Module talk:pi-headword

February 2016

@Wyang, sorry to bother you again, but the Pali templates are acting funny at भुज (bhuja) - any idea why? It isn't detecting the script code I believe. —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 01:45, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

@kc_kennylau I've reverted your edit at Module:scripts/data. It broke this Pali template. @Aryamanarora Now it works. Wyang (talk) 10:44, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

@Wyang: Lesson learnt: not to trust Appendix:Unicode/Combining_Diacritical_Marks because they give you the circle thing (U+25CC) also. --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:56, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

@Wyang, Kc kennylau, thanks guys! —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 12:42, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

ñā in Burmese script

@Octahedron80, Wyang, Aryamanarora: The module is transliterating ñāta into Burmese script as ဉာတ. Are we sure that's correct? I think (but I'm not 100% sure) it ought to be ညာတ. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:00, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Umm Wikipedia has the following: "ည has an alternate form ဉ, used with the vowel diacritic ာ as a syllable onset and alone as a final." I'm not sure either. Wyang (talk) 09:10, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Both ဉ (ñ1) & ည (ñ2) are used in Burmese language (and also both ဉာ & ညာ). The ဉ (ñ1) might be confused with ဥ (u) and most vowels stick to the ည (ñ2), so I recommend to use ည (ñ2) everywhere. However, Pali language in Burmese script is not the Burmese language; some rule might be different. --Octahedron80 (talk) 11:47, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

PS. Perhaps we can keep both forms (in alt) and make pages for them equally. --Octahedron80 (talk) 11:52, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Having looked through my Burmese dictionaries, I take it back. It appears that native words starting with /ɲ/ are spelled with ည, but Pali words (both loanwords in Burmese and Pali itself written in the Burmese script) are spelled with ဉ. This appears to apply to ာ as to the other vowel signs. Unless I've misinterpreted the dictionary evidence, ဉာတ is correct for Pali and for Pali loanwords in Burmese, but a native Burmese word would be written ညာတ. So everything's fine as it is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:42, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Also check http://www.mediafire.com/view/gbdg3eik111gjue/20141102_113119.jpg --173.68.165.114 22:48, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Adjectives

@Octahedron80 Do Pali adjectives really have inherent gender? —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 16:22, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Aryamanarora: No; see pages 48 ff. of [1]. Just as in Sanskrit, adjectives have a stem form (which we use as the lemma), e.g. bāla (“foolish”), which has inflected forms that show gender, e.g. bālo (nominative singular masculine), bālā (nominative singular feminine), bālaṃ (nominative singular neuter). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:48, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Octahedron80: That was what I thought. {{pi-adj}} which relied on this module seems to have a gender parameter nevertheless. —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 19:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Alternative Latin Forms

I have just tweaked the logic so that now non-Latin alternative forms default to transliterations of the value of the Latn argument, rather than to transliterations of the entry name. The need was discovered with the entry evam, which I believe is useful. -- RichardW57 (talk) 01:31, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

An Alternative Form not Tagged for Script

The form ᨷᩤᨷ has its alternative forms generated by {{pi-alt|pāpa}}. It derives an alternative ᨸᩣᨸ but does not mark it for script! This should be investigated when the generation of predictable alternative forms within a script has been handled. -- RichardW57 (talk) 21:24, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

@RichardW57: The module function is somehow convinced that the "current script" is Tai Tham and thus is not displaying the script's name. I'll look into it. — Eru·tuon 23:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh. The script of the pagename is Tai Tham, but it looks like it is actually pronounced bāba, while the Tai Tham form in the table is pronounced pāpa. — Eru·tuon 23:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

No. The letter ᨷ U+1A37 TAI THAM LETTER BA is pronounced /p/ in Pali, and the big Northern Thai dictionary I have (the 'MFL') treats initial ᨷ transliterated to Thai บ U+0E1A THAI CHARACTER BO BAIMAI and initial ᨷ transliterated to Thai ป U+0E1B THAI CHARACTER PO PLA as two different letters. (The choice of transliteration is based on sound.) There is, or was, similar behaviour in Khmer - U+1794 KHMER LETTER BA is pronounced /ɓ/ in native or well-assimilated words, but /p/ in Pali-Sanskrit words.

Confusingly, a fancy Northern Thai U+1A37 TAI THAM LETTER BA can look very like a Lao U+1A38 TAI THAM LETTER HIGH PA, so a hypothetical casual Pali reader might not notice the difference. - RichardW57 (talk) 09:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

To clarify and simplify: We get ᨷᩤᨷ in the west and ᨸᩣᨸ in the east. (I think we will also find ᨷᩣᨷ in some places, or perhaps rather, some hands.) - RichardW57 (talk) 10:08, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Returning to the issue, it seems therefore to be an aesthetic issue. If we're going to omit the script when it's the same as the headword's, perhaps we should put such words at the top of the list. It's lower priority than automatically handling multiplicities such as for _opatati_ 'to fall', for which I can see the following Tai Tham possibilities, tagged by the regions I know something of:

1. ᩒᨷᨲᨲᩥ, ᩒᨷᨲᨲᩥ (Kengtung)
2. ᩋᩰᨷᨲᨲᩥ, ᩋᩰᨷᨲᨲᩥ (N. Thailand)
3. ᩋᩮᩣᨷᨲᨲᩥ, ᩋᩮᩣᨷᨲᨲᩥ (N. Thailand - this is in the MFL as a Northern Thai word! Possibly it doesn't occur in actual Pali)
4. ᩒᨸᨲᨲᩥ, ᩒᨸᨲᨲᩥ (Laos & Isan)

I've wrapped the repeats in {{lang|nod|word}}, but the repeats are being badly misrendered on my machine.

The first two are rendered the same by the Hariphunchai font, a font for Northern Thai; I'm not sure it is wrong to do so. (My Da Lekh fonts render all four differently.) I don't know enough about the Pali of Sipsongpanna to make confident predictions. All four would be pronounced the same (except for local variations in tone). - RichardW57 (talk) 09:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Position of generated form

Inconsistent transliteration is misreported if the automatically generated script form with implicit vowels is not the first (or only) alternative given by the template. I've fixed this to look at all four from the template before complaining. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:41, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Transliteration in Headlines

I'm ready to have transliteration in headlines enabled. A method of injecting manual input transliteration has been tested (proof of principle) by inserting

   data.translits = {}

data.translits[1] = 'Hello'

before the call to full_headword(). (This change was not been committed.) I intend to get transliteration enabled before implementing manual transliteration. RichardW57 (talk) 21:42, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Transliterations for Template:pi-alt

To prevent romanisations suddenly appearing in lists of alternative forms, I've explicitly specified the transliteration as '-' in function alt(). RichardW57 (talk) 18:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Gender of Noun Forms

(Notifying RichardW57, Aryaman; errors): , @Octahedron80: Do we really want to have to add genders to noun forms? They're usually not specified. Adding them for oblique forms would multiply the difficulty in determining the genders of some words, whereas at present we only need to worry for the lemmas. It's bad enough having to propagate gender determinations across scripts for the subsidiary lemmas.

Additionally, you (for it will be you who has added the question marks to most noun forms) will have to decide what to do for agghaṃ, for although as an accusative it is masculine or neuter, as a nominative it is only neuter. Do you really want there to be two entries, one for the nominative and one for the accusative? --RichardW57 (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Incidentally, {{pi-noun form}} does not route through this module, so until that is fixed, your change for noun forms has no effect. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2022 (UTC)