Disputatio:Panines

message: I have removed this for the present -- " Natus est fortasse Pushkalavati in urbe Gandharae fere ad extremum Charsaddae recentioris oppidi finem in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistaniae." because the two sources cited (both luckily available on line) do not support it. (They don't disprove it, either.) I have quoted in the footnote what the Imperial Gazetteer says, for what it's worth. Staal says "(fourth century B.C.)" and refers to another source, also available on line, for discussion: it isn't Staal's purpose, nor indeed the Gazetteer's, to sort out Panini's biography, so, at the least, better sources are needed. I'm currently checking the source which Staal cites (Thieme's long review of Burrow's Sanskrit Language). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:03, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: By all means have at it! Be my guest! Etc. Perusing the 10K list, I was surprised that Panini wasn't already here; likewise Portus Hispaniae (being a national capital and all). But time lately is lacking for a treatment as full as might be wished. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:08, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :Well, there's no certainty: that at least is certain.

text: :As far as en:wiki is concerned, the name "Gandhara" was added in 2008, and the reference to Staal at about the same time, but Staal doesn't mention Gandhara. The specific name "Pushkalavati" was added on 17 January 2009 by an anonymous editor with a special interest in this region of Pakistan, and has been there ever since. The reference to the Imperial Gazetteer got in later. Neither of the sources support these names, nor do any other sources I've seen.

text: :It's a lesson, if anyone needs such a lesson, that wiki editing hates a vacuum. If there's no name, we must find one. If a claim is unsupported, we must support it. It makes the Wikipedia articles on early Oriental history and literature (among other examples) much more unreliable than the average, because in those fields of research there are many unknowns ...

text: :The traditional story is that Pāṇini came from Śalātura near modern Attock, but I don't yet know the basis of this traditional story. 2400 years is much too long for "tradition". But I can at least rewrite and expand his origin and date based on a few apposite pages of George Cardona, Pāṇini: A Survey of Research (1976), thanks to Google Books and a modern reprint publisher. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:24, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I now expect to find out about the traditional story and all other imaginable early sources thanks to the wonderful University of Chicago Library, which has digitized this. O happy day! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:52, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :::To be scrupulously fair to those anonymous en:wiki editors, the names "Gandhara" and "Pushkalavati" (Latin Gandarica and Peucelaitis) really do occur in earlier discussions of Panini's origin, though not in the sources cited on en:wiki. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:34, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::And now you've boosted it above 8,000 characters, so it's getting three of the four points (well, hundredths of a point) available on the 10K list! Macte! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:26, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  De patria 

message: How about a Latin name? Two possibilities are Paninius  and Panines . Lesgles (disputatio) 20:51, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Good finds! I think "Panines" agrees with the rule that Anne worked out (with due support from earlier sources) because Panini is 3rd declension. But perhaps Anne herself will comment. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:04, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :Macte! :) IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:24, 1 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)
Ah, non animadverti iam abhinc duos menses hoc nomen tractatum esse. Mihi quoque Panines exemplo Aristophanis et Demosthenis magis placet. Itaque adiectivum q.e. "Paninianus" (bis in textu) in formam q.e. Paninius aut Paninicus corrigendum est. Neander (disputatio) 20:48, 31 Maii 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine