Talk:Punjabi language: Difference between revisions

This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Languages Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Punjab Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punjab, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Punjab on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PunjabWikipedia:WikiProject PunjabTemplate:WikiProject PunjabPunjab-related articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. India: Punjab High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (India) (assessed as Top-importance). This article was last assessed in March 2019. Pakistan High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

What is ਸਮਝੋ ਅਤੇ ਲਿਖੋ 59.89.82.16 (talk) 10:14, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understand (imperative) and write (imperative). عُثمان (talk) 21:20, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@نعم البدل Re-added the Punjabi IPA pronunciation with a source, just wanted to give you the full quotation for context since it is interesting.

> The Punjabi stress rules place stress on the penultimate syllable [dʒɑ]. In most other North Indian languages such as Hindi-Urdu, a syllable with a long vowel is normally an open syllable. But a recent tendency in Punjabi pronunciation is to turn even such such open syllables into closed ones by geminating the consonant of the following syllable and grabbing half of the consonant if the consonant is a tense one and can be geminated. The name of the language is most commonly pronounced by its speakers as [pəɲˈdʒɑb.bi], and not as [pəɲˈdʒɑ.bi]

From Bhardwaj (2016). Panjabi: A comprehensive grammar. Pg 88

Anecdotally, this reflects my experience hearing the word spoken as well and what I know about general Punjabi pronunciation tendencies. (I should actually find an audio to link there if there isn't one already.) The pronounciation without the gemination at the final syllable boundary is more of an Urdu/Hindi tendency than a Punjabi one. I am actually going to add the IPA short letter marker as b̆ on the first one since if we want to get really specific the first b is half length as explained here. عُثمان (talk) 21:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the tone section [kə˨ɾə̆] is described as high-falling; ˨ looks like low tone and I would have expected high-falling to be written something like ˥˩. [kə˦ɾə̆] is described as low-rising; ˦ looks like high tone and I would have expected low-rising to be written something like ˩˥. It seems like the rule is to take the first pitch of the tone, high or low, and then reverse it: high transcribed as low and low as high. This doesn't make sense to me and if it's intentional, the logic should be explained in the article. — Eru·tuon 18:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Erutuon These IPA transcriptions are just incorrect. There are other issues besides that, such as the word final vocalic release using the wrong character (it is also not necessary to include as it only manifests when a word is said on its own). Transcriptions typically also use attaching diacritics rather than separate tone letters as Punjabi only distinguishes broadly between high, level, and low. Some speakers will pronounce the high and low with a contour but it is not a factor in distinguishing words. Then the footnote about Indian vs. Pakistani dialects is entirely unsubstantiated—there is no such difference. I will redo these based on Punjabi University's print dictionary, which includes IPA transcriptions. عُثمان (talk) 14:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I have now updated the table and included references to the page numbers in the dictionary. I take back what I said about the significance of the vocalic release—in the context of tone, there is reason to indicate them. Since pronuncing this is not required for level tone monosyllable words, but always occurs for monosyllable high/low tone words if not followed by a word with level tone, I decided to include this in the IPA transcriptions. عُثمان (talk) 16:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

IAmAnEditor008 (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Add the Northwestern Indo-Aryan in the language family.[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Add it to where? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:02, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@UnbiasedSN: What is your issue with Pakistan being included specifically? It is officially recognised as a language in the Punjab province, both by the Punjab Assembly and in the Census. By your logic, Haryana, Delhi and West Bengal shouldn't be included either, and by that standard, all language infoboxes should be scrutinised. It's unreasonable. As far as the "Punjabic" term is concerned, it has been used previous in academic works, see Google Scholar. نعم البدل (talk) 01:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

show me a source. Otherwise stop crying and edit warring. UnbiasedSN (talk) 01:49, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only two source use Punjabic. Barely enough to claim as an actual word.... You need to so more research. UnbiasedSN (talk) 01:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@UnbiasedSN: If that's your behaviour, then I will report you. There are reliable references for both issues, and the term "Punjabic" and clear ambiguity between dialects of Punjabi, and Punjabic dialects/languages, however I am sensing some bad faith from your end. نعم البدل (talk) 01:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a source saying it's not "It is the official language of the Indian state of Punjab and is one of the languages recognized by the Indian constitution. In Pakistan Punjabi is spoken by some 70 million speakers, mostly in Punjab province, but official status at both the national and the provincial level is reserved for Urdu." By britannica. UnbiasedSN (talk) 01:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@UnbiasedSN: Urdu and Punjabi are both officially recognised by the Punjab assembly. In fact, Punjabi was recognised as the language of Punjab way before Urdu. Urdu was only recognised in Punjab recently. That does not warrant the removal of Pakistan from the list. The reference is directly taken from the Punjab laws, that supersedes, Britannica which likely didn't even know about it. نعم البدل (talk) 01:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting on source... UnbiasedSN (talk) 01:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The references were already included in the infobox, which you kept removing! نعم البدل (talk) 02:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Checked source. Not even credible. UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you say it's unreliable? That's a discussion for WP:RELIABLE, and certainly not for you to make an arbitrary call on. نعم البدل (talk) 02:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere does it even mention official status.... UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The act named "THE PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF LANGUAGE, ART AND CULTURE ACT 2004":

::::::::::Preamble.– Whereas it is expedient to provide for the establishment of the Punjab Institute of Language, Art and Culture for the patronage, promotion and development of language, art and culture in the Punjab and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto;

It is hereby enacted as follows:-

1. Short title, extent and commencement.– (1) This Act may be called the Punjab Institute of Language, Art and Culture Act 2004.

(2) It extends to the whole of the Punjab.

(3) It shall come into force at once.

I would say that's pretty conclusive that Punjabi has been officially recognised in the Province of Punjab. 🧐 نعم البدل (talk) 02:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not showing even the word official.... UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's literally a mandate; an act passed in the Punjab Assembly. How much more official do you want it to be? نعم البدل (talk) 02:14, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A mandate is completely different than recognition.... UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How so? This act established PILAC which regulates the Punjabi language, and informs the government on matters relating to the Punjabi language. Did you even bother reading the entire thing? It's more specific than the references given for the Indian states. The reference given for Haryana, doesn't even mention the word "official". نعم البدل (talk) 02:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then take out haryana... What's your point?

I've shown you a source where it says it's not officially recognized by the most trusted source ever. Then you proceed to show me not even a proper source but an excerpt. UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify what you mean by "proper source", [punjablaws.gov.pk] is a reliable government source. What is your issue exactly? نعم البدل (talk) 02:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you even gone on the site you sourced? Nowhere does it say anything about punjabi being recognized as an official language. This conversation with you is going no where... UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLUESKY That act was a major development for the Punjabi language in Punjab; it does not need to specifically clarify that it's "officially" recognises Punjabi, because that is the whole point of the act! نعم البدل (talk) 02:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If Britannica says the sky is blue it's blue... If Britannica says it's not recognized as an official language it's not an official language... Glad to see you resorted to going to Admins for your POV pushing. UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Britannica does not pass laws in Pakistan. It has not acknowledged the act that was passed in 2004, or has talked about it, and it is also wrong or contradicting since Sindhi is also an "provincial official" language in Sindh as per Britannica itself [1](!), and more recently Pashto in KPK [ref]. Simply put Britannica is wrong. نعم البدل (talk) 02:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And Britannica was updated on Mar. 26, 2024. Can you please kindly show another 3rd party source showing it's recognition. Also, "Simply put Britannica is wrong..." WOW. UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:50, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reference for the recognition of which language? I literally showed you Britannica has contradicted itself. Sindhi is literally an official language in Sindh and Britannica itself has mentioned it? نعم البدل (talk) 02:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not talking about sindh... Stop trying to change the topic. Please stick to the topic at hand which you can't even back up. This is clearly a blatant attempt at POV pushing. UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on a minute.

Britannica says regarding the Punjabi language in Pakistan:

• but official status at both the national and the provincial level is reserved for Urdu.

Yet when it comes to Sindhi it has explicitly stated:

• spoken by about 23 million people in Pakistan, mostly living in the southeastern province of Sindh, where it has official status

That is contradicting itself. Go learn what "POV pushing" actually means before throwing it around. Britannica is literally wrong here.

The Punjab laws clearly indicate that Punjabi is an officially recognised language in the Punjab. The fact that you cannot accept this is concerning. نعم البدل (talk) 03:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Show a source then... Any 3rd party source. As proper research is due in this case. You obviously can't accept the facts that it's not recognized. In this case, you are obviously POV pushing. You're whole editing history is showing hints of linguistic gatekeeping. UnbiasedSN (talk) 03:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. You barged in hailing Britannica as some intensely reliable source and now you're backtracking on it, and 2. Punjab Institute of Language, Art & Culture (PILAC) was established in September, 2004 for patronage, promotion and development of Punjabi Language. source: PILAC itself, or are you now going to argue that the institute which regulates the Punjabi language in Pakistan is now also wrong and POV pushing? Lmao. نعم البدل (talk) 03:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. Britannica still stands. Stands stronger than your argument to be honest. Yet, I still see no other source mentioned by you. Obvious POV pushing due to such strong convictions without proper research. UnbiasedSN (talk) 03:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just showed you Britannica contradicts itself, it's a bit amusing to see you still hail it as reliable in this case. Does Britannica also regulate the Punjabi language by any chance? 😂 نعم البدل (talk) 03:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I brought two references:

1. Punjabi laws.

2. PILAC itself

None of them are reliable for you, but apparently a site which contradicts itself is reliable. 😂 نعم البدل (talk) 03:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not credible. Mandates doesn't equal recognition by Pakistan government. Find credible sources please. LMAO

[2] UnbiasedSN (talk) 03:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the objectives which the PILAC act hoped to achieve:

• advise the Government on all matters of policy relating to promotion of the Punjabi language, art and culture;
• facilitate and patronise research activities and programmes regarding the Punjabi language, literature, art and culture representing various regions of the Punjab;
• enrich Punjabi language enabling it to absorb the advancements in Science and Technology, and progress of modern society;
• collect, preserve and arrange books of classical and modern Punjabi literature and set up a reference library with modern facilities and provisions for the common users and research scholars;
• prepare or cause to prepare dictionaries and encyclopedia in the Punjabi language;
• enable the Punjabi language to serve as a rich source for broadening the scope, usages and dimensions of the Urdu language;
• interact with cultural and literary institutions, organizations, and libraries in the Punjab and other Provinces of Pakistan engaged in the promotion of language and culture;
• interact and collaborate with various institutions, established all over the world, with a view to promoting Punjabi language, art and culture;

That sounds and acts like an official language. I wonder if the Indian government was this specific. 🧐

نعم البدل (talk) 03:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say it has official recognition... WOW... This is so sad.... There's a chinese cultural society in my neighborhood that has similar goals... Does that mean chinese is an official language of the USA.. Promotion does not equal Recognition...This is a clear and shut case. This is such a pathetic attempt at POV pushing. UnbiasedSN (talk) 03:32, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]