Talk:Central Indo-Aryan languages

Languages Mid‑importance

	Language portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

India Mid‑importance

	India portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was last assessed in January 2021.

Khariboli

Shouldn't the Khariboli in the list of Hindi languages be replaced with Hindustani, it 'only' being the main dialect of Hindustani? --JorisvS (talk) 09:43, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bhojpuri

At least by some sources, it seems, Bhojpuri is mentioned along with (most of) the Hindi languages: [1]. Thoughts about what to do with this? --JorisvS (talk) 10:39, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Wrong Hindi. It's not Central Zone. — kwami (talk) 20:23, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Right, I forgot about the Hindi language (Hindi belt). --JorisvS (talk) 13:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - I really wish we had clearer names. — kwami (talk) 21:13, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Bhojpuri should be removed from this article. Bhojpuri is listed on several pages as being a Bihari (Eastern Indic) language, not a Hindi (Central Indic) language. Nicole Sharp (talk) 09:53, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hindi languages

Why is this page called Hindi languages when it's clearly only Central Zone Hindi encompassing only minor dialects?Filpro (talk) 16:58, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly 'encompassing only minor dialects'. This is a subbranch of the Indo-Aryan branch, and as such includes multiple languages, including the de facto national language of India. The terms are synonymous: Central Zone = Hindi languages (though the other uses of 'Hindi' are not). --JorisvS (talk) 21:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is confusing. It is good that we did not use Glottolog otherwise it will become more subbranch. Any issue in just having Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan as simple qualification ? Something like Britannica http://www.britannica.com/topic/Hindi-language. We can still mention all Zone and branches in the separate sections on same page.PradeepBoston (talk) 19:37, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 June 2023

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.

It was proposed in this section that Central Indo-Aryan languages be renamed and moved to Hindi languages.

result:
Withdrawn – see [below] for nom's statement. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; everyone stay healthy! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 18:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move logs: source title · target title

This is template {{subst:Requested move/end}}

Central Indo-Aryan languages → Hindi languages – As per WP: CONSISTENCY, WP:RECOGNIZABILITY, WP:COMMONNAME [2] and WP:NATURALNESS of article title. The current title is a technical one which most readers probably might not recognise which is a violation of guidelines mentioned in WP:article title. A more natural and recognizable title like Hindi languages (currently, a redirect to this page) which also the WP:COMMONNAME of the article subject will aid readers greatly. The article will also be consistent with other similar articles like Rajasthani languages and Bihari languages. Individual article pages for sub-groups of Indo-Aryan languages like Western, Eastern, Northern and Central also do not exist. PadFoot2008 (talk) 13:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: have reverted procedural close – please see #Discussion after 1st closure subsection below. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 22:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose First, one correction. The article Eastern Indo-Aryan languages does exist. Further, here is a slightly altered Ngram view[3] that give at least a few attestations of "Central Indo-Aryan".

However, my main point is that we might have to go a step back: is the grouping covered by this article (whether called Central Indo-Aryan or Hindi languages) actually a thing in linguistic classification? A look at the table in Indo-Aryan_languages#Subgroups shows that there are indeed many sources that define some kind of Central group (or 'zone') for the Indo-Aryan languages, but none except for Kausen (2006), which is a tertiary source not specialized in Indo-Aryan linguistics, defines the Central Indo-Aryan languages the way we do here. Moving this page to "Hindi languages" will not heal this, because here "Hindi" is not a classificatory but a sociolinguistically defined term. Certainly, the varieties covered in this article are commonly considered to be Hindi, but not as distinct languages in a linguistic subgroup called "Hindi languages", but as dialects of a sociolinguistically demarcated Hindi language (singular!), in all its fuzziness (cf. the Bhojpuri debate). And we already have an article about this, viz. Hindi Belt.

The only correct solution if we want to keep the information in this article is to split it into two: Western Hindi and Eastern Hindi. –Austronesier (talk) 16:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One primary reason why I wanted to move this page was indeed the fact that a classification called Central Indo-Aryan Languages did not correspond to Eastern and Western Hindi languages consistently and thus the article being called Hindi languages will be more accurate (Eastern Hindi + Western Hindi languages). Also Hindi belt doesn't refer to the region were languages grouped arbitrarily under Hindi are spoken, rather it corresponds to the region where Hindi is the lingua franca but not necessarily the native language. Both are different. Also Eastern and Western Hindi languages aren't dialects of a language called "Hindi". Standard Hindi and Hindustani are one of the various languages within the Hindi languages and referring to others as it's dialects would be incorrect. Similar to how all Rajasthani languages are dialects of Standard Rajasthani. The Hindi languages are a group languages not dialects of a singular language. PadFoot2008 (talk) 08:08, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Hindi Belt is the area where speakers of vernacular IA varieties (whether you call them languages or dialects) sociolinguistically identify with "Hindi" and use MSH as "Dachsprache" (although some speakers take pride in their variety as a distinct language and consider themselves not diglossic, but bilinguial, as observed e.g. with many Braj and Awadhi speakers due to their own respective literary histories). The Hindi Belt area largely covers the speech areas of Western Hindi and Eastern Hindi varieties, but can also extend further (depending how speakers view their own variety, and also on census practice).

What I'm trying to say, the main thing that is incorrect here is to have this very article that presents Western Hindi + Eastern Hindi as an actual subgroup (or zone) within IA, when hardly any scholar of IA linguistics does so (maybe earlier versions of Ethnologue did, not sure about that). From a comparative viewpoint, Western Hindi + Eastern Hindi languages share little to nothing (except for the name "Hindi") that isn't also shared by one of the other established branches of IA. I'll happily support this move request if "Hindi languages" is reduced to a disambiguation article that links to Western Hindi languages and Eastern Hindi languages.

If not moved, we could add some detail that "Central Indo-Aryan" is a fluid concept that can greatly differ from scholar to scholar. The only common denominator is the inclusion of Western Hindi (NB not necessarily Eastern Hindi). But fluid concepts are things that we usually avoid for language subgroup articles from an encyclopedic viewpoint (linking to it becomes arbitrary, an infobox makes little sense, it cannot be categorized etc. See also Talk:Indo-Aryan_languages/Archive_1#Classification_3.) Pinging @Kwamikagami: as the article creator for ideas how to get out of this dilemma. –Austronesier (talk) 09:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that "Hindi" as generally conceived is a spurious group cladistically. However, we currently have Central IA as a branch of IA at Indo-Aryan languages. As long as that's the case, we should have a corresponding article here. Of course, if we update our classification at IA, we should change or move or create or delete the dependent articles. But because this is a dependent article, any corrections should be made there first. — kwami (talk) 10:01, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree to creating a disambiguation page called Hindi languages linking to two seperate articles Eastern Hindi languages and Western Hindi languages and change this page (Central Indo-Aryan languages) to a redirect to the former and divide it's content among the new articles of Eastern Hindi languages and Western Hindi languages. PadFoot2008 (talk) 14:51, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's Hindi Belt for that. We could simply remove all incoming links to 'Central IA languages' and redirect 'Hindi languages' to Hindi Belt. — kwami (talk) 22:38, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hindi langauges and Hindi belt are different. See Hindi (disambiguation). Hindi languages do not include Rajasthani and Bihari languages by convention. PadFoot2008 (talk) 07:55, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rajasthani and Bihari are both Hindi "dialects", so Hindi does include them. Central IA does not. — kwami (talk) 09:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We do follow the classifications made in the Indian Census. Those classifications has been by consensus accepted as incorrect and politically driven. We follow classifications made by linguistic experts and scientists. Please, see previous comments and discussions. PadFoot2008 (talk) 11:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have divided the content of this article into new standalone articles of Western Hindi languages and Eastern Hindi languages now. PadFoot2008 (talk) 11:49, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion after 1st closure

Those need to be clarified because it's no longer clear what "Central IA" is supposed to mean, and we are now inconsistent. — kwami (talk) 19:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have reverted the procedural close and am in the process of reversing so this can be further discussed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 22:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've been editing the child articles so that they're consistent. I'm not sure it matters much which way we go otherwise. — kwami (talk) 22:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this article need to exist? The content has now been divided between two articles. This page can be a redirect to Indo-Aryan languages#Central (Madhya or Hindi). This article doesn't have any vital information not contained in other articles and is a pretty fluid and disputable subgroup. @Paine Ellsworth, this doesn't need further discussion. PadFoot2008 (talk) 08:18, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The concept of the Central Zone has more relevance in the scholarly literature than the non-entity "Hindi languages". So, obviously, this article is useful, and there is no consensus to turn it into a redirect as you have unilaterally decided to do in the middle of a discussion. There is certainly some cleanup needed and more info about alternative views on the scope of the C. Zone, but that's best done in an existing article. –Austronesier (talk) 09:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All right then, I guess. Anyways, it was you yourself who suggested this article be split. Look at your very first comment in the discussion. PadFoot2008 (talk) 10:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, editor PadFoot2008, you deserve an answer from me. The situation here in the present is what I had first thought to do, then I decided to close this request and [keep things as you had left them]. There had been some resistance before that, but I wasn't sure how strong it was. Turns out it is stronger I think than either you or I had suspected. So we land back here in the present moment, and editors can continue discussion about the merits and the drawbacks of moving this article to a different title. Thank you very much PadFoot2008, Austronesier and kwami for your improvements to Wikipedia! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 12:01, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot @Paine Ellsworth, for providing me an answer. I do not consider continuing this discussion further and plan on leaving everything as it is (Central Indo-Aryan languages existing as it's own article, Hindi languages redirecting to this page and Eastern Hindi languages and Western Hindi languages having their own articles). You can close this discussion now if you think it's good. Thanks again. PadFoot2008 (talk) 12:13, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 18:09, 28 June 2023 (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.

New articles created with overlapping scope

Editors watching this page may wish to look at Eastern Hindi languages and Western Hindi languages, new pages created with an overlapping scope. Looking at Google Scholar, it seems that there's enough coverage using these terms to establish notability, but that doesn't preclude WP:PAGEDECIDE or other considerations of how to best present information to readers. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 01:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]