Talk:Bengali language/Archive 2

Wrong Informations in :Old Bengali (900/1000–1400)

"....as the entire region- Assam, Bengal and parts of Bihar and Orissa..." Ancient Kalinga, Utkal or Kosal or modern Odisha was never be the Part of Kamarupa. its a wrong information and corrupting the history.

Old Bengali (900/1000–1400)

Old Benagali is referred to Charya Padi. The manuscript of Charya Padi was on the palm leaf manuscript. And bengali don’t had any palm leaf writing culture. But Odia do have form 1000s of years. Charya Giti are Odia the words are no difference between Old Odia words. There is no reationship between Bengali language. Its not correct.

http://orissamatters.com/tag/history-of-bengali-language/

again in Old Bengali section it is writtern ad "verb inflections -ইলা -ila, -ইবা -iba, etc"

ইলা -ila :

Odia:  Karila, Khaila, Dekhila, Nachila etc
Bengali: Korlo, Bollo, dekhlo, nachlo etc

-ইবা -iba :

Odia: Jiba, Khaiba, Dekhiba, Nachiba etc
Bengala : Jabo, Bolbo, Dekhbo, Nachbo etc

Is it not clear that Chariya GIti is in Odia but not Bengala ?

About Physical Map of where language is used

Other parts of India are distinguished in the language map which confuses me what that part has to do to be distinguished? Administrator please re-draws the map with only the part where Bengali is used in South Asia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.175.160.131 (talk) 17:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Geographically the most Eastern?

Along with Assamese, it is geographically the most eastern of the Indo-European languages. Wouldn't Assamese and Bishnupriya Manipuri be the most Eastern? Even If BPM is not actually a language at least the whole thing should be mentioned? Maquahuitl

Ranking of Bengali in the world's languages

Comparing the stated ranking of Bengali here and that on the page List of languages by number of native speakers I found a discrepancy. What is the truth? Would someone correct the discrepancy please? --JorisvS 21:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

See [1] this link from SIL. Thanks. --Ragib 23:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure the Ethnologue source is reliable, since for example it gives the number of Portuguese speakers as 170M, which is less than the population of Brazil, an entirely Portuguese-speaking country. In any case it's undesirable to have Wikipedia articles completely disagreeing with each other, so I'm changing the ranking to "between 4 and 7" until this can be resolved, ideally at Talk:List of languages by number of native speakers. Lfh 20:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Ethnologue is generally considered a good source for ranking. If there is a better source, please feel free to mention it here. Thanks. --Ragib 20:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm by no means an expert, I'm just trying to resolve the inconsistency between articles. The sources used by the list are the CIA and the World Almanac, but if you think the Ethnologue data are better - which they may be - you might want to include them on the list. Lfh 22:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

From IQBAL50000: Hello Friends, I just want to say something: As far as I'm aware the second most widely spoken language of India is Bengali, after Hindi. I am 99% sure it's not Telegu. Telegu is the third most widely spoken language of India, after Hindi and Bengali. I can provide you with ample amount of explicitly clear confirmations of the accuracy of what I stated here -i.e. Please read the following web links:-

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/profiles/India.pdf -(please read whole of final paragraph of page 7)

http://www.w3cindia.in/2006/08/Talks/e-GOV-Sts-LLT.ppt -(please see table on page 5)

http://lands.let.kun.nl/literature/heuvel.2004.2.pdf -(please read the third paragraph of section 3.2, which is on page 3)

'India: ECONOMY' http://www.mongabay.com/reference/new_profiles/250in.html -(please read second paragraph of the 'Languages' section of this article)

Also, Bengali is ranked as the 6th most widely spoken language in the world (in terms of mother tongue), - Please see the following link of a very reliable and up to date website: 'CIA - The World Factbook -- World ' https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html -(please scroll down and read the "Languages" section under the 'People' heading).

this is actually quite convincing. any body has references claiming telegu is no 2?--ppm 20:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

From Iqbal50000: MY DEAR FRIENDS, I THINK THE EVIDENCES I HAVE STATED ABOVE ABSOLUTELY AND MOST CONCLUSIVELY PROVES THAT BENGALI IS THE 2ND MOST WIDELY SPOKEN LANGUAGE OF INDIA, AFTER HINDI. THE SOURCES I QUOTED ABOVE ARE NEUTRAL SOURCES (I.E FROM INDIAN GOVT SOURCES AND OTHER SOURCES), ALL OF WHICH STATE EXPLICITLY THAT BENGALI IS THE 2ND MOST WIDELY SPOKEN LANGUAGE IN INDIA AFTER HINDI! IN ALL OF THESE VERY SAME NEUTRAL SOURCES OF MINE, TELUGU IS STATED AS THE THIRD MOST WIDELY SPOKEN LANGUAGE OF INDIA AFTER HINDI AND BENGALI. THESE SOURCES ALSO GIVE PERCENTAGES FOR EACH OF THE LANGUAGES OF INDIA! AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THESE DATA/INFORMATION ARE NOT FROM WEST BENGAL OR FROM ANY OTHER STATE AUTHORITIES! THEY ARE FROM THE GOVT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA AND OTHER SOURCES WHICH ARE NATIONAL/FEDERAL SOURCES-I.E. ACCEPTED SOURCES FOR THE COUNTRY OF INDIA AS A WHOLE!! MY FRIENDS WHO HAVE QUOTED SOURCES STATING TELUGU AS THE SECOND MOST WIDELY SPOKEN, ARE NOT NEUTRAL SOURCES. THEIR SOURCES ARE DATA/INFORMATION WHICH ARE EITHER FROM LOCAL/STATE SOURCES EG ANDHRA PRADESH STATE SOURCES, OR FROM SOURCES ABOUT/CONCENTRATING ON A STATE/LOCALITY (I.E. ANDHRA PRADESH). WE ALL KNOW THE OFFICIAL STATE LANGUAGE OF ANDHRA PRADESH IS TELEGU. I THINK WHEN WE ARE DISCUSSING NATIONAL/COUNTRYWIDE ATTRIBUTES OF ANY COUNTRY, NATIONAL/FEDERAL SOURCES SHOULD BE QUOTED, AND SHOULD BE REGARDED AS MORE RELIABLE THAN SOURCES FROM, (OR CASE STUDIES ON) A PARTICULAR STATE/LOCALITY OF THE COUNTRY! THEREFORE I WOULD KINDLY REQUEST THE AUTHOR OF THE ARTICLE TO AMEND THE ARTICLE WHITH REGARDS TO THE RANK OF BENGALI IN INDIA, BEARING IN MIND ALL THE GOVT AND OTHER NEUTRAL 'OVERALL' COUNTRYWIDE SOURCES.!-REGARDS+BEST WISHES TO YOU ALL.

Bengali ranks as 7th in Native speakers - refer to Wikipedia's List of languages by number of native speakers. The current citation next to the ranking (i.e. [1] is out of date. Can we please update the information already? Jerse 06:00, 14 February 2007 (UITC)

From IQBAL50000: WIKIPEDIA IS A GREAT SOURCE OF INFORMATION ON A WIDE VARIETY OF SUBJECTS/TOPICS. HOWEVER, AT BEST IT IS A SECONDARY SOURCE OF INFORMATION, AND AS WIKIPEDIA ITSELF CLEARLY INDICATES, IT RELYS ON CITATIONS FROM OTHER SOURCES. SO THEREFORE, WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES ARE BASED ON OTHER PUBLISHED/SCRUTINISED SOURCES. SO, IN MY HUMBLE VIEW, ONE WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE CANNOT BE USED TO VERIFY INFORMATION IN ANOTHER WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE. ALL WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES ARE BASED ON OTHER SOURCES, AND THE FIGURES I QUOTED ARE FROM CIA-THE WORLD-FACTBOOK, WHICH IS UPDATED REGULARLY. BEST REGARDS TO ALL THE CONTRIBUTORS OF WIKIPEDIA.

Bangla sopken in the Middle East

I am pretty sure Bangla is spoken by at least 10,000 people in some Middle Eastern countries, by large number of Bangladeshi, Indian workers. Could someone refine the Map.

But aren't they temporary residents? --ppm 05:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

From Iqbal50000: Hello friends. The 'temporary workers'who speak Hindi,Urdu, Swahili and other languages living/working in the Middle-Eastern countries are often stated in many websites. But, the number of Bengali speakers is never stated in these very same websites, when we all know that there are many Bengali people working/living in various Middle Eastern countries.

Good Article Nom

Don't see it anywhere on the nomination page. Does that mean it failed? Should I remove the tag at the top of the page? --Ttownfeen 16:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

vs. Bengali Grammar article

There's some duplication between this article and the Bengali Grammar (BG) article. In general that's probably not a problem, but the BG article doesn't mention word order (apart from postpositions), while this one does. Seems like that ought to get at least as much coverage in the BG article. Likewise the (zero) copula. Mcswell 15:10, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

In the discussion on the Bengali Grammar, the writer gives examples such as "noeTa goru", "koeTa lok", "jutA" etc. Would this be Standard Colloquial Bengali. I believe the SCB forms should "no'Ta", "ko'Ta" and "juto" etc. Thanks,

Aniruddha Einrud (talk) 20:26, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, that depends on what region you are in. In Bangladesh, the SCB would be NoeTa, not No'ta, or JutA rather than Juto. --Ragib (talk) 20:31, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

FA Drive?

I think its time for a FA drive. Thoughts?--ppm 20:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Isupport the nom. Its time to have a FA drive.Amartyabag 06:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

If no body opposses, I'll give it a try. Even if a failure might "energize the base" :)--ppm 03:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Discuss

Whoever is changing the language rank, pls discuss it here. Your own ethnologue citation contradicts your assertion, look at the numbers pls--ppm 09:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

But the other citation (The Role of Attitudes in Language Shift and Language Maintenance in a New Immigrant Community: A Case Study) states Telugu is 2nd most common in India.--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Right, but ethnologue, as well as other references in this talk page contradict that. The issue atleast deserves discussion here. Let's see some more references. Also, though I am not discarding that reference out of hand, it is an article on Telegu, and might seem weaker than other references that take a all-India view (like ethnologue).--ppm 12:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

What would finish the discussion will be data from the 2001 census. I couldn't find it, but that would convince me either way--ppm 12:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Library of Congress country profile gives Bengali as the second most spoken language in India. It gives percentage also. Pleasee see page 7 of Country profile: India (December 2004). I think this source is more dependable than either of the two references used now. Please comment.--Dwaipayan (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Regional variations

This section should probably be merged with dialect, as per FAC comments. I am holding back myself due to my, well, ignorance; but i'll give it a try unless someone else does it.--ppm 07:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Have a talk with SameerKhan. Then give it a go. In that case, the section "Dialect" may have to be placed down rather than just after "History".--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Please be sure to use edit summaries. --Ideogram 03:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Map, Sound sample

Looking at the worldwide distribution map right now, I think the baby blue dots need to be changed to some other color. The dots on Rome and Athens(?) are barely noticable. Also, I believe dots should be added to Atlanta, Ga., USA and Dubai, UAE.

The sound sample that Peter Isotalo asked about in the FA nom page can be found here File:02 abani bari2.ogg. Would someone mind finding a place to put it in the article?

--Ttownfeen 04:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

gave the map another try. pls take a look.--ppm 08:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks good! --Ttownfeen 03:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Northern West Bengal, Chittagong hill tracts

Isn't Bengal NOT the principal language of these areas? Shouldn't it be light green perhaps? Maquahuitl 16:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

FROM IQBAL50000: WELL, CHITTAGONG HILL TRACTS ARE INSIDE BANGLADESH, AND NORTHERN WEST BENGAL IS IN WEST BENGAL STATE OF INDIA-WHICH IS OBVIOUS!, SO BOTH OF THE AREAS YOU MENTIONED ARE ALREADY ACKNOWLEDGED-NEEDLESS TO SAY!

Regional usage

I wonder how justifiable the east/west dichotomy is. There are similar difference north and south. Just emphasizing differences across political boundaries seems incomplete--ppm 07:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Second largest in India?

some sources say it's second, others point it's Telugu that's second. one of the sources given quotes only a 1991 census. the other is from Library of Congress. Language Engineering Research Centre at University of Hyderabad states it's Telugu that's in second. This one from a Chennai and this from Hyderabad institutes' papers says telugu is second. The official government website (ending with "nic.in") says In terms of population, Telugu ranks second to Hindi among the Indian languages. Shouldn't that be reflected accordingly in the article. Idleguy 08:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the confusion with this is the definition of “in India”: if it includes only speakers in West Bengal and not Bangladesh itself, then of course they wouldn’t outnumber speakers of Telugu! Unfortunately the political boundaries of “India” are still potentially confusing, even though Bangladesh has been a separate nation for over 35 years. MJ 18:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

You guys are forgetting that Bengali is very very widely spoken around India like in Orissa, Assam, Jharkhand, and all the seven states in the north-east of India apart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.98.112.251 (talk) 14:24, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

FROM IQBAL50000: REST ASSURED, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CONFUSION HERE! INDIAN GOVERNMENT SOURCES QUOTE BENGALI AS THE SECOND MOST WIDELY SPOKEN LANGUAGE IN INDIA, AFTER HINDI(AND THIS IS, NEEDLESS TO SAY, IN TERMS OF POPULATION SIZE-NOT LAND SIZE!). THESE SOURCES MOST OBVIOUSLY DO NOT INCLUDE BANGLADESH!!! IT IS A SEPARATE COUNTRY! I THINK THE INDIAN GOVERNMENT IS WELL AWARE OF THIS FACT! DON'T YOU THINK SO? PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW THE WHOLE DISCUSSION, ALONG WITH THE EVIDENCES/THE REFERENCES, THIS ARTICLE USED/CITED-BEFORE SAYING ANYTHING. IF YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCES TO BACK UP YOUR STATEMENT ABOUT THE POSSIBLE "CONFUSION" YOUR ARE REFERING TO, PLEASE PRESENT IT. UNTIL THEN PLEASE REFRAIN FROM MAKING ANY SUCH BASELESS STATEMENTS. ALL THE CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS DISCUSSION CANNOT ALL BE 'CONFUSED'-ONE OR TWO (ALONG WITH ME!) MAY BE, BUT ALL OF US CAN'T BE!BEST REGARDS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.142.81.167 (talk) 19:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Isn't চলিতভাষা pronounced as "cholit-bhasha" rather than "cholito-bhasha"? — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 16:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have heard both pronounciation in Kolkata region, though "cholit-bhasha" is probably more predominantly used.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting, I've been hearing "cholito-bhasha" or "cholti bhasha". --Ragib 20:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

This again illustrates regional variation :) Seniors in my family (who used to live in East Pakistan) says "cholti bhasha", whereas in my school days (in West Bengal) I have not heard this pronounciation. Here people use "cholit-bhasha", and also, "cholito-bhasha"!--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:28, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The Standard Colloquial Bengali (SCB) pronunciation is "cholito". --Zaheen 04:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Is it a cognate of the Hindi word chalte meaning "going". Contextually that's how I thought of it, as just the "going & coming" "everyday" dialect. (Hope you got my train of thought).Bakaman 02:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes. The participial adjective "cholito" is a derivative of the Bengali verb "chola" (to move, to go). The meaning of "cholito" in this context is "in vogue". --Zaheen 16:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Isn't standard colloquial bengali based entirely on the Kolkata dialect? Is this the accepted standard of west bengal only or of bangladesh also? It is fascinating though, my parents are bangladeshi and they say cholti-bhasha. Taajikhan 07:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

No, Standard Colloquial Bengali (Cholti Bangla) is not entirely based on the Kolkata dialect, although the two are relatively close (especially when compared to Bangladeshi dialects). It is based on the dialect of Nadia, which is not far from Kolkata. There is definitely a distinctive Kolkata dialect that can be heard in many movies and shows, and sometimes it's hard for people from Bangladesh to distinguish this from Cholti Bangla, but I presume people from West Bengali are more aware of the difference. Also, regarding your parents speaking Cholti Bangla in Bangladesh... I believe this is very common, especially among middle and upper class families in the cities. From my contacts and travels in Bangladesh, I've noticed this is growing more common with every generation in fact. Strange but interesting! --SameerKhan 08:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Please don't include Bangladesh for declaring Bengali as the second most spoken language 'in India'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.51.67.170 (talk) 23:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congrats everyone. The article is now featured ! Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The writing is still unclear in a few areas. The following doesn't flow.

Some argue for much earlier points of divergence — going back to even 500 CE[6] but the language was not static; different varieties coexisted and authors often wrote in multiple dialects. For example, Magadhi Apabhramsha is believed to have evolved into Magadhi Abahatta around the 6th century; Abahatta competed with Bengali for a period of time.

The first sentence is fine on its own. The second sentence, however, is awkward. Why was Magadhi Apabhramsa brought up? Which Abahatta "competed" with Bangla? When? What was the "competition" about? How does all this relate to the statements made in the first sentence? No brilliant prose here. --Zaheen 12:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The following does not sound right:

Like most other modern Indic languages, Bengali arose from the Magadhi Apabhramsha melting pot of Middle Indic languages, around the turn of the first millennium CE.

Chatterji's ODBL (1926) says on p. 91:

“ The modern represantatives of Magadhi Apabhramsa are Bengali, Assamese, Oriya, Magahi, Maithili and Bhojpuriya ”

These do not constitute "most other modern Indic languages", as the sentence under consideration suggests. Magadhi Apabrhamsa was spoken/used on the eastern parts of the subcontinent, possibly in Bihar-Bengal-Orissa region. --Zaheen 13:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

320 million?

320 million native speakers of Bengali? Where is this number coming from? Its unbelievably high--ppm 17:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

About 220-230 (at least) million of that is accounted for by Bengal area. I'm unsure if Bengalis spread around the word constitute a number as big as 0.1 billion. Anyone else has any ideas? My personal hunch is this was a result of competitive inflation with other South Asian languages. urnonav 16:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I think its just flat wrong. 220 sounds more reasonable. Also, apart from being totally unacceptable, I don't understand the motivation btw this contest, as regardless of the figures, Bangla will be placed in 2nd position as far as south asian languages are concerned.--ppm 20:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Its not about the motivation. Its about being correct or wrong. Bengali today has around 181000000+ (which is all set to increase after population census of India in 2011). Infact its not even a matter of a lot of pride but being factually correct is very important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.98.104.139 (talk) 22:44, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Where did this 300 million estimate come from? Maybe in another 50 years, but not yet. Besides, the source the number cites itself only claims 230 million. Judging by the estimates of Bangladesh, WB, Tripura populations and estimates of expats, there can't be too much more than 255 mil native speakers. Nevertheless, we gotta stick to the citations, so I'm changing it to 230 million.Taajikhan (talk) 22:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Apparently somebody reverted your edit, because it (again) says 300 million, which is way above the cited source, not to mention the Ethnologue and any other sources I've seen. I don't have time to do more, but I will edit the number down to 230 million, a number which I suspect is still too high, but which agrees with the cited source.

See also the discussion further down this page entitled "Added dubious tag - 230 mil speakers". Mcswell (talk) 20:36, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

pie chart

The pie chart shows todbhov words as being the largest component of Bangla vocabulary while the accompanying text has totshom words as the largest. Which is right? PEHook 01:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

the 2nd paragraph of the section answers your question--ppm 21:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Blanking of citation

I notice that Jerse (talk · contribs) has been removing the ranking citation repeatedly from the article. I request the user to discuss this here in the talk page before repeating the same thing. The citation clearly backs the information given in the page. This is a featured article, and undiscussed edits like this are unfortunate. Thank you. --Ragib 05:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, he has blanked the citation again. Note that his main argument is that the article on List of languages by native speakers ranks Bn as 7th. But that ranking is clearly arbitrary there (the two numbers column doesn't match with the ranking column). I request the restoration of the citation unless Jerse can come up with any solid argument. --Ragib 06:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I restored the citation--NAHID 12:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Writing System

Should we redirect the Writing System to Eastern Nagari script? After that, may be, we can merge Bengali script and Assamese script as these two articles essentially deal with the same set of scripts. -Bikram98 06:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

This has been discussed in Talk:Bengali script. I don't see any reason to merge the status quo ... --Ragib 06:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the following sentence:

“ The Bengali writing system is not alphabetical such as the Roman script. ”

What does it mean to be "alphabetical"? → AA ^{(talk • contribs)} — 16:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Please read Writing_system#Types of writing systems to understand the difference between alphabetical and abugida writing systems. --Zaheen 20:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I always assumed the term "alphabetical" referred to the ordering of the letters. I see it has a specific concept in linguistics. Amazing what things you learn here :) → AA ^{(talk • contribs)} — 20:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Vocabulary

"(67%) are considered tôtshôm (direct reborrowings from Sanskrit), 21,100 (28%) are tôdbhôb (native Bengali vocabulary), "

In all the languages I know (For eg Kannada and Marathi) Tatsama and Tadbhava are used respectively as 'directly borrowed/like' and 'derived from/originated from' sanskrit. So I was wondering if tôdbhôb explained as - native Bengali vocabulary is a correct translation. Both the words tatsama and taddbhava are sanskrit words with the meaning as I explained above and tôdbhôb definately sound like Tadbhava. --Kaveri 20:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually Bengali evolved not directly from Sanskrit, but via Prakrit. So, Sanskrit words in their unchanged form are called "Tatsama", while words that went through a sort of derivation/transformation are called "Tadbhaba" (I guess that's what you were referring to). Native Bengali words are not in either of these two sets ... --Ragib 20:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The terms "tatsama" (Sanskrit-borrowed), "ardhatatsama" (semi-Sanskrit-borrowed), "tadbhava" (Sanskrit-derived), "bangla" (Bengali), "deshi" (local), and "bideshi" (foreign) are somewhat misleading in Bengali dictionaries. "Tatsama", "ardhatatsama", "deshi", and "bideshi" are all borrowed words... where "tatsama" and "ardhatatsama" words are borrowed from Sanskrit, "deshi" words are borrowed from Austroasiatic languages, and "bideshi" words are borrowed from all other languages. "Tadbhava" and "bangla" words are normally grouped together as native/inherited words, although "tadbhava" means it existed in the earliest forms of Bengali (inherited vocabulary from Prakrit and thus from Sanskrit originally), and "bangla" means it was coined in Bengal but after Bengali had already become its own language.

As Ragib said, Bengali (as well as Marathi) evolved from other languages which in turn evolved from Sanskrit or at least something like Sanskrit. Kannada, of course, did not evolve from Sanskrit, but like Marathi and Bengali, it did borrow a large number of words from Sanskrit over its history. Words that were directly borrowed from Sanskrit after Sanskrit had ceased to be a spoken language are traditionally called "tatsama" (or in Bengali, tôtshômo). Some of these borrowed words replaced or stand beside other words which are actually also originally Sanskrit words but transformed over centuries of language change. For example, in Bengali there is a word কৃষি krishi "farming", which is a tatsama word (borrowed from Sanskrit after Sanskrit had ceased to be a normally spoken language), which stands beside the word চাষ chash "farming", which means the same thing and in fact derives from the same word কৃষি krishi. চাষ chash would be considered a tadbhava as it is an originally Sanskrit word that has undergone significant transformation in the development of the Bengali language. Now, the term "tadbhava" is still somewhat ambiguous. In the case of Bengali, which is an Indic language distantly descending from Sanskrit, "tadbhava" words are in fact the native words of the language. Some form of Sanskrit evolved into some form of Prakrit, which evolved into Old Bengali and so on. All the words from Sanskrit that still remain in Bengali (tadbhava) have of course undergone significant changes, but they are still the core native vocabulary of Bengali. In fact, Bengali dictionaries don't label many words as "native" The only words called "native" in Bengali are the ones that were coined in Bengal after most of the core vocabulary had already been established. These so-called "native" words only constitute a small fraction of the vocabulary that would actually be considered native/inherited in the linguistic sense (the tadbhava words). Anyhow I'm starting to ramble, but the main point is that the labels as they are in the article are accurate. --SameerKhan 07:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. So from the explanation (ramblings ;)) I gather that the category I call in Marathi vocabulary as Tadbhava would be called 'Native' in Bengali. --Kaveri 18:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

SameerKhan's explanation does not suport his end assertion..

     " but the main point is that the labels as they are in the article are accurate".

I Think tadbhava should not be translated as "native" but as "derived". In fact the word "Tadbhava" itself is a "Tatsama" word.. A Sanskrit word roughly meaning "as it became" . So in fact Bangla is very similar to Marathi in this respect. we have "Tatsama", "Tadbhava" , "Deshaj" and "Parabhashiya" ( Borrowed from sanskrit, derived from Sanskrit ( or originating in Snaskrit), "native" and "Borrowed from languages other than Sanskrit). I am reluctant to change this myself as I am neither a Bangla speaker nor an authority on the language. Just making a point.. see if anyone agrees!

Yes, but in this case, Bengali and Marathi (as languages) are derived from Sanskrit, so "tadbhava" can mean both "derived from Sanskrit" and "native". In Bengali, at least, tadbhava words are the Sanskrit-derived Prakrit words that were inherited into Bengali as it evolved out of Prakrit. Thus, they were the base of the language's vocabulary when the language began to develop out of Prakrit. Any Sanskrit word borrowed after that point is "tatsama", and any non-Sanskrit-derived word coined in Bengali after that point is "deshi". This is similar to Spanish and Latin. The core vocabulary of Spanish is simply Latin-derived words that evolved into what became the beginnings of Spanish (like "tadbhava"). But Spanish also re-borrowed Latin words after Latin had already ceased to be a spoken language and Spanish had already formed into an independent language. These re-borrowed words could be thought of as "tatsama". Then of course a few words simply came about independently in the Spanish-speaking world ("deshi").

One must remember that all languages came from other languages. That doesn't mean they all borrowed their vocabulary from other languages. Every language inherits some words and borrows others. Bengali inherited a large vocabulary from its parent language Prakrit, which inherited its vocabulary from its parent language, Sanskrit. These are not borrowings, as the words form a direct line of evolution down from Sanskrit through Prakrit to Bengali. These would be called "native words" by most linguists and "tadbhava words" by Indian scholars. Then of course Bengalis (and presumably Marathi-speakers as well) borrowed more Sanskrit vocabulary to supplement the vocabulary they already inherited. These are the "tatsama" words. Anyhow, I'm not so good at explaining things when I'm not talking to someone in person... so I really apologize if this isn't helping! --SameerKhan 07:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The graph seems to have mixed tathshom with tadbhab. the legend shows the majority to be tadbhab whereas the article and the discussion states that tathshom is the majority. --AmmarK 01:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

tatsama

Hello, I have created Tatsama and would appreciate contribution from Bangla scholars. I myself am mainly busy with Sinhala alphabet, but I find it very interesting that very similar socio-etymological patterns are found in Bangla and Sinhala Jasy jatere 19:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Rank of Bengali in World Languages: ignatius.edu is not WP:RS; 21 Feb in lead

This school webpage:

• "The World's Most Widely Spoken Languages". Saint Ignatius High School. February 6, 2001. Retrieved 2006-11-17. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |rank= ignored (help)

is based on 1999 ethnologue.com data and is clearly not WP:RS. The article is already referring to the 2007 encarta data (rank 6) and the 2005 ethnologue data (rank 5); if there are other trustworthy sources, let's have them.

The ignatius high school thing is not even a proper study :)) Its just random rambling and opinion of the school. It is very funny that someone cited this as an original source :)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.98.104.139 (talk) 22:47, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, I feel Ekushe february is an important aspect distinguising Bengali and the power the language holds on its people; added a brief summary on this in the lead. mukerjee (talk) 21:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I would like to have the words "widely spoken" rephrased to something else, because Bengali is not exactly one of the most widely spoken languages in the world. "Widely" primarily means "over a great (geographical) extent".--Zaheen 03:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

from iqbal50000: "WIDELY SPOKEN" DOES ACTUALLY MEAN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO SPEAK IT, AND NOT THE SIZE OF THE AREAS ITS SPOKEN IN! IF THAT WAS THE CASE, ENGLISH, SPANISH, RUSSIAN, WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS MORE "WIDELY SPOKEN" THAN MANDARIN, SINCE THESE LANGUAGES COVER MORE AREAS! THE TERM "WIDELY SPOKEN" IN THIS CONTEXT, IS USED IN ALL THE PUBLISHED SOURCES I ENCOUNTERED SO FAR IN MY LIFE. CAN YOU GIVE ANY PUBLISHED/PEER-REVIEWED SOURCES, WHERE ANOTHER PHRASE IS USED INSTEAD OF "WIDELY SPOKEN" IN THE CONTEXT OF NUMBER OF SPEAKERS OF A LANGUAGES? IF SO PLEASE PRESENT IT, SINCE I AM YET TO SEE SUCH SOURCES.

BENGALI IS SPOKEN BY A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE AS MOTHER TONGUE, AND THATS WHAT IT MEANS WHEN THE PHRASE "WIDELY SPOKEN" IS USED. AS FAR AS I AM AWARE, THIS IS THE USUAL TERMINOLOGY IN THE FIELD. BENGALI/BANGLA IS SOMETIMES CONSIDERED AS ONE OF THE WORLDS ARTERIAL LANGUAGES, AS ITS A COMMON MEANS OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN LARGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE, WHO ARE ONE OF THE LARGEST LINGUISTIC GROUPS OF THE PLANET. THERE'S OVER 3500 LANGUAGES IN THE WORLD, AND BANGLA IS THE SIXTH!.BEST REGARDS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.142.81.167 (talk) 18:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you seem to be right. Widely does mean "among a large number of people" here. I forgot about the secondary meaning of the word. On a different note, could you not use all caps? Basic netiquette. --Zaheen 23:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Added dubious tag - 230 mil speakers

All other wikipedia articles which cite sources indicate a lower number of speakers than that. Although these may be outdated due to population growth, it's still our job to use the cited numbers. I'm not too sure what to write though, but I added the dubious tag because this info is likely to be wrong (concerning the number of speakers). Althena (talk) 07:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Added a reference supporting the number. The info isn't likely to be wrong, considering the population of Bangladesh, West Bengal, Parts of Assam/Bihar/Tripura etc. --Ragib (talk) 09:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment from blogsd

is it a joke this article and every article related Bangla (Bengali) there was a lots of lots of bangla latter typing mistake . there is no The Bengali consonant clusters Latter ( juktakkhor in Bengali) . Why ??? . The "oukar" ঔ / কৌ and okar ও / কো Latter is totally wrong . wrong type oukar " কৌ " right type oukar is " ৈকা similarly wrong type okar কো right type েকা . if u dont change it . some time its convey deferent meaning and maximam time no meaning. its just look like " wkipidaeio.gr " does it has any meaing or "wikipedia.org has meaning . person who dont know bangla will think this is "কৌ" right type . thats not good for bangla launge . --Blogsd ! 21:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

It is your machine that needs to be fixed. In other words, your browser/system is not at all configured to show unicode characters properly. You'd find the same problems viewing any other Indic script. Please refer to WP:INDIC for instructions on how to fix your browser. I'm copying the response to your talk page too so that you can fix it. Feel free to contact me if you still have problems fixing your system. --Ragib (talk) 07:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Bangla or Bengali

Why is the article called Bengali and Not Bangla —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.193.170.34 (talk) 14:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

English Wikipedia uses common English names and Bengali is easily more recognizable in English than Bangla. --Regents Park (moult with my mallards) 17:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

International Mother Language Day

The article gives the impression that UNESCO celebrates IMLD as a sort of commemoration of the event in 1952. However, the UNESCO website ([2]) does not make this connection. My guess is that the idea came about independently, and then the day was picked to synchronize with the Bangladesh holiday. Someone should rewrite this accordingly and cite appropriately. (Also, the subsequently gives the impression that the two events happened close together in time. However, the firings were in 1952 and IMLD came about in 1999.)--Regents Park (moult with my mallards) 17:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Here is a quote from a UNESCO website: "In recognition of the Bangla Language Movement, the International Mother Language Day was declared in Resolution 12 of UNESCO`s 30th General Conference in 1999.".

Also, note that the resolution 12 was a result of the acceptance of the proposal submitted by Bangladesh, and supported by several other countries, adopted by UNESCO. The specific text of the Bangladeshi proposal adopted into Resolution 12 reads: "Recognizing the unprecedented sacrifice made by Bangladesh for the cause of mother language on 21 February 1952,"[3] --Ragib (talk) 17:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

OK. Mea culpa. I'll pop in the citations and make a small change to the text. --Regents Park (moult with my mallards) 18:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Quick additional note. The first link above ([4]) is a quote that refers to Resolution 12 of UNESCO's 30th general conference (http://www.unesco.org/education/imld_2002/resolution_en.shtml) doesn't refer to the event. The second link ([5]) does but is a draft resolution. I've included the second link as a reference in the article but if someone can find a better citation (either where the draft resolution is accepted or in any UNESCO document) that would be much better. --Regents Park (moult with my mallards) 18:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I think we can refer to this UNESCO journal, no.11, 30th session, Monday nov 8, 1999. It mentions that "30 C/DR.35 Submitted by: Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia. Supported by: Oman, Benin, Sri Lanka, Egypt, Russian Federation Bahamas, Dominican Republic, Belarus, Philippines, Côte d'Ivoire, India, Honduras, Gambia, Federated States of Micronesia, Vanuatu, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Comoros, Pakistan, Islamic Republic of Iran, Lithuania, Italy, Syrian Arab Republic".

On the Journal no. 16 (page 6), it is mentioned that on 10 am Nov 12, 6th meeting, this resolution was examined and recommended. The following text from UNESCO also shows that as a result of this draft amendment submitted by Bangladesh (Dr.35), the commission made the following recommendation:

30 C/DR.35 (submitted by Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia; supported by Oman, Benin,Sri Lanka, Egypt, the Russian Federation, Bahamas, Dominican Republic, Belarus, the Philippines, Côte d’Ivoire, India, Honduras, Gambia, the Federated States of Micronesia, Vanuatu, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Comoros, Pakistan, Islamic Republic of Iran, Lithuania, Italy and the Syrian Arab Republic) relating to paragraph 05204, the Commission recommends that the General Conference proclaim “International Mother Language Day” to be observed on 21 February.

I hope this helps. :) Thanks. --Ragib (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Additional Source

This book (full-text available online) may be used as an additional source in this article. Arman ^(Talk) 02:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation of ê

I’m confused as to how the this vowel should be pronounced. According to the table in the phonology section, ê is a low-mid front unrounded vowel, which is indicated with an epsilon [ɛ] in IPA. The symbol [æ] is a low front unrounded vowel, which would be placed one box lower in the table. According to my understanding of IPA, either the symbol [æ] is incorrect, or it’s placement in the table is wrong. languagegeek (talk) 06:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Romanization issues

Two topics regarding romanization of Bengali are presented at Talk:Bengali script. Please discuss them there if you care. — AjaxSmack 01:37, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Help needed at Imagine Peace Tower page

There is an opportunity to add the Bengali version of the English imperative phrase "Imagine Peace" to the In Other Languages section of Yoko Ono's Imagine Peace Tower. Use the proper script if possible, and put all in upper case if applicable. Insert in the list alphabetically. If a choice of expression, select that used by "the common man". Thanks. Irv (talk) 20:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Banglapedia links

I have fixed some Banglapedia links, but possibly not all of them. The old URLs of the form

• http://banglapedia.org/HT/xxx.htm

no longer work. Instead, you have to use

• http://www.banglapedia.org/httpdocs/HT/xxx.HTM

(with uppercase HTM!)

Thnidu (talk) 20:29, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Which English?

Which variety of English is the article supposed to be using? I am seeing both UK and US spellings.
Not a crisis. Just asking.
Varlaam (talk) 15:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Transliteration of sample texts

I was wondering why the faithful-to-script transliteration of the sample text uses ITRANS instead of the National Library at Kolkata romanization, which is considered more standard and academic. It seems that Wikipedia policy (Wikipedia:Indic transliteration scheme) is to use ISO 15919, which is basically identical to NLK. I'd like to change the ITRANS text to NLK/ISO if no one is opposed. Bʌsʌwʌʟʌ ^{Speak up!} 00:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I think User:SameerKhan (a linguist by training) and User:Zaheen are more qualified to answer your question, so perhaps you can drop a note to them? --Ragib (talk) 03:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

It's true; I don't think there's any reason why we should favor one transliteration over another unless there is a precedent on Wikipedia. I've changed it to NLK, since that's closer to what is used for other Indic languages on Wikipedia. --SameerKhan (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks great, thanks! Bʌsʌwʌʟʌ ^{Speak up!} 03:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Lingua Franca?

Hi, editors of Bengali language. I'm currently working on cleaning up the Lingua franca page, on which Bengali is currently listed. I'd like your input on this issue. First, the definition of a lingua franca, per that page, is " a language systematically used to communicate between persons not sharing a mother tongue, in particular when it is a third language, distinct from both persons' mother tongues." Based on my initial reading of this page, I'm inclined to say that Bengali does not actually meet this criteria--that is, that Bengali is actually the native language of people who regularly use it. It's clearly both the official and national language of Bangaldesh. In India, though, I'm unclear how it's used. Is it mainly spoken as a native language? Or are there a large group of people who learn Bengali as a second (or third, etc.) language as a means of communicating with others who don't share their own language? For instance, English clearly meets the definition of lingua franca for India, and Hindi probably does as well, as they are learned as second languages for the purpose of communicating with people of different native languages. But I can't tell if Bengali fits this category. I appreciate any input you can give me on this issue. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:10, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

From your definition of Lingua Franca, I would say Bengali does not meet the definition at all. In Bangladesh, Bengali is spoken as a native language. In India, wherever Bengali is spoken, it is spoken primarily by the Bengali people. Non-Bengalis, even those living in the state of West Bengal of India, would probably use Hindi or some dialect of it. So, Bengali is again not a lingua franca according to your definition. --Ragib (talk) 07:46, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, many non-Bengalis in West Bengal do speak Bengali as a second/third language, especially when dealing with Bengali people. Of course non-Bengalis use their own mother tongue (such as, Hindi) at home.--Dwaipayan (talk) 22:21, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

That's not between non-Bengalis. Also, I've never heard of the term "lingua franca" used for a national or official language used within its domain. Nearly every major national/official language would be a lingua franca by that definition, since immigrants would speak to each other in it. — kwami (talk) 23:03, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Countries where Bengali is spoken.png Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Countries where Bengali is spoken.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 5 June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:26, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Sierra Leone

I've adjusted the "official status" of the language in Sierra Leone to just a mention of the announcement, because nothing seems to have been done about it since 2002. Usually, official status requires some form of legislation. Dbfirs 07:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
By the way, maybe a note should be attached in the "countries where Bengali has official status" to explain the formal character of the face. Lori 18/11/2012 03:16 GMT+1

Shadhu bhasha

I made a slight change to the comment on Shadhu Bhasha being "negligible" in modern writing, as it can still be found on street signs in Bangladesh, as in the very common phrase নির্মাণ কাজ চলিতেছে nirman kaj cholitechhe ("construction work is in progress"), which would be নির্মাণ কাজ চলছে nirman kaj cholchhe in Manno Cholit Bhasha. I've seen this myself in Dhaka, and I also found a photo on a blog with the same text: http://media.somewhereinblog.net/images/pervezctg_1247376852_3-image004.jpg --SameerKhan (talk) 17:13, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Deleted paragraph

I don't know where this person got this paragraph from. It was in the history section, and someone added a citation needed tag in April of this year. But clearly, it doesn't reflect any generally accepted linguistic perspective, if any perspective at all. Even linguistic macrofamily hypotheses don't posit similarities in syntax between the disparate languages and families.

"The influence of the Turkic languages of Central Asia can also be seen in Bengali and the other Indo-Aryan languages of non-peninsular India. More significantly, although the vocabulary bases are quite different, the Indo-Aryan languages share, with the Dravidian languages to their south, and with Turkic and certain other language groups of Eurasia (extending even to Mongolian, Korean and Japanese) a similar syntax (especially as regards word-order and the use of post-positions and other devices). This points, perhaps, to deep ancient connections among the people now speaking these languages that differ so much in vocabulary. These connections may have been obscured by conquests—and the subsequent adoption, in ancient times, of much of the vocabulary (but far less of the syntax) of the languages of conquerors such as the Arya by the conquered peoples of Bengal—and other places in South Asia where Indo-Aryan tongues are currently spoken."

Fmqtr3754 (talk) 07:21, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

"Long" literary tradition

The introduction noted "With a long and rich literary tradition." Bengali literature dates back to 10th and 11th centuries, when Bengali along with the other New Indo-Aryan languages arose, but copious literature dates only from the mid-19th century, the start of what is termed the Bengali Renaissance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmqtr3754 (talk • contribs) 07:28, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Genealogy of Bengali

Rigvedic was a written dialect of Indo-Aryan. Any written dialect of a spoken language is not the only dialect that is spoken. And likewise Rigvedic wasn't the dialect spoken by all Indo-Aryan speakers at the time of its writing just like Shakespeare's and Chaucer's English were not the only English dialects spoken at their time. Take another sacred language closely related to Rigvedic, Older Avestan. It is separated by about 1000 years from Younger Avestan and is not its direct ancestor.

In the case of the early Prakrits (recorded only as the so-called Dramatic Prakrits, as opposed to the late Prakrits, Apabhraṃśa), not only is it expected that they are not a direct continuation of language of the Rigveda, which was composed by an Indo-Aryan-speaking priesthood in the mid-second millennium BCE, like Younger Avestan, morphological (grammatical) and lexical (words) features indicate that they are not a continuation of the older dialect. In fact, the Vedas themselves don't exhibit morphological and lexical continuity.

In summary, it is only a popular conception that "Sanskrit" (in linguistic context, referring only to Classical Sanskrit) is the ancestor of the modern Indo-Aryan languages, just like it is also popularly conceived that Romance languages descend from Latin. But like many popular etymologies, these popular conceptions are actually incorrect. Modern and historical languages are composed of many dialects, not all of which are written down. Likewise, the dialect on which written Bengali was based in the early 19th century was not the only dialect that was spoken.

I made a revert to this edit made in July:

Along with other Eastern Indo-Aryan languages, Bengali evolved circa 1000–1200 AD from the Magadhi Prakrit, which developed from a dialect or group of dialects that were close to, but different from, Vedic and Classical Sanskrit. It is now the primary language spoken in Bangladesh and is the second most commonly spoken language in India.

to:

Along with other Eastern Indo-Aryan languages, Bengali evolved from the Magadhi Prakrit and Sanskrit languages. It is now the primary language spoken in Bangladesh and is the second most commonly spoken language in India. All the Indo-Aryan languages including Bengali, Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, Oriya, Assamese are called the daughters of Sanskrit. For counter-views regarding such deterministic linear history that leads to historicism (see Althusser), one may browse some different articles.

Frankenstein5689 (talk) 10:15, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

References

"Secondary language in the City of Karachi" ref needed

Just seen User:Faizan_Al-Badri reverted a sentence of another user, which says "It is also a recognized secondary language in the City of Karachi in Pakistan.". As a Bengali, I don't ever hear about that, my be my lack of knowledge. Could you please provide the reference? Please enlighten me.--FreemesM ^(talk) 07:20, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done Faizan (talk) 07:44, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Dear Faizan, thanks for your quick response. But DEMOTIX is not a reliable source it is "The Network for Freelance Photojournalists". Another one is bbc Urdu link, sorry to say I can't read Urdu. could you please help me to search another English reference or translate the specific part of the BBC news, which supports your statement?--FreemesM ^(talk) 07:54, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I've translated the bbc news on google translator, but can't get a single word about official recognition of "Bengali is Secondary language in the City of Karachi". Do you have more references? That section named Official status, is describing those organizations or states/country, which officially recognize Bengali as their language. I think description of Department of Bengali in the University of Karachi is irrelevant here. As thousands of universities worldwide offers Bengali course, we should not list them down here.--FreemesM ^(talk) 08:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Obviously, if Bengalis live in Pakistan, for which I have provided an Urdu BBC reference, then "Bengali is Secondary language in the City of Karachi"! And the reference for University of Karachi is to support the Bengalis in Pakistan. I have found new references, and am adding them. Faizan (talk) 08:20, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to say, but "Bengalis live in Pakistan" does not mean "Bengali is Secondary language in the City of Karachi". As example thousands of Pakistani (More specifically Bihari, who introduce themselves as Pakistani!) live in Dhaka, Bangladesh, but Urdu is not second language here.--FreemesM ^(talk) 08:26, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Urdu is! See the article for references on this perspective. Urdu is widely spoken by the Pakistani Biharis in Bangladesh. Faizan (talk) 08:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done I have added more references. Faizan (talk) 08:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

• Comment Secondary language or no-secondary-language, the point is that there are two million Bengalis in Karachi, which is the third largest Bengali population in the world after Bangladesh and India. The Bengali language definitely exists in Pakistan, so it would definitely be WP:DUE to mention it on this article. PS. On a different note, I am aware that there also used to be a Bengali-language newspaper in Karachi, known as the Daily Qaumi Bandhan. Not sure if it still gets published though... Mar4d (talk) 08:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Dear Mar4d, I don't think just a news paper mean anything. Population is a matter, then it will be better to state that a huge population in Pakistan talks in Bengali, but before explaining is secondary language, it requires official recognition.--FreemesM ^(talk) 09:09, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Dear Faizan, which sentences actually supports "It is also a recognized secondary language in the City of Karachi in Pakistan."? Your new source explain The Language Movement and is an editorial type of writing. Again I want to say offering Bengali course doesn't support it's recognition as secondary language. As example few universities in USA offers Bengali course, does Bengali their secondary language?--FreemesM ^(talk) 09:03, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

With regards to your reply to me, no, I wasn't trying to say that a single newspaper is what makes the language notable in the country. I was merely trying to point out that there exists a Bengali community in Pakistan and we have evidence that Bengali is written/spoken there. It should be mentioned somewhere in the article if it isn't. Mar4d (talk) 09:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Spoken and literary varieties: spellings, articles, sections

The spellings "Choltibhasha" and "Shadhubhasha" seem to be in more common use in English than the spelling (and pronunciation) "Cholito bhasha" and "Shadhu-bhasha". I've changed them accordingly at the heads of the bullet points in Bengali language#Spoken and literary varieties, mentioning alternate forms in parens. I've also added a redirect page Shadhubhasha → Shadhu-bhasha.

In general, the spellings are chaotic and should be cleaned up. Further, the beginning text of Bengali dialects#Spoken and literary variants is almost identical to that of Bengali language#Spoken and literary varieties (in this article), but diverges a lot after the bullets, and this article's section has far more references. ISTM that the two sections should be merged, and one transcluded into the other. --Thnidu (talk) 17:37, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

ami tumake valobashi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.101.231.254 (talk) 16:22, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Bengali language materials

https://archive.org/details/grammarofbengali00forbiala

https://archive.org/details/grammarofbengale00carerich

https://archive.org/details/companiontojohns00mendrich

https://archive.org/details/bengalienglishdi00syke

https://archive.org/details/dictionaryoflawo00robiuoft

https://archive.org/details/dictionarybengal1687haug

https://archive.org/details/adictionaryprin00unkngoog

https://archive.org/details/dictionaryofprin00drozrich

https://archive.org/details/originofbengalis00rakhuoft

https://archive.org/details/historyofbengali00sendrich

https://archive.org/details/historyofbengali00mazuiala

https://archive.org/details/historyofbengali00vijauoft

https://archive.org/details/aranyasanhitaofs00kuth

https://archive.org/details/holybibleinbenga00brit

https://archive.org/details/psalmsofdavidpro00weng

https://archive.org/details/gospelsaccording00elle

https://archive.org/details/mrklikhitasusa00thom

https://archive.org/details/catalogueofbenga00brit

https://archive.org/details/bengalisuppcatal00brit

https://archive.org/details/bengalibooksinli00brit

Rajmaan (talk) 23:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Internal links on "official" and "national" language

I reverted a revert on my insertion of internal links to pages on official language and national language. Not clear on what criteria the links were removed.--A12n (talk) 14:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Bangla spellings of non-Bangla words

When discussing topics that aren't Bangla proper - such as Apabhramshas, Prakrits and the like - we should use the standard forms most commonly used in the appropriate English literature. There is no cause to spell Apabhramsha "opôbhrômsho", for example, since the entirety of scholarly works in English (and outside any Bongo publications) use the spelling "Apabhramsha" or the IAST equivalent. It is needlessly obscurantist. Also, if you have an objection to an edit that has a few single word changes in it and many other changes as well, there's no call to revert the entire edit. Please note Wikipedia:Indic transliteration applies to periods before Bengali; and even if you were to disagree on that, Romanization of Bengali even specifies "In addition, when representing a Bengali word to allow speakers of other languages to pronounce it easily, it may be better to use a transcription, which does not include the silent letters and other idiosyncrasies (e.g. স্বাস্থ্য sbasthyô, spelled <swāsthya>, or অজ্ঞান ôggên, spelled <ajñāna>) that make Bengali romanization so complicated." Ogress _smash! 13:38, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

You reverted my edits again en masse with the edit summary "discuss on talk" - 1. I did post on talk and 2. you are reverting en masse instead of fixing a handful of words. Ogress _smash! 18:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

STOP!, your edits on the page Bengali language are not constructive and no-improvement!

examples of your edits:

• Eastern = Eastern Zone (Magadhan) =X (too bulky and long, Eastern is understood)
• Bengali writing system is a script not alphabet system.
• you removed the India flag Icon
• ôrdhômagôdhi = Ārdhāmagādhi =X We are transcribing/romanizing Bangla in this article, not Indic scripts in this articles.
• and so many spelling errors and changes, please stop un constructive edits. বব২৬ (talk) 03:11, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

There are no spelling errors. Wikipedia links to Bengali alphabet, not script; you can't criticise me for following Wikipedia's own standards. We are translating Bangla when it is BANGLA, not when it is discussing other topics such as Middle Prakrits. Except when speaking Bangla, no one refers to Ārdhāmagādhi as "Ôrdhômogôdhi". This is the English Wikipedia and you can't link to every single thing on the page in Bangla just because that's what the page is about. 05:06, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

You have mass-reverted my edits FIVE TIMES in the last half-day and you do not discuss, you order. Your behavior is unacceptable. Ogress _smash! 05:14, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

If you talk about Romanization, then let me tell you, no Romanization systems have been adopted in standard or officially. So the Romanization which represents and transcribes Bengali script to Roman script with true phonetic values is widely used to transcribe Bengali. Don't try to use Devanagari style Romanization in articles with Bangla text. Hope you understand. বব২৬ (talk) 05:34, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Your comments appear suddenly after I reported you? Ogress _smash! 05:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

I am not in front of my PC all time, hence it takes time for me to reply and talk on various pages. Thank you, Cheer up ^__^ বব২৬ (talk) 06:14, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Not all of Ogress' edit are wrong, so বব২৬ should not revert everything. But again, Ogress went on restoring and editing disputed content before discussing properly. Both should, either have seek a WP:3O or resolved it in discussion. In a way বব২৬'s attempt to restore to earlier version is correct, as it is a norm to keep the article in rest to a previous version until a consensus is reached. I'd carefully see each edits and comment on them later. – nafSadh did say 19:45, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

First, I would like to ask বব২৬ if he agrees to allow me to restore the content that does not involve the romanisation issue. There's a lot of redirects and grammar things I fixed in that article and I don't think those are at contest. If it doesn't involve Bengali romanisation (or my apparent syntax error that removed the flag of India, which was an inadvertent error), I'd like to go back and fix those things.

Second, I tried posting a compromise version that retained the Bengali romanisation of things, but you simply reverted that. Your claim is that since this page is about the Bengali language, all romanisation of words on the page from Indic scripts should be according to the particular Bengali romanisation scheme you are using. But the Bengali romanisation is based on transcribing modern colloquial speech, not script, thus giving a romanisation that often does not match the written form. For example, the article discusses Ôrdhômagôdhi - but the IAST/Kolkota standard form used by scholars and libraries for the last century+ is Ardhamāgadhī, which does not match the Bengali romanisation in terms of length marking and vowel quality. It's unpredictable: you can't reverse-engineer the devanagari form from the romanisation! And, as I pointed out Romanization of Bengali itself states:

In addition, when representing a Bengali word to allow speakers of other languages to pronounce it easily, it may be better to use a transcription, which does not include the silent letters and other idiosyncrasies (e.g. স্বাস্থ্য sbasthyô, spelled <swāsthya>, or অজ্ঞান ôggên, spelled <ajñāna>) that make Bengali romanization so complicated.

The standard for scholarly works on Indic languages is IAST for Sanskrit and Kolkota Library for Indic languages in general; these are the forms commonly used when romanising Indic languages across the board. In fact, you piped Wikipedia pages using the IAST/Kolkota standard in order to give a Bengali romanisation for them; this, I think, is obscurantist as the romanisation of Bengali is for Bengali, not Apabhramsa (or even Abahatta). If this page were on the Bengali romanised Wikipedia, it would be appropriate to discuss "Ôrdhômogôdhi", but since this is the English Wikipedia, people who are unfamiliar with Bengali romanisation but are familiar with Indic linguistics will still not be able to recognise that word for Ardhamāgadhī. Is this not a valid concern? Ogress _smash! 21:27, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

In the spirit of the honor of collaboration, both of you should refrain from making ANY edit in this article for three days. That is generally the ideal period to cool down from an steaming edit war. Meanwhile keep talking here. – nafSadh did say 23:00, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Standard (Bangla Academy) Bengali translit is mostly XHK (almost same as Kolkata) with the exception for ং is ng, The wiki standard is not standard. Looking at this comparison some of Ogress's edit are not entirely correct. Including:

• Eastern Zone (Magadhan) should be Eastern only. Magadhan is not universally accepted name amongst scholars.
• Eastern Zone Indo-Aryan languages should be Eastern Indo-Aryan languages
• to centuries of contact with Europeans, Mongols, Arabs, --> here it is Mughals, not Mongols
• It shall be Persia or Persia, as Persia is the common English word to refer to that land. Iran generally means present-day state.

Most changes in romanization done by Ogress appears to be correct. – nafSadh did say 23:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Some of those things you list as incorrect are the actual wikipages here at Wikipedia. Persia might arguably be the common term but the Wikiproject and Wikipedia have decided on Iran and Greater Iran as the correct terms and Persia is a redirect, as evidenced by your pipe. The "Mughals" were not an ethnic group but an empire, so that sentence should be rewritten to clarify what it means. Eastern Zone or Eastern is fine.

I had not planned to make any changes for a period of time but even then discussion is in order, so I figured I'd try to organise what is and isn't an issue to be handled so there isn't any confusion. XHK does not seem suitable for usage on the wiki as it appears to be case-sensitive, although the article about it on Wikipedia then follows up with what appears to be IAST/Kolkata-like forms. Ogress _smash! 23:33, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

That is what pipes for, use more understandable term and redirect to more correct. Global community respect Iran's plea to call them Iran, so main article location is Iran; but generally we do not associate the word Iran to historic Persia, as we do associate Persia with.

It is true that Mughals are not a nation, so the sentence beg rewrite. But using Mongols is factually incorrect.

The article [[Indo-Aryan languages itself requires a lot of improvements.

The XHK column in Romanization of Bengali uses no cap. I am neither talking about XHK, I am talking about Bangla Academy standard. It is not listed in the article. I attempted to insert, but it is a long boring task to do so. The standard Bangla Academy transilt is almost similar to NLK and XHK with a few changes. NLK uses ē for এ but Bangla Academy uses e. – nafSadh did say 00:45, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for waiting patiently for me be online back again and reply to the talk page, "User".

To "Nafee" I agree to allow to restore the content that does not involve the Romanization issue, I myself am fixing it.

And talking about Romanization I think the phonetic Romanization shall remain as it is, it will not make a difference at all. For example me stating "ôpôbhrôngshô" on the article (as you said it may confuse users from the term "Apabhraṃśa"). No! It wont confuse, use tags like ""[ [ Apabhraṃśa | ôpôbhrôngshô ] ]"", so it will redirect user/reader to correct page, and on those pages for sure you have the description as ""Apabhraṃśa (Sanskrit: अपभ्रंश, IPA: [əpəbʱrə̃ˈɕə], Prakrit: Avahansa, Bengali: অপভ্রংশ ôpôbhrôngshô) is a term..."". The same for Tôtsômô, where the article says that it is differently spelled in Bangla, and many such... So I don't think the phonetic Romanization of Bangla should be a problem. Thank you. বব২৬ (talk) 04:11, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@বব২৬ I prefer to be called as Sadh in person but on Wiki it is nafSadh. About romanization, I don't like to translit অ with a, but like it with with ô. But, the thing is, we have to stick to standards to avoid confusion. The reason a is linked to অ is because those letters have same root as origin. – nafSadh did say 04:19, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

বব২৬ please refrain from editing this article for a while, as other party, Ogress is also refraining from it -- to cool down from the war. – nafSadh did say 06:35, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Number of speakers

There's a discrepancy of 70 million speakers between the lede and the infobox. Why is this? FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 17:24, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Discrepancy between Telugu and Bengali articles

I have posted a talk topic on the Telugu language talk page on an apparent discrepancy between the Telugu and Bengali articles concerning Sanskrit ancestry. Thisisnotatest (talk) 23:39, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Burden is not trivially additive

However, since this change is not as widespread and is not being followed as uniformly in the rest of the Bengali printed literature, today's Bengali-learning children will possibly have to learn to recognize both the new "transparent" and the old "opaque" forms, which ultimately amounts to an increase in learning burden.

If the logic behind that conclusion was as impeccable as it wishes to appear, one could make the same claim about children learning English with Mother Goose in hieroglyphics as an intermediate step, which I certainly wouldn't myself.

The above statement is not supported by the theory of learning as I understand it. Even in software development there's a maxim that sometimes the shortest path to a working system is to write it twice, with the prototype going directly into the round file once its purpose (bootstrapping the process) has run its course.

I thus regard the above statement as unsubstantiated conjecture. — MaxEnt 03:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree. It’s not at all like the situation with, e.g., Traditional vs. Simplified Chinese, where there are different forms of thousands of characters, most of which are derived by various rules. That really does increase the burden. This “transparent” Bengali is more like the idea of horizontal Korean, where the same individual glyphs that everyone already knows are simply written in sequence rather than combined (into syllable blocks for Korean, or clusters for Bengali). No one who reads the script at all would have to learn more in order to read the simplified version. (Not that I’m advocating the use of these simplifications; just that I agree with your point about the text in this article.) MJ (t • c) 00:58, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bengali language. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_29-12-2002_pg9_6

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:38, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bengali language. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121119232520/http://www.21stfebruary.org/eassy21_5.htm to http://www.21stfebruary.org/eassy21_5.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:14, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Shouldn't "Bengali" be replaced with "Bangla"?

In the eight amendment to the constitution of Bangladesh in 1988, "Bengali" was replaced with "Bangla". Government documents write Bangla, not Bengali. So I think the page should be moved to Bangla language. If "Kolkata" can replace "Calcutta", why can't "Bangla" replace "Bengali"? What do you say? - Smmmaniruzzaman (talk) 04:50, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

• Agree with the proposal. Its high time we renamed the article to Bangla. - Mar11 (talk) 13:07, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Because we use the most common name. Not the most official name. And also: Bengali is not only spoken in Bangladesh, but also in West Bengalen. --Wester (talk) 23:45, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I support the name change. People of Bengal region (both Bangladesh and West Bengal) calls this language Bangla. I fail to see why the Wikipedia article should call it Bengali.Shopnochura (talk) 11:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Strongly, very strongly disagree. The common norm is that the local language speaking community decides how they are going to spell foreign names. Otherwise we will have to call Japanese "nihongo", Chinese "Putonghua" or some such. This is madness. We will then have to rename every single language's name in all the languages in the world to reflect the local pronunciation. This is NOT how language works. Every language community interprets and spells foreign names in their own way. A foreign language speaker doesn't determine the spelling of the local language. That has historically been the overwhelmingly common way of doing things. The same people who prefer "Bangla" would never prefer to rename other language names in their own Bengali language. Because that would be madness. It would deny hundreds of years of naming tradition in Bengali. For example Japanese is called "Japani" in Bengali. We have millions of texts where "japani" is used. It will probably never be converted to ""nihongo". Just like that, it has been hundreds of years and milions of texts where the English writers have used "Bengali". It would be equally absurd to change it. NOBODY CARES. Only a misguided foreign person who has misappropriated the English language as his own would feel this kind of absurd entitlement to change the language of the Anglo-Saxons. This is unwarranted overreach. Zaheen (talk) 20:25, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Wikipedia uses the most common name worldwide and not any official name. Also Bengali is not limited to Bangladesh, Indian states of West Bengal and Tripura uses the term Bengali to till this date. -- Manasbose ^{(talk | edits)} 19:58, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Strongly Oppose - Bengali is the English name for the language. By that logic, German language should be renamed to Deutsch. UserNumber (talk) 14:07, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Oppose - This is an English Wikipedia, thus we will be using the WP:COMMONNAME that appears in the "English" sources, which is Bengali and not Bangla. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:30, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bengali language. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130210004955/http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/Statement1.htm to http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/Statement1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 22:04, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

"Bengali" changed to "Bangla" in Mediawiki software

Please see this discussion about a recent change from "Bengali" to "Bangla" in the Mediawiki software. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:05, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

The archived discussion is now at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 28#Bengali or Bangla?, and the consensus was to revert the change and retain the Western form "Bengali". Dbfirs 07:49, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

World Map

The world map that was previously displayed on this page shows the Bangladeshi diaspora, which is not the same as the Bengali-speaking people worldwide. I have removed it pending a more accurate map. Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 09:00, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Bengali as honorary official language of Sierra Leone

Certainly doesn't belong in the lead or infobox- there don't seem to be any (SL) government sources that support this. It should either be removed completely or moved elsewhere/to another page, like foreign relations between SL and BD or something. Also see archived section from 2011/2012; not sure exactly what was decided though. Also see Talk:Sierra Leone and search "Bengali" and "Bangla": seems like the consensus there is that Bengali is not actually an official language, despite whatever the president stated once. ʙʌsʌwʌʟʌ ^тʌʟк 22:19, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. All news articles that make this claim can be traced back to one article in a Pakistani newspaper in 2002. I remove it when I can. Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 07:57, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

@Basawala and Gamesmasterg9: I've just removed it again, as it was reinserted by UserNumber. The fact that he removed the warning from his user talk page tells me that we should expect him to reinsert it again sometime in the future. Mr KEBAB (talk) 17:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Apparently this is not the first time he tried to add it - see [6] and [7]. Mr KEBAB (talk) 17:17, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I've removed it again. I don't know whether this is a new editor. Dbfirs 16:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Duplicate Maps

A map appears in the infobox, captioned "Bengali speaking region of South Asia". Another map appears in the Dialects section, captioned "Bengali-speaking zone in South Asia." They are very nearly the same map, except in one the region is blue and in the other it is red, and also the shape is slightly different. It isn't right to have both of them, but I don't know which one to remove. Bruce leverett (talk) 01:33, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Bangla (Bengali) is truthfully an official language of Sierra Leone

I've watched the truth information in media where it's never been wrong. And I've watched in many websites and many peoples also know it like me.

The government of Sierra Leone don't use Bangla as their official language, but the constitution of Sierra Leone have written to accepted as Bangla is their official language by respectfully. Sjsagorbd (talk) 13:29, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

It's true that the declaration was widely reported, especially in Bangladesh, but it was never implemented. See the talk page of Sierra Leone where this has been discussed at length. Dbfirs 14:53, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Help Bengali language article

Please read thoroughly about Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages guidelines for improvement in Bengali language article. Read articles like Tamil language, Danish language or English language these are all featured or Good articles. Please ensure that Bengali language do get a FA or Good article status.--Priyansh90 (talk) 06:52, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Priyansh90, as you are not a significant contributor to this article, it is not appropriate for you to nominate it to be a Good Article without consulting the significant contributors to see whether it is ready for such a nomination (see WP:GANI for GA nomination instructions and guidelines). It should not be nominated unless it is ready, which you seem to think is not the case, based on your comment above. Just looking at the first paragraph under History, I can tell you that the article would not pass GAN as it currently stands; it would not meet the "well-written" criterion without at least some copyediting. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:27, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

BlueMoonset, alright I have left a message here let see who can help make it GA or FA status article. I accept your point that I'm not a signification contributor to this article moreover its not yet ready GA nomination.--Priyansh90 (talk) 04:43, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Statistical consistency

With approximately 260–300 million total speakers worldwide, ...

Whereas the article Indo-Aryan languages presently gives the number as 242 million speakers. — MaxEnt 06:49, 15 June 2019 (UTC)