Talk:Local history book

Title

I've restored the English-language title "Local history book" after this move because there is no evidence at Google Books Ngram that bygdebøker or bygdebok is a more common term in English. Doremo (talk) 18:43, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the discussion. Let me elaborate....

I am not sure the comparison of Google book searches for "local history book" versus "bygdebok" is at all relevant though. In English language use, a "local history book" is a very broad term that could literally mean any kind of book about local history, and it does not automatically by definition have anything to do with Norwegian farms books. Also, a straight translation of the original Wikipedia article from Norwegian to English also doesn't work quiet so well as the original Norwegian language term is still important and retained. Consider the following secondary sources, for example: Bygdebøker (Farm Books), What is a «bygdebok»?, Norway Farm Books or Bygdebøker, and Bygdebøker, called Farm books in the US!. The English language Wikipedia article for a saga is still Saga, and not What was Said (a literally translation of the word from Old Norse/Icelandic).

Many secondary sources in English use the term bygdebøk and define it as a Norwegian farm book. A local history book is not necessarily a Norwegian farm book; but rather way to describe what bygdebøk are. The term bygdebøk is widely used in English-language secondary sources, particularly about the Norwegian diaspora and genealogic research. There even are examples of collections in English-speaking libraries for volumes of bygdebøker, for example the Arne G. Brekke Bygdebok Collection at the University of North Dakota in the United States. Note that the library labels it a "Bygdebok Collection", not a "local history book" collection. A "local history book" collection at the University of North Dakota, if one existed, would be about Grand Forks and the U.S. state of North Dakota.

It is my opinion, based on secondary sources, that the current article should be named Bygdebøker with redirects form Norway farm books, Norwegian farm books, bygdebøk and bydgebok. The article redirect for local history book may not be necessary. Sorry for the rambling response. This discussion could benefit from broader perspective of the Norway wiki project.

Kærleikr (talk) 20:49, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I would agree that Norwegian local history book would be a more specific and logical title if there are future WP articles about such publications for other cultures. However, I still cannot see the benefit of moving the page from a transparent English title that anyone can understand to one that no English speaker will understand, especially when bygdebøker gets zero hits at Google Books Ngram. I understand the impulse, but bygdebøker seems to violate both "most common name in English" and "prefer singular nouns" at the article title guidelines. Doremo (talk) 02:45, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the links and reply. Not an expert in Wikipedia policy, and singular is better. I am still confused by the Google data’s relevance though. Many English language secondary sources retain bygdebøk when discussing Norwegian farm books. The article for Smörgåsbord isn’t titled “Swedish buffet”, as the article for Hygge isn’t titled “Scandinavian coziness culture”. Secondary sources in English use bygdebøk the same way as those terms. Bygdebøk seems notable enough for an English language encyclopedia. The translation of the original article from a Norwegian language article without considering use of the term in English language secondary sources is the problem, in my opinion.Kærleikr (talk) 03:12, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

It varies by lexeme. Both smörgåsbord and hygge seem to have a good representation in Google Books Ngram and I think that both of these words would be readily understood (and even used) by many English speakers. I did a search at Newspapers.com for these words: smorgasbord (1,508,339 hits), hygge (3,447 hits), and bygdebok (14 hits, but including one article reprinted several times). The last term always appears glossed, indicated that it will not be understood by a non-Norwegian; for example, "a bygdebok, the official history of the district"; "Norwegian farm histories, known as bygdeboks"; "the history of the farm ... has been kept in a kind of book called 'bygdebok' (pronounced 'big-de-book')". I think a better comparison is that Norwegian knitting does not appear at strikking, or that Norwegian cuisine does not appear at Norsk mat; knitting, cuisine, and local history books are mundane things that might be produced in any culture, whereas smörgåsbord and hygge seem to lean much more toward something that is culturally distinctive or peculiar. Doremo (talk) 03:41, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The problem is the raw searching of literally translated terms and poor secondary sourcing, and not considering the use of these terms in quality, English language secondary sources about Norwegian farm books. The Capitol Times source (1968; Wisconsin, US) you just added is not actually about bygdebøker or farm books. That seems to be about an American compiling stories of Norwegian decedents from an area that migrated to the United States—that’s not the same thing as a bygdebøk, which were authored by Norwegian historians or volunteers often at the commission of a local government and frequently includes the history of farm and its ownership, births, deaths, etc. Kærleikr (talk) 04:02, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Ultimately, I'd be happy to see this article expanded (because it's obviously not only Norwegians that write local history books), and for the Norwegian part to be a subsection. The Norwegians did an excellent job of developing the genre, but I know it also exists in English, Slovenian, and other languages. Doremo (talk) 06:13, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, perhaps that explains the misunderstanding. If the intention is for local history book to be a broader article about a literary genre and that the intention is to broaden it to include local history books across several languages, countries and cultures, it might actually make sense for bygdebøk to have a separate article. Would you be opposed if a created a separate article from this one and titled it bygdebøk? That separate article would focus on the etymology, history, and usage of the bygdebøk term and genre in English language secondary sources. (I created a redirect already that links here) Kærleikr (talk) 15:07, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm still not convinced that bygdebøk qualifies as an English word (and title). (The term seems to be absent from English dictionaries and very limited in other English sources, frequently used to add "local flavor" to a text.) However, I'd be happy to see content added to this article that would expand it beyond the Norwegian context. Doremo (talk) 15:15, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The books I have read that calls itself "bygdebok" are a very specialized type of book, containing the history of individual farms. Not all books about local history are considered "bygdebok"s. The only one I've read that was a mix of local history and farm history simply called itself a book. My sample size if however very limited. Ters (talk) 15:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)