User talk:Pulimaiyi

Archives
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Out of process deletions of rfv-quote at अमृत

The discussion of the validity of the quotation at Sanskrit अमृत (amṛta) is still in progress, so kindly do not delete the notice until the discussion is finished. --RichardW57m (talk) 14:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@RichardW57m: The RFV is not unresolved. It's just you refusing to concede even after being shown evidence contrary to your conviction. -- 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 14:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Derogatory comments regarding other editors

Greetings,

I am writing to formally warn you of violations of the Wikimedia Foundation's Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC), as well as Wiktionary policy on wiktionary:Civility.

You wrote a comment speculating on another editor's mental health. It is extremely arrogant, judgemental and rude to speculate on the mental condition of an editor you don't know. Please refrain from commenting on editors and stick to the content. Thank you.

I have redacted your comment appropriately, and I hope and pray that I will not have occasion to do it again. Elizium23 (talk) 19:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Old Awadhi

Would it be appropriate to upgrade Old Awadhi awa-old from an etymology-only language to a full-fledged chronolect as inc-oaw? It might be more accurate to make a distinction between

• modern Awadhi terms such as बल्लेबाज (ballebāj) versus
• older terms found in the Ramcharitmanas, Hanuman Chalisa, Padmavat, etc.
• Also, CAT:Awadhi semi-learned borrowings from Sanskrit would imply that a term was first borrowed into Old Awadhi rather than modern Awadhi.

This would be similar to how terms found in Kabir’s work are currently considered as Old Hindi and terms found in the Guru Granth Sahib are currently considered as Old Punjabi.

(see [[User_talk:Pulimaiyi/2022#Old_{{desc|LANG|TERM}}_in_descendants_trees]])

The case for distinguishing Old Awadhi is perhaps stronger than Old Marwari or Old Maithili because

• Ramcharitmanas, Hanuman Chalisa, Padmavat, etc. are all fairly well-known texts that have been analysed several times.

(see MOD:Quotations/awa/data)

• the Eastern Hindi languages do not have an Early New Indo-Aryan common ancestor.
• There already exists Old Gujarati for Gujaratic-Rajasthani languages and Old Bengali for Bengali-Assamese languages, and their relationship to Old Marwari or Old Maithili would need to be clarified.

The etymology-only code for Old Braj bra-old is a descendant of Old Hindi rather being contemporaneous with it. So, with the current arrangement it is possible for an Old Braj term from the सूर-सागर to be a descendant of an Old Hindi term from Kabir’s work.

Old Awadhi was tangentially discussed with Svartava with respect to Chhattisgarhi being an ancestor of it in two edit summaries at the revision history of भाखा

Kutchkutch: Is it appropriate to … make Chhattisgarhi a descendant of Old Awadhi?

Svartava: No idea about Chhattisgarhi being descendant of Old Awadhi

Making Chhattisgarhi a descendant of Old Awadhi is not possible without upgrading Old Awadhi from an etymology-only language to a full-fledged chronolect.

Apparently, Svartava has a WT:AutoWikiBrowser bot that can replace instances of one code with another. (also AryamanA)) Kutchkutch (talk) 09:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kutchkutch: I gladly support this move. I want to ask, however, is Awadhi sufficiently different from Old Awadhi natively (ie, without the intervention of any foreign loanwords)? As such, would the Hanuman Chalisa in modern Awadhi be any different? -- 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 05:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Since many of lemmas in CAT:Awadhi lemmas other than बल्लेबाज could possibly refer to both Old Awadhi and modern Awadhi, it is completely understandable to ask how different they are. Although a distinction between the two has been made in descendants trees, since they are merged as one language, I have avoided creating any Awadhi entries.

• Old Awadhi terms are mentioned in the dictionary {{R:inc-ohi:Callewaert:2009}}. The term “Old Awadhi” has been used since Grierson in 1904 ({{R:inc:Masica:1993}} page 53). There are Perso-Arabic borrowings in Old Awadhi as well as modern Awadhi.
• Modern Awadhi terms are mentioned in dictionaries such as {{R:awa:Dikshit}} and the {{R:hi:Hindwi}} database. Although, a modern Awadhi dictionary could possibly refer to Old Awadhi texts, this would be similar to how a modern Marathi dictionary would refer to the Dnyaneshwari.

• Regarding how the grammar (rather than the lexicon) of Old Awadhi differs from modern Awadhi, {{R:awa:Saksena}} is an entire book on that topic. Although it is from 1937, this work would perhaps be more helpful in imagining what the Hanuman Chalisa would be like in modern Awadhi. There are several comparisons in {{R:awa:Saksena}} between Old Awadhi and modern Awadhi that clearly show how the language has changed.

• Since you said that you support keeping Old Awadhi separate from modern Awadhi (and just wanted some further clarification regarding how different they are), it seems that the implementation towards it can proceed.

@Svartava After the language code for inc-oaw is created (and if you have nothing further to say about the matter), could you run your bot to replace awa-old with inc-oaw?

Kutchkutch (talk) 12:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@Svartava Thanks for helping out with the implementation by using the bot. The implementation seems to be done now. Kutchkutch (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kutchkutch Your work is appreciated as well, we managed to finish this quite quickly with the teamwork. Congrats on completing 19000 edits, also. Svartava (talk) 03:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@Svartava: You seem to have missed the Reconstruction namespace- I just fixed a module error at Reconstruction:Sanskrit/तिथिवार. It seems like this has happened before, since I vaguely remember on at least one other recent occasion finding Indic-related module errors only in that namespace. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: I just want to clarify that I did check CAT:E more than once but it wasn't updated (technical delay) when I checked (I also put it in my watchlist for some time around these events, so that any new addition in it to be shown, but again that didn't happen because as far as I have seen such changes only appear when a recent edit on that page causes some error rather than when the functioning of some pre-used template/module is impacted). It happens because search results by default don't show namespaces other than mainspace (if possible, we might want to change this because reconstructions are content pages / dictionary entries, but whatever) and the last such instance recently was related to the merging Apabhramsa lects. Svartava (talk) 15:14, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@Svartava: I wasn't expecting you to spend all your time patrolling CAT:E- that can take days for the errors to pop up. It's just that you obviously were very careful to prevent the errors in mainspace by changing the language codes via AWB, but you didn't do the same for the Reconstruction namespace. I had assumed it was merely that you did't think of it. If it's a matter of not knowing how to search the Reconstruction namespace, that can be fixed. It's actually not hard at all to add namespaces at Special:Search, but I'll make it easier for you: this is a search for "inc-oaw" in the namespaces that are most likely to be a problem. Just replace the "inc-oaw" with the language code you're interested in. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 04:07, 15 August 2024 (UTC)