Talk:Inuit/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Inuit or the Inuit

In the article the Government of Canada's Inuit, Inuk (Linguistic recommendation from the Translation Bureau) is used as a reference for the singular Inuk and the plural Inuit. However, I didn't notice until today that the reference also says "Because Inuit means "the people," do not use the or people with Inuit". So should this, and other articles, in general follow that particular style guide. It is a Canadian guide and may not apply to Greenland and Alaska and does appear to be used that way by Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. A quick look would suggest that it may apply to Inuvialuit ("the real people and Inuvialuit) but not the Iñupiat. Opinions? CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 06:27, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure I would only follow the Canadian govt style guide. I would go with what most sourced guides use. Do we know what other sources and style guides tend to do? Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:26, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes to User:CambridgeBayWeather, no need for the or people when discussing the people collectively. One might say the Inuit language. Greg Youngling's Elements of Indigenous Style (2018) is a good additional resource, as is the Alaska Native Language Center. Additionally, from those sources, my understanding is Inuit is used also used as an adjective in English: an Inuit agreement or an Inuit musician (Youngling, 66), as opposed to an Inuk agreement. Iñupiat is more challenging; I don't see why the should be added, but ANLC does use the Inupiat of the North Slope. Yuchitown (talk) 15:20, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown

I agree with @Yuchitown, there is no need for the or people when discussing them collectively. At the very least I would agree that the should not be used with Iñupiat, even though I feel that is a minor detail, so much so that the ANLC has overlooked it as pointed out. The exception would be in discussing the language branch. --ARoseWolf 15:37, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't remember this coming up with any other group whose name translates to "the people". It sounds like a distinction only a bureaucrat would consistently make.

I don't know how dependable this source is, but every group name in it that translates as "the people" normally takes a definite article in English. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 16:19, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

The point of the recommendation is sound: avoid the combination "Inuit people", and otherwise use "Inuit" like you would any other plural noun in English that functions as an ethnonym, like "Canadians" or "Americans". Nevertheless, care must be taken – I would not go as far as saying "the Inuit" is always wrong. You can still say "the Inuit" if you're referring to a specific group of Inuit. In the Inuit article, I can already see two places where careless deletion of "the" has led to problems:

• "The exchanges that accompanied the arrival and colonization by the Europeans greatly damaged Inuit way of life" – "Inuit" is an adjective here, not a noun, so "the Inuit way of life" is correct.
• "Many of Inuit were systematically converted to Christianity in the 19th and 20th centuries" – this should just be "Many Inuit". Cobblet (talk) 16:37, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks all. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 19:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I also would favor dropping the "the." Activist (talk) 11:49, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

yes, drop it. that (the) germanic/european (language) is easy with creating those decisive "the" does not mean its impossible. Many languages are deciding such inside the word already like in latin and cyrillic. 85.149.83.125 (talk) 14:58, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

People. You do realize Northern peoples are not all the same right? Their languages may differ from region to region and also their traditional clothing or even the stitching can differ. ~~Ann~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:4CB0:E73A:71E:EC76 (talk) 06:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)