Talk:Etymology of Assam

message: This article has been slapped with multiple tags.  An attempt was made to address the issues in the talk page (see below) and the tags were removed.  The tags were reinserted.  From what I see from User:Bhaskarbhagawati's objections, comments on the following would help immensely to resolve the issue.
* Is it inappropriate to consider the name of the region in other languages---namely, 'Asama', 'Asham', 'Asam' etc.---while considering the etymology of the name "Assam"?  Are we constrained to just consider the use of the name in the English language?
* Comments on where POV statements exist in the article.
* Whether it reads like an advertisement, and how it can be improved.
* Whether there exists a systemic bias.
Chaipau (talk) 12:08, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for Comments

message: This article should be prepared as per decision made at RSN. This should be immediately complied to honour long lasting dispute. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 10:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The above mentioned RSN was made in the context of Assam#Etymology, which has since been resolved here: Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_44#Assam. The resolution specifically mentions that the community has come to the same conclusion in all previous WP:3O, WP:RSN and WP:DRN, and that User:Bhaskarbhagawati should not indulge in WP:ICANTHEARYOU. Chaipau (talk) 11:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Disputes are not resolved without two way sources and involvement of second person in dispute which is exactly the case with above mentioned DRN and most importantly DRN cannot go against the findings of RSN. I ask other users to look in detailed discussion done in Reliable Sources/Noticeboard in link give above. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 16:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  The link to RSN which you provided, (this), has voluminous inputs from you.  So your claim that you did not participate in the discussion is false.  Just for the records, in that discussion one of the opinions was . Chaipau (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable Sources/Noticeboard 

message: I have cleared a section because better presented in Etymology of Pragjyotisha Kamarupa article. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 02:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This section is needed in the article to show that the political entities were named not Assam but Kamarupa/Pragjyotisha before the advent of the Ahoms.  This provides a significant clue to the Etymology of Assam, which all writers have discussed in their works while discussing the etymology of Assam.  You have also deleted the Assamese scripts, with the justification that there was no velar fricative, which is a mistake.  First, the Assamese and the Latin scripts show just how the name was written, not how they were pronounced. Please revert the deletes and discuss here for a consensus before you remove anything. Chaipau (talk) 10:40, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Just by omitting ancient period gives the idea of non linkage. If written as X then pronouched as X, simple. X is there only in Adi Sankrit not in later varieties like Vedic Sanskrit, Pali, Prakrit and Apabhramsas, before entering in Eastern Assamese by Sanskritisation. Expecting a brief talk here, you revert it yourself then. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 12:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I frankly don't understand what you are saying here.  In any case, in none of the spellings any phoneme is assumed.  Chaipau (talk) 19:37, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Then what is AXOM. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 19:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  The only "Axom" appears in a quote from Taher.  But no phoneme is implied there.  Look at the context in which it is used.  I have checked the Duttabaruah Bhagavata, and it is written with a স.  Ask a Bhagawati how this is pronounced in the Sattras while it is being read.  Chaipau (talk) 20:17, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Give reference with quote for presence of VFV in medieval times. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 02:17, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No one is making such a claim. Chaipau (talk) 02:57, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Then please do not use স here. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 03:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not?  The Assamese script was used to write Sanskrit too, where no velar fricative was intended.  Chaipau (talk) 04:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

text: I shall happily provide you references, but I can't make out what your objection is.  I think I have addressed your objection the phoneme /x/.  What are you objecting to?  Chaipau (talk) 17:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

text: The reference is in the text itself.  Srimandbhagavat, skandha 2, H Dattabaruah and Co., Nalbari, pp-38 Chaipau (talk) 03:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

text: Because that is transcribed in ITRANS.  Why don't you open up a Bhagavata and look at page 38?  If you want I shall provide a scan in a few days time.  Chaipau (talk) 10:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

text: Yes, the above lines, show that Sankardev, who transliterated the Bhagavata in the 16th century, used স.  That should satisfy your needs for a reference and example of the use of স in the medieval times.  Chaipau (talk) 14:23, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

text: Also, this is not the place to discuss how and when the voiceless velar fricative became common in Assamese.  It could be during the first millenium or later.  But this article does not deal with that.  Chaipau (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

text: Why are you harping on the velar fricative, when it is not an issue here?  How is it relevant to the discussion?  All evidence are reported here for readers to make up their own minds without taking sides.  Chaipau (talk) 20:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

text: The 'x' is used just once in the article, in a direct quote (Taher).  But his quote is used to date the Bhagavata, not to support the phonetics.  So your objection is invalid.  But if you are so allergic to the Taher quote, I can easily delete that can replace it with some other quote to establish the date of the Bhagavata.  Chaipau (talk) 22:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Only thing i can say that remove স alphabet from this article due to unavailabity of sources or i will do it. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 06:38, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have given you the source (Srimadbhagavata, Nari Narayana Dutta Barua (ed), p.38).  Why is this not acceptable to you? Chaipau (talk) 10:01, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

text: I have started the dispute resolution process.  Chaipau (talk) 10:47, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

text: I have also added text in the article to make explicit that there is no phonemic value in other scripts.  This must be now acceptable to you.  Chaipau (talk) 11:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section removal 

message: I have removed your WP:3O request from the active list. It has been there for a few days and no volunteer seems willing to accept it. This particular discussion involves a rather limited and, IMO, technical subject. I recommend you post a comment on the WikiProject India & WikiProject Assam talk pages and ask for assistance from those project members.  Say something like "Please look at Talk:Etymology of Assam to assist in clarifying ......". Also, you might look at WP:LING. Add the project to this article talk page and ask for assistance there.  – S. Rich (talk) 05:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  3O request -- decline 

message: The quote:
Assamese is the easternmost Indo-Aryan language of India, spoken by nearly eight millions of people inhabiting mostly the Brahmaputra valley of Assam. The word Assamese is an English formation built on the same principle as Simhalese or Canarese etc. It is based on the English word Assam by which the British rulers referred to the tract covered by the Brahmaputra valley and its adjoining areas. But the people call their country Asama and their language Asamiya.
is irrelevant here.  This passage, originally from Grierson's Linguistic Survey of India, describes the derivation of the word "Assamese".  In "It is based on the English word Assam...", the it refers to Assamese in "The word Assamese is an English formation..." in the previous sentence.  Since it describes the word Assamese, it is not relevant here.  Chaipau (talk) 10:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No, what important here is the fashion, in which word Assam was used. Say, who coined the term, for what purpose and exactly refers to what etc. I have given full sentence, to avoid cherry pick. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 11:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: But this article is about how the word "Assam" came into being, not how Assam is being used.  Look up Etymology. It says: "Etymology is the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time. By an extension, the term "the etymology of [a word]" means the origin of the particular word."   Chaipau (talk) 11:30, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insertion of quote from Sarmah 

message: Which sources are partisan?  Chaipau (talk) 18:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Try to include sources for Asama, English Assam etc., importantly in neutral tone rather only rejection. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 02:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: All possible theories are discussed here and given their own sections.  Removing the partisan tag. Chaipau (talk) 11:32, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The reference of Peter Wade is under ambuigity. Goalpara was hardly ever occupied by Tai kingdom, hence source is unclear and unreliableभास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 05:00, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the Ahom did not occupy the Goalpara region that is why Peter Wade is unreliable?  Are you serious?  Chaipau (talk) 05:23, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't he mentioned Goalpara ?भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 08:51, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Partisan sources