Talk:Assamese alphabet

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

Merge with Bengali script?[edit]

Since both the Bengali script and Assamese script pages basically deal with the same information, we could merge these two into the "Bengali-Assamese Script" article. I could definitely, however, imagine that there could be people on both sides of the putative merger who would be vehemently opposed. What do you all think? --SameerKhan 05:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this should be merged with Bengali, under a rubric "Use of Bengali script for Assamese". -- Evertype·✆ 18:20, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree - although they are mostly identical, it's useful to separate out Assamese because there are additional letters and some major differences in pronunciation. Girlchick (talk) 20:36, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I completely disagree with "Evertype" (who is he?)-anyway, the jerks like him is actually making Bengali's unacceptable by assamese people as despite many proofs provided against that Assamese script is sourced from Bengali script, they still tries to put such comments. Shame Bengalis !!!

Actually the correct quote should be- "Assamese & Bengali script are from same source- Nagari script".

I disagree with SameerKhan too... by Azad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.99.189.62 (talk) 17:26, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just a run-of-the-mill expert in the world's writing systems. Don't mind me. But It is not "useful" to separate Assamese because it has a few additional letters. Icelandic has a few additional letters that English doesn't have, but both of them use the Latin script. The name for he script that is used to write both the Bengali and Assamese languages is Bengali. The encoded script used for both of them is Bengali. The rest is non-encyclopaedic POV. -- Evertype·✆ 21:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The three "zô"s, and "eeio"[edit]

So someone has changed the three letter-"zô"s in the table to be called "jô", "jhô", and "zô". Unless I am totally mistaken, aren't these letters all pronounced the same in assamese? I believe that there is variation across speaker - where some people say "z", others say "j"... but I don't think that anyone pronounces the three letters as different from each other, right?

I'm not 100% familiar with this language, but I know that all the research I have seen in the language has agreed that the three letters are not distinguished in modern Assamese pronunciation, similar to the situation of the three letter-"xô"s.

Would anyone be able to fill me in on this, so I can make the appropriate revisions to the chart if necessary?

Also - how is the name of the letter described as "eeio" pronounced? Isn't it just "io"? It seems odd to have four vowels ("eeio") in the name.

--SameerKhan 17:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would say the "jh" sound exists in Assamese (ঝ). But this is from what I imagine I have heard, and leave it to the experts to decide. I would imagine that জ and য are very similarly pronounced. The letter ঞ is called "niyo" but pronounced "iyo" with slight nasalization. So "eeio" is definitely wrong. Chaipau 23:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed the ঝ "jh" sound exists in Assamese, like in jhorna ঝৰ্ণা = jhorna. However জ and য are pronounced the same. Regarding "eeio", are you referring to য় (ôntôsthô yô)? Now, the table looks Ok. So is for ঞ (nio). Bikram98 18:20, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added info from the Bengali script article[edit]

I copy-pasted material from the Bengali script article, and modified it for Assamese. Since I'm not an expert on the Assamese letter names, it'd be really helpful if someone could go through and check that I changed the Bengali letter names correctly to fit to Assamese alphabet. Please feel free to add more information, and if you have questions about what I added, please let me know. Thanks! --SameerKhan 02:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The modifiers[edit]

As far as I am aware traditionally the modifiers are placed with the consonants. The last four entries in the consonants are always ৎ, ং, ঃ and ৺. Should they be placed with the consonants or separately as modifiers here? Chaipau 20:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Script[edit]

It's time to see that "Assamese script" redirects to "Assamese alphabet" as if there's no script named so. It's time that we work towards creating the script page separately (sans the "Eastern Nagari" tag of course) putting all the correct references in due places. ‍‍‍Gitartha.bordoloi (talk) 19:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assamese script redirects to Assamese alphabet. As does Bengali script to Bengali alphabet. Chaipau (talk) 15:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
so is "script" and "alphabet" the same thing? Gitartha.bordoloi (talk) 19:19, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The page was moved with the following comment: "moved Assamese script to Assamese alphabet: we use 'alphabet' for the main segmental scripts; we should be consistent with the others". And "A segmental script has graphemes which represent the phonemes (basic unit of sound) of a language." Defined here. So it is appropriate. Chaipau (talk) 16:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rather, it is misleading and mistaken. We'll have to take this up in the WikiProject. -- Evertype·✆ 21:28, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kanai Baraxiboa rock inscription.png Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Kanai Baraxiboa rock inscription.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why Eastern Nagari?[edit]

There is no existence of any concept like "Eastern Nagari". It is a term which got termed in Wikipedia itself in the Bengali Script page. Please do not use the same to bring Assamese Script also under its belt. Even many Bengali linguists have proved that Bengali Script is no way related to Nagari. Therefore, Assamese too cannot be termed as a variant of Nagari Script.

Please follow these links: 1. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=C9MPCd6mO6sC&pg=PA88&dq=bengali+script+nagari&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YoEBT73lJcra0QH0qsjABQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=bengali%20script%20nagari&f=false

2. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=GvZKk7WZEy8C&pg=PA133&dq=bengali+script+nagari&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YoEBT73lJcra0QH0qsjABQ&ved=0CFsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=bengali%20script%20nagari&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.245.26.164 (talk) 10:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The name Eastern Nagari does not in anyway mean it has anything to do with the Nagari script. It is used as a place holder for the class of scripts that emerged in Eastern India and used for many languages like Assamese, Bengali, Maithili, besides Manipuri, Bishnupriya Manipuri and even such languages as Bodo etc. In the scholarly literature, this script is called Bengali script (see Mahendra Bora, The Evolution of Assamese script, 1981, Asam Sahitya Sabha, p4). It was decided that the use of Bengali to denote this class of scripts for so many languages is not appropriate in Wikipedia, and among various suggestions, it was decided to call it Eastern Nagari script. Chaipau (talk) 11:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with the term "Eastern Nagari" is that it was coined in Wikipedia by a few Wikipedia Editors, which itself is wrong. Check this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_neologisms#Neologisms You have admitted that this was started in Wikipedia itself. Let the scholarly literature be updated by scholars doing original research. Using the term "Eastern Nagari" will mislead them. Let them come up with a new term, if any, to suit the interest of one and all, and not only of the Wikipedia community. Please try to understand. You cannot just decide something here and impose on the people. satyakamd (satyakamd) 23:59, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Eastern nagari" is a neologism for what? From the discussion it is clear that it is a placeholder where a number of eastern Indian scripts are discussed, in a non-language specific manner. If a scholar is misled by a Wikipedia article, he is no scholar. "Eastern nagari" is not a synonym for the Assam-Bengali script which has been in vogue since the use of the printing press and which has evolved somewhat since its inception in the 18th century (here, it should be pointed out, Assamese-Bengali is a neologism because officially this is the Bengali script). And the Assamese-Bengali script is not identical to the script that had been used for Assamese before the advent of the printing press. Assamese alphabet is language specific and is meant to cover the usage of scripts both in the the Assamese-Bengali as well as the medieval Assamese phases with relevant historical notes that would cover the earlier Kamrupi as well as the proto-Assamese scripts. I hope this would clarify the issues. Chaipau (talk) 10:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are trying to justify a placeholder, a name which the wikipedia editors decided to call a 'lost' script, which however is a new coinage of the term. Therefore your placeholder, by all means, turns out to be a Neologism, which by Wikipedia rules, cannot be a justifiable term to merit reference to. I know what you are trying to explain, but you are here trying to justify a neologism, which itself is wrong. Please introspect. Had it been an old term, historically proven by scholars, I would not have raised this objection. Satyakamd (talk) 10:39, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The neologism argument has not been accepted yet, so please do not remove references to Eastern Nagari alphabet from the article.
Let me reiterate to you why "Eastern Nagari alphabet" is not a neologism but a placeholder. The scholarly literature will tell you that the term used for the class of scripts in eastern India is "Bengali" (see the discussion in Mahendra Bora, especially his comments on Dani that there is no independent Assamese script). Mahendra Bora quotes from G H Ojha: The Bengali script sprang up from the Nagari script as prevalent in the eastern region of India, that is, around Magadha, the specimens of which are to be found in the numerous rock-inscriptions, land-grants and coins of Bihar, Bengal, Mithila, Nepal, Assam and Orissa (page 4). Thus, the name Bengali was/is used for a wide variety of scripts not all associated with the Bengali language. I tried to contribute to the Bengali script article in this spirit but soon realized that it was too Bengali language centric and cannot be used for this class of scripts. Others felt it too, and thus the Eastern Nagari alphabet article was created. The name "Assamese-Bengali", on the other hand denotes an entirely different thing. It describes the script that came together after the printing was introduced and Assamese and Bengali began to be printed from the same set of characters. Mahendra Bora insists that this script has just a "slender thread" connecting it to the past independent development of the Assamese script (page 13). To insist that the Assamese script is a variant of Assamese-Bengali script would rob it of much of its independent development prior to the advent of the printing press.
So you have it. Call the article "Eastern Nagari alphabet" "Bengali alphabet" after Ojha—but you have a "Bengali alphabet" article already, describing something else altogether. So even if you call it a neologism, it is a necessary neologism, and we cannot escape from the fact that we will have to use a name other than "Bengali" for it. If you think you are trying to insist that one should not call the Assamese-Bengali "Bengali" (as the Unicode consortium has done) by objecting to the name "Eastern Nagari", you are mistaken, because these are two different issues.
Chaipau (talk) 08:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why Assamese alphabet[edit]

  • Since currently Unicode does not show any script by name Assamese script; why do you need this page?
  • In your consonant cluster section shouldn't it be kkô instead of kka as you defined consonant kô and so on for all conjuncts?

Kurmaa (talk) 14:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Simple answer to your Question, Wikipedia is not based on Unicode, it depends on all possible and valid references, there are several scripts in world which are not yet covered by Unicode. The controversy will never end between Assamese and Bengali Scripts, but I think there should little reason to complain a Article named Assamese Alphabet. Dipankar Chetia 19:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge!!![edit]

Merge the Bengali script and Assamese script articles as Bengali-Assamese script, As Bengali language and Assamese language shares the same writing script (with exception of three alphabets in difference), both language scripts have the same origin and style of use. Both articles can be merged as Bengali-Assamese script as only Bengali and Assamese (and related influenced minor languages like Bishnupriya Manipuri and Kokborok) use this script, and is unique in it's use in Bengali and Assamese, and hence also does'not have a specific name as Devanagari script has. So it shall be as Bengali-Assamese script, The same script shall not be separated in to two. As Bengali-Assamese script article is created it can have a note on the three letter variations. Hope for Positive thoughts. Thank you. BijoyChakrabarty (talk) 16:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: This has been tried before and it did not work. Look at the past discussions in the two talk pages. Chaipau (talk) 16:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Even if visually similar, there are so many differences in pronunciations between the two languages, it is better to keep them separate. Bikram98 (talk) 04:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ISO 15924 code[edit]

Hi! At ISO 15924#List of codes Assamese is not mentioned. What wikidata property value ISO 15924 alpha-4 or numeric code (P506) should be added at Assamese (Q29401) and Assamese Wikipedia (Q8559119)? Regards Gangleri also aka I18n (talk) 17:10, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Assamese alphabet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Consonant clusters[edit]

@Klbrain:, @Chaipau: Hi the section "consonant clusters" contains lots of misleading informations. Sound that don't exist in Assamese phonology, like dental and cerebral consonants are mentioned there. The Assamese orthography is based on traditional and Sanskrit rules so the names of the letters are like "long i, retroflex t, dental d, retroflex r" etc which mislead people. The phonology is very different from the spellings. Msasag (talk) 13:15, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If it's wrong and unreferenced, then feel free to delete it; if it's wrong and referenced, feel free to add a referenced qualifier. I was involved in the merge, but not in the creation of the text added with the merge, so your expertise in identifying right from wrong is very helpful! Klbrain (talk) 14:43, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 August 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 18:02, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Assamese alphabet → Assamese script – Abugida not an alphabet. AleksiB 1945 (talk) 14:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 18:32, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. This article is about the form of the Bengali–Assamese script used to write the Assamese language. The proposed title does not currently redirect here. I am not comfortable with the distinction we are making between 'alphabet' and 'script' in this case, but it needs a wider discussion. Srnec (talk) 16:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Abugidas are alphabets, so that's irrelevant. Although we do use Daniels & Bright terminology for classification, we don't use it for article titles. This convention, of 'script' for the writing system and 'alphabet' for the adaption of a script to a particular language, has been WP consensus for a decade or more. The Assamese script is the same as the Bengali script. The Assamese alphabet is the adaptation of that script to Assamese, which is what this article is about. If you want to change that consensus, per WP:CONSISTENCY we need a centralized discussion, rather than just picking at the edges with separate RMCs. — kwami (talk) 10:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chaipau: Can you point us to where this was decided? Or where it is written? Thanks, Srnec (talk) 22:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Srnec: I believe this is it—Wikipedia:Naming conventions (writing systems). Chaipau (talk) 22:50, 21 August 2022 (UTC) (edited) 23:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Chanban[edit]

Wt 49.14.157.211 (talk) 22:25, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ছতমঢ়রয মৃত্যুন।ক।ঢপথযাত্রীদের। যে হয়[edit]

ন 103.242.219.94 (talk) 16:22, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Assamese_alphabet&oldid=1198357249"