Talk:Konkani language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose that Varli language be merged into Konkani language. I think that the content in the Varli language article can easily be explained in the context of Konkani language, and the Konkani language article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Varli language will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Ankush 89 (talk) 17:58, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Redundancy issues for Konkani language page[edit]

Hi there... I'm writing to seek the opinions of seasoned editors. A few days ago, there was an edit war on the Konkani language page, specifically between an editor of Goan descent and an editor of Mangalorean descent. The former didn't appreciate content contributed by the latter and eventually resulted in a massive edit war. The consequence of such an altercation led to the latter creating a whole new page for the non-Goan dialects of Konkani at Kanara (Canara) Konkani. The editor who created this whole new page has contributed significantly and quite productively, I must say. However, I am not convinced whether this is the right way to go.. i.e. having two different pages for essentially the same language. Quite interestingly, I found out that there is already a page for Karnataka Konkani at Karnataka Konkani. This kind of duplication and redundancy is a little unsettling. Your feedback would be appreciated. Signed | Aoghac2z | 06:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Butting in Since I am a (mangalore) Konkani speaker myself, I would just advise you to be very polite when making any suggestions for change/replacement of the page(s). Konkani people are a very proud lot, and extremely sensitive about their language (which, I think, is because of fear of it gradually dying out).

About this matter, I can say from my personal experience (a mangalorean konkani speaker who did his undergraduate studies in Goa) that goan konkani is almost a completely different language(there is some similarity, but differences are much more); whereas the konkani spoken by those living outside goa can be said to be different dialects (they use the same words for the same meaning, only the pronunciation is different). In this scenario, goan and the other konkani are same only in name; and thus perhaps different pages is justified. However, a page for different dialects is a waste of wikipedia resources, and may also lead to a lot of confusion; it may be advisable to put them under one page only.PratikMallya Talk! 08:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your enthusiasm. I'm a native speaker of Mangalorean Konkani myself, so I don't need any cautionary note regarding politeness and sensitivity. :) Getting to the elephant in the room, I'm very sorry to say that your personal experience in Goa or whatsoever is of no relevance here. Linguistic publications and major linguists do NOT treat Mangalorean Konkani to be a separate language at all, rather it is considered a dialect. Be it George Cardona, Manoharray Sardessai or Ayyapannicker... all major linguists consider Mangalorean Konkani to be a dialect, not a separate language. In my opinion, when you maintain two separate pages, one for 'Konkani' and the other for 'Kanara Konkani', it gives the reader an impression that Kanara Konkani is a whole different language and not part of mainstream 'Konkani'. Signed | Aoghac2z | 14:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
But then, I don't think separate articles will be a good idea. Not many people will know that two different widely spoken dialects of Konkani exist. I myself did not know :) . I will have a look at the two (three?) pages and get back to you. Yes Michael?Talk 09:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
It looks quite messed up. This should be sorted out immediately. The Canara Konkani page is well written, though there are a few issues. User:Aoghac2z, I am not Konkani myself, so I do not know the intricacies of the language. Would a disambiguation page serve any purpose, or will it complicate further? Yes Michael?Talk 14:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Well, the situation is messed up, indeed. The author of the new page has done a very commendable job and the content contributed by him is very productive... even though there are issues with the reliability of sources used. As far as my personal opinion goes, I do not believe that a separate page for the Kanara dialects of Konkani is proper. It is also important to take into consideration the fact that the author of the new page created the page out of an edit war... so the motives behind the creation of the new page itself were not legitimate in an academic sense. Like, I said there's already a page for Kanara Konkani at Karnataka Konkani.... so as it stands right now, there are 3 separate pages for essentially the same language. I would say we kickstart the process of merging the content from this new page into the main language article. Signed | Aoghac2z | 14:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Is there a situation where having two different articles would be better indeed? For example, if the histories of both the Canara and Goan Konkani are different, then it would make more sense to keep it in two different articles. Yes Michael?Talk 14:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Well, the evolution of the language and the history is not different at all. Konkani speakers in Karnataka came to Karnataka from Goa in the 15th and 16th centuries. At the time of migration, Konkani was already a very developed language, so there are no differences in history or linguistic evolution. If you look at the new page.. you will notice that the history aspect of it is something that should have been included in the main article... there is nothing unique about Kanara Konkani from a historical standpoint that distinguishes it from Goan Konkani. Signed | Aoghac2z | 15:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Then all is well I suppose. The Konkani Language article should discuss both dialects, and the differences between them could be laid out neatly. But, if there is a world's difference between the two dialects, then the article will become huge, and could be better off split into two. I believe that one article is the way to go. Also, since both the dialects have separate ISO codes, (or whatever codes), both the infoboxes could be included in the relevant sections. Thoughts? Yes Michael?Talk 15:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Hello Gentlemen, couldn't help not peeking into your conversation. As has been mentioned by user Aoghac2z, Canara Konkani indeed evolved of Goan Konkani. That is all there is to it. Their paths went separate ways thereafter. Canara Konkani has undergone tremendous variance from Goan Konkani rendering the dialects mutually unintelligible. The comparison is like Kannada and Telugu. It must be stressed that although the Canarese Konkani dialects have not yet been standardised, they vary dramatically in terms of phonetics, syntax and orthography from the newly promulgated Standard Konkani, the Goan Antruz dialect. Although Canara Konkani phonology-syntax-orthography is not standardised, prevalent rules of speech are popularly employed in writing and this rarely undergoes variation. Canara Konkani has been written in the Kannada script and follows different orthographic rules from Goan Konkani which is predominantly written in the Devanagari or Roman Scripts. e.g. the name of the language in the Kannada script is ಕೊಂಕಣಿ (koṅkaṇi - कॊंकणि) and this pronunciation is prevalent in Karnataka and Kerala. In the Devanagari script, the name of the language is कोंकणी (kōṅkaṇī - ಕೋಂಕಣೀ ) and it is pronounced that way in Goa Omniglot. Let me share some examples:

  • "having brought" in Goan Konkani is written/spoken as हाडुन/हाडोन ಹಾಡುನ್/ಹಾಡೋನ್. The same in Canara Konkani is written/spoken as हाड्नु/हाड्न ಹಾಡ್ನು/ಹಾಡ್ನ್.
  • Goan Konkani does not undergo vowel rounding:- second person singular imperative is written/spoken as कर ಕರ್ (do!), first person singular optative करू ಕರು (do I?). in Canara Konkani second person singular imperative is written/spoken as करि ಕರಿ (do!), first person singular optative कोरुं ಕೋರುಂ (do i?).
  • Canara Konkani shows temporal compensation like Kannada :- देव ದೇವ್ (god) - दॆवालॆं ದೆವಾಲೆಂ (of god), पूत ಪೂತ್ (son)-पुतालॆं ಪುತಾಲೆಂ (of the son). Goan Konkani does not :- देव ದೇವ್ (god) - देवाचॆं ದೇವಾಚೆಂ (of god), पूत ಪೂತ್ (son) - पूताचॆं ಪೂತಾಚೆಂ (of the son)
  • Canara Konkani nouns/pronouns, like Kannada end in short vowels :- दोणि ದೋಣಿ (boat), आम्मि/आमि ಆಮ್ಮಿ/ಆಮಿ (we). Goan Konkani ends in Long Vowels :- आमी ಆಮೀ (we), वोडी ವೋಡೀ (boat)
  • The verb declinations are different: verb- to do: Canara करचॆं ಕರ್ಚೆಂ Goa करुंक ಕರುಂಕ್

must do Canara करुक ज़ाय ಕರುಕ್ ಜ಼ಾಯ್ Goa करपाक ज़ाय ಕರ್ಪಾಕ್ ಜ಼ಾಯ್

  • Goan Konkani pluralisation of words ending in ई are different from Canara Konkani. In Goan Konkani गाडी ಗಾಡೀ (car) - गाड्यॊ ಗಾಡ್ಯೊ (cars). In Canara Konkani गाडि ಗಾಡಿ (car) - गाडियॊ ಗಾಡಿಯೊ (cars).
  • The preposition (postposition) "in" shows difference in declination when it follows ई in Goan and Canara Konkani.Goan:- गाडी ಗಾಡೀ (car) - गाडींत ಗಾಡೀಂತ್ (in the car), भुरगी ಭುರ್ಗೀ (girl) - भुरगीक ಭುರ್ಗೀಕ್ (to the girl). Canara:-गाडि ಗಾಡಿ (car) - गाडियेक ಗಾಡಿಯೆಕ್ (to the car), च़लि ಚ಼ಲಿ (girl) - च़लियेक ಚ಼ಲಿಯೆಕ್ (to the girl).
  • The continuous tense shows variance: I am doing Goan Konkani हांव करत आसा ಹಾಂವ್ ಕರತ್ ಆಸಾ Canara Konkani हांव करतऽसा/कर्त आसा ಹಾಂವ್ ಕರ್ತ ಆಸಾ
  • All these examples are from the book on Goan Konkani grammar written by Fr. Thomas Stevens and the book on Canara Konkani Grammar by Fr. Agnelus Maffei will show the stark difference between the Goan Konkani family and Canara Konkani family. There are many more; listing all would not be humanly possible for one person.
  • you may peruse Canara Konkani websites Save My Language, Konkani Mitra, [1] to confirm prevalent orthographic rules, syntax and phonemes.

I would also like to share with you that Canara Konkani has a separate ISO code ISO 639-3 kex Canara Konkani Code

I suggest that Canara Konkani be a separate page because:

  • Goan Konkani received state support from 1962 and became the official language of Goa in 1985. Government of Karnataka founded Karnataka Konkani Sahitya Akademi only in 1997. Hence Konkani organisations have to heavily rely on Goan patronage.
  • Goan Konkani is being taught from 1962 from pre-school to university level. Canara Konkani has hereto, not received any such support from the Govt. of Karnataka and is being taught on an experimental basis in St. Aloysius College and Canara Saraswat Education Trust's Ganapati High school.
  • There is a tendency to maintain status quo in the Konkani linguasphere because littérateurs tend to get into hair splitting arguments on phonology-syntax-orthography. Hence the name of the language is koṅkaṇi in the Kannada script and kōṅkaṇī in the Devanagari and Konkani organisations have done zilch to rectify this anomaly.

Canara Konkani has a long way to go in terms of standardisation; but that does not deny the fact that it stands out separately. What I mean to arrive at is that Canara Konkani only relies on Goa for patronage. Otherwise, to all intents and purposes, the Canara Konkani dialect family and Goan Konkani dialect family are mutually unintelligible. If, for example, German can have separate articles for Hochdeutsch, Plattdeutsch and Schweizerdeutsch, I am certain Canara Konkani can stand separate on the basis of the same convention too.

As far as the Karnataka Konkani article is concerned, it is vociferously guarded by a user from Goa who refuses to allow any contribution other than those in the Standard Antruz Goan Konkani; which is not spoken and is unintelligible to Canaraites (it is unintelligible to the Goans themselves). I have not only tried to contribute to the Konkani Language page but also to the Karnataka Konkani page but in vain. The user and I have had several discussions on our respective user pages. I also requested the said user on several occasions to discuss on the posts before deleting them; that too did not work. The said user perceivably has a Jingoistic agendum; to Hinduise and Goanise the Konkani language and Karnataka Konkani articles. Said user has also censured me on my talk page w.r.t. the Canara Konkani that I write in and holds that only the Goan Antruz dialect is truly Konkani. This is against the conventions followed in Wikipedia which give equal weightage to all dialects of a language.

I am not very sure that justice will be done to Canara Konkani if the article is merged into Karnataka Konkani. I don't mind the merging of the articles if it is deemed fit by mutual consent and as long as the neutrality, stability and the fidelity of the article are vouchsafe.Imperium Caelestis 23:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The analysis provided by User:ImperiumCaelestis is indeed correct. However, I'm not sure which source he has picked that up from. I can deem that to be correct based on my own knowledge of my mother tongue. That being said, I have a major concern with the kind of sources User:ImperiumCaelestis is relying on....Sites like Save My Language, Konkani Mitra, Konkani Sansar are sites of private organizations. They are not a linguistic governing body nor an academic body that contributes to the study of Konkani from an academic standpoint. All these three sites seem to constitute self-published content. We have had instances from the past when some people have tried to add content based on sites like SaveMyLanguage.org, only to be questioned about the reliability of such a site by veteran Konkani editors like Deepak D'souza. Anyone can start a site like that, and generate content based on mass user submission. Such sources do not offer any reliability on the orthography rules.

Additionally, I want to come to a bigger point here. There is no such dialect or a sub-family type called 'Kanara Konkani'. There are significant differences even between Mangalorean Catholic Konkani and Mangalorean Saraswat Konkani. Mangalorean Catholic Konkani is related to the Bardesi dialect (a northern Goan dialect) than the Mangalorean Saraswat dialect. Mangalorean Saraswat Konkani on the other hand is related to the southern Goan (Saxxti) dialects. Even simple words like 'your' are enough to demonstrate the difference. In Mangalorean Catholic Konkani, 'your' would be 'tuje' which is the same in most Goan dialects. Whereas, in Mangalorean Saraswat Konkani, it is 'tugele', which is what you will hear even in North Kanara (Karwari) dialects of Konkani... even though Karwar Konkani as a whole is heavily influenced by Goan dialects.

Mangalorean Catholic Konkani and Mangalorean Saraswat Konkani do not share an immediate common history to be clubbed together. All Konkani dialects share a common history.. but my point is... even though both the aforementioned dialects are spoken in the South Kanara area, their evolution and histories are quite distinct.

I would have to beg to differ with the statement "the Canara Konkani dialect family and Goan Konkani dialect family are mutually unintelligible". The dialect of Konkani spoken in Karwar (which also falls under Canara region) is closer to the Goan dialects than the Mangalorean. It would be quite an exaggeration to say they're unintelligible. Speakers of Urdu and Hindi do understand each other even though both speakers are unaware about the intricate details of specific vocabulary used. If Goan and non-Goan dialects of Konkani were 'unintelligible', then linguists would consider them to be separate languages. However, that is NOT the case.

Examples of High German and Low German are fine.. because linguistic bodies do recognize their distinct identities. But which linguistic organization recognizes 'Kanara Konkani' to be a distinct linguistic family?

Lastly, just because User:Nijgoykar was being unaccommodating, it doesn't warrant moving on to a whole new page. There are ways to deal with jingoism. Signed | Aoghac2z | 00:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

  1. Canara Catholics and Canara Saraswats use "-jem", "-chem" and "-gelem" interchangably. The Canara Saraswats say "Aan Tuzo!!" (teraa baap!!). The Canara Catholics, though rarely, use "gelem"; please refer to the attachment by Ancy D'souza supporting the voviyo on the Mangalorean_Catholics page.
  2. Although Mangalorean Catholics and Mangalorean Saraswats might have arrived during two different timelines, they have mutually interacted with each other for more that three centuries and hence understand each quite well. This is due to the fact that the Mangalorean Catholics have preserved the Sanskrit base of their dialect and that both dialects have a huge corpus of Kannada and Tulu words, e.g. nel-floor, mudi-ring are some of the words common to both dialects. In fact "but" in Goan Konkani translates to "पुण" , whereas in Canara Konkani, both Saraswat and Catholic, to "ज़ाल्ल्यार".
  3. the dialect in Karwar have also retained the अ sound hence करता is pronounced as kartaa and not as cortaam or ever cottaam as is in Goan Konkani. Hence I say mutually intelligible. My kuladevataa is Shri Lakshminaray Mahamaya at Ankola, Karwar and hence I can confidently say, as I go there quite often, that I do not find the dialect unintelligible. I have, however, found Goan Konkani, both Hindu and Catholic, Hard to digest and decipher. N.B. the North Canara dialect too used ज़ाल्ल्यार and not पुण. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImperiumCaelestis (talkcontribs) 00:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Linguists do indeed consider them as separate dialects. It is an accepted fact that ISO-639 deals with languages. I would also like to share with you that Canara Konkani has a separate ISO code. The Konkani language codes are: ISO 639-2 kok (Konkani Macrolanguage) comprising of,

ISO 639-3 knn Konkani (Independent language)
ISO639-3 gom Goan Konkani
ISO639-3 kex Kanara Konkani [2]Imperium Caelestis
Sorry fellas. Was sleeping all this time. Anyway, I must get another clarification. As an editor mentioned somewhere above, are the differences so large as Kannada and Telugu? Yes Michael?Talk 03:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I still feel that there should be only one article. All the differences mentioned above can be mentioned in the article. I await your comments. Yes Michael?Talk 04:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
My only concern is that users should not get confused. When they type Konkani in the search box, they should be redirected to one page. If necessary, the page could have broad subsections, and one of the subsections could have another article dedicated to it, like say Differences between Goan and Canara dialects of Konkani Language. What say? Yes Michael?Talk 04:18, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

To show you how different the Standard Goan Antruz Konkani is from Canara Konkani, I am sharing an example with you. The following comment was written by User:Nijgoykar on my talk page. I shall translate it into "written as spoken" Canarese Konkani

Goan (1) तुमी कोंकणी देवनागरी लिपयेंत चुकीची बरयतात,आनी हो एकेतरेचो अपप्रचार ! (2) प्रत्येक शब्द अर्धकुटो बरवचो न्हय .. (3) चुकीचे रीतीन बरवचो न्हय... (4) हाचे सारको कोंकणिचो अवमान दुसरो ना .. (5)आनी एक गोश्ट नागरी लिपि आता सद्या पोर्ण्या रुपान अस्तित्वात ना,पूण देवनागरी आसा,असो वेगळचार केल्यार आमीं झगडूंकूच उरतले

Canarese (1) तुमि कॊंकणि देवनागरि लिपियॆंत च़ुकीचॆं बरयतात, आनि हॆं एक रीतिचॆं अपप्रचार!(2) प्रतियॆकळॆ ऊत्र/ऊतर अपुरॆं बरंवचॆं न्हंय..(3) च़ुकीचॆं रीतियेनॆं बरंवचॆं न्हंय...(4) हाजॆ वारिं/म्हणकॆ कॊंकणिलॆं चॅरॆ/अवमान दुसरॆ ना...(5) आनियॆकळॆ विषय नागरि लिपि आयजिकालि पॊरनॆ रूपांत अस्तित्वांत ना, जाल्यार देवनागरि आसा, अश्शि/अशॆं विंगडाय कॆल्यार आमि झगडुकच़ दॆंवलिं N.B. Canarese Konkani has hereto not been standardised and the above is a written "written as spoken" version and is followed by Canara Saraswats and Canara Catholics alike.

Canarese Konkani has a lexicon that is at variance to Goan Konkani and shows tremendous Kannada-Tulu influence. A lot of words, used in Goan Konkani and not used in Canarese Konkani. e.g. to gather in Goan Konkani is एकठाय करुंक whereas in Canara Konkani it is ओट्टु करचॆं, एकठाय is simply not used. This is in addition to the grammatical nuances I stated above.Imperium Caelestis 06:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Per my analysis, I don't think there is a sea change between the two dialects. We do not want to confuse Wikipedia users with too much of unnecessary classification do we? I suggest you start off work on merging all the three articles. Let me know if my help is needed in doing that. Yes Michael?Talk 06:10, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
please peruse a Goan Catholic's, who married a Mangalorean Catholic, perspective on this topic [3]Imperium Caelestis 13:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Stating that Goan Konkani and Konkani spoken in coastal Karnataka are unintelligible is a gross exaggeration. Honestly, your assertion that you do not understand Goan dialects have no relevance to Wikipedia. That is your own personal opinion. If you ask for my personal opinion, I would assure you that I comprehend Goan dialects perfectly... but then again, my personal opinion has no relevance to Wikipedia. Also, I've never heard 'Aan Tuzo' used in Amchigele (Saraswat Konkani).

The differences you are pointing out are obvious for any dialect. That's precisely why they're called dialects. If all words were similar, it would not be a dialect, it would simply be one and the same language. Also, I'd like to point out, that making over-the-top judgments (such as the differences between Kanara Konkani and Goan Konkani being as large as Kannada and Telugu) is purely Original Research. I have no knowledge of Kannada nor Telugu, but linguists recognize Telugu to be a separate language. Linguists do not recognize Konkani spoken in coastal Karnataka to be a whole different language.

Regarding the ISO codes... those codes itself are quite messed up. Look at ISO 639-3 kex.. it says Kukna mainly... its alternate name is given as Kanara Konkani. Now look at ISO 639-3 gom.. it says Goanese.. but 'Mangalore' is listed as one of its dialect names. There is nothing clear and lucid about those codes.

Regarding the link to a Goan catholic (married to a Mangalorean Catholic)'s experience...It is important to understand that those are his personal opinions. They are not of academic nature. Wikipedia does not honor such personal opinions.

Lastly, User:ImperiumCaelestis, you are analyzing a whole lot. I'm sorry to say, but a lot of what you've been saying seems to constitute Original Research. We simply need to record facts on Wikipedia... Original Research has no place here on Wiki. I deeply admire your passion for linguistics and the research you've been doing is fantastic (I personally engage in a lot of linguistic research for Konkani).. but Wikipedia is not a medium to publish it.

I agree with MikeLynch...there really isn't any sea of change between the various dialects of Konkani. User:ImperiumCaelestis, you should kickstart efforts to merge your new page into the main Konkani article. If you have problems with jingoism from Nijgoykar, let us know and we can handle it. Signed | Aoghac2z | 14:48, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

User:Aoghac2z, I have reiterated time and again that the nuances, of Canara Konkani, I have stated are mere observations and I have made this clear in citations wheresoever applicable; they are neither research, nor propositions, or postulates. I have also submitted observations of other individuals and a factual report of the Language Information Services, Central Institute of Indian Languages , Mysore. I do agree that the ISO 639-3 codes are vague at describing Konkani.

I firmly opine that the Konkani language page should discuss phonology - orthography - syntax of the Goan Antruz dialect which has recently been promulgated as Standard Konkani and Canara Konkani be mentioned as one of the dialects and the Canara Konkani/Karnataka Konkani article be linked to it. Merging the two pages will make one gargantuan article. I agree to Yes Michael?'s proposition that the pages be kept separate. I am, however, for merging Karnataka Konkani and Canara Konkani.Imperium Caelestis 16:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I believe MikeLynch's proposition is that all three pages be merged. And I support that proposition too. I realize that you've contibuted significantly to the Canara Konkani article... It's quite verbose for an article on a dialect. There are quite some issues I see at a cursory glance.. specifically this image. The source you have mentioned in there shows no information of such a map. It seems like you have created this map out of your original research. I am a little busy this weekend, but I'll look more into the article later.

KonLinguasphere.png

Signed | Aoghac2z | 17:05, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── To the point of being pedantic; I reiterate that the Karnataka Konkani Sahitya Academy and the Kerala Konkani Academy have not standardised Konkani in the concerned states and no available map shows the Konkani speaking areas in Karnataka and Kerala. The base file of the map was taken from [4] and the rendition was from the Census of India, District Census Handbook. You could say it is procedurally incorrect, but original research is not a phrase you should ascribe to it.Imperium Caelestis 09:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Forget the map for now. It has to be done by a different procedure. Let us finish this discussion first. Yes Michael?Talk 09:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
We are sort of digressing from the main issue at hand. Have a look at my proposal.


My Proposal[edit]

Wait a minute guys. As the other editor (involved in the 'edit war'), is probably busy in real life, I am asking you guys. Keep in mind one major point. You guys are native to that region, and know a lot about the intricacies of the language. But the rest of the world does not know it. When they search for Konkani Language, they should be directed to one single page, rather than getting confused by two different pages. What you see is not what the other people see.

Let me be very clear on my proposal. My proposal is that there should be only one page for Konkani. Period. Now, if the differences between dialects are too much, then a separate article may be made, which can be titled Differences between Canara and Goan Konkani. Do you agree with this? Yes Michael?Talk 18:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I fully support MikeLynch's proposal. That's precisely what I've been trying to say since the very start. Signed | Aoghac2z | 21:45, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I feel Nijgoykar should also be privy to this conversation due to his substantial contribution. Only then can a truly consensual decision be arrived at. I have no issues with merging the Karnataka Konkani and Kanara (Canara) Konkani articles. However the proposition of merging those with the Konkani Language page is too courageous a thought and should best be done away with, as it will result in one behemoth of a page. The page resulting from merging Karnataka Konkani and Kanara (Canara) Konkani could be directed to by using a {{See also}} template. Imperium Caelestis 09:07, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
We can't wait all day for him can we? :) And what do you mean by too courageous? I am a Kannadiga, and I consider myself fairly well informed, and still I was not aware that there were two dialects which supposedly vary so much. We should not confuse users of Wikipedia. When you say "it will result in one behemoth of a page", I have already proposed a solution that we describe the differences in another page. I believe this is only fair. Yes Michael?Talk 09:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Very Well. We shall wait till evening IST. Yes Michael?Talk 09:47, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I have just posted a talkback on his page that will direct him to your page. My experience with Nijgoykar tells me that he normally accesses Wikipedia in the evenings. Imperium Caelestis 09:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

My opinion is that the two articles (Canara Konkani and Karnataka Konkani) must be merged. It simply doesn't make sense to have two separate articles for the various dialects of Konkani spoken in Karnataka. However, i think that it would be a bad idea to merge the above two articles into the Konkani language article. From my own observation, there are more differences to be found between Goan and Karnataka Konkani, than between American and British English. If the latter two dialects are notable enough to merit articles of their own, then so are the Konkani dialects. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 10:09, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Of course there are separate articles for American and British English.. but these articles primarily highlight the differences. They do not necessarily carry the distinction of being a full featured language article. Have a look at either of the two (American English or British English); you'll find that neither of the articles reek of a separatist agenda. You won't find a language family tree, which is the signature identification of a language article. American English and British English articles primarily act as supplementary articles, not as stand alone articles. In my opinion, the way Kanara Konkani article stands right now, it looks more like a separate language article... especially the history part (the inscription at Shravanabelagola etc.) which is shared by Goan dialects too. My proposal resonates with MikeLynch's = to merge significant areas of the article with the main Konkani language article... and have a separate article highlighting the differences. That being said, I have serious doubts about the distinction factor being drawn at the Goan border (ie. Kanara and non-Kanara dialects). People in Karwar, for example, consider themselves to be ethnic Goans (there is even a demand to merge Karwar with Goa). Their language is quite close to the southern Goan dialects. In essence, Karwari Konkani is closer to Goan dialects than Mangalorean dialect. This is precisely why I have serious concerns about where the boundary should be drawn. Additionally, people searching for Konkani language, must be driven to one article.. which is why it is necessary to include significant portions of the content from Kanara Konkani into the main Konkani article. Kanara Konkani must act as a supplementary article, not as an independent article. Signed | Aoghac2z | 21:43, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
To insinuate that the Canara Konkani article reeks of a separatist agendum can best be termed naïve. Such show of unilateralism is uncalled for. The Canara Konkani articles gives similar information in terms of regional variation, history and vocabulary in the North Canara, South Canara (Karavalli) and Malabar region, as does the American English article of the US. I suppose the above user was referring to the article American and British English differences; which should actually be questioned on grounds of redundancy . I am sure people searching for the Konkani language will use their discretion between Konkani language and Canara Konkani. In agreement to Joyson Noel Holla at me!'s proposition, I also submit that the article Canara Konkani is in line with Wikipedia's requirement for brevity. Imperium Caelestis 22:26, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Well then, i would suggest that the Canara Konkani article remain, it's article revamped to highlight only the linguistic differences, and significant areas of the article (for instance, the history section) merged with the main Konkani language article. This would be a much better idea as opposed to it's deletion and replacement with, "Differences between Canara and Goan Konkani". The article should elaborate on how the Canara dialects differs from Standard Konkani (the Ponda dialect). Furthermore, merge it with the Karnataka Konkani article. The term "Karnataka Konkani" would be more appropriate, as this is the land's current name. No one calls it Canara anymore! Imperium Caelestis, whatever differences of opinion you may be having with Nijgoykar, you should not have created a separate article in the first place. Refrain from such an action in the future! If need be, then further articles can be created on respective Konkani dialects in Goa, Karnataka and Kerala. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 06:54, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Joyson Noel, your point is noted. I don't have a problem with differences in opinion; they broaden my understanding of the subject. My objection is to users, in this case one particular user, persistently deleting my contributions under the fallacy of original research. Now I know whom to approach in case such a thing occurs in the future; before I wrote the article Canara Konkani, I didn't. Users Aoghac2z, Yes Michael? and PratikMallya were the ones to notice substance in my contribution and kind enough to offer their help in bringing the matter on the discussion table. I reiterate, I had no intention of creating a separate Canara Konkani article and have maintained right from the outset that the articles, Karnataka Konkani and Canara Konkani, be merged provided the wholesomeness and impartiality of content is maintained.

Coming to your second point, Canara/Kanara (kênarā ) or karāvaḷi is to Karnataka what Konkan is to Maharashtra and Malabar is to Kerala. It simply refers to the coastal districts of Uttara Kannada, Udupi and Dakshina Kannada. The word is much in vogue. The Saraswats of this region refer to themselves as Kanara/Canara Saraswats; there is a magazine by the name Kanara Saraswat (KS). the Mangalorean Catholics also refer to themselves as Canara/Karāvaḷi Christians, the word is used in koṅkaṇi kōguḷ Wilfy Remimbus' song kênarā āmtso gā̃v describing the history of the Mangalorean Catholics and the beauty of the region. Here is the list of places with their Konkani names:
  • Panaji -paṇjẽ
  • Margao - maḍgā̃v
  • Quelossim - keḷśĩ
  • Udupi - ūḍup
  • Padubidri - paḍbidre
  • Mangalore - koḍiyāl
  • Ponda - phaṇẽ

Hence the statement No one calls it Canara anymore! does not hold water. dēv barẽ koroImperium Caelestis 13:05, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

You are new here! So, i would like to point out two ways in which you can avoid disputes over content:
* Make sure that facts or quotes that can be disputed are appropriately sourced. See WP:CS for more info. Furthermore, make sure the reference is reliable and verifiable. See WP:RS and WP:VERIFY. That way, no one can dispute the concerned statement.
* I am not familiar with the edits you have made, but will go ahead and say this anyway, just in case. Do not engage in Original Research! An article should reflect facts and existing opinions by experts.
* Make sure that the articles you create satisfies the criteria for notability (WP:NOTE), and that the text of the article is worded differently from the source (WP:PLAGIARISM.
Next time, you come into a disagreement, discuss in the relevant talk page instead of engaging in an edit war. If there are any problems with a particular user, you can complain at WP:ANI. If you believe that an existing article has issues, Be Bold and work on it, instead of creating a separate article out of fear of getting into disputes. Lastly, i would suggest that you take some time off from editing and learn the basic rules from the link that i sent you. Also, learn the various policies on uploading images. This will help you to become a better Wikipedian and will improve your life significantly here, as well as the quality of your edits. I understand that the standard "Welcome" page is like a big brick that hits on the head with hundreds of rules, so you don't know where to start. But do take my advice into consideration. At times, being unaware of, or misinterpreting basic rules and policies can make one look foolish. If you have any questions, then please feel free to message me.
As regarding "Canara Konkani", a search through google book search does not yield any result by this name.
* http://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&tbo=1&q=Canara+Konkani&btnG=Search+Books#q=Canara+Konkani&hl=en&tbo=1&prmd=ivns&source=lnms&tbs=bks:1&ei=qOF4TYKrNcOxhQeSmJXiBg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=6&ved=0CB4Q_AUoBQ&prmdo=1&fp=ca25c6b69108c813
On the other hand, a first page search of "Karnataka Konkani" provides the following references to this term by reliable sources.
*http://books.google.com/books?id=Tg3XQlsgnHQC&pg=PA34&dq=Karnataka+Konkani&hl=en&ei=3-J4TdCEL4Pl4gaaqeC4BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Karnataka%20Konkani&f=false
*http://books.google.com/books?id=C9MPCd6mO6sC&pg=PA812&dq=Karnataka+Konkani&hl=en&ei=3-J4TdCEL4Pl4gaaqeC4BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Karnataka%20Konkani&f=true
As such, i still think that the appropriate title for the range of dialects spoken in Karnataka is Karnataka Konkani. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 14:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
By the way, Karavali is the Tulu term for Karnataka. The Mangalorean Catholics use both terms interchangeably. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 14:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Joyson Noel, Thank you for sharing the rulebook with me; I have already referred to these. AshLin graciously brought those to my notice right at the outset. reference to Kanara/Canara Konkani is in the adjoining link [5].

The title Karnataka Konkani is fine by me; I am fine with the Canara Konkani article being merged into it, or vice versa. I am not contesting this.
Although words like karāvaḷi (Kanara), dōṇi (boat), gurtu (acquainted), gōttu (know), guḍḍo (hill), nêl(floor), sambaḷ (salary) are from Kannada-Tulu, and kādzār (wedding), besā̃v (blessing), mīs (mass) from Portuguese, these words are as much considered part of Konkani lexicon in Canara/Kanara/Karnataka. I hope you are not suggesting these words not be added in the Konkani Wiktionary or a Konkani dictionary.Imperium Caelestis 16:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
My suggestion would be to read them again, carefully! The most recent article you have created has a lot of issues, which could be avoiding simply by following the Manual of Style. Regarding Karnataka, my point was that Mangalorean Catholics use all these terms - Kanara, Karavali, Karnataka, to refer to the state that they hail from. From my knowledge, there is no specific Konkani term for Karnataka. Furthermore, link states "Kanara Hindu Konkani". Joyson Noel Holla at me! 16:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The only issue regarding the Konkani language agitation page was that an eager beaver administrator marked it for deletion citing it was not as per the standards of a stub just as I was creating the page. please enlist the other lot of issues Look Joyson Noel, I am not an antagonist. That article speaks of a history that is common to both you and I, and I'd like you to submit constructive criticism on that article's page if any. We could get into hair splitting arguments on whether Canara/Kanara Konkani is prevalent or not. We could also team up and help our mā̃ybhās rise out of the ashes. I leave that to your discretion.

The manual of styling is something which you too can help out with. mog āso!! Imperium Caelestis 18:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for asking! I would love to help you out. I shall provide my review in the article's talk page tomorrow or the day after. My criticism is constructive. As i am an older Wikipedian with far more experience, you should take my advice for what it is. I am not trying to belittle you in any way. We are all volunteers here. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 19:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── My dear fellow Konkani Joyson Noel, Those articles belong to all of us. They are our common history. I have no issues with users editing and contributing information so long as there is a reason. It is killing when someone just deletes one's contribution without discussion and overlooks offered evidence. Your advice is, and will be, well received. Don't wait to be asked, just hop onto the bandwagon. Imperium Caelestis 20:04, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Atricles lack sources[edit]

The articles which have been newly created lack sources and references.The creator has used original research.None of the articles cite any references!Even I can add many things which I have discovered or realized but its not the way!

Noone is bothered about that ! moreover wikipedia is not a battleground for discussing the current issues about development of the language but its about conveying precise information to its readers and not confuse them!

So please guys do not add funny sources and mention the name of the books or journals.. an no blogs or any community portal,because all Konkani communities always look down others and have been ever glorifying themselves... its in our blood so please do not do that! No community websites serving as references at all! Nijgoykar (talk) 01:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Path ahead[edit]

Mike, the issue is a very emotional one. Its great for you to take a lead in this. Being non-Konkani seems to be a major qualification in your case (sad but true). Paraphrasing Bernard Shaw in "My Fair Lady", Konkani communities are divided by their common mother tongue.

To avoid edit warring and bad blood, I suggest we move step by step slowly over a period of time. First of all, let User:Imperium Celeste be asked to improve his references. Then, let the Karnataka Konkani and Canara Konkani articles be merged. We could then take things forward from there after that.

It is apparent that three sets of Konkani dialects of the macrolanguage are predominant - gom, knn & mar. The varying degrees of official acceptance can result in either an inclusionist view or deletionist view - therein lies the cause for edit wars. It would be good to develop the articles/find refs/reduce OR first.

Please archive this page, except for the latest talk. As is customary for Wikipedia, all people are requested to be civil, to assume good faith, not make broad sweeping statements, and aim for consensus.

I appeal to Konkani editors to please cooperate in the spirit of the Konkani macrolanguage - a culturally rich and diverse language spoken by people of different ethnicities, religions and written in many scripts. The challenge for this community of Konkani Wikipedians of all dialects is to resolve this issue without rancour and with consensus within Wikipedia guidelines.

AshLin (talk) 04:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── AshLin, your discretion is laudatory :). Having overcome my disappointment that a certain user did not adhere to the Please do not bite the newcomers guidelines and Consensus and carried on a covert edit war, I am glad that this discussion is taking a civil turn. The ISO 639 codes, with regards to the Konkani language and dialects, are vague. Most users covering Konkani, Goan, Canarese as well as Malabarese dialects, are known to use the code gom. Some users use the knn code on the logic that it stands for Konkani (independent language). Hence we have a condition where articles are attributed code gom and the language Babelbox is attributed code knn.

I stand by AshLin's appeal and in furtherance thereof request all contributors to and editors of articles related to the Konkani language, culture and people to respect the diversity of the language and not endeavour to paint the articles in one colour.
Original research seems to be the phrase of the season. The article states "Wikipedia does not publish original research. The term "original research" refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and stories—not already published by reliable sources. It also refers to any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not advanced by the sources.This means that all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable published source, even if not actually attributed." Damning an article or a contribution as Original Research without query and deliberation is an uncivil act and unbecoming of oneself.
Users are requested to peruse the new articles and make use of the {{citation needed}} tag at places where they feel a reference is needed. It must be stressed that the new articles do, and should, portray the history, culture and linguistic nuances of Konkani speaking communities regardless, of their religio-cultural background. Imperium Caelestis 05:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


The Onus is on you[edit]

Imperium, please understand WP:OR accurately, as I would be amongst those who would delete such material considered as OR. Also, the onus of finding accurate references is on you. As of now, I consider the article you created as poorly referenced. What we have requested here is time for you to verify what you wrote. If you cant find references, out it goes. I'll do it myself as a speaker of amchigale, rather than have gom speakers do it; so that the none can be accused of bipartisanship. You have a month's leeway from my side. I request Mike to partner me in this issue. I will presently restrict myself to the two articles being considered for merger. Any changes for amendments to this Konkani language article will be proposed here for consensus. I hope this is okay with all concerned. AshLin (talk) 13:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── your views, terse though they are, are received in good faith. I am a Bhānap āmchigelo; nevertheless I am in deliberation with wiki administrators to restrain them from deleting the images of a Nawayathi Konkani periodical and a book of catechism in Konkani published by the diocese of Karwar. I have created and contributed to 4 articles Canara Konkani, Konkani phonology, Konkani Language Agitation and Konkani script, and am in active consultation with Shri. Guru Baliga of the Konkani Language and Cultural Foundation, Mangalore for contributions which might throw more light on the articles. The articulation of your intentions goes against Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and Wikipedia:CONSENSUS and is out of line with Wikipedia:Editing policy, Wikipedia:Resolving disputes and Wikipedia:WIP

Coming to your point, I have references for all my contributions. I appeal to seasoned users like yourself to review the articles and leave your views on the talk page or better still, leave a {{citation needed}} beside statements whose veracity is likely to be questioned, rather than go on an editing spree a la militaire. I hope you share my predicament in having an article with a reference list twice as long as the article itself.

It can not be stressed enough that this is not an us-against-them slugfest. We are all in the endeavour to present information regarding the Konkani language, its dialects, its communities and it best be done consensually. Godspeed!!Imperium Caelestis 14:44, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Your slugfest point well-taken but you are not correct on all points. I am continuing this thread on the talk page of Canara Konkani. AshLin (talk) 16:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Thank you very much indeed :) I'll be glad to join you there. Imperium Caelestis 16:41, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Discussion moved to the Talk Page of Canara Konkani.[edit]

This discussion has been moved to the talk page of the article in question. Please contribute here @ Talk:Kanara_(Canara)_Konkani Signed | Aoghac2z | 19:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Restructuring The Konkani language article[edit]

Oyez!!, To begin with, I'd like to share with all my Konkani speaking brethren that an extension of this article dealing with Konkani dialects in Karnataka and Kerala, Canara Konkani has been promoted to a Class-B article.

I propose that we discuss the restructuring of the Konkani language article on the lines of the Tamil language article. This page in it's current form, looks quite verbose and cluttered. I propose:

  • Some sections call for a separate article e.g. "Konkani literature"; there is so much that has not been covered.
  • The Konkani script deserves a separate article. This in view of the argument that this article pertains to a language and a mere mention of scripts should serve the purpose. The five scripts of Konkani should be given equal weightage; this will be a realistic approach and not an idealistic one. However it must be stressed that Devanagari is the official script.
  • History could be summarised and stated in detail in a separate Konkani language agitation article.
  • Konkani grammar deserves more weightage as many readers, unaware of the nuances of the language, might want to gain in depth information . Hence creating a separate article would be advisable.

Currently, the article goes from history=> Portuguese era & migration=> early epigraphy=> revival=>early literature. This presentation looks ad hoc and is in need of streamlining. your views are solicited. Imperium Caelestis 18:56, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Please refer

These following articles must be emulated. They are all Featured Articles.

Hopefully, one day the Konkani language article will be added to this list as well. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 09:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

User Joyson, I share your hope, and your enthusiasm. Lets not keep it to one day; we'll start working out a consensus right away. I saw the discussion regarding the script being required as part of the article. I have two points highlighting that sections irrelevance here:
*The article is about a language. Script should be covered by a separate article.
*The script part only mentions the Devanagari. I am a Mangalorean and we use the Kannada script to write Konkani regardless of whether or not it has official sanction. And we form 40% of the Konkanosphere.Imperium Caelestis 11:52, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Kindly refer to a previous discussion on the Mangalore article regarding the use of Kannada script and share your thoughts on it. Personally, i have changed my views since then. I believe that the Konkani language must have a standardized script, and that it be Devanagari as declared by the Goan govt. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 12:22, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
User Joyson, User Deepak D'Souza has made a very politically correct statement. This is exactly what I mentioned in my earlier message. The five scripts of Konkani should be given equal weightage; this will be a realistic approach and not an idealistic one. However it must be stressed that Devanagari is the official script. This is only in view of the fact that Konkani in the Roman script script is in vogue in Goa and is under active consideration for communication purposes, and government employees may submit applications, appeals or representations in that script along with Konkani in Devanagari and Marathi. In Karnataka, Konkani it is a known fact that Konkani is written in the Kannada script and Konkani can be taught in schools in the Kannada script.
I myself am a staunch supporter of the Devanagari as pre-Portuguese records have been found of Konkani being written in it, and that one script will help to reduce the unintelligibility amongst the dialects. However, I am not in favour of using the Wikipaedian platform as an extension of government literature. As I could see from your points in the said link, we both agree that Wikipedia should be used as a platform to mention substantiated facts.
Until such time as Devanagari does not attain the status (officialdom notwithstanding) of the sole script which Konkani is written in, or appears to have reached that stage, all concerned scripts must find mention. This will serve two purposes:
*It will invoke interest amongst users of the other scripts and create an amicable environment on the talk page.
*It will aid users of other scripts to compare the scripts against each other and might help them to learn the official script. Imperium Caelestis 14:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Before i make up my own mind on this subject, i would like to hear the views of other knowledgeable editors as well. This will help us to see more views regarding both sides of the argument. As such, i have requested User:AshLin, User:Aoghac2z, User:MikeLynch, User:Premkudva, User:Nijgoykar, User:Fredericknoronha, User: Deepak D'Souza, User:Zauercraut, User:Kasbee, User:Pratik.mallya, User:Konkani Manis (Guru Baliga of World Konkani Academy) and User:Ashok Prabhu to participate in the discussion. Hopefully, they all shall take heed of my request and offer their views as well. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 10:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Agree: Editing a language article is quite a detailed and precise act which is why I have not done any editing on any language article so far. And do not wish to start any time soon. Having said that trying to restructure the article to emulate other well written language articles as mentioned above is quite commendable and need be done. I am all for it.--PremKudvaTalk 11:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
In my opinion state accurately the scenario on ground - different scripts used by different parts of the community but Goa has made devanagari the official script for Konkani within that state. AshLin (talk) 16:20, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
OK. Then i'll take that as agreement with Imperium. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 16:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Having been involved in discussions related to Konkani, I am of the opinion that all scripts should be mentioned. It is not similar to many other Indian languages in the sense that it is written in many scripts, in different regions. Of course, you all know that better than me! Yes Michael?Talk 18:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Agree: I think it would be a great idea! Joyson Noel Holla at me! 12:01, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Outline of sections[edit]

One of you are requested to please propose an outline of which sections you intend having - see the various featured articles for guidance. Put it up here so that we can offer comments/suggest improvements. AshLin (talk) 11:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Please comment above, Ashlin! I would like to hear your opinion on whether it would be a good idea to use the different scripts here. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 12:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Outline[edit]

change the linguasphere map. post a realistic map including coastal KA and KL
  • definition/lead
  • classification
History
  • origin of the word Konkani
  • old Konkani (जणे रसतळवांतुं मत्स्यरूपें...., चवुंडराजें करवियलें, etc)
  • Middle Konkani (Hortus, Maffei, Stephens)
  • Modern Konkani (definition of gom covering KA and KL dialects)
geographical distribution (mention GA, KA, KL)
  • Recognition (also see Konkani language agitation)
  • Legal status
Phonology (also see konkani phonology)
  • vowels
  • consonants
  • numbers
    • cardinal
    • ordinal
Language
  • standard Konkani (Antruz, with reason)
  • variation in dialects
  • Lexicon
    • original words
    • tatsama words
    • tadbhava words
    • loan words from languages other than Skt.
  • syntax (SOV language, suffixes show person, number, mood, tense, and voice, etc)
writing system (also see Konkani script)

written in Dn, Kd, Pers, Rom scripts. Dn official.

Grammar

originated from sanskrit. brief mention of parts of speech and figures of speech.

Government bodies (Goa Konkani academy, Karnataka Konkani sahitya academy, Kerala Konkani academy)
Private organisations
Konkani Culture and arts
  • Periodicals
  • Films
  • theatre
  • music
Issues (multiple dialects, scripts, dialect of Marathi, etc)


My Recommendations[edit]
  1. transfer Portuguese and Bahamani atrocities to Konkani language agitation
  2. remove script table. It is not in line with reality
  3. remove detailed description of the Sumerians (Shakas)
  4. Imperium Caelestis 14:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Did the Bahmanis and Malik Kafur (as pointed out in the Konkani language agitations article) really try to destroy Konkani? Although they might have definitely oppressed Hindus, i don't think that they were ever involved in the suppression of Konkani. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 15:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Sumerians are not Shakas.and Sumerains have played a very important role in Goan history which can never be overlooked. Nijgoykar (talk) 15:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Strangely, I cant find this in the Goa#History. I'm interested,please point me to reliable sources. AshLin (talk) 16:34, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


Read:

  • Gomantak Prakruti ani sanskruti Part one..in Marathi by Ba.Da.Satoskar
  • The cultural history of Goa from 10000 B.C.-1352 A.D. Goa Sinai Dhume, Anant Ramkrishna (1986).

Nijgoykar (talk) 16:46, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


Thanks, will try to get it in Pune. AshLin (talk) 16:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

You cant find it in the article Goa because that article itself is very much incomplete and lacks reliable sources.Moreover this dates back some 5000 years back so not so important but it does have given many important things to Goan society which continue till date.Nijgoykar (talk) 16:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── User Nijgoykar, I thank you for joining this conversation in spite of your initial reluctance. I stand corrected on the difference between Sumerians and Shakas (Scythians). You said that the Sumerians played a role in Goan history. Well, if we have more meat on that, it could be carved into a separate article. I do not see the relevance of Sumerian modification of local customs and introduction of temple architecture in an a language related article. However, Sumerian features and words could be elaborated upon.

User Joyson, I too, like you, am not convinced that the Marathas and Bahamanis were out to get Konkani's throat. The exodus resulting from those invasions, however, caused Konkani speakers to migrate to coastal Karnataka/Canara and Kerala. On another note, I personally feel politics should be kept at a bare minimum and influences on the language should be mentioned. Imperium Caelestis 17:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Sumerians introduced many customs,modified the village system, introduced temple worship,the devdasi system in goa,the cultivation of Khajan land.This all has deeply influenced the language.They introduced new terms many of them are still found in Goan or any other Konkani.Agriculture,religion,orship has alwys played a very important role in shaping up a language.I am studying Akkadian language i shall soon publish a list of the loanwords. Nijgoykar (talk) 17:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

The outline looks good. We could take it as provisional, if no one has any comments soon and improve it as we go along. AshLin (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

User Nijgoykar, the loan words could be added in the category "loan words from languages other than Sanskrit". However cultural influences do not come under the purview of this title. If we go by your logic, we will also have to write the saga of Aryan advances right from the Caucasus, how Aryan advances pushed the Dravidians to the south and how these two races/communities influenced Konkani culture. But we will be going way beyond the point and the scope of the title. Imperium Caelestis 18:41, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I fail to understand the relevance of Sumerian influence on Konkani as a language. There's no gainsaying the influence of Sumerian culture on the land that we know as Goa today, however influence on culture doesn't necessarily translate to influence on language. Daivadnya Sets being the purported descendants of ancient Sumerians IS OF NO RELEVANCE to Konkani language. Further more, Konkani is an Indo-Aryan language descended from Maharashtri prakrit. We're all aware that Maharashtri Prakrit began losing its ground around the 8th century after which it gave way to Marathi and Konkani. Konkani started taking form probably from the 10th century onwards, at which point it started establishing itself as a language. The Sumerian influence that has been mentioned in the article is most likely from the BC era... an era in which Konkani wasn't even born. There definitely must be loan words from the Sumerian influence, but to point out that Sumerian culture led to the development of Konkani language is inappropriate. User:Nijgoykar, you've most likely found mentions of these Sumerian influence in anthropological books or books about the land that comprises Goa today. These in no way are of any academic relevance from a linguistic perspective. Leading linguists do not recognize Sumerian influence to be a development factor in Konkani's growth. This article is about Konkani language, and not Goan history. ¬ Aog hac 2z | 18:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Imperium, the Bahmanis (I'm not sure about Malik Kafur) led Konkanis to migrate, therby causing the dispersions of the Konkani people, but not the language's decline. Please correct it in the Konkani agitations article. The true decline of Konkani began with the advent of the Portuguese. After that, the Konkanis who fled north to the Maratha kingdom lost Konkani as their mother tongue, giving it up for Marathi. The Goan Catholics increasingly turned to Portuguese, while their Hindu brethren increasingly turned to Marathi in Goa. This is the reason why today, the Marathi press in Goa is strong and have a good readership, whereas the state of the Konkani press is abysmal and only a fraction of the readership of the Marathi press. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 08:42, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
How about adding a disambiguation too??

The following is a quote I added to the Konkani phonology article as disambiguation. This helps in keeping wanton discussion at bay regarding dialects like including Malwani, Konkan being in Maharashtra, etc.

This should appear right after the lede. Imperium Caelestis 16:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

LOL[edit]

LOL! I knew this would be your conclusion!I am taking about the Daivadnyas!Its only what Dhume thinks about Daivadnyas... none of the Daivadnyas would even know that! I read it only in his books.And when it comes to Konkani its always about caste it comes without saying.And now I am free to conclude to think the above mentioned guy belongs to some particular caste!

This was my last attempt to edit this article!

Good luck guys! Nijgoykar (talk) 08:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no need to be sarcastic in your tone. I don't even know what you're trying to point out, but I'm assuming here that this post of yours was directed towards me. I was simply pointing out that I saw this line under the Sumerian influence sections: Goan anthropologist and historian Ananta Rāmakṛṣṇa Śeṇavī Dhume claims that Goan Śeṭs are descendants of ancient Sumerian colonists. My point was that this is of no relevance whatsoever to Konkani's development as a language. That being said, I fail to understand your last line. ¬ Aog hac 2z | 16:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

grrrr!! there goes a dignified discussion from the pulpit to the gutters. I don't like this language of divisiveness. However I shall abide by Romans 16:17 " I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them ", and maintain my dignity and silence. Imperium Caelestis 17:40, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Imperium, you know more about the Bible than i do. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 18:22, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Originated from Sanskrit?[edit]

Konkani has not originated from Sanskrit!Konkani has originated from Prakrit and then apabhramsha! In-fact Sanskrit it self means refined which was not a spoken language and originated from Prakrit. so its Prakrit that has given birth to all modern so called Indo-aryan languages. Vedic Sanskrit was spoken dialect but classical Sanskrit was never spoken!

Nijgoykar (talk) 18:00, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

would you kindly enlighten us ignorant users where Prakrit originated from?? Imperium Caelestis 18:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC) (I retract this statement and apologise to the user)

Echoing the question asked (not the sarcasm though!), Prakrit probably has its roots in Sanskrit (my knowledge is limited, so don't count on it). Yes Michael?Talk 18:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

User Mike, Prakrits are a group (not one single language) of Indic languages that originated from vedic Sanskrit. Panini standardised the rules of Vedic Sanskrit and brought about Classical Sanskrit. While Sanskrit was patronised by the Brahmin class, the Kshatriyas patronised Prakrit. However, religious Buddhist literature is written in a Prakrit language called Pali and Jain literature in a Prakrit called Ardhamagadhi. :) Imperium Caelestis 19:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I had a closer look a the sources used by User:Nijgoykar and I just want to say that a majority of these sources are books with anthropological and socio-cultural themes. These books do not appear to be linguistic from an academic sense. A lot of content I have come across lately appears to be very socio-cultural oriented.. especially the first two sub-sections under Development. I want to reiterate that this article is about Konkani language, and not Goan history. ¬ Aog hac 2z | 19:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Prakrit and Konkani
  • Is Konkani हांव तूं is more closer to Prakrit हऊ तऊ or Sanskrit अहम् त्वम्?
  • Can Konkani खंय थंय be possibly derived from Prakrit कहिम् तहिम् or Sanskrit कुत्र तत्र ?
  • Why does Konkani does not follow Sanskrit grammatical rules?
  • Why does not Konkani follow a uniform Apabhramsha pattern?

Please do read Introduction to Prakrit By Alfred C. Woolner Nijgoykar (talk) 05:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)(more to come,I dont have time now)

Kindly peruse Sanskrit and Prakrit, sociolinguistic issues by Madhav Deshpande pp 2-10. It describes the origin of the Prakrits from Sanskrit. However, this is not within the purview of this topic. It is not an article to discuss the Prakrit languages. Imperium Caelestis 07:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Then monopolizing the article and making such statements! Nijgoykar (talk) 08:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC) And I already have that book with me,and I never read books that talk about Aryan invasion theory which is not at all true and has been outdated now. Nijgoykar (talk) 08:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

User Nijgoykar, please don't run down other users, or use aggressive language. It will not help resolve the issue. Please take one issue at a time and please be civil. Please give the references with page numbers. Please help us locate the references by uploading it to web or sending us pdfs by mail. We can then discuss these issues one by one and reach consensus. There are Prakrit experts in Deccan College and Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute who can be approached for opinions/adjudication if necessary. But without due deliberation and without taking the trouble to be civil and undergo the painful process of discussion of edits, one by one, we will not be able to address your legitimate concerns. AshLin (talk) 09:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


Well I was not the one to start it.I dont like others attacking me every now and then.(I am not talking about you) Nijgoykar (talk) 09:52, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

grrr!!, i really wish we could take Prakrit discussions over to this page. This discussion over Prakrits does not deserve the time we're giving it. However, here's the link to the book [6].

  • हांव, खंय are Tadbhava words
  • where (खंय) in Skt can be translated as कुत्र, कुविद्, क्व, कुतस्, कुह, कुहय, यत्र.
  • there (थंय) in Skt can be translated as तत्र, अमुत्र, तेन, त्यत्र, एना, अमुतस्.
  • would you kindly elaborate on your last point, "Konkani does not follow a uniform Apabhraṃśa pattern. warm regards Imperium Caelestis 11:26, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


LOL you dont get the point!


khay comes from sauraseni kahim! thats all I dun wanna argueNijgoykar (talk) 14:27, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

to put it figuratively, Adam and Eve did not speak in the Prakrits in the garden of Eden!! The Prakrits definitely had an ancestor and that was old Vedic Sanskrit. To suggest otherwise would be Original Research. As much as the Hindi dialect of Delhi is considered as Standard Hindi, old Vedic Sanskrit was considered the standard for medieval Indo-Aryan languages. It should not come as a surprise that the liturgical and dramatic Prakrits existed even when Panini wrote the grammar for, what is today referred to as, Classical Sanskrit. Imperium Caelestis 16:51, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


All Prakrits have not definitely originated from Vedic Sanskrit.There many dialects that were spoken before that.What about the Harappan language?What about the other so called non-aryan languages spoken that time?I cannot mention the names of the books as I am in Bangalore and most of my books are in Goa.This is not at all original research but its very true from anthropological and linguistic point of view.Even in Goa there are so many sub-dialects.Dialects changes every 15 kms everywhere in India.And the Vedic Sanskrit was really spoken by a relatively smaller group of people residing in the Punjab Sarasvati region of whom not all followed Vedic religion.Especially those people from the Ganges delta really did not follow Vedic religion at all.Read Kosambi,you ll agree to it.Moreover Konkani has got its own substratum before Prakrit like Vedic Sanskrit.May be the language spoken \by the proto-austroloids and then the thousands of Sumerian settlers,and finally the Indo-aryan speakers,and the others.Does is make any sense? Nijgoykar (talk) 02:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────


I do not intend to comment on anything henceforth.Please spare me! Nijgoykar (talk) 05:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Resources[edit]

To all users,

Please do propose changes but back it up with verifiable references. It would be really helpful if you would provide access to any books that you may have and wish to quote. Most such books are "orphans" (in copyright but no longer printed) or out of copyright and are suitable candidates for uploading to www.archive.org.

BTW, I have located Woolner on www.archive.org for all to download and refer.

There are a fair number of Prakrit resources on www.archive.org. See :

http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=Prakrit%20AND%20mediatype%3Atexts


Very few Konkani resources though :


http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=Konkani%20AND%20mediatype%3Atexts

If you have others, no matter which language, please add them to archive.org.

AshLin (talk) 09:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation part[edit]

- as added by User:ImperiumCaelestis

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Where did you pick that up from? Any attributable source? ¬ Aog hac 2z | 07:57, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

here [7]Imperium Caelestis 08:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Well then please cite the source there. ¬ Aog hac 2z | 08:37, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I see it there now. ¬ Aog hac 2z | 08:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

hahaha..I've just taken the article to the cleaners. all necessary comments will have referencesImperium Caelestis 08:46, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Hold your horses![edit]

Please list out your actions & the reasons so that we can follow your train of thought. For example, why get rid of the Geography section?

AshLin (talk) 08:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

the geographic section is safe, including each link and reference. as agreed upon in the earlier outline, it is being brought after the History part and modern Konkani sub-part. I'll put it back is it's being missed :) Imperium Caelestis 08:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Suggestions![edit]

Suggestion 1:There is no need to mention Kadodi there

reasons being:

  • It is mere a dialect,spoken by a really very small population.
  • It is and it has never been a written language.

Suggestion 2:The Disambiguation is not properly placed.It should not be a part of Introduction.

Suggestion 3:In the etymology part,more needs to be stressed about the Proto-Austroloid dialect.

Nijgoykar (talk) 11:52, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Future suggestion: Konkani never was a language of a single homogeneous community, but of a heterogeneous group, including Brahmins and non-Brahmins of various castes. Differences, however, remain in the speech of Brahmins and non-Brahmins among both the major religious groups viz. Hindus and Christians. '[1]

So no religion or caste name should be mentioned.Though the dialects spoken by the three religions or the castes and scripts used must be mentioned.

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

  • Kadodi finds mention on Wikipedia and is on the list southern Indo-Aryan languages (SIA). It is going through the same phase that Konkani once underwent. Regardless of it being a minority, it should be mentioned as keeping a lid on it will not do justice to the list of the SIA family.
  • The etymology part deals with the origin of the word Konkani. words from the proto-Austroloid dialects can be added to Loan words from non-Sanskrit languages. It should not be forgotten that Konkani is an Indo-Aryan language.
  • religion-caste: point taken. Imperium Caelestis 12:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Intro: The disambiguation in the intro looks odd. I would suggest that it be used as a note instead. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 14:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)  Done (added as note) Imperium Caelestis 14:42, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
See this for example. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 14:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion 4:I do not really think Kunka dialect is of Indo-Aryan origin is.As per my knowledge it is a dialect of Austro-Asiatic origin whcih was similar to Mundari language.So I request to check the sources once again. Nijgoykar (talk) 03:46, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

It has been verified Nijgoykar. However, here is the link for reconfirmation [8]

Suggestion 5:The first section of the Roots would be re-framed.Konkani just gets its names from Konk and it does not have its roots in it.It has just got a very few words in it.so its no opt to say roots lie in Konk. Nijgoykar (talk) 02:14, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I did not get your point. could you rephrase it. I feel the roots part is quite heavyweight and could undergo weight reduction. Imperium Caelestis 06:22, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion 6: Classification part is missing!It just says its an Indo-Aryan language.What happened to the details classification which used to be there before?Nijgoykar (talk) 02:17, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The lede had statements on the script, population distribution, etc which are already covered detail in dedicated paragraphs. These have been deleted from the lede to avoid redundancy. Any other point which has not been covered in subsequent paragraphs may kindly be stated. Imperium Caelestis 19:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Mohe,moho,maka[edit]

In the famous Arti for lord Ganesha written in Brij Bhasha says moko ati bhave .Konkani Maka seems to be analogous to Moko.As as per apabharmsha ans prakrit rules,ka is normally rendered as ha.or sometimes it can be the other way round.ha can be ka. The Konkani word Mhaka finds its roots in prakrit Mahyam and then Mhahao ,moho,then rendered as Konkani mhaka and so on. Some other examples could be: tubhyam>tujjhao>tujjo. Nijgoykar (talk) 05:57, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ "LIS". 

Explanation![edit]

Konkani has rejected ऋ, ॠ, ऌ, ॡ, ष, क्ष and are assimilated with र, ख, ह, श and स.


Illustration:

  • Sanskrit ऋषि becomes रूशी in Konkani,similarly ऋण becomes रीण.
  • ऌ, ॡ are not found in Konkani at all but can be used to write Sanskrit words like kḷpti
  • Sanskrit विष becomes वीख
  • वृक्ष becomes रूख
  • similarly क्षण is rendered खीण in Konkani


Let me know if anyone needs further explanations.


Nijgoykar (talk) 07:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Words in South Asian languages are of three types, Tatsama (unmodified loanwords from Sanskrit), Tadbhava (borrowed from Sanskrit, but changed to fit the phonology of the native language) and Deshi (native word that can not be traced back to Sanskrit). Konkani, in addition to these has a copious lexicon of Dravidian words. Coming to the point, śuna became sūṇẽ (tadbhava) and vṛkṣa yielded rūka (tadbhava). However, Konkani has a copious lexicon of Tatsama words like kṛpā (favour, grace), sūrya (sun), candra (moon), vidyāpīṭh (university) , nitya (daily, everyday). The pronunciation of ऋषि and ऋण is not the same in all South Asian Languages e.g. Hindi (riśi, riṇ), Bengali (rīśī, rīṇ), Marathi (ruśī, rūṇ). The two words are however recognised as Tatsama words nonetheless.

To maintain that Konkani has rejected the said consonants and vowels would not be a fair observation. Imperium Caelestis 04:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Literature[edit]

I made some minor changes to the Literature section to improve readability. I forgot to log on first so the changes will show up with an IP address--sorry! None of the changes were to content; it was just minor changes to grammar and punctuation. Dave (djkernen)|Talk to me|Please help! 14:38, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

The language with the ISO code knn[edit]

What exactly is the language that has been assigned the ISO code knn? I am clear about gom (Goan Konkani) - this is the language that is the Sole Official Language in the state of Goa, and is also spoken in Karnataka and parts of Kerala and Maharashtra, and some of whose dialects are Antruz, Bardeshkari and Saxtti. How, then, does this differ from the language knn? Is knn the same as Konkani dialect (Marathi)? If yes, which document says so?

Unfortunately, the Ethnologue pages for gom and knn do a fine job of creating more confusion. These pages seem to have mixed up attributes of these languages. For example, 'Konkan Standard' is given as an alternate name for knn, but since gom has official status, doesn't gom deserve to be called 'Konkani Standard' or 'Konkani Proper'. And who ever really heard of a language called 'Konkanese'?

In the interim, I have changed the name of the language knn in the article to the name used by ISO, SIL and Ethnologue: 'Konkani', and I have also removed to references of it being a dialect of Marathi. I object to selecting 'Maharashtra Konkani' or 'Konkanese' for the purpose of dab, because the Ethnologue also gives its names as 'Konkani Mangalorean' and 'Bankoti', so why not use these? Please do not change the name in the article until this discussion is resolved.

The Discoverer (talk) 12:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Because they're not the same thing, that's why. Whether Maharashtran Konkani is a dialect of Marathi or of Konkani I have no idea; evidently there's a dispute on exactly that question. But if it is Marathi, or even might be, it's ridiculous to call it "Konkani" in an article on Konkani. — kwami (talk) 13:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)


I strongly object to the use of 'Maharashtra Konkani' for the purpose of dab, because the Ethnologue also gives an alternate name as 'Konkani Mangalorean'.Mangalore is in Karnataka which is a different state from Maharashtra. 'Maharashtra Konkani' would basically be Konkani dialect (Marathi) while 'Konkani Mangalorean' would basically be Karnataka Konkani or Canara Konkani.
Can we compromise and call knn 'Konkani (Bankoti)' for now? - The Discoverer (talk) 13:27, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Ethnologue is not a very RS. We don't blindly follow it. If we did, we would have to move this article to Goan Konkani.
Use whichever name you feel is justified by the lit, as long as you don't use plain "Konkani", which is used for something else in this article. You can't give two mutually exclusive things the same name in an article on one or both of those things. — kwami (talk) 13:42, 5 August 2011 (UTC)


I agree with you Kwamikagami. Unfortunately, I did not find any satisfactory lit. 'Konkani Mangalorean' was added only in the 16th Ethnologue and most of the other alternate names, including Bankoti point to knn being geographically Maharashtrian in origin. So, in the end it may turn out that knn is Konkani dialect (Marathi) and 'Konkani Mangalorean', Karnataka Konkani and Canara Konkani fall under gom.
I will use Konkani (Bankotti) in the article, only for want of a better name and only until the confusion is resolved.
By the way, I did not understand the meaning of 'RS'. - 14:03, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
"Reliable source". Ethn. isn't much of one. SIL just doesn't have the staff to do it justice. — kwami (talk) 14:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)


Konkani dialect (Marathi) says The sub-dialects of Konkani gradually merge from standard Marathi into Goan Konkani from north to south Konkan. The various sub dialects are: Parabhi, Koli, Kiristanv, Kunbi, Agari, Dhangari, Thakri, Karadhi, and Maoli. These dialects make up knn as per the Ethnologue. So, it's clear that knn is actually the same as Konkani dialect (Marathi), and Mangaloean Konkani, Karnataka Konkani and Canara Konkani fall under gom. Ethnologue errs when it includes 'Konkani Mangalorean' in knn. I propose to call knn Maharashtrian Konkani to differentiate it from Goan Konkani. Ofcourse, speakers of both laguages call them Konkani. - The Discoverer (talk) 15:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of irrelevant content[edit]

Admins please delete following content and Photo which is not related to the topic Konkani Language --Konkani Manis 12:21, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Haradi Rajaram Prabhu[1947-2011] a Bank employee by profession from Tirthahalli shimoga Karnataka, has contributed greatly to the growth of the Konkani community. He served as incharge for the newly purchased GSB samaj bhavan between 2005 to 2009 and has worked significantly towards its growth and created great source of income for Konkani community Bangalore during his tenure . His works have been greatly admired by the his contemperories and prominent personalities Mr Dinesh nayak and Mr Upendra nayak who are the leading members of GSB samaj at Bangalore during this period . Haradi Rajaram Prabhu has also worked as social activist,philantrophist and a man of great values and principles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Konkani Manis (talkcontribs) 12:21, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


I second this too.The content is not so important in this article its about Konkani language and not about a person.Secondly please do not bring Castesim here,no caste name should be mentioned. Nijgoykar (talk) 13:43, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Restructuring the Konkani language page - Attempt II[edit]

The Konkani language article and talk page could well be called the Balkans of Wikipedia. I see that an initial attempt at restructuring the page to make it look less like propaganda and more like a featured article has been thwarted. When it was already established that script, phonology. history were items that warranted separate articles and were subsequently created, it was disappointing to see them being brought back into the Konkani language article. I request all users to kindly suggest and restructure this article by consensus. Imperium Caelestis 06:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

moving the medieval Konkani section coz of its irrevelance[edit]

The following section has very less to do with history of the language'


This era was marked by the invasion of Goa and subsequent exodus to Marhatta territory and Canara (today's coastal Karnaraka) and Cochin.

These events caused the Konkani language to evolve into multiple dialects. The exodus to coastal Karnataka and Kerala required Konkani speakers in these regions to learn the local languages and hence this caused penetration of local words into the dialects of Konkani spoken by these speakers. e.g. the word dār (door) gave way to the word bāgil . The phoneme "a" in the Salcette dialect was replaced by the phoneme "o"

Other Konkani communities came into being with their own dialects of Konkani. The Konkani Muslim communities of Ratnagiri and Bhatkal came about due to a mixture of intermarriage of Arab seafarers and locals as well as conversions of Hindus to Islam.[1]Another migrant community that picked up Konkani was the Siddis who were sailor-warriors from Ethiopia.[2]

Offensive language in substratum section[edit]

Consistent reference to Dravidian and descendants of "proto-Australoids" as primitive is despicable. Clearly, whoever has written this has no grasp of the nuances of the English language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.16.188 (talk) 13:54, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


Dravidian is a linguistic term here!and no statement implies any sort of descent from Ptoro-australoids.You opinion is not really worth considering coz u were getting personal :) Nijgoykar (talk) 14:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know about "offensive", but what does "Austroloid" mean? Isn't it a rather meaningless term? — kwami (talk) 04:19, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

'Konkani', 'Maharashtrian Konkani' and 'Goan Konkani'[edit]

Venn diagram of the Konkani language family

This is with regard to the classification of Konkani dialects. This has already been discussed earlier. To summarise, the speakers of the Konkani dialects of Maharashtra and the Konkani language both call their respective tongues Konkani. For this reason, the names 'Maharashtrian Konkani' and 'Goan Konkani' are used to differentiate the two usages of the word Konkani. The dialects comprising Maharashtrian Konkani have collectively been assigned the ISO code knn while the rest of the Konkani dialects come under the ISO code gom. The languages with the ISO codes knn and gom are grouped together under the Konkani macrolanguage with ISO code kok. However the term 'Goan Konkani' being used to refer to the non-maharashtrian dialects is misleading and indeed a misnomer because the dialects under the ISO code kok are not confined to the territory of the state of Goa (eg. Mangalorean and Malvani) and in common parlance, Goan Konkani is understood to be the dialects spoken in the geographical area of Goa (eg. Antruz, Saxtti and Bardeskari). This classification is shown in the image. Hence, 'Goan Konkani' should be used carefully, and as far as possible should be avoided when referring collectively to the non-maharashtrian dialects. The Discoverer (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Malayalam script ?[edit]

Was Konkani ever written in Malayalam script? Any citations? - PrinceMathew (talk) 05:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Where konkani was written in malayalam script???Never Truth trumps (talk) 18:59, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

There is a source cited in the article that says that Konkani is written in the Malayalam script: Madhavi Sardessai The Discoverer (talk) 15:06, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Its is quite clear in that article about movement towards devanagari.I can give bundle of souce of these kind which will be contradictory to your statement. Truth should trump (talk) 04:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Copyedited[edit]

PaintedCarpet (talk) 20:18, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

AfC draft[edit]

There's a draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Konkani Script, about Konkani writing. It has no references but might be a source of ideas for expanding this article. —rybec 01:00, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

A Konkani grammar (1882)[edit]

A Konkani grammar (1882)

https://archive.org/details/akonkanigrammar00maffgoog

Rajmaan (talk) 23:43, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Kurukh[edit]

Kurukh are not proto-australoid. They are a dravidian tribe. Their language is Dravidian too. This should change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.249.54.100 (talk) 02:51, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


Inscription on Shilahara king Aparaditya[edit]

An inscription dating back to 1166 AD contains following curse in Konkani written in archaic nagari script,rest of the inscription is in Sanskrit and Marathi.

अथ​(आतां) जो कोण्णुईरे सासनळोपी तेआच्या वेढ्यांत देवाची भाल सकुटुंबी आपडे तेआची माय झवी गाढवे

the literal translation of the above lines would be

now whoever breaks the rules god's spear(bhaalo in modern Konkani.. or curse) will fall on him and his entire clan and his mother will be fucked by a donkey.


such a curse can also be seen in Nageshi inscription,the stone inscription at Nageshi depicts a female figure fornicated by a donkey. The depiction could be seen here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konkani_language#/media/File:Nagueshi_Inscription_1413AD.jpg


Nijgoykar (talk) 03:03, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Separate article for "Konkani literature"?[edit]

Can we have a separate article for "Konkani literature"? Most Indian languages seem to have a separate article for literature. (See Template:Indian literature). 61.3.105.131 (talk) 04:26, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I think that the page Konkani could do with some parts made into separate articles. I've created the page Konkani literature, mostly with content from the section on this article, and summarised the said content in this article. I think the article on literature has potential. The Discoverer (talk) 15:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

dates[edit]

Important dates related to the history of Konkani Language<ref name="goatourism.gov.in"/>

  • 1187: The date of the first Konkani inscription discovered
  • 1209: The Maratha poet Jñāneśvar wites the Jñānēśvarī in Konkani[citation needed]
  • 1548: the Portuguese destroyed all Konkani works
  • 1808: Konkani Bible is published in Goa
  • 1932: Portuguese start first Konkani school in Goa
  • 1987: Konkani recognised as a National language by the Government of India


Jnanehswari is not written in Konkani,its written in archaic marathic which shares many similarities with Konkani. Nijgoykar (talk) 11:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Konkani language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 05:42, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Confusion regarding map and script[edit]

Since canarese konkani have different page then why we are highlighting other script in Goan konkani.Bombay to karwar Use Devanagari script(no other script).secondly konkani was never used in Kannada script or malayalam script (It was used in exception case like sahitya academic related works). Please clarify. Truth should trump (talk) 21:27, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Goan konkani page is redirecting to this page,then why other scripts are highlighted here? Truth should trump (talk) 21:29, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Truth should trump, Goan Konkani does not refer only to Konkani spoken in the State of Goa, but also includes dialects like Mangalorean Konkani and Malwani as you can see in this diagram. It is spoken in an area covering the south coast of Maharashtra and Karnataka also in addition to Goa. The reason it is called 'Goan' Konkani is in order to differentiate from 'Maharashtrian' Konkani, which is a collection of Maharashtrian dialects like Agari. Therefore Konkani written in the Kannada script in Mangalore also comes in Goan Konkani and so also Konkani in the Roman script which is used by many people in Goa. For this reason, this map shows an area outside of Goa too. Canarese Konkani refers to a different language, known as Kukna. I'm surprised that you say that from Bombay to Karwar people only use Devanagari script. In Goa, step into any church and take a look at the Konkani books, you will see that they are in the Latin script. Similarly if you visit any bookstore you will find books in Konkani in the Latin script. So if you want to state in the article that Konkani is only written in the Devanagari script, then please show a reference that says the same thing. Otherwise please refrain from making changes in the article. The Discoverer (talk) 11:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Map is quite clear which is showing karwar and goa where actual goan konkani is spoken (I accept about roman script by Catholics even in mangalore) but who told Kannada script is used in Karnataka?Ref clearly mentions govt of Karnataka has given option to write either in devanagari or in Kannada script(it is only if childrens find difficulty in writing Devanagari )and it is not mandated anywhere to use kannada script and what about malayalam script?go through ref.Now I'll give reference from I high court of Karnataka which about script of konkani.Please revert after solving page issue. Truth should trump (talk) 06:20, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Please go through ref of high court Truth should trump (talk) 06:25, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Konkani is written in five scripts: Devanagari, Roman, Kannada, Malayalam, and [[Perso-Arabic scrip.[3] Because Truth should trump (talk) 06:25, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

See the ref given for this statement nothing is related Truth should trump (talk) 06:27, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Google "high court decision on konkani Devanagari script" . You will find related document @present I am not proceeding bcoz i am waiting for your justification please do clarify.Except roman all reference goes dump I have already referred. @present only 2 script are used Devanagari and romi. Truth should trump (talk) 06:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Truth should trump, thank you for your understanding. Regarding Kannada, Malayalam and Arabic scripts, the reference by Madhavi Sardessai clearly states that these scripts are used. If you can provide a reference which states that Kannada, Malayalam, and Arabic scripts are not used at all then we can think of removing them. Secondly, we are not in this case talking about just the official scripts, but also about the scripts which are being used unofficially also. The Discoverer (talk) 13:45, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Konkani 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:

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

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • 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) 21:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Konkani 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:

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

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • 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) 03:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Konkani 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • 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) 17:10, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Anglicised pronunciation?[edit]

[kõkɵɳi] is hardly an anglicised pronunciation, since English doesn't have the sounds [õ], [ɵ], and [ɳ]. Okay, something similar to [õ] may appear in some French loans, but apart form that... Wathiik (talk) 07:24, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Konkani 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • 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) 04:43, 12 December 2017 (UTC)