Talk:Kamrupi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edit War on Kamrupi[edit]

The edit war from yesterday has me a bit confused. Would Kamrupi redirect to the disambiguation page or somewhere else? That might be closer to the issue under dispute, not the title of the dab page. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 20:30, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should remain the same, just as in Assamese. It is likely people will link to [[kamrupi]] while editing and readers can take their pick. The [[kamrupi]] in the linking page can be corrected later. Chaipau (talk) 20:53, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to add that Kamrupi (disambiguation) should redirected to Kamrupi. Chaipau (talk) 20:55, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whether [[kamrupi]] redirects to [[kamrupi (disambiguation)]] or vice versa, the reader's experience is the same. Are there policies that prioritize one over the other? — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 21:17, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The naming convention seems to be this: "the disambiguation page is the ambiguous term itself" Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Naming_the_disambiguation_page. So [[kamrupi]] seems appropriate to me. Chaipau (talk) 22:14, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so [[Kamrupi (disambiguation)]] would only make sense if [[Kamrupi]] was the title of an article.
Bhaskarbhagawati, are you of the opinion that Kamrupi dialect or Kamarupi Prakrit should be renamed to Kamrupi? — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 23:13, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That’s right. Actually both Kamarupi Prakrit and Kamrupi dialect are within one article named Kamrupi till few weeks ago,discussing its ancient origin and remnant today as dialect in section allotted. In Kamrupi disambiguation page, Kamrupi can be stay as item referring to said language.bbhagawati (talk) 04:46, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, then we're putting the cart before the horse here. We need to come to an agreement about those articles first. I see only two ways that the move to [[Kamrupi (disambiguation)]] would work. Either those two articles merge into one article named "Kamrupi" (what you're proposing) or one of them is renamed to "Kamrupi" (something that hasn't been proposed but is certainly a possibility). If we agree on one of those things, the presence of [[Kamrupi (disambiguation)]] as the disambiguation page will be practically automatic. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 05:01, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think merging and renaming as Kamrupi is better option.bbhagawati (talk) 06:54, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Kamarupi Prakrit" and "Kamrupi dialect" are two different things, that need different article spaces. I have made the arguments in Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit. Neither Kamarupi Prakrit nor Kamrupi dialect qualify to be called Kamrupi. Because Kamrupi could mean "Kamrupi dialect", "Kamrupi Lokgeet", "Kamrupi people" many different aspects of the region of Kamrup. Chaipau (talk) 13:11, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Kamarupi Prakrit" and "Kamrupi dialect" are two different things, that need different article spaces. I have made the arguments in Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit.I have provided sources for same. Neither Kamarupi Prakrit nor Kamrupi dialect qualify to be called Kamrupi. Because Kamrupi could mean "Kamrupi dialect", "Kamrupi Lokgeet", "Kamrupi people" many different aspects of the region of Kamrup.Kamrupi is basically an language, so will be known by same. For people it will be Kamrupi people and for Lokgeet it wil be Kamrupi Lokgeet etc.bbhagawati (talk) 14:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Usually, when there's an article on a people and on a language where both use the same word (e.g. Spanish, Polish, Japanese), the format is to title the former as X people, the latter as X language, and use X as a disambiguation page. See WP:Naming conventions (languages)#Languages and their speakers. Since this is really about the merge, though, we should keep this discussion at Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 15:54, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you are saying but here problem is that if you name it as dialect then it do injustice to its history and vice versa nor we can keep two articles for same subject. So Kamrupi name can accomodate the entire article or other option is renaming the same as Kamrupi language. bbhagawati (talk) 06:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kamarupi Prakrita / Kamrupi Prakrit[edit]

Since this is really about the merge, though, we should keep this discussion at Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit.

Kurmaa (talk) 11:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why Wikipedia uses derogatory term Lower Assam[edit]

Kurmaa (talk) 11:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ahom Ahomese/Assamese & Ethnocentrism[edit]

  • To avoid any ambiguity, let me define Ahom as of or related to Ahom kingdom, e.g., Ahom-goods, Ahom-man, Ahom-woman, Ahom-culture, Mongoloid-Ahom, Dravidian-Ahom, Tai-Ahom, … … … while Tai-Ahom (a branch of Mongoloid-Ahom) are the people whose ancestors immigrated from that time Thailand and established Ahom kingdom in eastern part of Kamarupa.
  • From day one the Tai-Ahom entered in Eastern Kamarupa they had no choice but to learn to speak in local language. There were no systematic language-learning approaches out there. They then occupied and form kingdom right there. So from day one this Ahom dialect or Ahomese was started as part of learning difficulties. Ahomese is what is Assamese.

Kurmaa (talk) 22:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Kamrupi and modern Standard Assamese are considered two dialects of the same language. Modern Kamrupi is not a dialect (or group of dialects) of Standard Assamese. If we say "Kamrupi is an Assamese dialect" is the objection that it might seem like we are saying that Modern Kamrupi is a dialect of Standard Assamese or is somehow subservient to it? — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 23:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you accept that modern English is a dialect of old English?
  • Say that you accept it, then you are correct in saying that modern Kamrupi is a dialect of old Kamrupi (same language).
  • Modern Kamrupi is not a dialect (or group of dialects) of Standard Assamese. -This is correct.
  • If we say "Kamrupi is an Assamese dialect" -No you cannot say that because it not only undermines fundamentals like Grimm's law, dialect formation due to (a) foreign occupation (b) geographical isolation (c) phonemic deficiency, ... but also undermines scholarly moral.
Kurmaa (talk) 16:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, modern English is not a dialect of the Old English. Look at List of dialects of the English language. You will notice that even BBC English is listed. As is Standard American English. Likewise, Kamrupi is a dialect of the Assamese language. The standard Assamese (that you read in newspapers, books etc), eastern Assamese (that you hear around Sibsagar) etc are all "dialects" of the Assamese language. Kamrupi itself has sub-dialects. Assamese language is a group of a different varieties of "speech" that share some common characteristics, which could be linguistic features, literature, etc. Your notion that a dialect is somehow derived from a language is wrong. As is the notion that calling Kamrupi a dialect is giving it an inferior position. It is not.
Chaipau (talk) 01:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Assamese is a dialect of Kamrupi, but Assamese became the state language for political reasons. Scroll up to read that highlights scientific reasons how a dialect may form. -Kurmaa (talk) 02:02, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kamarupi or Kamrupi[edit]

Kamarupi or Kamrupi can mean of or related to Kamarupa or Kamrup.

Here spellings Kamarupa and Kamarupi are for Sanskrit usage, while Kamrup and Kamrupi are for non-Sanskrit (including current day) usage.

Again, here the term Kamrup is used for greater undivided Kamrup. This is present Western Assam, present Cooch Behar state, some areas in present Bangladesh, and some in present mountain kingdom Bhutan.

Some Examples:

Kurmaa (talk) 18:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The three-revert rule[edit]

Observe that on the surface it appears users Aeusoes1 and Chaipau works together enabling to get away with this Wikipedia:3RR#The_three-revert_rule, for example after Aeusoes1 without a delay Chaipau takes over in edit war.

Kurmaa (talk) 15:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget Bkonrad.
Nobody agreed with your edits. That's a sign that you don't have consensus. Simply reverting reversions doesn't suddenly make your edits agreeable.
Moreover, it looks more like you were putting your opinionated commentary in article space after being unable to gain any favor in related talk pages. You've been here long enough to know that that kind of thing is contrary to Wikipedia's goals. In other words, you were acting in bad faith.
You were vandalizing, plain and simple. 3RR doesn't apply to vandalism. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 15:31, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was to explore further whether user Aeusoes1 and Chaipau have been teaming up in order to use Wikipedia:3RR#The_three-revert_rule without getting warning - the duo have been long enough in Wikipedia.
  • Here, one does not need 2 folders/topics Kamarupi Prakrit and Kamrupi Dialect, but s(he) needs one folder/topic Kamrupi or Kamarupi (in Unicode Devanagari कामरुपी) where from past to present Kamrupi shall be presented in a manner appropriate displaying unbroken thread in order to uphold scholarly moral - Kamrupi is not a dialect of Assamese / Ahomese - Kamarupi Prakrit and Kamrupi Dialect shall be merged.
Kurmaa (talk) 18:08, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's already a merge proposal at Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit. So far, the arguments for a merge have been unconvincing but there's no reason to put another proposal for the same outcome here. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 18:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fine, users shall discuss merger stuff in Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit.
  • But what is the matter with users Aeusoes1 and Chaipau that duo have been teaming-up to make Kamrupi a dialect of Assamese (Ahomese) in Wikipedia?
Kurmaa (talk) 15:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have sources that say otherwise? — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 15:47, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BBhagawati has now found a source that says Kamrupi is a dialect of Bengali too ([1])!! Chaipau (talk) 17:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's a dialect continuum, so Kamrupi shares more features with North Bengali than Standard Assamese does. There's similar variation in classification with Galician and Portuguese, though it's between considering Galician a separate language or not. Not sure if one source is enough to really change how we classify Kamrupi at Wikipedia. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 18:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's true, but it does not look to me that BBhagawati is trying to drive toward dialect continuum. Chaipau (talk) 03:13, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, it does not say anywhere in (Goswami 1970: 1) that Kamrupi is a Bengali dialect. Chaipau (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is he saying there's a separate Kamrupi dialect of Bengali? I'm not so sure if it would be relevant to that article. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 13:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
He is claiming that Kamrupi is a dialect of both Assamese and Bengali. This is what I inferred after reading the reference he has cited. The basis for claiming this is a general comment the author makes on dialectal continuum that Kamrupi forms with North Bengal in a concluding part of a section. This is probably the first time I have heard it being said, so I find this surprising. Nevertheless, we now have a profusion of boxed quotes placed random in the article that look like billboards. Chaipau (talk) 06:11, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would make more sense if the author said Goalparia (the dialect group to the west of Kamrupi and contiguous with North bengali) instead of Kamrupi. Chaipau (talk) 07:24, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kamrupi&oldid=1202099376"