Open main menu

Wiktionary β

User talk:AryamanA


EWDC #3Edit

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

Equinox 04:50, 30 December 2017 (UTC)


Hey, just a few comments on *táwkma: 1. It's a confusing stem, but *táwkma is the not **táwkman, 2. if you copy the descendents from the PIE entry, please use {{see desc}} on said entry, 3. I think the etymologies are much improved if you list the full etymology, when you can, instead of simply using |alt= to the root, and please also add {{PIE root}} when appropriate, 4. Parthian comes before Old Persian, as the "old" is ignored. If you have any thoughts to the contrary, please let me know. Thanks! --Victar (talk) 07:32, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: Sorry about that, in hindsight those are very obvious mistakes. Thank for fixing the entry. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 14:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Oh, no worries. Just trying to make the PII entries even better. Thanks! --Victar (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
@Victar: Would that not be *táwkmā instead? The noun is masculine in Skt, Avestan and OP. The nom. sg forms are तोक्मा (tokmā), 𐬙𐬀𐬊𐬑𐬨𐬁 (taoxmā) and 𐎫𐎢𐎶𐎠 (taumā) respectively. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
@माधवपंडित: I (and you) moved it, but I think that might be was a mistake now, which is why I slowed my roll. According to Mayrhofer, the Avestan is neut. and the OP a fem. derivative. Monier says the Sanskrit is masc., but the looks to be tokma, not tokmā. Also, if it was a masc. mā-stem, you would expect the accent to be the on suffix, not the root, as you see with neut. ma-stems. --Victar (talk) 02:03, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Then, again, Mayrhofer could be wrong. The Kurdish looks to be masc. Also, there might have been some confusion with the word for power. --Victar (talk) 02:22, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
@Victar: I see now. It had occurred to me that the ending should be *-mā́ but I ignored in favor of what I thought was apparent: all three major descendants are masculine and are declined with an ā. No idea why the masculine declension of तोक्मन् (tokman) is तोक्म (tokma) but it is. After we are sure about the OP and Avestan forms, it's your call. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 02:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
@माधवपंडित: Monier-Williams claims that the masc. is a derivative of an earlier neut. --Victar (talk) 06:16, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

دخالت ممنوعEdit

از اینکه بر صفحه بحث و گفتگوی من "دخالت" میکنید، آزرده ام. خواهشمندم که دیگر بر صفحه بحث من دخالت نکنید رفتار هر کس بیانگر شخصیت و تربیت پدر و مادر اوست Ariamihr (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Ariamihr: You shouldn't remove stuff like that. JohnC5 had a legitimate question. And no need to talk about my parents. (btw بیت is missing an entry). —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 01:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
@Ariamihr:: Your user talk page doesn't really belong to you, it's for communicating with other editors. You can back it up and then remove the contents, if you wish. Your behaviour is strange, at least, considering that people haven't treated you badly. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:04, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I had a go at the entry you wanted created. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

استرجع کنندہEdit

آداب محترم آریامن صاحب!

انگریزی ویکی لغت پر استرجع کنندہ یعنی رول بیکر بننے کا کیا طریقہ کار ہے؟ BukhariSaeed (talk) 04:46, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: آداب! رول بیکر تخریب کاری کو ایک ہی کلک میں ونڈو کر سکتا ہے۔ —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 15:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
محترم مجھے اس اختیار کا علم ہے اردو ویکیپیڈیا، ویکی ڈیٹا اور کامنز پر میں استرجع کنندہ ہوں مگر یہاں کہاں درخواست دیتے ہیں اس سے لا علم کرپیہ آپ مجھے بتا دیجیے۔BukhariSaeed (talk) 15:38, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
@BukhariSaeed: مجھے معاف کریں جناب، میرے لئے اردو پڑھنا مشکل ہے. استرجع کنندہ بننے کے لئے کسی منتظمین کو آپکو WT:Whitelist پر نامزد کرنا ہوگا. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 02:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)‎



can you fix ur:Shiva on urwiktionary? i don't know how to translate these words (module name?)BukhariSaeed (talk) 06:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: I see you fixed it :) I also made hi:Shiva and imported the modules to hiwiktionary like you did. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 02:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
I am talking about the categories, وہ سب انگریزی میں ہیں ان کو کس ماڈیول سے ترجمہ کیا جاتا ہے؟‎ BukhariSaeed (talk) 03:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
@BukhariSaeed: Oh, ur:Module:etymology. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 13:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
ur:शिव, same problem with category. محترم اب یہ کس ماڈیول سے ہوگا؟‎ـ BukhariSaeed (talk) 07:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
and what about Terms derived from शिव? translation module.BukhariSaeed (talk) 07:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
@BukhariSaeed: میں آپکی بات سمجھا نہیں جناب... سب ٹھیک لگ رہا ہے. شاید Module:sa-translit؟‎AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 03:18, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
وہ سب ایک اردو ویکیپیڈیا کے یوزر نے ٹھیک کر دیا تھا۔ شما کریں کہ آپ کو تکلیف دیBukhariSaeed (talk) 04:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)‎


بابو. BukhariSaeed (talk) 14:46, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: [1] میں نے اس لغت کا استعمال کیا۔‎AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 15:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
آپ کی لغت بظاہر معتبر لگ رہی ہے ممکن ہے کہ میں غلط ہوں۔ رہنمائی کرنے کا شکریہ :) BukhariSaeed (talk) 16:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)‎

Plural on urwiktionaryEdit

آداب! محترم وزراء الخارجية میں ”جمع کا وَزِير الخَارِجِيَّة“ لکھا آ رہا ہے اور ماڈیول کی بناوٹ بھی انگریزی ویکشنری کے حساب سے ہے اسی وجہ سے ایسا ہو رہا ہے۔ تو کیا آپ اس ماڈیول کو درست کردیں گے؟ ویسے اسے "جمع کا وَزِير الخَارِجِيَّة" نہیں بلکہ "{وَزِير الخَارِجِيَّة کی جمع}" ہونا چاہیے تھا۔ BukhariSaeed (talk) 11:41، 13 جنوری 2018 (UTC)‎

"وُزَرَاء الخَارِجِيَّة (نقل حرفی درکار ہے) مذکر pl"
اس "pl" کو بھی "جمع" کر دیجیے گا BukhariSaeed (talk) 11:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)‎
@BukhariSaeed: آداب! میں نے ماڈیول کو درست کر دیا ہے۔‎
AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 15:24, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
محترم شکریہ!
اور وہ pl درست نہیں ہو پایا؟ BukhariSaeed (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
pl درست ہوگیا
اور آپ نے کوما بھی درست کردیا اب بس واوین (") درست کردیجیے وہاں اردو وکشنری پر بھی کہا ہے آپ سے :)
BukhariSaeed (talk) 16:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
جناب شکریہ میں نے اردو کے Module:links سے خود ہی درستی کر لی واوین کی درستی کرلی :)--BukhariSaeed (talk) 16:49, 13 January 2018 (UTC)‎
@BukhariSaeed: کوئی بات نہیں جناب، اگر کوئی اور مدد کی ضرورت پڑے تو ضرور پوچھیں۔‎
AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 18:09, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


Someone added descendants here, I removed them as a couple were wrong and there appeared to be problems with their other edits but that was a bit hasty as it does seem as though the Hindi and Urdu sections were right. Could you check if it is now correct, please? Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 15:50, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: They're correct. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 16:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 16:20, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

دعای ربانی - a favourEdit

Sorry to bother you again, please could you just delete this, I will re-create immediately. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2018 (UTC) I made a really bad mistake by copy and pasting. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Sure, no problem, it's deleted. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 17:03, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks so much :) What happened is, I wanted to make the image larger because you need to be able to see the writing so I went to the first page I thought of which has a big image and copied from there. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


بپتسمہ میں میں نے مثال شامل کی ہے مگر مثال میں اردو الفاظ جلی حروف میں نہیں دکھائی دے رہے؟---BukhariSaeed (talk) 18:21, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Urdu TransliterationEdit

Can you please make Module:ur-translit for auto transliteration like Module:hi-translit? BukhariSaeed (talk) 09:55, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: Unfortunately, it’s not possible for languages such as Urdu or Persian. They are only partially phonetic. The Arabic module only works with fully vocalised Arabic in about 95% of cases.Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
@Atitarev: Urdu can be vocalized too, even though it usually isn't here (which I find pretty strange, since it's useful to have that in a dictionary). I can try to make such a module. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 11:28, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
It's no use since there is no practice to FULLY vocalise Urdu texts, even in dictionaries, let alone finding vocalised texts. Occasional symbols are used to make the reading easier. It doesn't hurt to experiment, though. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:32, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Urdu can be vocalized too, even though it usually isn't here (which I find pretty strange, since it's useful to have that in a dictionary). I can try to make such a module.
محترم بہت خوب امید ہے کہ آپ کامیاب ہوں BukhariSaeed (talk) 14:19, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
@BukhariSaeed: Good luck, you can probably use Module:fa-translit as a base for Module:ur-translit, it will require other parts to exist as well - Module:ur-translit/documentation, Module:ur-translit/testcases, Module:ur-translit/testcases/documentation. You need to assess, if it's all feasible to transliterate a vocalised Urdu unambigously and accurately. Note that if you want to distinguish pairs i/e, ē/ī, o/u, ō/ū, it may not be possible. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Something about linking Hindi to Persian that's been on my mindEdit

Hello AryamanA, it occurs to me there is an issue with the way that Persian and Hindi and Urdu are linked at the moment. When a Hindi word is mentioned as being from Persian it is the Tehran or kind of standard modern Iranian pronunciation (terminology?) that the Romanisation reflects. Good examples aren't coming to mind right now, but as a recent example کتاب مقدس, the pronunciation was probably closer to 'kitab' than 'ketab', 'bach[ch]a' rather than 'bach[ch]e' etc. (as I'm absolutely positive you know). In the earlier days of editing, I supposed it was hoped that some editors speaking Dari Persian (especially native speakers), would appear and formulate their own Romanisation system, add entries and so on, but for some reason it has never happened. I wonder if an intermediate solution is to link to the words without a transliteration? There does need to be a system of showing two transliterations, one Iranian and one from Afghanistan and there are a handful of entries which are Afghanistan-only where I haven't put a transliteration as to put the Iranian one and have it there alone would be wrong. Anyway, it's just a point that I have been thinking about. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 12:10, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Also, I thought I was online maybe a few weeks ago and someone (I thought it was you?) put an etymology section referring to a Tajiki entry as being 'from' Persian. I looked back through your entries but I couldn't find the edit (maybe it wasn't you?). Anyway, I would view that as incorrect. Thank you. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 12:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Incidentally, that is why I think the use of the new synonyms template and change of location is not suitable for Persian. When, in the future, there willbe two transliterations for Persian entries, it will be very long to have synonyms under each line like that. I mean something like, بچه bačče Iran bačča Afghanistan. That would make more sense for the Hindi entries as well. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 12:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Hindi and Urdu tended to borrow from Classical Persian (which is closer to Dari, you're right), so I have been trying to change {{bor|hi/ur|fa}} to {{bor|hi/ur|fa-cls}}, but I don't have any good Classical Persian resources. Also, why not something like بچه (I. bačče, A. bačča)? And something similar for headwords.
Yeah, that was probably me for Tajik, I may have misunderstood the relation between it and Persian. Tajik is descended from Classical Persian, though, is it not? —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 13:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


Why the quotation marks here? ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:11, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Tooironic: No reason really, I removed them. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 16:42, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Hindi usageEdit

Urdu speaking Christians use مقدس and مقدسہ for their saints and what is the hindi speaking Christians usage? — Bukhari (Talk!) 15:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: संत (sant) I think. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 16:42, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
In urdu سَنْت (sant) is used for Hindu & Sikh saints, ولی (wali) for Muslim saints and مقدس (muqaddas) for Christian saints (e.g. Saint Luke, in urdu مقدس لوقا {muqaddas luka}). Aryaman are you sure there is no specific word for Christian saints in Hindi? — Bukhari (Talk!) 16:50, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
@BukhariSaeed: I'm not really sure. I've also seen सेंट (seṇṭ), and the Hindi translation of the Bible uses पवित्र जन (pavitra jan, holy person), but I've never heard anyone say that. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 16:53, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
ok :( — Bukhari (Talk!) 17:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
@BukhariSaeed: Sorry :( —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 02:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


In moving बाटना, a broken redirect was left at बटाना, which was linked to from this page, which I bypassed in this diff; can you check that my edit was correct, or edit the page to whatever it should be linking to? - -sche (discuss) 23:52, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@-sche: It wasn't correct, but it's my fault for not fixing up my mess. It's kind of complicated, I've fixed all of the pages. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 00:22, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, for that and for fixing बटाना too! :) - -sche (discuss) 01:44, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


I'm not sure about this sentence. How would you write it in Hindi:
(You might be interested in the Hindi language Wikipedia.)
Is this correct?: आपको हिन्दी विकिपीडिया में रुचि हो सकती है। —Stephen (Talk) 03:05, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
@Stephen G. Brown: Not exactly, that says "You can/might be interested in Hindi Wikipedia". It's also a bit formal. Here are two possible translations (the first one is less formal):
शायद आप हिंदी विकिपीडिया में दिलचस्पी रखेंगे।
śāyad āp hindī vikipīḍiyā mẽ dilcaspī rakheṅge.
कदाचित आपको हिंदी विकिपीडिया में अभिरुचि होगी।
kadācit āpko hindī vikipīḍiyā mẽ abhiruci hogī.
AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 11:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, Aryaman. —Stephen (Talk) 12:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


Might as well in the spirit of the times right? 1 has a grammar of the Awadhi in the Padmavati, with a translation, and then much much more if you're interested. We can also use this to see what we want to do with Old and Modern Awadhi. DerekWinters (talk) 06:08, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Great find! Hopefully we won't have to censor any quotations lol. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 15:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

انگریزی ویکیپیڈیا منتظمEdit


آریامن صاحب آپ کسی ایسے صارف (یوزر) کو جانتے ہیں جو یہ سرگرم ہے اور وہ انگریزی ویکیپیڈیا پر منتظم (ایڈمن) ہے۔‎Bukhari (Talk!) 15:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: سلام! مجھے معاف کریں جناب، میں انگریزی وکیپیڈیا پر بہت کم لوگ جانتا ہوں.‎AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 20:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
جی کوئی بات نہیں :)‎Bukhari (Talk!) 02:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Proto Indo Aryan lemmasEdit

I can't tell what these recent entries are about. Excepting dʰr̥ẓḍʰás most of these (like ćʰoṭṭas) seem to be actually Proto Middle-Indo-Aryan or Proto Prakritic or something like that. Its not just because they lack a sanskrit word but rather the form and the shape is similar to the simplified and corrupted words that exist in Prakrits. You see , sanskrit words are rather complicated, reflecting earlier Indo-aryan and Indo-european words. Proto Indo Aryan is more archaic than even Sanskrit so it does not make much sense to haev words which are obviously corrupted later forms and label them as Proto Indo Aryan words. And why would you create bāppas when all dictionaries agree that Sanskrit वप्ता has given rise to these words? Regards —This unsigned comment was added by 2405:204:9387:6B0C:0:0:D9F:28AC (talk).

@2405:204:9387:6B0C:0:0:D9F:28AC: You are right, this has bothers me too. The problem is that we cannot trace back stuff like to the actual Proto-Indo-Aryan form. It could be *kṣotras, ṭṣotras, gẓʰotras, kṣoṣṭʰás, etc. and we don't know which one because we don't have the Sanskrit. Maybe we should add {{lb|inc-pro|Middle Indo-Aryan}} to the entries, or make a separate code for "Proto-Middle Indo-Aryan". @माधवपंडित.
वप्तृ (vaptṛ) can't be the ancestor, that would yield Prakrit vappa or vappu, the (ta) would be lost.
Also, I've seen you before right? You should make an account man, you could really help out with the sorry state of Indo-Aryan languages here. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 02:06, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, @AryamanA. Yes, I was around briefly in September and a bunch of times before that.
You see, I hesitated to join because I don't want an issue of sock puppetry or spam to be created since I and User:माधवपंडित share a residence for most days of a week (we're siblings). I mostly edit wikipedia as an IP and obviously he's into this more than I am, my interest is strictly dictionary, he's more for etymology, proto Indo european and stuff like that which is why he joined and I edited sporadically anonymously.
I think that "vaptā/vaptr" can fit because the descendants seem to fit: like you said the t was lost, and no modern language shows the t. Some other example I've compiled include:
Skt. argha -> Pkt. aggha -> Hi. āgh
Skt. abhra -> Pkt. abbha -> Hi. ābh
Skt. garbha -> Pkt. gabbha -> Hi. gābh.
Similary, Skt. vaptar -> Pkt. vappa -> Hi. bāp.
Let me know what you feel. Regards again.
@CueIn: Oh, I feel so stupid, I absolutely misinterpreted that. Yeah, वप्तृ (vaptṛ) is a perfect fit. It's strange that {{R:CDIAL}} and {{R:hi:McGregor}} don't mention it all though. The short a is kind of a problem, since we have Punjabi ਬਾਪ (bāp) instead of the expected ਬੱਪ (bappa) (Punjabi preserves consonant clusters). Still, I think it could work.
Thanks for making an account! Generally, if you tell that you are on a shared IP then there's no reason to fear blocking. Wiktionary is very lenient with sockpuppets anyways, as long as you don't use them maliciously. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 04:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
I was definitely giving *ćʰoṭṭas the stink-eye. --Victar (talk) 06:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
@Victar: So is "Proto Middle Indo-Aryan" the way to go? It's better to not introduce false accuracy by reconstructing *kṣotras, as the Proto-Indo-Aryan may have been. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 06:45, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
I would like it if we had a code for "Proto-Prakrit" (essentially the same as "Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan") and put *ćʰoṭṭas, *kuttas, *cauḍas (wide) under it. Kind of how we have Proto-Sogdic, Proto Armenian etc. Although wiktionary may turn out to be the only place that has "Proto-Prakrit/Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan", we can be more accurate and save Proto-Indo-Aryan for actual PIA words like *pHtā́, *śwā́ etc. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 08:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
"Proto-Prakrit" is a better name since "Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan" is too long. Perhaps all the Turner and other DSAL reconstructions can be given entries under "Proto-Prakrit/Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan". "Wiktionary turning out to be the only place that has "Proto-Prakrit" is a troublesome thought, but better for accuracy. So perhaps trees would have the hierarchy:
Indo-European [Term?]
Proto-Indo-Iranian [Term?]
Proto-Indo-Aryan [Term?]
Sanskrit [Term?]
"Proto-Prakrit/Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan" [Term?]
Prakrits [Term?]
Kutchkutch (talk) 09:27, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
@AryamanA, can your reverse engineer *ćʰoṭṭas to a PIA word? If so, I'd say just move that there and and have *ćʰoṭṭas be labeled a descendant. I don't mess with anything past PIA, but if Proto-Prakrit is attested in the literature, you can make a case to @-sche on it for a code. --Victar (talk) 15:08, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
@Victar: Prakrit simplifies clusters too much, it's just not possible to project backwards to PIA. I made the code pra-pro myself, since it's non-controversial and we already have pra for Prakrit. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 16:25, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
The point is that there are many PIA forms which this Proto-Prakrit term could have derived from and we definitely do not want to get speculative, especially with titles of pages in the reconstruction namespace. A Middle Indo-Aryan word need not necessarily have a PIA/Sanskrit/IIR etymon; innovations are found at every stage of language development. *ćʰoṭṭas may be such a word with no real PIA origin. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 16:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
@AryamanA, you should really run new codes by the Beer Parlour first, regardless of whether they're disputed or not. --Victar (talk) 16:34, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
@Victar: Yeah, you're right. I've made a discussion and pinged some people. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 16:49, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the analysis, @AryamanA. There are two possible explanations for Punjabi, firstly, it may be from Hindi, or this may be a legit PIA lemma. Hindi Sabasagara (the one which you introduced me to several months ago at the discussion for भाथा) gives वप्तृ as the origin, but I now see that they have gotten etymologies wrong on other words so this may not be correct. CueIn (talk) 13:51, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@CueIn: If we do move it to the Proto-Prakrit namespace then we can mention the possible Sanskrit Etymology there. Hindi Shabdsagar is generally okay, since it was actually written after Turner's CDIAL and so may rely on newer research. I wish we had better resources though, Turner's CDIAL is in need of an update.
@Kutchkutch, माधवपंडित: Looking at Google Books, Proto-Prakrit has been an idea since the 1960s, and many scholarly papers at least mention it. We wouldn't be the first to document it. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 14:47, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Wow! Does this mean we're going to get another new language? I sure am eager. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 16:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)


Hello User:AryamanA, I noticed that you reverted my edit to घंटा. If you look at any classic dictionary of Hindi-Urdu/Hindustani, the original spelling of the word in Urdu is گھنٹا, which is widely used. The spelling you reverted to is a modern Arabisation of the original spelling. This article actually does a good job of explaining why the alternate spelling گھنٹہ exists. In light of this information, I am going to restore the proper version of the article. If you are able to do so, I would also recommend moving گھنٹہ to گھنٹا so that گھنٹا is listed as the primary entry/spelling and گھنٹہ is listed as the alternate spelling. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam (talk) 15:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Anupam: گھنٹہ has >500,000 hits on Google while گھنٹا has only 20,000. I agree گھنٹا is more true to the etymology, but since we are a descriptive dictionary we document what's currently in use, not what's "correct". So I will not move the form, even though I agree گھنٹا is more "correct". Also, classical dictionaries like Platts and Fallon are hugely unreliable since they rely on outdated scholarship. I used to refer to them a lot before, but I've seen now that their etymologies are usually very wrong and the definitions are imprecise. Modern dictionaries like [2] and [3] are much better. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 18:37, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
But we're not exactly a descriptive dictionary are we? That's why we keep the nuqta forms as the main lemma, even when nuqta-less forms are significantly more popular on the internet. DerekWinters (talk) 20:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your thoughtful reply User:AryamanA. What are your thoughts User:DerekWinters? I think that the original spelling گھنٹا should be the primary article title with the recentism گھنٹہ listed as an alternate spelling. I also agree that it is very important to keep the nuqta forms as the primary article title, despite the fact that many publications (though not all) carelessly omit them. With regards, Anupam (talk) 21:13, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: That's because it's not convenient to have add a nuqta using most input methods. There's also a problem with the chandrabindu; I just switched to Gboard for Android and it doesn't even have a button on the Devanagari keyboard for the chandrabindu. Whereas ا and ہ are both easy to type on Urdu keyboard.
The nuqta is also important because it reflects pronunciation. (I also think we should have vocalization for Urdu, but that's another topic)
@Anupam: Even if we restrict to news articles, there are 285 hits for گھنٹہ and only 4 (!!) for گھنٹا. This leads me to believe that this "recentism" has become firmly adopted into formal Standard Urdu. I will make a proper redirect page for گھنٹا though. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 22:14, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
However the same articles that have the nuqta (not necessarily thought of as such though) under ड and ढ omit it for Arabic/Persian terms as a choice. I'm fully in favor of having the nuqta for those lemmas, but I do think we're certainly not as descriptive as we like to seem. DerekWinters (talk) 23:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: Yeah, you're right I guess, non-nuqta spellings are used way more often. One idea is to move the nuqta entries to non-nuqta forms and have a |head= in the headword template. That would be a lot of work though. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 23:59, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
I think it is better to be only partially descriptive, otherwise all misspellings and grammatical errors would have to be accepted. The nuqta spellings are better. DerekWinters (talk) 00:02, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
The nuqta forms should remain. Removing the nuqta often changes the word as a whole. For example, ख़ाना means place while खाना means food. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam (talk) 02:08, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Our Chinese entries have the lemmas at the traditional spelling rather than the more common simplified one because it's much simpler to convert traditional to simplified than the other way around, which is the same idea as that behind choosing the nuqta spelling as lemma. A lemma is a theoretical construct used for convenience and to avoid problems with keeping separate entries in synch on a wiki. That's not the same as choosing a main vs. alternative form based on "correctness". As for misspellings: we do have entries for the common ones, and some that are sanctioned by usage are treated as the main form. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:23, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

EWDC #4Edit

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

Equinox 23:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


1 You might like this. This website also has many other Indian linguistics papers. Also check out shodhganga if you get the chance, they have a huge selection too. DerekWinters (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Wow, that's really interesting stuff! Shodhganga looks neat too, since it has so many papers in Hindi (and other non-English languages) that are hard to find elsewhere. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 19:16, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
And this 2. @माधवपंडित as well. DerekWinters (talk) 20:18, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: Looks interesting, thanks! -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:58, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Kachchi (and Sindhi)Edit

@माधवपंडित The majority of sources indicate that a Vrachada (व्राचड) Apabhransha is the ancestor to Sindhi (and thus Kutchi). But some sources seem to say that व्राचड is from Paishachi prakrit. I don't know if we can find any material in Vrachada, and I think there's nothing extant in Paishachi. What do you think? DerekWinters (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: I think Paiśācī (and Avantī and Prācyā) probably deserves a code, but since we don't have any real corpus for it, I'm not sure if adding it as an ancestor of Sindhi is a good idea. Also Grierson says that Paiśācī existed parallel to Vrācaḍa, so the progression is unclear (but Grierson is also a very outdated resource).
About Vrācaḍa Apabhraṁśa, it definitely existed at some point so it deserves a code and should be marked as an ancestor of Sindhi et al. Probably inc-vra would be good.
On an unrelated note, I think the Eastern Hindi dialects actually arose from Ardhamāgadhī and not Māgadhī. The most obvious evidence is that Eastern Hindi lacks the merger of the sibilants to ś, it merges it to s like Ardhamagadhi. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 02:28, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
The ś may have also evolved into s after contact with Western languages, but that's only speculation, I have no time-frame to look at this from.
On an unrelated note, would it be fair, under चतुर्, for the cattāro prakrit forms to be descendants of the Ashokan prakrit term? DerekWinters (talk) 03:22, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Whoops, didn't look at your tag. DerekWinters (talk) 03:25, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: I doubt it since Old Awadhi didn't have ś either (but Bihari might, IDK). We'll see later.
The given Ashokan form is undoubtedly a northwestern dialect form (it has tp, the other dialects would have tt), but yeah it should be okay. Let's see what others have to say on the BP discussion before making it official though. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 03:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
That's true, and we can also reconstruct the other dialects, especially from evidence of phonological processes determined from other words. DerekWinters (talk) 03:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Also, we should make dialect-tagging (like in Coptic) mandatory with Ashokan Prakrit, even if the lemma is cited somewhere other than its main entry. DerekWinters (talk) 03:39, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: I agree. I already added dialect tags to all my earlier entries and made the labels as well as MOD:inc-ash:Dialects for {{alter}}. Check out CAT:Regional Ashokan Prakrit. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 03:40, 5 February 2018 (UTC)



محترم پتا نہیں کیوں مگر انگریزی میڈیاویکی کی طرح اردو لغت کا میڈیاویکی نہیں بن پا رہا ہے۔ انگریزی میں ایک خاص قسم کا بوکس بن رہا ہے مگر وہ اردو میں نہیں بن رہا ایسا کیوں؟ — بخاری (گفتگو!) 12:26, 5 فروری 2018 (یو ٹی سی)‎

@BukhariSaeed: آداب. دیر لگانے کے لئے میں مافی مانگتا ہوں. میں میڈیاویکی کے بارے زیادہ کچھ جانتا نہیں، مگر WT:Grease pit لوگ ہونگے جو آپ کی مدد کر سکتے ہیں.‎AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 17:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
کوئی بات نہیں ویسے بھی اب معاملہ سلجھ گیا ہے :)‎Bukhari (Talk!) 17:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
@BukhariSaeed: بڑھیا!‎AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 17:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

तरकारी (tarkārī)Edit

The author of the book I got it from learnt Hindi in Benares, so it may be dialectal: I do not know myself further than that.

The page in question:

I think it is, I've never heard it before. Delhi dialect uses more Persian borrowings generally; even शाक (śāk) is rare, सब्ज़ी (sabzī) is by far the most common. The prestige dialect of Urdu is in fact the dialect of Delhi so that might have something to with the Persianization. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 22:30, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
The Bengali তরকারি (tôrôkari) is quite common. DerekWinters (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: Dasa says Persian تره (tare) + -कारी (-kārī). —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 22:27, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Request for help (again)Edit

Hello, sorry to bother you but could you possibly delete this edit of mine, and the following ones that show the same text? I would really appreciate it. I have also asked User:Chuck Entz. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:37, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Sure, no problem. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 14:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you :) Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:50, 8 February 2018 (UTC) (talk)Edit

Has a couple of edits in Urdu and Sanskrit that need review if you don't mind. Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 23:46, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: It's a sock of User:Gfarnab. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 14:43, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Need HelpEdit

Can you please help me in removing transliteration of Urdu, Persian & Arabic languages from Urdu Wiktionary? (e.g. ویکی‌پدیا نقل حرفی درکار ہے) — Bukhari (Talk!) 11:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: I'm not sure, I have the same problem on Hindi Wiktionary. You could ask at WT:Grease pit. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 11:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
@BukhariSaeed:: What do you mean by removing transliterations? In order to remove, it needs to be automated but it can't be automated for these languages. How do automatically transliterate ہمت? It can be "himmat, hemt, himt, hamt, hammit, humut, hamat", etc. There is no infrastructure for this to happen. As far as I am concerned, Urdu, Persian and Pashto will always require manual transliterations. Arabic is already automatically transliterated but only on fully vowelled forms and not in all cases but in about 95% of cases. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:32, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
@Atitarev: BukhariSaeed is talking about Urdu Wiktionary. The imported modules there cause Urdu entries to say "transliteration needed" but that shouldn't be necessary because it's the Urdu Wiktionary. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 11:34, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
دھنیہ واد محترم آریامن!‎Bukhari (Talk!) 11:56, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


Can you please tell me the name for Caodaism in Hindi? — Bukhari (Talk!)

@BukhariSaeed: I think काओडाइ धर्म (kāoḍāi dharma) or काओदाइ धर्म (kāodāi dharma). —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 11:26, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you :) — Bukhari (Talk!) 11:56, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Niya PrakritEdit

This may interest you. DerekWinters (talk) 17:00, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Great find! Nowadays Niya Prakrit is usually called "Gandhari" (pgd). —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 17:47, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm fairly certain that Niya is in the Tarim basin, so wouldn't that not be Gandhari? DerekWinters (talk) 18:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: Oops, I was misled by [4]. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 22:52, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Interesting. I see that they're related, but I'm fairly certain they're different, esp with Niya being much more conservative. DerekWinters (talk) 22:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: It should probably get a code then. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 22:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters Hey, I didn't want to spam your talk page, but this Bundeli grammar is really cool. Bundeli also has a long history tho, so it may have the same problems as Old Braj and Old Awadhi vs. modern Braj and Awadhi.

That is quite cool, yeah we'll have to dig into the literature to see what we should do about it. DerekWinters (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Maybe we should make a Indic-languages discussion page, since otherwise everyone has to pinged repeatedly...AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 23:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea tbh. DerekWinters (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)


Sorry for spamming, but, for the gẓʰ sound in Proto-IA, which I presume lasted into other dialects of Vedic before forming Prakrit झ, what do you think of using ग्ष़ (ग्ष़ापयति) to transcribe it? Obviously this conjunct never existed historically, but it's no different than using gẓʰ in it's Romanization. DerekWinters (talk) 15:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: I think we would have to use ग्ष़्ह because it's aspirated (*gẓ is also a thing by itself). But yeah, I think it would make sense to have that. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 16:38, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Locking threatEdit

So, even though I created the entry, you're going to threaten to lock it because I'm using the declension template used in over 90% of Sanskrit entries, instead of the new, buggy one, which has yet to garnish unanimous community acceptance? That seems rather petty and an abuse of admin tools. --Victar (talk) 03:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: No, no, no, I didn't mean it like that. I *could* have locked it, but I want to reach a consensus, so I just commented it out. I really appreciate your work and would never abuse my admin tools like that in a disagreement. I'm really sorry for sounding threatening. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 03:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
When is it buggy? —*i̯óh₁nC[5] 05:35, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • garnishgarnerΜετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
    • On the contrary, I think unanimous community acceptance would look much better with a sprig or two of parsley. I'm just glad this is in my native language, because I've studied dozens of languages and taken classes in a fair number- but I'd have trouble saying much in anything but English...
Return to the user page of "AryamanA".