Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Kamarupi Prakrit. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Corrections required

Kamrupi Apabhramsa of Western Assam is separated from Magadhi Prakrita of Central India in first millennium and became literary language of scholars of that time as well as court language of Kamrup Kingdom. This Apabhramsa contain traces of Sanskrit and Prakrit due to ancestral link and became language of day to day use of people from Western Assam, known today as Kamrupi dialect. Due to its Apabhramsa stage in first millennium CE, it cannot be termed as Sanskrit, Prakrit or modern Indo Aryan language. So this article should be moved to either "Old Kamrupi" or "Kamrupi Apabhramsa". From what i had seen, this article is stub and can be considered for merge with Kamrupi dialect.

Here are my sources :

(i) Kamarupa Anusandhan Samiti, Journal of the Assam Research Society - Volume 18 Though Apabhramsa works in Kamrupi Specimens are not available, yet we can trace the prevalence of early Kamrupi Apabhramsa through the window of archaic froms as found in the grants or Copper-plates mentioned above. This sort of Sporadic Apabhramsa is a mixture of Sanskrit, Prakrit and colloquial dialects of Assam.

(ii) Sukumar Sen, Grammatical sketches of Indian languages with comparative vocabulary and texts, Volume 1 Assamese, or more appropriately the old Kamarupi dialect entered into Kamrup or western Assam, where this speech was first characterized as Assamese.

(iii) Sukhabilasa Barma, Bhawaiya, ethnomusicological study Based on the materials of the Linguistic Survey of India, Suniti Kumar Chattopadhyay has divided Eastern Magadhi Prakrita and Apabhramsa into four dialect groups (1) Radha-the language of West Bengal and Orissa (2) Varendra-dialect of North Central Bengal (3) Kamrupi-dialect of Northern Bengal and Assam and (4) Vanga-dialect of East Bengal.

(iv) Upendranath Goswami, A study on Kāmrūpī: a dialect of Assamese says Assamese entered into Kamarupa or western Assam where this speech was first characterised as Assamese. This is evident from the remarks of Hiuen Tsang who visited the Kingdom of Kamarupa in the first half of the seventh century A.D., during the reign of Bhaskaravarman.

(v) Suniti Kumar Chatterji, The origin and development of the Bengali language, Volume 1 One would expect one and identical language to have been current in North Central Bengal (Pundra-vardhana) and North Bengal and West Assam (Kamarupa) in the 7th century, since these tracts, and other parts of Bengal, had almost the same speech. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 13:01, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

We've already covered this issue and no one agrees with either your proposal or that your interpretation/presentation of these sources' statements is accurate. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 15:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I will wait for appropriate reply for some time before moving to next level of dispute resolution. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 10:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Corrections required---replies

Kamrupi Apabhramsa of Western Assam is separated from Magadhi Prakrita of Central India in first millennium and became literary language of scholars of that time as well as court language of Kamrup Kingdom. This Apabhramsa contain traces of Sanskrit and Prakrit due to ancestral link and became language of day to day use of people from Western Assam, known today as Kamrupi dialect. Due to its Apabhramsa stage in first millennium CE, it cannot be termed as Sanskrit, Prakrit or modern Indo Aryan language. So this article should be moved to either "Old Kamrupi" or "Kamrupi Apabhramsa". From what i had seen, this article is stub and can be considered for merge with Kamrupi dialect. — Bhaskarbhagawati — (continues after insertion below)

The name "Kamarupi Prakrit" follows the name used by Sharma 1978 (p0.25, full ref in article). He has reconstructed the linguistic features of this language most fully, and lists about 17 of them in the next few pages of his book. Toulmin 2006 (full reference in article) has called this language proto-Kamrupa, and identifies it as the ancestor language of Assamese as well as the Kamatapuri lects. This language is, of course, not fully reconstructed. Since the fullest account of this language comes from Sharma, the name should follow his use. A merge with Kamrupi dialect makes no sense because this is an ancestor language of not just the modern Kamrupi dialects, but all Assamese as well as Kamatapuri lects. Chaipau (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Here are my sources :

(i) Kamarupa Anusandhan Samiti, Journal of the Assam Research Society - Volume 18 Though Apabhramsa works in Kamrupi Specimens are not available, yet we can trace the prevalence of early Kamrupi Apabhramsa through the window of archaic froms as found in the grants or Copper-plates mentioned above. This sort of Sporadic Apabhramsa is a mixture of Sanskrit, Prakrit and colloquial dialects of Assam. — Bhaskarbhagawati — (continues after insertion below)

This is an article written by Parikshit Hazarika (full reference in article), where he claims, mainly on the grounds that since Kamarupa was a strong enduring political entity in the classical period, the language of Kamarupa deserves a special position with its own linguistic imprint. He writes: "This sort of oneness must have helped the growth of a common language which can be termed as Kamrupi Prakrit or Kamrupi Apabhramsa" (p80, emphasis mine). Hazarika quotes from an unreferenced article by Beni Madhav Barua (The Scribe-Engravers of Indrapala's Second Copper-plate and Prakrit of Pre-Ahom Times) thus: "The pre-Ahom inscriptions of kamrupa contain a few other instances of Prakritism that may be taken to indicate the nature and form of the dialect as current in those times, say from 6th to 12th century AD, I mean the prakrit language in the historical background of Assamese." So Hazarika, as well as his predecessor Barua accept "Kamarupi Prakrit" as a name for this language.

Your quote, where he calls for examination of Kamarupa inscriptions to reconstruct the language is exactly what Sharma 1978 has done (see above). Sharma, of course, calls the language "Kamarupi Prakrit". Chaipau (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

(ii) Sukumar Sen, Grammatical sketches of Indian languages with comparative vocabulary and texts, Volume 1 Assamese, or more appropriately the old Kamarupi dialect entered into Kamrup or western Assam, where this speech was first characterized as Assamese. — Bhaskarbhagawati — (continues after insertion below)

This sentence has major problems at many different levels. For example, how could the language that entered Kamrup be called (old) Kamrupi? He obviously meant eastern Magadhi. The language can be called Kamarupi only after it had acquired significant linguistic features in Kamarupa. He also calls it Assamese, which is again a misnomer. Chaipau (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

(iii) Sukhabilasa Barma, Bhawaiya, ethnomusicological study Based on the materials of the Linguistic Survey of India, Suniti Kumar Chattopadhyay has divided Eastern Magadhi Prakrita and Apabhramsa into four dialect groups (1) Radha-the language of West Bengal and Orissa (2) Varendra-dialect of North Central Bengal (3) Kamrupi-dialect of Northern Bengal and Assam and (4) Vanga-dialect of East Bengal. — Bhaskarbhagawati — (continues after insertion below)

He is just paraphrasing Chatterji, so no comment need be made on him. Chaipau (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

As far as his use of "Kamrupi dialect" is concerned, Chatterji uses it in the sense of "the Magadhi Apabhramsa dialect of Kamarupa". He in fact uses "Kamarupa Dialects" not "Kamrupi-dialect" . This is clear from the tree he has constructed and which is reproduced in Toulmin's thesis. We have discussed this extensively in previous discussions, and this interpretation was accepted as correct. Chaipau (talk) 11:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

The tree, reproduced as Figure 7-3 (p302), is here]. The relevant portion of the tree is given below:

Forms of Magadhi Prakrit and Apabhramsa as brought to Bengal, Assam and Orissa
- Radha Dialects
- Varendra Dialects
- Kamarupa Dialects
  - [Eastern]
    - [Assamese]
  - Western
    - North Bengali [Jalpaiguri, e.Purnia, s.Darjiling, Dinajpur, Koch Bihar, Rangpur, w.Goalpara]
- Vanga dialects

Note that Chatterji includes west Goalpara in North Bengali, but not east Goalpara, which purportedly he includes in Assamese. Chatterji lists only the modern Bengali dialects in his tree, and not the dialects of Oriya and Assamese. So east Goalpariya as well as Kamrupi and other dialects in the east he implicitly includes under Assamese. Chaipau (talk) 12:46, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

(iv) Upendranath Goswami, A study on Kāmrūpī: a dialect of Assamese says Assamese entered into Kamarupa or western Assam where this speech was first characterised as Assamese. This is evident from the remarks of Hiuen Tsang who visited the Kingdom of Kamarupa in the first half of the seventh century A.D., during the reign of Bhaskaravarman. — Bhaskarbhagawati — (continues after insertion below)

Upendra Goswami seems to have borrowed the first sentence from Sukumar Sen. see above. The second sentence simply says that the language of Kamarupa was different from the one in north India in the 7th century. This simply reinforces the notion that there indeed existed a language associated with the Kamarupa Kingdom. This is precisely the language Sharma 1978 has tried to reconstruct and named "Kamarupi Prakrit". Chaipau (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

(v) Suniti Kumar Chatterji, The origin and development of the Bengali language, Volume 1 One would expect one and identical language to have been current in North Central Bengal (Pundra-vardhana) and North Bengal and West Assam (Kamarupa) in the 7th century, since these tracts, and other parts of Bengal, had almost the same speech. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 13:01, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

We've already covered this issue and no one agrees with either your proposal or that your interpretation/presentation of these sources' statements is accurate. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 15:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Chatterji here refers to either Kamarupa Prakrit, or to its immediate predecessor. Toulmin 2006 calls Kamarupi Prakrit "?proto-Kamrupa" and its immediate predecessor "?proto-Gauda-Kamrupa" (because he is referring to Pundra-vardhana). "?proto-Gauda-Kamrupa", according to Toulmin, is the ancestor language of Bengali, as well as Assamese and Kamatapuri lects. (See Figure 7-21 in Toulin's thesis). So Chatterji here does not contradict anything in this article.

If you are trying to draw attention to Chatterji's use of "West Assam (Kamrupa)" then Chatterji would do better to amend his 1920's thesis. The Kamarupa kingdom expanded very rapidly both to the east as well as to the west. The second oldest (or as some claim, the oldest) Kamarupa inscriptions, the 5th century Nagajari Khanikargaon rock inscription, was located in Golaghat (look at findspot "2" here). Chaipau (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I will wait for appropriate reply for some time before moving to next level of dispute resolution. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 10:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree with user:aeusoes1, that we have had this discussion a number of times. But I provide the arguments anew here, in summary, in anticipation of the dispute resolution process. Chaipau (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you give your top five sources (quotes) here ? भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 12:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

As for quality, i have provided high quality sources like Suniti Kumar Chatterji, Sukumar Sen, Kamarupa Anusandhan Samiti and Upendranatha Goswami. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 13:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I have addressed all your concerns, point-by-point, clarifying the quotes you have provided yourself. I have also provided additional references in here and in the article body. I don't think there is any need for additional quotes at this time. Chaipau (talk) 13:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

For early disposal of issue we need sources from both sides, which can be compared for quality. Kindly cooperate for same. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 13:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Your proposal for a page move or merge. I have addressed your arguments, which I think is sufficient. Any other issue that might arise, I shall address when it does. You are asking me to prejudge a situation, which I won't like to do. Chaipau (talk) 13:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Then how we go ahead without sources ! भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 14:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

You said you were prepared to go to the next step of dispute resolution. Go for it. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 14:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Sure i will do it in some point of time. Are you interested to be one of the party !! But i still think User:Chaipau can provide good sources supportable. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 14:40, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I can participate in the dispute resolution process as well. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 15:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

OK भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 16:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

All sources including mentioned by you referred the speech as "Apabhramsa" while Prakita is not equal to Apabhramsa. So please remove Prakrita suffix from title. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 08:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

All sources?? Where did you read that? Parikshit Hazarika and Beni Madhav Barua call it Prakrit. Mahendra Madhav Sharma, who has given the fullest reconstruction of the language till date, calls it Kamarupa Prakrit. Parikshit Hazarika, who you quote, calls it a Prakrit too. But Kamarupi Apabhramsa is not the only alternative for this. "Kamarupa Dialects" (Chatterji 1929), "proto-Kamrupa" (Toulmin 2006) etc are also valid alternatives. But this is yet an unreconstructed language. But those who have worked on reconstructing it and have brought out its primary linguistic features (Sharma, and before him, Beni Madhav Barua and Dimbeswar Neog) have all called it a Prakrit, which is the basic rationale for keeping the name as it is. The primary reason why these authors have called it a Prakrit and not an Apabhramsa is given in the article lead itself (Vararuci's rule). I do anticipate that the Prakrit-Apabhramsa divide may not be relevant in the future as the full reconstruction becomes available, when it might just be called "proto-Kamarupa" following modern conventions, but till that happens, the name should remain as it is. Chaipau (talk) 09:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thats why i am asking you to provide your top five high quality sources. And also please add new quotes to article keeping existing quotes constant which is not the case in one of your last few edits. Regarding allergy, its not acceptable because i have never edited articles related to said subject which i accused of being allergic but yes surely allergic to false glorification. So i will maintain good faith and expecting the same from you. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 19:09, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Please take this to the next level. I am tired of repeated arguments. We need some feedback from others. Chaipau (talk) 20:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

New Comments

I have addressed all your concerns, point-by-point, clarifying the quotes you have provided yourself. I have also provided additional references in here and in the article body. I don't think there is any need for additional quotes at this time. Your so called point to point clarification is mostly erroneous.

The name "Kamarupi Prakrit" follows the name used by Sharma 1978 (p0.25, full ref in article). This case of single source, we don't even know its context. Sukumar Sen calls it Old Kamarupi dialect, Golokchnadra Goswami calls it Western Assamese dialect, Sukhbilash Barma calls it Kamrupi dialect, Kamarupa Anusandhan Samiti calls it dialect mix with Sanskrit and Prakrit.

Kamarupa Dialects" not "Kamrupi-dialect This repetitive claims was addressed before how Kamarupa, Vanga, Radha and Varendra are name of places not languages.

If you are trying to draw attention to Chatterji's use of "West Assam (Kamrupa)" then Chatterji would do better to amend his 1920's thesis. The Kamarupa kingdom expanded very rapidly both to the east as well as to the west. The second oldest (or as some claim, the oldest) Kamarupa inscriptions, the 5th century Nagajari Khanikargaon rock inscription, was located in Golaghat Nalanda inscriptions are also available, so thus Nalanda was also within Kamarupa. — Bhaskarbhagawati — (continues after insertion below)

The only new thing you have mentioned here is the Nalanda clay seals. Yes, some do in fact claim that Nalanda was in the control of Bhaskarvarman for some time. He spent 3 years west of the traditional boundaries of Kamarupa. After the death of Harshavardhana, he is said to have helped a chinese invader invade some northern parts of India. And he issued the Nidhanpur copper plates from Karnasuvarna.

Though copper plates and clay seals move (the Kamauli grants were found in Uttar Pradesh), rock inscriptions don't. Bhaskarvarman's brief control over additional regions do not alter the traditional boundaries of Kamarupa. D C Sircar identifies the eastern boundary of Kamarupa with present-day Sadiya. This agrees with the account left by Hiuen Tsang in the 7th century and the Yogoni Tantra composed nearly a thousand years later.

Chaipau (talk) 08:25, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

And most importantly you are consistently disregarding views of scholars, not only here but in other places too. You should keep in mind that its an encyclopedia not your personal book or blog. But marking for single source for any claim is fine. And title for this article is case of single source, for consistency it can be Kamrupi Prakrit or Kamarupi Prakrita. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 01:44, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

If you're not going to bother taking this to the next level of dispute resolution, you're just wasting everybody's time. Please go to WP:DR and take the appropriate steps. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 02:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

The only reason i am not hurrying in to DRN because word "Kamrupi" is as familiar to them as anything on planet X. I appreciate your time and energy on this subject but i urge you to let this matter within me an user Chaipau from now onwards. Thanks for your interest and happy editing ! भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 02:49, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I too have asked that this matter be presented to DRN. Asking User:aeusoes1 to back off has, to me, WP:Civil issues. Chaipau (talk) 09:24, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Might I suggest, Chaipau, that we limit talk page responses to encourage BB to take DR to the next step? Otherwise taking the time to provide thoughtful responses is too close to trollfeeding IMHO. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 15:24, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, now I realize I could have been doing just that inadvertently. Chaipau (talk) 15:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

There is no need for talk page discussions until sourced materials from articles are either removed or disregard for same is shown that what exactly happening now here and there. I personally wasted some time from mid 2012 upto now for such discussions and dispute resolution processes which hardly bind twenty four Wikipedia dedicated users like user Chaipau, nor i am too keen to interact with him which can be confirmed by looking at talk page history of mine and user Chaipau. So when i started fresh talks on top of this page, its according to Wikipedia guidelines to not edit war instead put dispute on talk page which i expected to address by few fresh neutral persons. My last replies are necessary to address so called point to point clarification which may considered correct if replies are not made. Only reason for late in replying is that initially i don't want to waste my time further on clearing such erroneous clarifications but as i said its became necessary before this discussion can closed.

So what it maybe, i am now winding up this discussion. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 02:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

If you want fresh eyes on the problem, WP:DR lists some avenues to get a larger response. It might be a bit tiresome to have to explain your position to those unfamiliar with the topic, as you and Chaipau did with me last year, but anything worth doing is worth doing right. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 02:43, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

You are right buddy but onething you maybe not aware is that same type of dispute on etymology of Assam state occured just before this dispute, on which i invested lot of time thinking once solved it will be binding but after final decision is made, he again filed a issue on DRN in my absense and giving them a one sided view of the matter. With one party available it went favour of him though its against findings of RSN. Yes, i can appealed for same but as i said i engage with that issue from mid last year and i don't want to do more on same. Thats why instead of going through such long time consuming processes i expect sourced material won't removed. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 02:59, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I am aware of that dispute. I'm also aware that the June 7-June 20 and July 10-July 27 discussions in which you participated led by-and-large to a consensus that Chaipau was happy with and that you were not; the August 20-August 24 discussion that you took a break from Wikipedia to avoid was about your refusal to adhere to the decisions of these first two discussions, not about reversing anything.

Again, if you can't bother to do it right, please don't waste our time blowing up this talk page. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 04:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Just for the records, here is the BB's latest edit on the etymology issue (diff), and this was the swift RSN verdict (RSN on EoA). The decision became available on the same day the edits were made! (Though we waited for more comments).

The DR process works; and BB's claim, that the RSN verdict was ignored, is false. The only reason why the July-August dispute dragged on for too long was because BB refused to comply with the consensus decisions at every stage (WP:3O, WP:RSN and WP:DR), and he had to be warned at the end (diff). The edit summary notes: "Multiple dispute resolution forums (Third Opinion, RSN and DRN) have come to a mutual agreement regarding this text.". I am putting this down here because BB frequently misrepresents what the agreement was in these forums.

Chaipau (talk) 08:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

User Aeusoes being reviewer is more than just having reviewing rights. Those links provided by you are of DRN and RSN. Anybody with little sense can see that in DRN case, it was inconclusive and thatswhy it went on RSN where it finally resolved with closing line after hearing all arguements, with which User Chaipau was not happy and he further asked for reviewing his aricle, which remained unanswered. So from where the question of my inhappiness and his happiness arises, but sure is a case of biased eyes and thatswhy i left your so called review process last year due such biases in reviewing. A person who don't like to opposed (e.g Prakrit-Prakrita and Sanskrit as an dead language) and get pissed off by such positions cannot be a trustworthy neutral person. An so called accusations of avoidance, it doesn't make sense that i will avoid such subjects on which i have binding decision, which i just need only to point out. It also be noted that Wikipedia is not compulsory as per Wikipedia guidelines and we have real lifes to be lived, which events require more priority than here.

So as you earlier proposed no further replies should made on posts here and regarding time being wasted of yours, i making your life easier by ignoring you.Thanks ! भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 02:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

POV pushing and quote mining

User:Bhaskarbhagawati is again trying to equate a historical literary language from the 14th century (early Assamese) with a modern dialect (Kamrupi dialect). He is claiming: "So said difference in spoken language of Kamrup from mid India pointed out by Chinese traveller Yuan Chwang was Kamrupi Apabhramsa developing in modern Western Assam region.". This is patently false. One of the salient features of standard Assamese is the shortening of the anterior /a/ in the presence of a following /a/. This is clearly stated in Kamrupi_dialect#Phonology:

In standard Assamese if a word has two /a/ sounds side-by-side, the first /a/ turns into an /ɔ/ or /ɛ/, a feature that became prominent in the early Assamese period.[30] In Kamrupi, two consecutive /a/ are tolerated (star: /taɹa/ (Kamrupi), /tɔɹa/ (Standard)).[31]

Therefore, early Assamese has both standard Assamese as well as Kamrupi features. Unlike what is being claimed above.

I am deleting that sentence.Chaipau (talk) 19:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Then why no scholar mentioning Eastern Assam, Eastern Assamese dialect, Sibsagariya dialect etc in terms of origin or mid literary language. Again original research ? भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 01:44, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

The references are given in the original text. If you want to dispute that this feature of standard Assamese comes from eastern Assamese, go ahead. But that does not even matter. The fact that this linguistic feature of standard Assamese exists in early Assamese shows that early Assamese was not exclusively western Assamese, which is the opposite of what you are trying to claim. Chaipau (talk) 09:51, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Link to page

There is no requirement that a source be online, and hence no requirement for a link to be provided, although if anyone has the book, it would be helpful to quote the exact words here since verification has been requested. Is it possible that this snippet of p. xliii covers it? Yngvadottir (talk) 19:32, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, that is the quote in the link provided. Note that this has nothing to do the the phoneme /x/, as BB seems to be claiming. Chaipau (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

স is equals to X and in my knowledge its not present in old Kamrupi. If you have the book please upload said page as snipett view shows nothing such short. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 20:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

স is a letter, whereas /x/ is a phoneme. They cannot be equal. Furthermore, the text in the article, which you are deleting, is almost verbatim in the text of the reference. The text in the article does not say anything about the phenome /x/; and your interpretation that it does, is wrong. Chaipau (talk) 21:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

I like to see mention of "স" in said book in context. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 21:25, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

As I noted on your talk page Bhaskarbhagawati, sources don't have to be available online. Don't ask others to prove what a source says. —Rutebega (talk) 22:44, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes i understand, but he can atleast provide full quote of author. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 01:23, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

You can challenge the text, but you cannot remove it. Look at WP:DISPUTED. I ask you to restore the text, or you will be in violation of Wikipedia policies. Chaipau (talk) 03:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Give the full quote and i have no problem. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 11:21, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

We're not going to wait for BB to undo his own problematic edits. BB, please do not disrupt Wikipedia just to make a point. If you continue this approach, the issue will be brought up at ANI. I'm pretty sure things will not go well for you. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 12:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm OK with reverting BB, but in fairness, it's no great task to simply type what the source says exactly. Chaipau, if you have access to the full text, could you do that? Thanks. —Rutebega (talk) 18:18, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Rutebega, this act of BB seems to be part of a dispute, the evidence of which you see right here on this talk page. Please go through the discussion here for some of the issues we are dealing with.

As far as the content is concerned, the link at the top of this section will give you all the context (even though it is partially occluded). The comment has nothing to do with what BB is claiming (something about the phoneme /x/), but about the nature of Prakritism in Kamarupa. His attempt at inserting the link to Sukumar Sen's quote lays bare his incessant effort at trying to link the 7th-12th century Prakrit to the modern Kamrupi dialect (look at that page's talk page too). He has been trying to push that POV for something like a year now. For a relationship between these, look at Toulmin 2006 (complete link in the reference section of this article). Chaipau (talk) 21:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

So that incomplete snippet view is your source and rest you made up yourself; because we disputed in past that স (X) which is a voiceless fricative velar is not present in Assamese in original. And yes you are right in terming the issue a POV but is not mine but of scholars, and this article in original prepared according to it, where i made no significant contribution before you tweaked the same. I ask you to restore the edits. Thanks ! भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 09:25, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I have a source which discusses voiceless fricative velar. Currently there is no references in article for that. If there any, better presented now. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak

The voiceless velar fricative is not an issue in this article. It is accepted that it arose as a lenition of the sibilants in Assamese. The argument Neog and Sarma have put forward is different---whereas the sibilants in Magadhi Prakrit and modern Bengali display a move to /ʃ/ ("sh"), Kamarupi Prakrit displays a move to /s/. This may be a precursor to a further move to /x/ later as has happened in Assamese, but that is not the issue here. Chaipau (talk) 11:33, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is a issue, Vedic Sanskrit has no X, so its inappropiate to claim existence of such sound in Apabhramsa. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 12:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Once again, the issue of here is the presence of /s/. There is no mention here of /x/. And secondly, Vedic Sanskrit had /x/ (Vedic_Sanskrit#Phonology, where it is said it was called jihvamuliya). Chaipau (talk) 12:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

You yourself mentioned X i.e স here. There no references in that article for same, can you give here any with quote. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 12:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Where did I say that? I said "স is a letter, whereas /x/ is a phoneme. They cannot be equal." Please read carefully. diff. Chaipau (talk) 13:43, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Here means in article you claimed presence of X sound in this Apabhramsa. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 18:47, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Is you are saying that said phoneme is not represented by X in latin script and স in eastern nagri script.

Does the word "axe" have a velar fricative? The script does not specify the phoneme, the language does. Chaipau (talk) 19:17, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Axe do not have VFV but Assamese words with VFV are written with X. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 19:24, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. It is the language that defines the sound, not the script. Chaipau (talk) 19:31, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Still Assamese VFV is represented by X when writing in Latin. Now give quote for existence of VFV in Kamrupi Apbhramsa. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 19:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Where is the claim that Kamarupi Prakrit has a velar fricative. Chaipau (talk) 19:42, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

The main characteristic of this Prakrit is the replacement ofś(শ) andṣ(ষ) bys(স). भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 19:45, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

The language of these inscriptions is Sanskrit. So, what do you think the sound is now? Chaipau (talk) 20:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Give reference with quote to support that line. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 02:12, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

The reference is given in the text. Chaipau (talk) 02:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Please see i have provided direct and full quote which you hesitant to give. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 03:50, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Which quote have you given? From where? Chaipau (talk) 04:04, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

The full quote which we are asking you above, which not even mentioned স anywhere, your sole reason for denial to give the said quote. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 16:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

The transliteration of ś(শ) ṣ(ষ) and s(স) is pretty standard. The Kamarupa inscriptions were themselves written not in Latin script, but in an evolving variety of the eastern Gupta script. And Sarma in his book used the latin letters with diacritic marks probably because it was easier to typeset. The inscriptions themselves are transcribed in the book in Devanagari script, not because the Kamarupa inscriptions were in Devanagari, but because they were written in Sanskrit and Devanagari is the defacto script for Sanskrit now. But Sanskrit was written in the "Assamese" script in Assam till very recently, and probably still used in some circles. And as far as three letters are concerned, there is a one-to-one correspondence between all Indic scripts. Chaipau (talk) 17:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I know you now try hard to justify your faking of source but issue is settled now. Can you tell me how many authors used the term Kamarupi Prakrit with quotes. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 00:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

This articles most appropiate name is Old Kamarupi dialect used by different authors. I will give sources. MM Sharma talks about Prakritism which is in harmony with KAS which terms it as Apabhramsa stained with Prakrit, Sanskrit and Assamese dialect. MM Sharma says its like local variety of Prakrit and CAN not SHOULD be termed as Kamarupi Prakrit. Please provide your all sources for Kamarupi Prakrit title with direct quotes and i will do same for mine. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 00:37, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Old Kamrupi Dialect VS Kamarupi Prakrit

(i)Buddhism and Culture of North-East India,Page 8,Rabindra Panth, 2004, the Buddhist "Dohas" composed in Kamarupa in the 10th and 11th centuries is a mixed Maithili- Kamarupi language as it bears a close resemblance to modern Assamese language, the direct offspring of the old Kamarupi dialect.

(ii)Grammatical Sketches of Indian Languages with Comparative ... - Page 31,Sukumar Sen, Ramesh Chandra Nigam - 1975, Coming from the regions of Videha-Magadha, through North Bengal, Assamese, or more appropriately the old Kamarupi dialect entered into Kamrup or western Assam, where this speech was first characterized as Assamese.

(iii)The history of civilisation of the people of Assam to the twelfth century,Page 395,Pratap Chandra Choudhury, 1959, The best specimens of wise sayings are contained in a work, 'Dakabhanitd', attributed to Daka, written in old Kamarupi dialect. The work provides an important specimen of the ancient literature of Assam.

(iv) Early medieval village in north-eastern India, A.D. 600-1200, Page 253,Abhay Kant Choudhary - 1971, Sen Gupta assigns A D. 845 or 902 to her. Daka is stated to have belonged to village Lehidangara near Barpeta in the district of Kamrup, and the Dakabhanita, a work in the old Kamarupi dialect.

(v) Ethnic Issues, Secularism and Conflict Resolution in North East India - Page 187,Bimal J. Deb, 2006, Kamarupi dialect differed only a little from that of mid-India. Thus the seventh century A.D. may be regarded as the terminus ad quern.

(vi) The Spirit of India: volumes presented to Shrimati Indira Gandhi ... - Page 527, Indira Gandhi, Indira Gandhi Abhinandan Samiti - 1975, specimens of a few characters indicating that the Kamarupi dialect, the mother of modern Assamese.

(vii) Historical archaeology of central Assam - Page 160,Niśipada Caudhurī - 1985, Beginning with a gradual change in the Kamarupi dialect, which differed only a little from that of Mid India, as recorded by Yuan Chwang the process of evolution of both the script and the language continued.

(viii) Journal of the Assam Research Society - Volume 23 - Page 63, 1978 ,The Gachtal pillar inscription, composed in old Assamese script and language, rather Kamarupi dialect, referring to the Yavana invasion from Bengal.

(ix) The Bodos in Assam: a socio--cultural study, year 2005-2006 - Page 47, Harka Bahadur Chhetri Atreya, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Institute of Asian Studies (Calcutta, India) - 2007, work called 'Dakarbhanita' or 'Dakarvachan' written in ancient Kamrupi dialect.

(x)Gopinath Bardoloi: Indian Constitution and Centre-Assam Relations, ... - Page 71, Niroda Kumāra Baruwā - 1990, Linguistically the spoken language of the mass is Assamese (old Kamrupi). भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 02:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The "Old Kamarupi dialect" is a dialect of which language? Chaipau (talk) 03:53, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Wrongly as of modern Assamese and correctly of Eastern Magadhi Prakrita. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 04:41, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Where is it mentioned that it is a dialect of modern Assamese? Chaipau (talk) 10:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

OK, I know where you are heading. We have had this discussion extensively here, and you have agreed to take this to the next step. Go ahead. Place it on WP:DRN. Chaipau (talk) 10:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

We are discussing correct title for this article and i am looking for quotes regarding justification for its Kamarupi Prakrit title from you. If you failed to provide enough references, it will be moved to Old Kamrupi Dialect. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 11:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

This is in dispute, you cannot move this yourself. You have to request a move and discuss it there and let someone else be the judge. You cannot judge this yourself because you are an interested party. Chaipau (talk) 14:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 17:47, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Kamarupi Prakrit → Old Kamrupi Dialect – As per sources below. Relisted - this may be a folorn hope but would be nice to get a few more opinions before closing! — Amakuru (talk) 22:58, 16 July 2013 (UTC) भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 19:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)