Talk:Charyapada

message: The manuscript 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/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.165.63.132 (talk) 14:20, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no distinction between the languages at the time of the authorship of the Caryapada; it was written in the common ancestor of all three languages. It's written in an Apabhramsa, not a modern language. Ogress smash! 19:00, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Charya Giti are Odia

message: I have reverted the recent name. Charyapada is the common name in English sources, and the move was undiscussed. See WP:COMMONNAME. Dougweller (talk) 17:56, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Charyapada is the romanization error. Generally Bengali script has been included with Indic script for romanization, where the basic romanization systen is for Sanskrit, and the true Bengali values are not represented. Chôrjapôdô is the true value for the word "". The first alphabet চ being Chô not Cha, second one র্যা rja not rya, third one প pô not pa and fourth one দ dô not da. Hence I would be in support for the rename of the page to phonetic Chôrjapôdô or simpler Chorjapodo. বব২৬ (talk) 19:08, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not relevant. Please read what I suggested, WP:COMMONNAME. Unless you can show that's the most common name in English reliable sources, we should stick with the present name. Dougweller (talk) 19:43, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Also the language of Charyapada was probably a derivative of Prakrit (the Ardhamagadhi variety, type Apabhramsa), as academicians hypothesize, and was only proto-Bangla/proto-Assamese, even proto-Oriya/proto-Maithili in character (check: Encyclopaedia of Indian Literature, European Trade and Colonial Conquest, Genesis of Indigenous Chakma Buddhists, World and Its Peoples: Eastern and Southern Asia). In all likeliness Charyapada may be a more correct Roman transliteration. Aditya(talk • contribs) 03:31, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Try searching the internet with Chorjapodo, you'll get more relevant results with Chorjapodo not Charyapada. বব২৬ (talk) 06:48, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

text: Why search the book? search the web also ..., if problems renaming the page, I would like the name Chorjapodo to also be included in the page then.  বব২৬ (talk) 17:05, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Please refer to WP:Commonname, বব২৬. Then, you'll understand why I searched books. Btw, Google search for Charyapada return 6,540 results against 4 results for Chorjapodo. Please understand that wikipedia articles are not based on individual user's likes and dislikes, rather there are set of rules & guidelines for them. Shovon (talk) 18:31, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand! (I think Chorjapodo should atleast be added in brackets then), Thank you ! বব২৬ (talk) 18:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately বব২৬, it seems that you don't actually understand. What you THINK is irrelevant if there are not enough reliable sources to back up that thought. Please stop your repeated attempts to insert a name which is used by almost nobody. Shovon (talk) 11:34, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: okay, okay, agreed! বব২৬ (talk) 11:39, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent move 

message: I've just started working with the article today, and I think there's quite a lot to be improved in the article. =P Especially the Language -section could be clarified and grammar improved there, don't you think? At the moment, I find it really hard to understand how the sections are related to the article in the first place? This would need, however, the original contributor to help to sort things out! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 14:14, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a couple of checks and it seems that the original contributors of those affinites -sections haven't been active for quite a while. I also noticed that  had already attempted blanking the section in the late 2010. Not only due to grammar, but I find the sections problematic mainly because they don't seem to be dealing with 1) the language, nor 2) Charyapada. For example:
 In his book (Ascharya Charyachaya) Karunakar Kar has mentioned that Odisha is the origin of Charyapada as the Vajrayana school of Buddhism evolved there and started female worship in Buddhism. Worship of Matri Dakini and the practice of "Kaya sadhana" are the outcome of such new culture. Buddhist scholars like Lakshminkara and Padmasambhava were born in Odisha. The ideas and experience of Kaya sadhana and Shaki upasana (worshiping female principle) which were created by Adi siddhas ... The poets of Charyapada prominently are from this region.
There is also this other section Glimpses of social life (the old version prior to my latest edit) where the grammar is quite poor:
Many poems provide a realistic picture of early medieval society in eastern India by describing different occupations of people such as hunters, boatmen, and potters. The geographical locations, namely Banga and Kamarupa, are referred to in the poems. Names of the two rivers that occur are the Ganga and Yamuna. River Padma has been referred to as a canal. Two occupations are mentioned. These are weaving, woodcutter and hunting. No reference to agriculture is available. Reference to prostitution by women occurs. The boat was the main mode of transport. Some description of wedding ceremony is also available..
The grammar could be improved a lot, and the phrases are conflicted. First it is said that two occupations are mentioned, and straight after that it is followed by three occupations: a weaver, a woodcutter and a hunter. The beginning of the paragraph mentions, however, three occupations as well: hunter remaining the same, but in addition boatmen and potters.
In my humble opinion, there is need for a larger clean up in this article. I tried to make improvements to the lede on the basis of the previous version, but I don't really believe I succeeded that well. Perhaps a bigger makeover would be an easier approach? :O Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Ps. I am not a native English speaker myself either so I'd like to call especially the native English speakers as well as those editors who know Oriya, Assamese etc. for collaboration! Cheers! :P Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 14:58, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar (especially) in the Language section