User talk:Pulimaiyi/2018

Hi, and Happy New Year! I've been thinking about making declension tables for the three Dramatic Prakrits using Module:pi-decl/noun for inspiration, and I wanted to ask if you think it would be best to keep it all in one module since they're near identical. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:21, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@AryamanA: Happy new year to you too! It's great that you're thinking of making a declension table for the Prakrits; do you have the info you need, though? And yeah, I think it's best if we keep this under one module, requiring the user to specify the language code in the input or something like that. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:06, 8 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I think Woolner and Pischel provide enough info for at least Maharastri and Sauraseni. It also helps that Prakrit simplified literally everything in Sanskrit's inflection paradigms (e.g. I just learned there's only two verb classes in Prakrit). —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 01:49, 8 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@AryamanA: True. It'll be a good idea to begin with the easiest: regular a stem masculine nouns. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:56, 8 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Speaking of Prakrit, I have become confused about the relation of Magadhi and Ardhamagadhi. It's obvious Magadhi is the ancestor of the Eastern Indo-Aryan languages, since it only has the ś sibilant like Bengali, Assamese, etc. What does that make Ardhamagadhi? I think Pischel relates it closer to Maharastri. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 20:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@AryamanA: Ardhamagadhi is from an earlier time. Prakrits are confusing. Bhojpuri is said to be descended from Magadhi Prakrit but it sounds just like a dialect of the Shaurseni Hindi. I agree that Ardhamagadhi may be more closely related to Maharashtri given their similarity. Their verbs are identical as are many other words. The Prakrits, excepting Pali, were more mutually intelligible than we think. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 02:50, 9 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Given there are dramas that use many different Prakrits for different characters, they were definitely mutually intelligible. I think Ardhamagadhi will have to be removed as an ancestor of Magadhi then. (btw, I just imported a crapton of enwikt modules to hiwikt, now the templates from here work there). —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:52, 9 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@AryamanA: Yes, please remove Ardhamagadhi as Magadhi's ancestor. I would guess Ardhamagadhi is one of the Aśokan Prakrits.

Really glad and thankful to you that Hindi Wiktionary now has templates for proper catagorization. I'm working on PIE and PII reconstructions on Hindi Wiktionary (lol) and templates sure help. I was inspired by User:Tom 144 who is very active in making PIE reconstruction resources available at Spanish Wiktionary. So I figured out our Hindi Wiktionary needs those too. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 08:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

हमारी हिंदी विक्षनरी काफ़ी बदतर हालत में है, हर लेख अपना ही ढंग में बनाया गया है, व्यवस्था विहीन। I will probably run a bot eventually to clean up all those unformatted entries one day. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 01:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@माधवपंडित: Please don't spend too much time there! We need you here :-) --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Per utramque cavernam: Lol thanks! Enwikt will always be my main thing. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 02:24, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Done! Check out Maharastri Prakrit 𑀧𑀼𑀢𑁆𑀢 (putta). The template is {{pmh-decl-noun}}, and the module for the backend is MOD:pra-decl/noun. Only masculine a-stems in Maharashtri are working as of now, but I'll add the data for the rest bit by bit. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 00:43, 21 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@AryamanA: Looks great! Thanks for the efforts! -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Look at your putta. In dative and ablative cases showing puttāa and puttāo. I think these are not right. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80: Hi, the Sanskrit dative case is पुत्राय (putrāya) so Prakrit dative puttāa may be right. I don't have that source in hand right now (Woolner and Pischel) so I think we should ping @AryamanA to see if this inflection is correct. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 04:07, 24 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80: They are correct; see Pischel, page 262, for a detailed table for putta. The ablative singular has many variants though, I have added them too. For dative singular, it is the same thing as Pali puttāya, but Maharastri Prakrit did not have the y to separate vowels. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 21:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for fixing *sarĵanam. In the future though, can you also update the links to that entry and add {{delete}} to the old redirect page? It saves someone else from having to do it. Thanks! --Victar (talk) 15:09, 28 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Victar: No problem, will do. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 08:16, 29 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! --Victar (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Madhva, could I ask that you add sources to PII entries you create? We have so many easy to use PII references templates now, there's really no reason not to. Thank you! --Victar (talk) 20:02, 30 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Victar:   Done -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:53, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Madhva. --Victar (talk) 03:45, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Just to note, I made the Lubotsky (1999) an inline reference and removed the Martinez/de Vaan (2014) reference because it doesn't give a reconstruction. --Victar (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey, just popping in again after finding this resource. 1 has several inscriptions, with the picture/rubbing, the romanization, and translation (though no word-by-word gloss sadly). About half of these are in Sanskrit (the other half different stages of Cham). Also @AryamanA for your Sanskrit interest. The Sanskrit ones are C.79, 80, 87, 97, 135, 136, 137, 145, 150, 173, 175, 205, 206, 207, 208, 216, and 217. I was thinking something like {{lb|sa|Champa}} with Champa being a regional Sanskrit variety (as we have with BHS, and as we can do with Javanese/Balinese/Khmer/Malay/Thai/etc. Sanskrit in the future).

If you guys add the Cham ones, apparently the oldest ones are in a southern Brahmi, but the later ones are in the Cham script. Also, I can't find much on the ranges/break-up of the Chamic languages (Old/Middle/Modern or whatever it may be). DerekWinters (talk) 13:19, 2 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@DerekWinters: That's really interesting! The Sanskrit seems very nonstandard, I'll definitely be looking for more Southeast Asian Sanskrit resources now. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 13:33, 2 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@DerekWinters: Interesting, thanks! I had no idea of Champa. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 07:41, 3 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Coincidentally or not, I read this in the news (Vietnamese: [1]) a few days ago. Hopefully more of it will become available some time soon. Wyang (talk) 01:54, 15 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Note my formatting changes. It's not a big deal, and could still be improved, but the point here is to use {{l}} rather than a plain link because it can format links better, and to avoid putting Arabic script in italics. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge: Thanks for fixing it! It had occured to me earlier but I let the square brackets on because I felt Kalasha spellings are so unique, they are not likely to share a page with other language entries, so there would be no need to redirect it to a specific L2. But I've fixed the other two templates now. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 04:56, 6 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for propagating the changes. Cheers! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:41, 6 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Madhav. Some of us were discussing your username and were noting how difficult it is to ping you. For that reason, it's actually specified in the WT:USER that usernames should be in Latin characters, preferably also without diacritics. I hope you might take that into consideration. Thanks. --Victar (talk) 17:53, 17 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Victar: I see. I am open to changing my username. It'll be simpler for me to log in as well. Can you redirect me to the thread where my name was discussed? Also, being still a noobie, I'm not aware of what one needs to do to change their username. Could you instruct me? Thanks. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:56, 18 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

It was a private discussion on the wikt discord server. If you do wish to change your username, all you need to do is submit a request here. Cheers. --Victar (talk) 02:05, 18 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nice username! lol for a second I thought we got a new editor who knew Maharastri Prakrit...—Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 20:56, 21 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

@AryamanA: Haha, thanks :D -- Bhagadatta (talk) 02:16, 22 June 2018 (UTC)Reply