Open main menu

Wiktionary β

User talk:माधवपंडित

Prakrit declension tablesEdit

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. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 22:21, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

@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)
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). —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 01:49, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
@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)

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. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 20:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@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)
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). —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 02:52, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
@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)
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. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 01:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
@माधवपंडित: Please don't spend too much time there! We need you here :-) --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
@Per utramque cavernam: Lol thanks! Enwikt will always be my main thing. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 02:24, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

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. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 00:43, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA: Looks great! Thanks for the efforts! -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
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)
@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)
@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. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 21:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Old redirectsEdit

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)

@Victar: No problem, will do. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 08:16, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! --Victar (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "माधवपंडित".