oral tradition (Q209815) they can still be easily retrieved and we don't have to think about making every dialect also an instance of "oral tradition" just because there are some dialects in an inventory of Intangible Cultural Heritage; we would need to be consistent - why should some dialects be "oral tradition" and others not?

I used and found the following classes for instance of (P31) or, partly (subclass of (P279)):

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Q113129799&oldid=1784165737"