Hello G Purevdorj! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Khoi khoi 05:55, 29 October 2006 (UTC) reply Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

Hi, on Mongolian name you just changed a lot of names to somewhat unusual (on WP) spelling variations. I remember you contributing to discussions on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Cyrillic) on earlier occasions. I have now made a new and more complete proposal at Wikipedia:Romanization of Mongolian. Would you mind sharing your opinion there? -- Latebird 16:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC) reply

Can you please have a look at mn:User_talk:Chinneeb#Улсуудын нийслэл, and give us your professional opinion? Temur 21:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! -- SineBot ( talk) 19:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Probe--G Purevdorj 20:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'd like to invite you to the Mongolia work group of the WikiProject Central Asia. You're welcome to add that page to your watchlist and participate in discussions there. So far, many general discussions about topics related to Mongolia have been discussed on individual user's talk pages, away from the attention of a wider audience. I hope that a centralized talk page will make communication between all of us easier. If a question doesn't primarily concern just one specific user, then the work group is probably the right place to ask it. See you there! -- Latebird ( talk) 06:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi, I have uploaded two pics for the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Mongolian). Yaan ( talk) 00:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! -- SineBot ( talk) 23:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Frohe Ostern! Ich frage mich gerade, was die korrekte Schreibung von Ligden Khan wäre - Ligden oder Ligdan? Äußere Mongolen schreiben "Ligden", aber eine Reihe von Autoren bevorzugen scheinbar "Ligdan". Wie kann das sein (tibet. Name?), und wie sieht der Name in der traditionellen Schrift aus? Yaan ( talk) 11:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Keine ganz leichte Frage. Es hat eine Änderung in der Vokalharmonieklasse gegeben bei Worten, deren Stamm nur i enthält, und zwar von hinter- nach vordervokalisch. Das würde eine Diskrepanz zwischen Mongolen und Nichtmongolen erklären. "Ligdan" ist natürlich EIN Wortstamm, also etwas seltsam. Könnte sein, dass für Fremdwortphonologie (kein mongolisches Wort mit L am Anfang) andere Regeln gelten. Ist am Ende aber irrelevant, wie man ihn im heutigen Mongolischen ausspricht. Für das andere müsste ich mal in die Quellen kucken. Vorder- und hintervokalisches g sind ja recht leicht zu unterscheiden. Wird aber vor Donnerstag nächster Woche nichts. Erwarten würde ich „Ligdan“. Aber es sollte (sobald die Vokalsache geklärt ist) noch eine zweite Variante erwähnt werden. Der Gute kommt nämlich nicht nur in den chinesischen, sondern auch in mongolisch geschriebenen Quellen als „LiNdan“ vor. G Purevdorj 15:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Kein völlig klares Ergebnis. Sehr wahrsch. Entlehnung von tib. legs-ldan, etwa mong. buyan-tu. Siehe auch Bolur Erdeni "Laenkldan qutughtan-u". Im Tib. a zu ä vor n, aber wann genau noch unklar. Daneben Vokalharmonie, und der Name war nicht unüblich. Soweit "Lighdan" mir bisher nicht belegt, würde ich vorsichtig vermuten, dass e ab urbe condita. Bisher finden sich:

• Altan tobci (je nach Version): Linda/en, Ligda/en
• Qad-un ündüsün-ü erdeni-yin tobciya: Lingda/en
• Bolur Erdeni: Laenkldan, Ligda/en
• Asaraghci neretü-yin teüke: Linda/en
• Iledkel shastir: Linda/en

Also g ~ n ~ ng (ein Phonem). Da nicht in Tib., sehe ich (lustigerweise, da man von den Buchstaben selbst her ja andersrum denken würde) zu ng keinen Weg außer von g aus. Und der Weg von ng zu n vor d ist unentrinnbar. Das soweit Geschriebene ließe sich durch weitere Quellen, durch eine systematische Lehnwortphonologie sowie durch eine Rekonstruktion der chin. Aussprache von 林丹 um 1600 vertiefen. Aber ich denke, es dürfte dabei bleiben, dass Ligden die treffenste Form ist. G Purevdorj 23:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

g>n|_d doch schon im Tib. belegt, d.h. eventuell konkurrierende Entlehnungen. Recht aufwendig zu untersuchen, das. Kann man nur skizzieren. G Purevdorj 10:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! -- SineBot ( talk) 10:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi,

does this look good on your computer: Ula{{gh}}an/Ula{{gh}}an? On mine (currently Apple) it does, but I would like to know what it looks like on others. Regards, Yaan ( talk) 16:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC) reply

Looks slightly better than the gamma I used in the bibliography in Mongolian language. Will certainly do. G Purevdorj 17:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe bold looks better? mong{{gh}}ol Yaan ( talk) 17:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC) reply

A bit. But it's too eye-catching this way. Better opt for the first version. G Purevdorj 21:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I am currently wondering how one is to know that it is Demchughdongrub, not Damchughdongrub. Are there different forms of the initial d for front and back vowels, or am I missing out something? Regards, Yaan ( talk) 17:59, 16 June 2008 (UTC) reply

While the Mongolian script is sometimes used to indicate the difference between d and t, neither of these does in any position indicate something about the vowel harmony class of a Mongolian word. Now the name in question is obviously Tibetan. In a Mongolian name, <gh> would have indicated back vowels. Not so here. And it is not even sufficient to look up the correct form in Classical Tibetan; see the discussion about several forms of a name under Ligdan. If the Cyrillic forms and the reconstructed phonetic realization of Classical Tibetan writing agree, we may be sure whether to opt for “a” or “e”. If not, one can try to reconstruct the history of the borrowing. But for a non-scientist (and for most scientists under normal circumstances), it stops short of this with an unsatisfactory form someone else has introduced. So to answer your question: you are not missing out something, unfortunately. G Purevdorj ( talk) 18:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC) reply

Too bad. Thanks anyway. Cyrillic Mongolian and the Chinese transcription give e as the vowel in the first syllabe, but I was wondering if/how this can go together with the back g (if it is a back g) at the end of the second syllabe. The relevant article, btw., is Demchugdongrub. Regards, Yaan ( talk) 10:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply

I just asked from a friend. Like written in the article name, it is a front g (not gh). So not even the trace of a conflict with e. G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:33, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply

I have seen a transcription with 'gamma', and none with 'ü', that is why I asked in the first place. But one transcription can of course always be wrong. Regards, Yaan ( talk) 22:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply

If you don't mind, I also came across a vocabulary question recently. Does the Sangiin in Sangiin Dalai nuur refer to 'Sangiin' as in 'Sangiin Yaam', or might it rather refer to Sangha? Yaan ( talk) 22:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply

Nothing worse than toponyms, eh? According to my dictionaries, there are approximately four modern words with the pronunciation and historical orthography of <sang>. ‘treasure’ (originally Chinese), ‘means of purification’ (originally Tibetan, containing ‘incense’ and ‘a certain kind of shamanist poem’), and some architectural structure of a temple (only featured in one dictionary). The dictionary of Lessing gives sangga (Sanskrit) ‘congregation, clergy’, but refers to quvaragh as more common. It doesn’t give a modern Cyrillic form either. If it did, however, it would likely have acquired a similar pronunciation. So I am not aware that any cognate of sangga still exists in modern Mongolian. Toponyms, however, have the disadvantage that they needn’t necessarily be synchronically transparent. Any explanation of sangiin dalai will have to have a rather concrete historical foundation, and I don’t have any book that would provide one. (It could also suffice to find some Buddhist terminology “sangiin dalai” with its meaning. However, could you conceive of any possible meaning of sangga-yin dalai???) So, in short, I dunno. G Purevdorj ( talk) 01:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply

Too bad. Thanks a lot, anyway. Yaan ( talk) 10:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC) reply

Hiyas,

I’ve replied to your Wiktionary comment at: wikt:User talk:G Purevdorj

(BTW, if you’ve any interest in contributing to Wiktionary’s Mongolian entries, I suspect that they’re quite needy!)

Nbarth ( email) ( talk) 22:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your prompt responses to my questions. Now they are talking about the next Olympics and everybody calls it "Лондонгийн олимп". In my humble opinion, it should be "Лондоны" because the name ends just with "н", not "нг". This difference seems to have been ignored when the Mongolian Cyrillic alphabet was developed. But we don't say "Дархангийн, Завхангийн" etc. We say "Дарханы, Завханы". Because these names end with "н". We say "Бээжингийн", not "Бээжиний" because actually there is "нг" at the end, which is ignored in the Cyrillic, but appearant in the Classical Mongolian and in the English transcription. Also we say "Жанчивлингийн, Шадувлингийн" because there is "нг" at the end. So the question is: which is right "Лондонгийн" or "Лондоны" ? Gantuya eng ( talk) 02:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Neither is wrong, for language is changing, and yours at a high pace. But the details are more difficult. There’s a lot of research on this question, the quality of which I never assessed, because I never read it. Would probably come in handy now. (And again, I have no books at all to consult at the moment.)

Word-final n in Mongolian is often pronounced as ng even if it was written just –n in Mongolian script, eg yavsan [jawsa̭ŋ] or altan [aɬta̭ŋ]. The standard exception is –n-a or –n-e in Mongolian writing which is [n] today, eg dagina [taɢɪ̭n]. But in the usual examples, there is still a process that leaves this n underdetermined phonologically, eg yavsnii [jawsnɪ] instead of [jawsa̭ŋgin]. However, this process is becoming weaker, and some words that had n only (instead of ng or na) now get a genitive as if it had been ng. For example, tüvshin (Written Mongolian tübsin) often becomes tüvshingiin (Google 531) instead of the expected tüvshnii (Google 2460). Such examples are not infrequent in contemporary Mongolian. So now “London”. “London” is a foreign word, and I fancy it doesn’t really have a historical phonological structure. So what rule to apply? The one most productive (widespread) at the moment: take [ɮɔntɔ̭ŋ] (I would suppose that’s the way in which Mongolians who don’t know English would pronounce it) and just create the genitive that is most readily available: Londongiin. It would be different if Mongolians would usually say [ɮɔntɔ̭n], but seeing “Londongiin” I can’t imagine they do. By the way, if you google for Лондонгийн, it is still second to Лондоны.

I hope that what I’ve written could contribute to your understanding of this matter. Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your time and extensive answer.

Another phenomenon that surprises me is the name "Лу гүний Итгэлт". Usually it is conjugated like "гүнгийн хэргэм", "гүнгийн хатун". And the original Chinese word is Latinised with "ng" (gong, wang). And the traditional Mongolian alphabet spells it with "ng". We never say "ваны", we say "вангийн" (То вангийн сургааль гм). So is it a mistake to say "Лу гүний Итгэлт" or should it be "Лу гүнгийн Итгэлт"? Gantuya eng ( talk) 12:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Ene chini yalgaatai. Aldaa baina gej bi bodno: 1. [ng]-tei ugiig [n]-tei bolgoh helnii hogjil yavc orchin cagiin mongol helend baihgui baina. 2. „gün“ gesen helbertei hoyor ugs baina: 1. gün[g] wan[g] 2. dalain gün. Internetees uzvel, anhdugaar ugiin butec bol /güN/. Oguulberiin ecest [güng] gedeg duudlagatai baih, harin hariyalah tiin yalgal ni /güni/. Hoyordoh ügiin avialbariin butec bol /güng/. Tiim uchraas nerleh tiin yalgaliin duudlaga ni omnoh ugtei adilhan, harin hariyalah tiin yalgaliin helber ni /güngin/. Harin „Лу гүний Итгэлт” gej bichsen hun ter hoyor ugiig biye biyetei sanamsargui anduurch bichsen shig haragdaj baina.

Harin ene asuudal uunees jaahan hecuu ni haramsaltai. „Tungalag tamir“-aas ish tatsan tul ter nom hezee bichsen ve, Lodoidamba guai ug ni yamar nutgiin hun baisan ve, ene nomiig anh bichihdee mongol esvel kiril usgeer bichsen ve geh met zuilsiig medej avah heregtei. Bas kiril bichigt oruulah ajliin uyeer mash olon aldaa gardag baisan. Bur nertei nom tul iim hereglee uunees bolj bas oor gazart ch garsan bolomj bii.

Medeej, Nuuc tovchnii helzui odoo oorchilson bolovch aldaa bish tul ene chini aldaa mon gej bas ch sanahguigeer helj bolohgui. Lodoidambagiin gar bichmel deer ene hereglee olon udaa gardag gej bid nar togtooj diilsnii daraa ene bol tuunii helnii onclog gej helj bolno. Tegvel nutgiin ayalguu buyuu salbar aman ayalguunii yalgaa baij magadgui, bas mongol helnii hogjliin chiglel 50 jiliin omno odoogoos ondoo baisan geh met olon bolomj baina. Harin iim nyambai medee baihguidee ug ni orchin cagiin mongol hel chini iim bish, odoo ingej bichvel aldaa baina gevel barag taarah yum shig. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Tsag zavaa zoriulsand ih bayarlalaa. Now I'm translating about avian flu. Sometimes it feels good to write "tomuuny" and sometimes it feels good to write "tomuugiin". Complete mess. Gantuya eng ( talk) 01:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply

The same with ugnii and ugiin for me. That's just normal, employing analogy where no actual linguistic evidence is left. Maybe all this might have settled down when I'm old and grey (possibly replacing -VVgiin altogether). But usually such processes take several centuries. G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply

So these are evolutional processes. Perhaps the beauty is in its constant movement. When some processes settle down, other processes begin. Gantuya eng ( talk) 18:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi Purevdorj,:)

I've read your article as promised and commented in my talk page. Gantuya eng ( talk) 07:21, 16 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi. Here is an archived page. As you see, it's just an abstract. I have copies of this paper and its original paper in Japanese, but I don't know if there are electronic versions of them.

One interesting point of this paper that is not mentioned in the abstract is:

[In the first half of the 20th century,] the name of 'Inner Mongolia' began to connote a positive meaning of 'unification of Mongolia to the south of the Gobi' for Mongols, but the Chinese Nationalist Party banned the use of Inner Mongolia [to keep Mongols under separate Chinese provinces].

PS. You can read some of his papers at CiNii. I think [1] is a good overview of his recent work. -- Nanshu ( talk) 00:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi Nanshu!

Thanks a lot for your link. I am always highly interested in obtaining any essays on the Mongolic languages, and for some reason or another, Mongolian studies research done in Japan is rarely taken notice of anywhere besides Japan and Obur Monggul. I'm to some extent in a position to change this, but I lack sufficient connections to Japan. Now, first of all, I hope I'll be able to cope with モンゴル語近代語彙登場の母体-『蒙話報』誌 - its pdf-form has the distinct disadvantage of prohibiting copying which is bad as I otherwise could copy the bunch of words that I don't know into a dictionary instead of looking them up in a kanji jiten first. But it looks worthwhile, and the 5th part even looks easy to comprehend. Thanks again, G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC) reply

What's interesting to me is that ethnic Mongols (and other minorities) from the PRC freely express their opinions that are in direct opposition to or overshadowed by official Chinese views.

Also, it's frustrating that only a few scholars in those fields are alarmed by the fact that they are isolated. Certainly, there are some good work. I hope they will be valued properly. -- Nanshu ( talk) 02:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Cool, thanks for your info! Trigaranus ( talk) 09:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Sain baina uu, Bi anh ene uguullegiig oruulahdaa Khaiysan Kholog Khaanii uyd Ossetian bolon Kipchak tseregiin bulegleliin nuluu Ikh Yuan gurend ihessen gej oruulsan ni logic-n huvid jaahan aldaatai sanagdsan tul zassan yum. Uchir ni Tughtemur-n uyes naash ted tur erguuleh huch olj amjaagui sanagddag. Shidebala buyu Sodbal Khaaniig horloh uyd Asuduud oroltson gedeg ch ted Mongol noydiin udirdlagaar hiigdsen gej bi uzdeg. Hundetgesen, -- Enerelt ( talk) 01:26, 9 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Za, oorchloltiin aguulga chini bol zugeer l dee. Oorchloh uchir chini undesleltei baih, chi ug ni bas anh tekstiig bichsen baij magadgui gej bi anhaarsan daa. Harin neg l udaanii uyeer bish, heden odriin daraa ooriin bichsnee oorcholvol jinhene edit baina. Help:Minor edit#When to mark an edit as minor gej unshaarai! "minor edit" gedeg temdegleliin uureg bol ene nevterhii toliin neg oguuleliig tanij zovshorooson humuust "za, aguulga ni oorchlogdoogui, bi hyanah hereggui" gej medegdeh yostoi. Gehdee saijruulsan aguulga bol oorchilson aguulga mon shuu. G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your input about that article. I have also noticed a lot of problems with it but haven't had time to sit down and plan out a new version. Anyway, I left you some comments at the article's talk page. Thanks, — Politizer  ^talk/ _contribs 20:11, 12 November 2008 (UTC) reply

I would certainly be willing to read this article and correct grammatical errors, however one of my classmates is editing the page as a school assignment. He is going to do another revision so I think he will fix the problems. I would be happy to take a look at it later if there are still any issues. Zoogzy ( talk) 04:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Does this mean that I could in principle write a detailed critique of his revision on the talk page, and he would get worse grades if he doesn't comply? G Purevdorj ( talk) 08:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi there. The Mongolian language article is already rated B-class, which is the highest rating that Wikiproject China gives without formal review (we do not use the A class). However, the article looks like it might be able to pass at WP:GA. Have you considered nominating it there? I will check out the other articles that you mentioned shortly. Thanks,-- Danaman5 ( talk) 00:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC) reply

I wasn't aware that this is above project-level, but I'll do as you suggested. Regards, G Purevdorj ( talk) 13:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC) reply

I know you're just handing out WP:Languages ratings, but just wondering if, as a languages person, you'd care to do the "split" of language off from the Danezaa article, which should be for ethnographic/historical material; not sure if you know enough to take part in the name debate, but because that debate exists (or rather because so many different "indigenous spellings/names" exist) the recourse to give the language page an English name, i.e. Beaver language has been used before with Thompson language and Shuswap language; anyway language isn't my department, though I've done a few such splits; just got my hands full elsewhere, also.... Skookum1 ( talk) 16:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply

No, I'm not familiar with American languages. That's enough for rating (given that you rate the amount, congruence, completeness etc. of data and the references and refrain from actually confirming the correctness of the data), but not to take a position in this discussion. Next, I've never done a split before myself, so I won't in this case. But good luck! G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Fröhliche Weihnachten. Yaan ( talk) 11:33, 25 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Za, bayarlalaa. Bas chamd zuliin sariin bayariin mend hurgii! G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Hi there! You wrote in the summary line: "(1. No ISBN necessary. Those who wanna have these books can do without. 2. you didn't expand the article, so these aren't actual references 3. not clear from title if 1989 essay on script, rather lang?)". My response: 1. Am very puzzled about the ISBN comment. It's one thing to decide whether a book should or should not be mentioned, but once it is mentioned, surely it's better to give the ISBN than not to give it? While ISBN optional, it's useful for the sake of easier identification and search in library catalogs. See Wikipedia:References#Citation_styles. I usually try to add ISBNs to cites that are lacking them. 2, True, I have not used them yet, but I was going to use the 1989 title as a reference for a couple facts in the article that currently don't have them, and possibly add a couple more details based on that. The 2009 book obviously has not appeared yet, but I pasted its data in along with the 1989 one since, once it's available, it probably would be the most up-to-date resource in English for the topic. In any event since you - an editor who actually wrote much of the article, and probably know lots more about the subject than I do - objected to listing those books, I won't bring it back until I actually refer to one of them. 3. The 1989 book, is mostly on Jurchen inscriptions and manuscripts (both script and meaning, such as has been understood so far), but it has a chapter specifically on the Khitan script (mostly summarizing the main results of Chinggeltei et al. available by that time). If you need the actual text for your work, you can email me (via Special:EmailUser/Vmenkov), and I'll get you link to it. Best regards, Vmenkov ( talk)

Hi Vmenkov, thanks for your comments. 1. ISBN seemed a bit commercializing to me, and it's very rare that they are included in the bibliography of books. Anyway, you're completely right about the guidelines (I didn't take them into account), so if you like you can restore the ISBN. 2. I actually didn't contribute much to the article and am not very competent on Khitan either. As I don't know the articles, I have no objections against any content of them, only to the circumstance that they were so far not included into the article by in-line references. And as this was your first contribution, it was hard to know whether these actually related well to the content of the article. But as soon as you come up with in-line citations, I'll be happy to have them not as further reading, but as actual references. 3. I'm always happy to have at hand any text that somehow relates to my work. G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC) reply

I have done work on it, but it’s all about improvement of course. There are some other language articles I have worked on that could be ranked by Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages. Is there a way to request a ranking?

Besides Munsee, the main Eastern Algonquian language page that could be reviewed is Delaware languages. I have also worked on Mahican language and Powhatan language. The latter two articles are more cursory because both are extinct and there is not a lot of documentation on them.

I have also worked on Ottawa language, which is a dialect of Ojibwe, an Algonquian language.

Thanks. John. Jomeara421 ( talk) 14:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi John! If you feel your article meets the Good Article or Featured article criteria on the quality scale, you can nominate it at Wikipedia:Good_articles/Candidates or Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates. (As I’m usually not using the A class when rating, to get anything better than B class means that you’ll have to nominate your article as a GA.) Otherwise, there is no formal way to ask for a reassessment. I'm considering establishing such a category at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Languages, but currently there is none. Unrated articles are automatically listed at Category:Unassessed_language_articles and are thus requested to be ranked. Actually, this did matter little in the past, as there were 2500 unrated articles in mid-November. But I’m very busy changing this: I have them down to about 950 by now. So if some rating (like “stub” for that well-referenced article on Delaware languages) seems to have become an anachronism, just delete the rating and the article will re-appear in the list of unrated articles. And of course there’s the possibility to drop a note at the talk pages of suitable editors. In the meantime, I’ve (re)assessed the articles you mentioned. (There should be a more precise standard for rating anything that is not a language unto itself, eg for extinct languages and dialects, but I try to do my best by improvising.) Best regards, G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:34, 1 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks for all your work on the other pages I mentioned - it is greatly appreciated. I am thinking of concentrating on the Ottawa dialect of the Ojibwa language page for a while to see how far I can push that. Dialect pages are tricky, because there has to be a balance between what goes there and what goes on the main page for the language, so some thinking is required on that. Ojibwa is complicated because there are a bunch of 'main' pages that are very muddled and overlap - trying to straighten them out would be a massive task and require more time that I have. I am going to put a message on the WikiProject Languages talk to see if there's a way to give better guidance for dialect pages.

Thanks. John. Jomeara421 ( talk) 04:24, 2 January 2009 (UTC) reply

I would perfer that someone that has no assosiation to the article rereview it, since I failed it (I think) and would have a bias for it. You might want to repost it at WP:GAN. Good luck! Leujohn ^{( talk)} 10:45, 11 January 2009 (UTC) reply

It is reposted (kind of), but considering the backlash ... But okay, I'll have to wait for the next reviewer to come along. G Purevdorj ( talk) 11:29, 11 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, did you see narrative "Prince Oljeitu the Beauty" (on my user page)? Please advise me how it can be edited to resemble Old English a little bit. Just a little flavour of Old English because the events in the narrative happened late 15th century. Except of "thou", "thee", I don't know anything of Old English. Gantuya eng ( talk) 13:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC) reply

You're bargaining for far more than you're prepared to receive. Old English is a variety that speakers of Modern English won't understand in the least. Eg. "bearn" instead of "son". You want some Middle English or Early Modern English (that would be the language of Shakespeare) features. Well, I'll guess I'll be quite clumsy at that, but I shall give it a try. G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC) reply

He he, sure. Thank you first of all for editing my funny translation of the Altan Tobchi text.

Old English: I meant not the very oldest English, but something close to the language of Shakespeare though I even cannot understand Shakespeare without explanation. I wanted something in between Shakespeare's language and modern language. Just a flavour. I think you've done it. Thank you again.

The Altan Tobchi copy I have is itself also not in its original language. It's a translation into modern Mongolian. I've got Erdeny yin Tobchi in its original language. Very tough to understand. 17th century. Ordos(?) dialect yet. :) Gantuya eng ( talk) 14:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, I don't know much about the rating process, and in particular I don't know if many people pay any attention to an article's rating. But in cases like this, where you gave a substantial article a Start-Class rating, it seems insufficient to just mention your reasoning in the edit summary. I only saw it because this page happens to be on my watchlist. Why not also add a Norefs or other relevant tag to the main article so that people actually notice the problem? CapnPrep ( talk) 20:32, 22 January 2009 (UTC) reply

I don't know whether ratings are relevant to the readers of individual articles, but sometimes they are relevant to the editors, and most important, they are relevant in order to know how the situation of language articles on en.wikipedia is as a whole. The tag saying that the article does not cite its sources is already present. If you take a look at the quality scale, you'll find the following line: "The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup." This is clearly not given, and thus there's not much more to comment on. G Purevdorj ( talk) 20:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC) reply

I added the tag myself. I wasn't calling your ratings decision into question. Just saying that as long as you're going to the trouble of evaluating all these pages (some of which, I suspect, are not watched very actively), in cases like these it would be easy and useful to leave some more explicit and visible recommendations for subsequent editors. CapnPrep ( talk) 21:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the clarification and my excuses for the slight arrogancy in claiming that there "was" a tag. There have indeed been few cases where adding a tag was as justified as here. I shall try to think of it when I stumble over a similar article next time. G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, that variant was actually an attempt at using the PRC transcription system, in analogy to names like Hohhot or Ulanhu. The problem with the passports is not that the PRC is not using the usual transcriptionsystem from Mongolian, but that they don't even use their own system and instead take a detour via Chinese characters. That's how you end up with stuff like Wulan Qiqige. Yaan ( talk) 16:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC) reply

What you gave was not Mongolian Pinyin as would be used for transcription of words that are not names. Can you provide me with a link for that Chinese system for the transcription of Mongolian names, so that I can have a look at it myself? G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC) reply

What I mean is something like this, though it's apparently mainly for geographical names. Now I am not so sure about the existence or shape of such a system for personal names myself anymore. Some more datapoints: Uyunqimg, Bagatur. P.S. Maybe this reads better. I had actually thought this link was brought up by you, now I see it was someone else here. Yaan ( talk) 17:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC) reply

I have somewhere provided a rather more complex pdf on Mongolian transcription. Anyway, to arrive at "Bator", you need a system that recognizes syllable chains, syllable chain pronunciation pairs or mere pronunciation (of some dialect that I am not aware of at the moment), or you might use an analogy to Ulanbator. None of your links provides something like that, they're just about simple transcription of letters in context. So it looks that we have no way to arrive at "Monhebator" without improvization, which is of course undesirable. G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC) reply

That "bator" was by analogy with "Ulanhot". Given that the current chairman of IMAR is written "Bagatur", I guess Monghebagatur is closer to what the name should look like. But you are right, guessing is not desirable. Regards, Yaan ( talk) 17:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Here is another nice example: click! Yaan ( talk) 13:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Closes in on pronunciation, but still fails to adhere to any actual system that we're aware of. What do you think of "urtien doh"? Just for the sake of the average German reader that is not going to busy herself with Mongolia? G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC) reply

The 'h' is a big nuisance, the 'e' too. Especially since German has no problems with double vowels. I was more impressed by all those personal names, Hasichaolu, Cha Gan etc. The movie title itself is OK, one only wonders why it's not something like Wuerting du. Yaan ( talk) 17:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC) reply

"doo" is quite possible, while somewhat less usual than "doh", but "urtiin" is no possible German spelling, and "urtin" as read by a German would sound quite different. But you very pointedly mention the reason why I didn't take any special notice of the other names; their written form is quite systematic. There may well be a different approach to names (of people, places etc.) and to other Mongolian vocabulary. Harin gunigtai baina daa. G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:48, 2 February 2009 (UTC) reply

		The Epic Barnstar
		Your assessment of all unassessed WikiProject Language articles surely qualifies as epic in the Homeric sense. Gimme danger ( talk) 04:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm not through with it yet, but soon will be. Anyway, thanks for the barnstar, I'm glad to know that other people find these ratings useful. G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:37, 18 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi there!

I have now removed this category from your user talk page.

Hope this helps,

The Helpful One 10:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Yes, thank you! G Purevdorj ( talk) 11:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Have you got time to edit the text about Mother Hoelun on my Userpage ? Danke. Gantuya eng ( talk) 11:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, so glad that you devoted time to edit it. The verses ate the end even became rhymed. I'm amazed. Thank you. Gantuya eng ( talk) 11:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Zugeeree, ug ni iim tekstiig hereglegchiin huudastaa tavih ni sain bodol shuu. Neg yum asuumaar baina. Chi "Lambaguian nulims" neg unshsan uu? Roman uu, oguulleg uu? Internetees olj boloh uu? (Bi eniig tendees oloh gej oroldson, harin olsongui.) G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Ene bol D. Natsagdorjiin oguulleg, yerdoo 4 tal. Yeronhiidoo lama huvraguudiig doogloson utgatai gedeg. Lama huvragiig doogloh nugel shuu dee. Bas duuri garsan. Ter jujigchin ni uuniig zaaval lama huvragiig naryg shoolson gej oilgoh albaqui. Ted ch bas hun uchraas hund l baidal durlal shanalal tedend ch bas bii gej helsen. Bi scanner olohooroo scannerdaad yavuulamz. Buh surguulid uzdeg baisan shig sanagdana. Gantuya eng ( talk) 03:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I'd like to put something in the back of your mind.

In the past week, I stumbled across Xiongnu#Origin and Languages which mentions Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat and Julius Klaproth in the section about Turkic and Mongolic theories. The subject does not attract more than passing curiosity, but these two early 19th century Parisians do interest me very much. Rémusat and Klaproth were friends of Isaac Titsingh who died in Paris in 1812; and both men were editors of posthumously published Titsingh books about Japan. In passing, I've tried to improve the articles about these two prickly personalities ....

It crosses my mind that you may come across these names in the course of your future research activities. If you do happen by accident to encounter anything which can enhance the articles about either of these two men, I hope to encourage you to contribute a quick talk page comment which I can follow-up in due course.

Just a thought ...? -- Tenmei ( talk) 15:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

If I happen to stumble over one of these and still remember your request, I shall gladly do as you requested! G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks. -- Tenmei ( talk) 15:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Please see Talk:Inner Asia during the Tang Dynasty#Semi-protection needed. -- Tenmei ( talk) 16:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I was wrong. I'm sorry for whatever can be construed as my part in the stressful exchanges of the past week. In retrospect, every well-intentioned contribution just made this situation worse because the most relevant factors were not within the ambit of anything written explicitly presented on the screen in front of me.

I regret the extent to which my contributions exacerbated a problem I was trying to mitigate. No one could have been more surprised than me as I continued producing the opposite of intended results. I'm not unsubtle; but all I can say at this point is that I will continue trying to learn from my mistakes. I know this isn't much of an apology; but there you have it. -- Tenmei ( talk) 15:20, 4 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi Tenmei! I'm not really sure whether your contributions have ONLY exacerbated the problem. You replaced a lot of the wrong-headed information that was originally present. And while the outsiders were not convinced that the article should be convinced, and while most of the Mongolia work group just perceived the vandalism and were flabbergasted that they were alone in doing so, your involvement at least managed to provoke evidence that is obvious for anyone to see. If the article might have been deleted, your involvement was a setback. But if this could not have been achieved, it was some useful help. I now just wish that YOU could set your mind at ease a bit. As was stated before and was shown by several of his/her contributions, Mr./Ms. Anonymous enjoys the distress s/he is able to cause. Relax and revert! G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Assuming I could have or should have done something differently, I've asked for help at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#Tenmei reported by Teeninvestor. Perhaps this will slow things down a bit. -- Tenmei ( talk) 00:17, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I plan to withdraw from WP:3RR because it is ineffective and no uninvolved editor has shown the willingness and temerity in wading into this escalating dispute.

Instead, the dispute resolution processes of formal mediation are necessary. If that fails, the resort to arbitration may prove helpful.

We appear to confront a small scale replica of what has occurred in other, wider disputes. In my view, the the words and actions of our alleged "tag team" have been consistently informed by a four-prong examination at each and every point of this escalating drama:

• 1. What is the quality of the sources used by both sides in the dispute?
• 2. What is the consensus of scholars in the field; and does the source reflect that consensus?
• 3. Are the sources actually supporting the assertions for which they are cited?
• 4. Are unsourced assertions being used?

As you probably know better than me, these four points are, unsurprisingly, at the center of most protracted disputes and are all violations of our core content policies, e.g., verifiability, no original research and neutrality.

As I see it, your participation has reliably focused on aspects of Inner Asia during the Tang Dynasty which would lead to a stable, credible article.

What seems to be missing is a method by which a determination on whether content policies are being followed can be made authoritatively. Mediation may help resolve the issues which mark this minor article as a battlefield. -- Tenmei ( talk) 14:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I fear that succeeding in convincing an outsider of the problems obviously linked with this article, Teeninvestor's mindset and probably the Chinese historiographical book, you would indeed have to look up other literature and, in the worst case, even get that Chinese source itself. I do agree that your position is sound, but I fear you don't manage to convey this to the outsiders on the talk page. So it's looking up literature. Otherwise we won't stand our ground, not as it is and probably not in mediation. But doing so requires some considerable effort, about a day in the library. But I have to do final exams in early sommer, and the preparation for these is linked to similar work. So I'm not willing to do this work in addition. I might possibly make a bunch of contributions to wikipedia, but this will be directly related to topics of my exams. For this reason, I decide not to try to get to the bottom of this. G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Your analysis and judgment are sound.

The mediation process is explained at WP:Mediation. I will initiate the process at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation. As you may know, all participation is voluntary; and in fact, Teeninvestor can thwart the process by refusing to agree to mediation or by withdrawing at any point afterwards. If you prefer, I will not include your name in this reasonable next step; but I construe the likely benefit/risk ratio as mildly encouraging. -- Tenmei ( talk) 16:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

This is my best effort to distill a complex tangle of problems into something succinct. Even if nothing else is ultimately achieved, I feel this writing exercise was worth my investment of time. I hope this can -- in some unforeseen manner -- help you avoid the necessity of "re-inventing the wheel" in some other setting in the future. In my view, this summarizing step is an essential part of the alchemy process which turns what we all endured into something of plausibly instructive value. I myself can't understand the full measure of lessons learned the hard way at Inner Asia during the Tang Dynasty -- not yet. See Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Inner Asia during the Tang Dynasty. -- Tenmei ( talk) 18:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

ArbCom

I posted the following on Teeninvestor's talk page. -- Tenmei ( talk) 20:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I posted an ArbCom notice template on Teeninvestor's talk page. He/she did not consent to mediation; and that dispute resolution process could not go forward. Today, a request for arbitration has been entered at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration; and the complaint is captioned "Verifiability/Use English/Burdens in proxy battlefield article". -- Tenmei ( talk) 21:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply

YOU do not need do participate unless you choose to do so

I'm sorry. Do I need to apologize? You are not required to be a part of this.

You are welcome to participate, of course; but I wasn't intending to drag you into anything. I used this ArbCom notice template because I thought it would be easily recognizeable; but if misled you by doing this, that's bad. Sorry.

Having asked for your feedback, I was persuaded that I was a little bit obliged to "keep you in the loop" ... but I truly had no intention to burden you unfairly. -- Tenmei ( talk) 23:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm following the process and I am glad for your posts, but I think it is unlikely that I will contribute to it. G Purevdorj ( talk) 00:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC) reply

ArbCom case

An Arbitration case has been opened, and is located here. As I understand it, the open-ended process invites anyone to participate, not only those who contributed to the thread which led to a case being opened.

I wonder if this forum might be worth your investment of time and attention -- if only because of the possibility that you glimpse some better way of dealing with those who would dismiss, deride, or devalue your future contribution labeling you "pro-Mongolian" (as if it were a self-evident and obviously perjorative term). This seems rather like those who have sought to diminish my Wikipedia contributions with a label "Japanese" (as if "Japanese" were to be understood an arguably derisive term).

I would guess you probably understand that my primary focus is elsewhere, but I'm still troubled by that "pro-Mongolian" gambit in the AfD thread. It's not so much that the innuendo was introduced, although I'm very clear that it shouldn't have been tolerated by the consensus. What still bothers me particularly is that this derisive tactic proved to be so easy, so effective, so readily accepted by the so-called "uninvolved" or "neutral" others in that discussion thread. I wish there were some way to leverage this ArbCom "event" so that such needless tactics were less easy or that such heedless claims were accorded closer scrutiny? Just a thought ...?

To be frank, I don't quite understand how this will unfold from this point on -- especially in light of what Teeninvestor has posted thus far, but the formal notice that the case had been accepted included the following, which I construe as being addressed as much to you as me:

• Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty/Evidence.
• Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible.
• You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty/Workshop.

Bottom line: If you can see some way to convert this from a mere academic exercise into something with practical and practicable consequences, please share your thoughts with me or with some member of ArbCom. You aren't obliged to do anything, but, as promised, I'm keeping you informed as developments follow one after another.

On an optimistic note, will you join me in hoping that this process can be converted into something which is demonstrably constructive, useful, helpful? -- Tenmei ( talk) 19:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Deleting Mongolia during Tang rule redirect page

In this slow-moving ArbCom case, I proposed only one remedy -- deleting the Mongolia during Tang rule redirect page; It has engendered one comment.

• See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty/Workshop: ( diff) 13:53, 18 April 2009 Patar knight (43,556 bytes) (→Deleting Mongolia during Tang rule: Seems to be a lggitimate redirect)

Teeninvestor invited this editor to comment -- see here.

You were in my thoughts when I typed out this proposal -- see here.

The discussion and decision-making about this singular proposal would benefit from your participation. -- Tenmei ( talk) 17:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC) reply

ArbCom remedy?

The ArbCom case is moving inevitably towards conclusion. The only part of it which plausibly concerns you is one of my proposed remedies:

• Deleting Mongolia during Tang rule redirect page.

I have added my arguments to what you already posted some weeks ago. If you want to add anything more to this one thread, now would be a good time to contribute whatever you think best. --20:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Purevdorj,

I am writing to discuss, in a friendly spirit, your recent rankings of Comparative method as B class and Joseph Greenberg as Start class. I am bringing this up, as you suggest, rather than changing the rankings myself, because I believe we should try to get a consensus.

The simpler case is "Comparative method". The comparative method is the principal tool of historical linguistics, without which it can - so to speak - do nothing, yet the article, in its present form, is solely focused on the use of the comparative method to validate genetic relationships between languages. There is nothing about its use, for example, to study the history of sound systems and, via it, their nature, as for instance by André Martinet in his Economie des changements phonétiques. But there is obviously a great deal more to historical linguistics than genetic classification alone, which occupies maybe 10% of the efforts of historical linguists. I hope you will agree with this observation and downgrade the article from B to C class until it includes a more wide-ranging treatment.

The second and more complex case is that of "Joseph Greenberg". It is possible that more information on typology would be helpful, but the information that is there is accurate and hits the essential points, whereas more detailed material might well be better discussed under e.g. Linguistic typology and Linguistic universal. The treatment of biography and especially of language classification controversies in this article is fairly complete, though it could always be expanded. Most important, the article is fairly heavily referenced (except at a few points), whereas the Start class criterion is "An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources." It also has a massive bibliography. I don't see any way this article is "Start" class. I suggest upgrading it up to B class (a little optimistic) or C class (a little pessimistic).

Regards, VikSol ( talk) 13:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi Viksol! Thanks for notifying me. Yes, I was somewhat reluctant to rate the article on the comparative method at all - I could be more familiar with that topic. And except for simple language articles, there is no project-specific template for rating. But you're justified in pointing out the limitations of the article. The other article is one of very few bibliographical articles in the whole WP languages, so I didn't really develop any measured judgement for this class. You're right, it does meet C class criteria. I do think, however, that the article is somewhat unbalanced, focussing too much on his activities in classification and too little on the foundation of typology. But that is only a criterion for GA class. B class only has "The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.", and it is easy enough to argue that this criterion is met. As no one really believes in Amerind, the missing in-line citations there are not crucial and not impeding B class. I don't like rating this article as B class, but I'll do it. G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, last summer I got a book by Če. Damdinsürüng, Mongolyn uran zoxiolyn deezh zuun bilig orshvoi (actually, the transcription is different), 1959. Unfortunately it is of little use for me now because I can't read Monggol bichig so well. I thought about scanning it with the book-eye scanners in my library and uploading it somewhere, maybe archive.org or wikisource if the latter accepts pdfs. I guess copyright is not so big a problem, nothing that will get me jailed anyway, but at roughly 600 pages and 5 cent per scan this is not going to be particularly cheap. I am not even sure I can scan two pages at the same time. Do you think it is worth it, or have any idea about how to save costs, or other comments? Regards, Yaan ( talk) 16:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi Yaan! I just got to the library and got a look into the book. It is a huge reader consisting of appr. 2000 pages in 4 volumes. It contains numerous adapted versions of historical texts. This means that this book is of great cultural and little scientific value. It is interesting exclusively for those who can read Mongolian fluently and want to become familiar with Mongolian literature from a cultural point of view. That is, most likely, almost exclusively Mongolians who can access it anyway. And you seem to own only part of the book. Thus (though I dislike to discourage you from such worthy efforts) I don't think that it is worth it in this case. Greetings, G Purevdorj ( talk) 11:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply

In that book you can find the poems of Khishigbat from Ordos. They are difficult to understand and I was asking you (G_Purevdorj) some time ago whether that is the Ordos dialect. If I recall right, indeed Če. Damdinsürüng made comment that those poems are in a local dialect. Gantuya eng ( talk) 15:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I think you were asking about some other work. But I might have a look at them. Poems don't take that much time and might reveal something of interest for me as well. A good friend of mine is Ordos, I won't have any problems if I don't understand them myself. G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Sorry, you're right. I was asking about Erdeni-yin Tobchi. But Khishigbatu's poems can be added to the list. He lived at the end of 19th century, so his language should be more modern than the language of Sagan Secen. I guess, to recognise a dialect, it's not necessary to read the whole text, a couple of sentences could tell. Gantuya eng ( talk) 03:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply

2000 pages? I thought that since my copy already contains 100 texts, it should be complete. Do they all have the same number (mine is XIV, I think)? Yaan ( talk) 12:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, what is the correct transcription for baruun (western) from Mongol bichig? I ask because of the image caption here. Regards, Yaan ( talk) 10:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC) baraγun G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks a lot. Yaan ( talk) 12:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Good evening
Well, I Think you know who I am. However, let me introduce myself: Dhegiha from fr.Wiki Thanks a lot for completing the french page on ordos dialect. We lack a good dictionary French-Mongol, and I must search (transcription, translation) in a bunch of books. May I ask you a few things about mongolian dialects, especially oirat ones.
I have a dictionary and an article about a dialect called 'degedü mongghol aman ayalghu'. The sources are in classical script and I can't find such a name in dictionaries (I've used a cyrillic-classical-chinese one). As far as I understand the Degedü live in Xingjiang in Xöxnuur (kokunor). Have they another name?
I've also made a page about the dialect of the 'Lesser Waisi tribe' (the page is 'Waisi') who live in Qinghai. It is also Oirat-like. The source is in Chinese (Minzu yuwen). Have they a mongolian name?
If you wish to answer, please do it on my user's page on fr.wikipedia. By the way, congratulations for your work on mongolian dialects
Dhegiha ( talk) 22:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Many thanks,
I wrote the page surely too fast. Your remarks were good. I checked and this was not 'nine' but 'blood' and so for 'tear';. However the article by sechen gives 'nʊlms'. is this a print error?
Dhegiha ( talk) 22:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Hallo Purevdorj
Ich hab' erst bemerkt das Sie deutsch sprechen. Also, ich bin Franzose aber wohn' im Kehl. Kein Wunder: meine Frau ist deutsche. Ich verstehe dass Sie erstaunt von meiner Quellen sind. Solche Sachen müssen in West-Europa selten sein! Die kommen aus meine eigene Bibliothek. Ich kaufe Bücher über Sprachen ein, und einen meinen beliebtesten Gebieten heisst Mongolische Spr. u. Dialekte. Ein Glück ist die chinesische Buchhandlung 'Le Phénix' in Paris. Hier hab'ich viel gefunden. Für die revues, ich war abonniert durch dieses Laden.
Sie wissen dass ich lese klassische Mongolisch absolut nicht flüssig, so vielen Dank für ihre Helfe! Für die Artikeln über Sünid, ich kann wahrscheinlich sie scannen (Wenn mein Scanner noch funktioniert!). Wenn ich Zeit habe..Ich werde Sie dann kontaktieren.
Sind sie ein Student oder Spezialist der mongolischen Sprachen? Und wohnen sie in Deutschland? Viele Grüsse.
Dhegiha ( talk) 21:24, 7 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, I have begun to create a template for writing Mongol bichig words as a table of individual characters, or sometimes, pairs of characters. A first example for what it is supposed to look like is on the right. In my opinion it does look good enough, but the problem is I think it is not possible to use such tables within paragraphs, only outside a paragraph or in other tables.

It is a bit of work, actually, to create all those .svg images of characters. Do you think it is useful? Regards, Yaan ( talk) 14:43, 15 April 2009 (UTC) reply

I guess it may have some limited use in the article on Mongol bichig itself, but not anywhere else on Wikipedia. How did you get this idea? G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Because I thought it would be more flexible than creating lots of single-use images. (Are you aware that only one of the two tables is really relevant here? The left one is just an illustration.) The idea is from railway-related templates like template:trans-Siberian Railway. Yaan ( talk) 15:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC) reply

If it is not written in one word, but with spaces in-between, it looks somewhat awkward. CAN it be written in one piece? G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:37, 15 April 2009 (UTC) reply

The idea was to write it in one piece. And the one writing that is left now actually looks like one piece on my computer. Yaan ( talk) 17:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC) reply

P.S. But not when I use Internet Explorer. Stupid. Apparently the problem is that the cells have all the same height. Yaan ( talk) 18:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Even if I use Firefox, the word is not shown in one piece (although the cells have different height then). G Purevdorj ( talk) 19:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC) reply

A second point that might be relevant: can those cells be integrated into a text? G Purevdorj ( talk) 19:34, 15 April 2009 (UTC) reply

I had changed the class of the table somewhere along the way. Now it should look just perfect in Firefox again. But of course that is not enough... I don't think you can use this within text, just in tables, infoboxes and the like. Unfortunately. Yaan ( talk) 13:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Apparently it looks much better on IE (still not perfect) if you don't shrink the images below a certain size. So maybe all we need are smaller images. Yaan ( talk) 14:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC) reply

You don't have infoboxes everywhere. If it is about inserting original script in normal articles, it might be better to have something like the IPA template and a font presented horizontally. If so, we wouldn't even need to use images everywhere. G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC) reply

But how would we make sure random other users have that particular font? I don't think using images instead of a real font would be so easy either, because of different widths of the letters if written horizontally. Maybe it's ok if you only use one image size all over wp, or find a way to enlarge or shrink images by a certain factor rather then giving an absolute width. Yaan ( talk) 16:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm not completely sure what I am talking about, but {{IPA|...} would make sure that any user can read IPA symbols independet of font. I wonder if something similar (or even the same?) could be done with Mongolian script. G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC) reply

I don't think it could. Or at least not so easily and without admin help. If you look at the source code of Template:IPA, they have apparently defined some IPA class, which is probably not possible for normal users because they lack the permission to do this on wp, and not possible for me because I lack the technical ability.

The problem with the font is that your computer can only display fonts that you have installed (under System control -> fonts or so). I think. Most users won't have fonts suitable for displaying Mongolian script. Even if they have a font capable of displaying Mongolian script as provided by unicode, unless they have Windows Vista they probably can only display initial letters. There are workarounds for this, for example at linguamongolia.co.uk (the dictionary), but from what I understand they require very special fonts that are not particularly common either. The IPA template seems to presume that the user has at least one out of a whole set of fonts that is able to display IPA symbols.

I think most users could display IPA symbols without using that template. If this was the case for the Mongolian script, I don't think I would have felt it necessary to create a template. Yaan ( talk) 16:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC) reply

I think I have now figured out how to make it work. But it is a bit of a hack and might not work equally well on all browsers, and it will take some time to pack this into an easy-to use template. But I think it can be done.

Actually, I think we can have both vertical and horizontal script, and once you have one of the two properly working, creating the other one should not be so difficult anymore. Just turn all the images clockwise and choose some default image size that looks fine. Calculations for other image sizes can then be done with the help of data we will need for the vertical script anyway. Yaan ( talk) 15:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC) P.S. except that now, it looks strange in Firefox again. Sigh. Yaan ( talk) 15:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Does it work on your computer now (the second/largest Hohhot)? Yaan ( talk) 15:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Yes, at the moment I'm using IE and the 2nd image works. The 3rd image is pretty good as well, but has two slight discontinuitites. G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Finally. Thanks a lot. The third one was manually coded, the second (and now the first) have been done with the template. Yaan ( talk) 15:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

• Unicode has a Mongolian alphabet, but it is displayed rotated by 90 degrees: ᠠᠡᠢᠣᠤᠥᠦᠧᠨᠩᠪᠫᠬᠭᠮᠯ . It is in the range ( hexadecimal) 1800 to 18FF. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 20:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Hallo Purevdorj
Ich habe sie ein Email gesendet. Und noch was, weil ich brauche IPA. Ich habe ein Buch gekauft, eine Sammlung Artikeln, mit eine phonologische Deskription von Chakhar von Uuta. Und überraschung, nilbusu, ist nicht als nʊlmɑs gegeben sondern als nœlʲmɔs. Verstehen sie das? Bedeutet Chakhar zwei Sachen? Die Standardsprache der Öbör Mongghol (barimjiy-a) und lokales Chakhar Dialekt?
Ta ih tus bolloo.
Dhegiha

Zwischen Standardaussprache und Chakhar wird schon unterschieden, aber Chakhar ist eine große Gegend, die selbst in ihrer engeren Abgrenzung zehn Landkreise umfasst. D.h. nicht alle Chakhar reden gleich. Aber wir haben hier ein Wort vor uns, das sich auch im Khalkha sehr unregelmäßig verhält:

:1. [nʊɮmɑs] ist eine gutbezeugte Aussprachevarietät dieses Wortes. /ɮ/ ist hier nicht palatalisiert. :2. Svantesson et al. 2005 geben für Khalkha nʊɮʲəms ~ nʊɮʲməs an. Das nichtphonemische ə wird dabei meist als [i] realisiert. :3. Ich meine mich an etwas wie [nœɮʲmʲœs] zu erinnern, aber das hab ich nicht in der Literatur. Das ist dann fast dasselbe wie „nœɮʲmɔs“.

:(3) ist als vermutlich analog zu (2) als /nʊɮʲms/, syllabifiziert /nʊɮʲməs/ zu analysieren. Das palatalisierte /ɮʲ/ kontaminiert den vorhergehenden Konsonanten, was im Chakhar nach Sechenbaatar eigentlich zu [ʏ] führen sollte. Wie dem auch sei, in unserem Dialekt ist das Ergebnis [œ]. Da die erste Silbe einen gerundeten Vokal hat, muss die zweite per Vokalharmonie auch einen kriegen, also ergibt sich [nœɮʲmɔs]. Zu (1): Es wäre denkbar, dass nicht /ɮ/, sondern /ɮʲ/, wobei /ʊ/ dann im Ggs. zu /ɔ/ oder /ɑ/ nicht besonders kontaminiert würde. Es bleibt hier das eine oder andere unklar, aber es ist weniger verwirrend, als es im ersten Moment scheint. G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:56, 22 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi! I'd be delighted to help on this article. Unfortunately I won't be able to start a concerted effort on it until the weekend; I hope this won't be a problem. (I see a few others have also offered to c-e at the FAC discussion, so perhaps the article won't be neglected in the meantime.) Best regards -- Timberframe ( talk) 16:21, 23 April 2009 (UTC) reply

The weekend is not far away, so I'm looking forward to seeing you then! G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Hallo Purevdoj,
Danke für die Korrektur auf die Artikeln. Ich habe geändert die Referenz auf Svantesson, wie du es vorgeschlagen hast. Du hast recht, ich glaube das er, nur die Zahl des Bevölkerung der bestimmten Kreise genommen hat.
Ich hab gerade gekauft die Bücher von Svantesson und Sechenbaatar. Jetzt hab'ich die Lösung über diese Zhenglan Kreis. Es ist nur die übersetzung auf Chinesisch von Shuluun Xox, d.h. die gewählte form für die Standardsprache. Aber, Svantesson schreibt dass normatisierter Chakhar ist wahrscheinlich anders als der dialekt von Shuluun Xox. Dieser Eindruck hab ich immer gehabt beim Vergleich der diversen Quellen (Chinggeltei vs. Dobu z.B). Und ich habe manchmal gelesen (bei Todaeva z.B) dass Chakhar ist die Basis der Sprache, und nicht gelesen der Sprache.
So, ich habe gemacht eine Seite Mongol (langue de Chine) mit Chinggeltei phonologie aus seiner Grammatik, und werde wahrscheinlich eine Chakhar-Seite mit Uuda oder Dobu machen.
A propos, hast du das Büchlein von Janhunen über Mandschurien-Kamnigan?,
Viele Grüsse und gute Nacht! Dhegiha ( talk) 21:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Ich sehe, dass auch deine Literaturrecherchen erfolgreich verlaufen :-). Darf ich fragen, ob du jetzt Sechenbaatar 2003 oder Sechenbaatar et al. 2005 hast? Fußnote 24 von Mongolian language enthält als wörtliches Zitat eine Aussage aus Sechenbaatar et al. 2005, dass Standardinnermongolisch nur auf [Shuluun-Hoh]-Chakhar basiert, aber nicht mit ihm identisch ist. Norǰin 2001 (zitiert auf Chakhar dialect) enthält zahlreiche Vergleiche von normativer Standardaussprache und Shuluun-Hoh-Aussprache, sowohl als Wortliste wie auch in der Analyse. Das Buch von Janhunen hab ich leider nicht. Viele Grüße und vermutlich bis bald! G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Das Buch das ich habe, ist die Grammatik von Chakhar (2003), leider habe ich nicht die zwei andere aus Hohhot! Aber jetzt weiss ich bescheid über diese komplizierte Frage des Chakhar. Und dann was ist barimjiy-a, bedeutet es gesprochen (Standard)?

Für das Buch über Kamnigan ich kann es dir schicken, ich habe es falsch bestellt (Internet manipulation!): ich habe jetzt zwei Exemplare.

Bis bald, Dhegiha ( talk) 22:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC) reply

barimjiy-a meint „ungefähres Maß“, ferner auch „Orientierung“ (Vietze). Vielleicht könnte man von „Richtwert“ sprechen. avia bedeutet „Laut“. Ich bin etwas überrascht, dass du Sechenbaatar 2003 einfach so hast kaufen können. Ich hatte mich damals an den Verlag gewandt, aber die hatten nichts mehr. Schlussendlich hab ich dann ein Examplar von Sechenbaatar geschenkt bekommen. Vielen Dank für das Buch von Janhunen! Ich schicke dir meine Adresse per Email zu. G Purevdorj ( talk) 23:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Hallo purevdorj
Hier ist die Quelle:
Süngrüb, Alaša Aman Ayalγun-u Abiyalaburi Bolun Barimjiya Abiyal-un Abiyalaburi-yin Qaričaγulul, In Erdem Sinjilegen-ü Ügülel-ün Tegübüri 1, Beijing, Ündüsütün Keblel-ün Qoriy-a (Minzu Chubanshe=Nationale Minderheiten Verlag), 1988.
Ich bin nicht absolut sicher auf die Transkription. Das Buch in nicht in die Biblio von Svantesson. Er schreibt Ögülel, bolon. Aber das weiss du genau! Es gibt kein Herausgeber. Nur steht: Dumdadu Ulus-un Mongγol Kele Bicig-ün Sinjilegel-ün Neyigemliγ (нийгэмлэг).
Bis bald Dhegiha ( talk) 10:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC) reply
PS: Ich habe die Seiten vergessen S.160-197

Wurzel bol-, epenthetischer Vokal -u- und Konverbalsuffix -n > bolun > bolon. /o/ ist im Mittelmongolischen immer Teil von Wortstämmen, nie von Suffixen. Den späteren Wandel nach bolon berücksichtigen wir bei der Umschrift nicht. (Ich persönlich benutze eine Umschriftkonvention, bei der in nichterster Silbe IMMER <u>, aber das ist nicht historisch akkurat. Das Problem für eine zügige Umschrift ist nur eben, dass man diesen Unterschied im Mongolischen gar nicht mehr hat, d.h. man müsste immer ins Mittelmongolische kucken, um Bescheid zu wissen. Das andere Wort ist Khalkha <өгүүлэл> von <өгүүл-> 'erzählen'. Luvsanvandan behauptet, dass hier ein Zusammenhang mit üge(n) 'Wort' besteht, aber ich erkenne nicht, durch welches Suffix. Andererseits hab ich Luvsanvandans Text hierzu auch nicht gelesen, und Lessing folgt ihm. Deshalb halte ich "ügülel" bis auf Weiteres für akzeptabel, aber schreibe selber "ögülel". Was am Ende richtig ist, weiß ich im Moment nicht, aber solange ich nicht eine Protoform rekonstruieren muss, ist das nicht so wichtig. G Purevdorj ( talk) 11:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Und es ist "ündüsütEn" < "ündüsü 'Wurzel' + tei 'haben' + n 'mittelmongolischer Plural'" G Purevdorj ( talk) 11:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Hallo Purevdorj,
Einige Bemerkungen zu Etymologie des Dörbetisches. 1)intsxæːdnɛ: das /-d-/ stimmt, aber diese Form ist nur bei Kara. Todaeva (Xinjiang-oiratisch Wört.) gibt intseɢæːxe, Tsoloo: intsaxaːxːa (Dörbet., Bayan, Khoton) usw.
2) manʊːl (richtige Form) findet man nur bei Kara, nicht bei Tsoloo. Das Wort kann man im Khalkha finden: manʊːl (Schriftmongolisch, manuul) und ist wilde Katze. Aber ein zweiter manʊːl steht als Synonym von manʊːxai Vogelscheuche, Marionette. Ich habe erst gedacht dass das Wort in Kara ein Lehnwort aus Khalkha wäre. Aber Todaeva hat manuːl ~ manuːxaː: Vogelscheuche. Und Burjatisch manʊːl: wilde Katze, manʊːxai: Vogelscheuche.
Schöne etymologisches Rätsel, nicht? Ob beide manʊːl verbunden sind oder nicht?
PS: ich habe dir ein Email gesendet.,
Dhegiha ( talk) 15:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC) reply

„manuul“ geht in Ordnung. Ich hab gestern nur zwei Wörterbücher geprüft, wo das Wort fehlte, aber in anderen Wörterbüchern kommt die Bedeutung „Wildkatze“ tatsächlich vor. Aber das „d“ kommt mir komisch vor. Vielleicht sollte man eine Fußnote machen, in der man Tsoloos Form angibt und darauf verweist, dass hier kein „d“ vorkommt. Wenn es ein Nomen intsxæː "das Wiehern" gäbe, wäre alles klar, dann könnte man mit -d- ein Verb ableiten, aber so ... Einfach "d" streichen geht natürlich nicht, keiner von uns weiß, ob es so ein „d“ dann nicht vielleicht doch noch gibt, und die Form von Tsoloo zeigt natürlich schon Einfluss von Khalkha. G Purevdorj ( talk) 18:51, 2 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Vielleicht macht Kara eine Confusion mit einem anderen Verb, intsedxe, zuschlagen, schnalzen (Todaeva, Xinj.-Oir.)!

Dhegiha ( talk) 20:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Klänge plausibel, aber nach meinem Wörterbuch bedeutet dein Wort nilaqu = "mit dem Finger schnippen", d.h. es gibt einen etwas größeren Bedeutungsunterschied. Trotzdem scheint es wahrscheinlich, dass Haradorji hier einen Fehler gemacht hat. Nur ist das nur sehr schwer mit Sicherheit festzustellen, ohne einen Xinjiang-Oiraten zu fragen. Am besten streichst du das Wort einfach und ersetzt es durch ein anderes. Es kommt in dem Artikel ja nicht auf das Wort an. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, do the infoboxes at Mörön (city) and Bulgan (city) look strange on your computer now, too? I see much too much empty space below the Mongol bichig writing. But I think this might be because I am currently using Safari, which tends to mess up wikipedia tables anyway. Yaan ( talk) 16:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Ich hab grade IE und es ergeben sich einerseits Lücken, andererseits werden manche Buchstaben teilweise übereinander geschoben. G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC) reply

OK, dann werde ich das jetzt erstmal revertieren. Yaan ( talk) 17:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC) reply

und wie sieht das hier aus: ? Ich weiss schon, dass die Buchstaben etwas unordentlich aussehen (der nuruu hat Stufen, besonders aergerlich bei kleiner Schriftgroesse), aber ansonsten? Wenn man sich auf eine feste Schriftgroesse festlegt, koennte man die Stufen sogar wegbekommen. Yaan ( talk) 17:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Sieht gut aus bei mir, sehe auch keinen gestuften Rücken. G Purevdorj ( talk) 18:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 396 articles were swept in May! That more than doubles our most successful month of 163 swept articles in September 2007 (and the 2 articles swept in April)! I plan to be sending out updates at the beginning of each month detailing any changes, updates, or other news until Sweeps are completed. So if you get sick of me, keep reviewing articles so we can be done (and then maybe you'll just occasionally bump into me). We are currently over 60% done with Sweeps, with just over a 1,000 articles left to review. With over 40 members, that averages out to about 24 articles per person. If each member reviews an article a day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. I know that may be asking for a lot, but it would allow us to complete Sweeps and allow you to spend more time writing GAs, reviewing GANs, or focusing on other GARs (or whatever else it is you do to improve Wikipedia) as well as finish ahead of the two-year mark coming up in August. I recognize that this can be a difficult process at times and appreciate your tenacity in spending time in ensuring the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 18:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC) reply

I left a message on the project's talk page. Let me know if you would like further clarification. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 21:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 290 articles were swept in June! Last month was our second most successful month in reviewing articles (after May). We are currently over 70% done with Sweeps, with just under 800 articles left to review. With nearly 50 members, that averages out to about 15 articles per person. If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. This may sound difficult, but if everyone completes their reviews, Sweeps would be completed in less than two years when we first started (with only four members!). With the conclusion of Sweeps, each editor could spend more time writing GAs, reviewing at the backlogged GAN, or focusing on other GARs. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 17:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC) reply

kennst du http://dic.on-toli.com/? Yaan ( talk) 11:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Hatte n gewissen Wiedererkennungsfaktor, aber ich hatte es nicht mehr präsent. Nett, dass du mich daran erinnert hast! Hab es zu Mongolian language hinzugefügt. Das Wort, was ich grade suche, finde ich aber trotzdem nicht. G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 215 articles were swept in July! We are currently nearly 80% done with Sweeps, with under 600 articles left to review. With 50 members, that averages out to about 12 articles per person. Once the remaining articles drop to 100, I'll help in reviewing the last articles (I'm currently taking a break). If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 19:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC) reply

I don't know how essential I find the phonology. There is nothing overly unique about the pronunciation. Koreans don't try to pronounce sounds they can't say so the pronunciation is just an approximation of the english pronunciation in Korean. If people want to know what sounds are available in Korean they can visit the korean language article. There is no standard or consensus on how english words are changed to konglish (as evidenced by pa-i-ting or hwa-i-ting) so I really think you're going to find it impossible to present a cited phonology for Konglish, not one that could be universally agreed to be correct. As for the citations, everything I've added comes from a newspaper. There are a couple cites for the words I don't agree with, but I'm not even sure how I feel about that section to begin with. I've never really liked them as they tend to attract trivia.-- Crossmr ( talk) 08:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Well, Korean is spoken over an extended area, so it is not surprising that there are variants. It may also depend on age, as holds for European /h/ to Russian /g/ vs. /x/. But while irregularities are expected to exist (as they exist in dialect phonology), I would expect more regularities. And the very fact that Korean has no particular loanword phonology but only uses its usual phoneme inventory makes this a fact that need not be noted in Korean language and not even in some detail in an article on Korean phonology - it is only essential for a special treatment of Korean loanwords or - for a treatment of Konglish. And there is a bit of stuff on such a question, eg [2], [3], [4], [5]. With some effort, it would probably be possible to find much more and better stuff. Anyway, I do think that your editing did substantively improve the article - just not to B class, but still from start class to C class. If you strongly disagree with my rating "C class", I would have to try to back up this claim, but if it needn't I'd prefer not to. It might be quite a bit of work :-). G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC) reply

I feel like as I'm reading "English Coda /s/ in Korean Loanword Phonology" that he is again not telling me anything that isn't obvious. As many Korean letters change their pronunciation in a final position ㅅ which is normally an "s" sound becomes a "t", loanwords necessitate putting the vowel ㅡ on the end for: 스 as with most final consonants. A final D becomes 드, a T 트, etc. The additional vowel makes the sound longer, and what I like to call harder or stronger in some cases, but in the end they're still regular korean sounds that sometimes appear in korean words. I felt like there wasn't really an objective analysis of the subjects themselves. The paper even admits further testing is needed to find "more reliable and robust data". There doesn't seem to be much comparison of the various levels of english ability by the subjects, simply a time measurement which as we all know can be pretty meaningless. About the only unusual or bizarre thing I've seen in relation to Konglish is how "lunch" has end up "lunchee" instead of "lunch-eu". For some reason koreans borrow ch as chee instead of ch-eu when they add eu to all the other final consonants. Everything else seems to follow what one would expect in a very rational manner. They use some words properly, they use some words because of bad translations, and they misunderstand the meanings of some words. All the sounds are approximated as best as possible in Korean, except for CH. As for your changing the class, I don't have any beef with that at all. I spent a long time looking up citations and tried to incorporate every cite I could find to remove any trace of OR I could find from the article and at least getting sitting as something started and cited.-- Crossmr ( talk) 14:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC) reply

What is obvious to you (and many linguists) may be less so for others. Many articles on physics and mathematics on wikipedia would look different if anything obvious wasn't mentioned. :-) G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi G Purevdorj. I have seen your efforts at rating language relating articles - I have drastically expanded the article on the Otomi language and would appreciate your comments on how I could make it even better. You can comment on the talk page. I have also listed the article for peer review and if you are interested in making a full review you can do so here. Thanks in advance for any help you can give. ·Maunus·ƛ· 18:15, 17 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I did not mean to revert your edits - I didn't realise you were also working on the article. Why are you removing the parentheses in the citations? Is that a requirement? ·Maunus·ƛ· 22:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the thorough copyediting - anything you can contribute is appreciated! ·Maunus·ƛ· 00:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Hiya G, quick question for you - the Hazaragi (and the associated page on Hazara) have some small lists of cognates with Mongol but they don't quite square with my (limited) knowledge of Mongol. If you have a moment, could you have a look please? Thanks! Akerbeltz ( talk) 17:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi. I'd planned to get to the Mongolian language article this week, but seems as though it's already been copyedited. If you don't mind, I think I'll wait for a while, as it's best not to have multiple editors stepping on toes. Just wanted to let you know I haven't forgotten. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 16:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Dale did his edit in one piece, so I wouldn't be surprised if he lets it rest at that. But just wait five days or so, if nothing happens during that time, Dale is done with it. (I'd prefer he weren't, though, he did make some nice improvements.) G Purevdorj ( talk) 19:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Salam to G Purevdorj: I am sorry for the mistake that I made there, The real meaning of Chigin in Hazaragi Language is your word "Breast" or "Chest" or associated part. I have also confirmed from Hazaragi Linguistics. I have changed the word, have a look please, here it is hazaragi language. | - |azaraBoyz ( talk) 17:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi,

Did you see this message: User_talk:Yaan#Latin - Traditional Mongolian - Cyrillic automatic transliteration of Mongolian Wikipedia ? Gantuya eng ( talk) 14:36, 3 November 2009 (UTC) reply

WM would get pretty nasty, and for Latin-Cyrillic there is already a page online. And the bigger part of the work is clearly the one undone. I'm not interested. G Purevdorj ( talk) 12:09, 5 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, gepunktete abgetrennte n's und gh's erhaelt man mit shift+ß nach dem jeweiligen Buchstaben. shift+ä (oder ö oder ü?) geht auch, aber dann ist das nachfolgende a andersrum orientiert. Ein ordentliches ng erhaelt man mit shift+n anstelle n und dann g. Um das g in jijighen schoen rund aussehen zu lassen, kann man nach dem g die Taste links neben der 1 tippen. Bei mir hat's jedenfalls so funktioniert. Gruesse, Yaan ( talk) 11:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply

P.S. "shift+n anstelle n und dann g" soll heissen: shift+n, nicht n+g Yaan ( talk) 15:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Exzellent, obwohl ich mir nicht zusammenreimen kann, wie du auf die Lösung zu jijighen gekommen bist. Kriegst du auch maTeriyal (mit wortinternem Anfangs-t), Dorji (mit wortinitialem Mittel-d) und eD (mit wortfinalem Mittel-d) hin? G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Meinst Du, jijghen mit zwei runden g's bzw. k's hintereinander ist falsch? Yaan ( talk) 15:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Keinesfalls, es ist sehr gut geworden. Nur überhaupt auf die Idee zu kommen, auf die Taste neben der 1 zu drücken, NACHDEM das hintervokalische g schon steht, ist etwas, worauf ich nicht gekommen wäre. G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, entschuldige die Verzoegerung. Ich habe es noch nicht selbst probiert, aber ein mediales d am Anfang eines Wortes muesste eigentlich mit einem Schlag auf die ß (auf englischen Tastaturen: minus)-Taste vor dem d funktionieren. Fuer ein t in der Mitte des Wortes muss man wahrscheinlich nach dem t irgendwo dort, wo auf der deutschen Tastatur das ä ist, rauftippen. Gruesse, Yaan ( talk) 10:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Funktioniert. Wie sieht es mit v und e (as in SErenbatu) aus? G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Ich verstehe nicht ganz. Meinst Du ein hinteres u in einem Wort, das auch e's enthaelt? Oder meinst Du ein v wie in Tuva und ausserdem ein 'langes' e wie in ? Zweiteres geht vielleicht nur mit tricksen. Wahrscheinlich Zeichen #180A (laut unicode: mongolian nirugu - klingt brauchbar, oder?) aus der Zeichentabelle kopieren und an passender Stelle einfuegen. Yaan ( talk) 15:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply

An ende hatte ich noch gar nicht gedacht, weil das spezifisch innermongolisch ist. Ich weiß nicht, wie man tuva schreibt, aber vermutlich tuv-a, wobei v zu u würde. davadagva enthält aber ein richtiges v. In SErenbatu wird das erste e als ausländisches e (genau wie v) geschrieben, um von Saranbatu zu unterscheiden. Die Taste v ergibt hin.gegen nur u, nicht v. G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Ein ausländisches e ist wahrscheinlich das, was bei shift+e herauskommt? Ein v erhält man mit shift+w. Ein Stückchen nuruu kann man offenbar doch über die Tastatur eingeben, nämlich mit shift+7. Und mit shift+8 erreicht man, dass die automatische Umwandlung in initiale/mediale/finale Formen unterdrückt wird, d.h. shift+8 wirkt wie ein unsichtbarer Buchstabe (deshalb initiales e: shift+8 und dann e, mediales e: shift+8 und dann e und dann shift+8, finales e: shift+8 und dann e). Wie man den nuruu am ende von ᠡᠲ‍ wegkriegt, weiss ich aber auch nicht. Oder brauchtest Du ein ᠡᠳ᠋(edä)? Yaan ( talk) 11:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Ich meine, edä hattest du vorher schon angegeben, aber ja: das war es, was ich meinte. Vielleicht kann ich grade noch w+ä und u+ä hinzufügen, dann scheinen wir erstmal alles gehabt zu haben, was ich grad so schreiben will. Schönen Dank! G Purevdorj ( talk) 12:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, the article states that Mongolian Cyrillic is a phonemic script. Is this so in respect to Inner Mongolian dialects? Yaan ( talk) 17:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Of course not. Cyrillic Mongolian is (usually) phonemic with respect to Khalkha Mongolian. Take, for example, Cyrillc чанга, Khalkha /ʧʰɑnɢ/ (га is /ɢ/, while г would be /g/), Chakhar /ʧʰɪng/ (which might be Cyrillic чɪнг with an additional phoneme because of the two i-s and the absence of /ɢ/), Khorchin (probably) /ʃɑng/ (which might be Cyrillic шанг). G Purevdorj ( talk) 01:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Could still be a quite phonemic orthography. A proof must be based on examples from one variety. TrueColour ( talk) 13:11, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply

As I stated, Mongolian Cyrillic is usually close to phonemic for Khalkha, but not for any other major variety. Yaan's question was whether it is phonemic in respect to Inner Mongolian dialects, which it is not (except for, to some degree, Shilin gol). G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Which fact would lead to the conclusion it is not phonemic for Chakhar or Khorchin? TrueColour ( talk) 17:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Cyrillic was developed basing on the Central Khalkha dialect. It didn't consider the variety of pronunciations in other dialects. If it seems to be phonemic for some other dialects, that's perhaps by chance if those dialects have pronunciations close to those of Central Khalkha. Is it right? Gantuya eng ( talk) 02:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC) reply

No. The definition of phonenic does not consider relations between dialects. A script and one "dialect" or language is needed. The pronunciation between dialects may vary. TrueColour ( talk) 20:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Then French is phonemic, too, just not for the dialects spoken today? Yaan ( talk) 11:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC) reply

"Which fact would lead to the conclusion it is not phonemic for Chakhar or Khorchin?" Read the articles on Khorchin and Chakhar and the commentary by Ganaa and you should know why Mongolian Cyrillic is only phonemic for Khalkha. I don't really have the time to present a detailed argumentation during the next several days, and the question is trivial enough. G Purevdorj ( talk) 04:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I noticed that you left a comment in the discussion tab of the Shehri language, I would just like to ask you to change the name of the page from "Shehri language" to "Jebbali language", because in the Dhofar area were it is spoken, it is referred to as Jebbali rather than Shehri.

Thank you-- Salalah4life ( talk) 10:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply

I don't have any knowledge about the respective conventions and will accordingly not act to accomplish something that I don't fully understand. The usage of the speakers themselves need not be crucial for more general conventions. G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:59, 24 November 2009 (UTC) reply

I have engaged a procedure for amending Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty.

• See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Request to amend prior case: Tang Dynasty.

I construe the process to require me to notify you; but of course, you are not required to do anything. -- Tenmei ( talk) 01:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Thank you. a short reply TrueColour ( talk) 12:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Your reassessment of Greenlandic language and any comments on how to improve it further would be appreciated. ·Maunus·ƛ· 15:22, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Thank you very much for your comments, now I know along which lines to keep working. ·Maunus·ƛ· 08:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi again, I have one some work on sources and introduced most of the changes you suggested. I'd be surprised if its not at B level now. I'd be happy if you take a glance. ·Maunus·ƛ· 19:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Have you had a look at the sources I sent you? ·Maunus·ƛ· 06:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC) reply

You'll gonna get a skeleton of the tense section before tomorrow is over. G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Dear Purevdoj,

Receive your flowers here:
Flowers

Gantuya eng ( talk) 11:09, 29 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks to everyone's efforts to the GA Sweeps process, we are currently over 90% done with only 226 articles remain to be swept! As always, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. With over 50 members participating in Sweeps, that averages out to about 4 articles per person! If each member reviews an article once a week this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. At that point, awards will be handed out to reviewers. As an added incentive, if we complete over 100 articles reviewed this month, I will donate $100 to Wikipedia Forever on behalf of all GA Sweeps participants. I hope that this incentive will help to increase our motivation for completing Sweeps while supporting Wikipedia in the process. If you have any questions about reviews or Sweeps let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 00:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC) 18:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)18:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lingjia Pan ( talk • contribs) reply

How come this band is not significant? Is there a way to undelete the article? Last time they also wanted to strangely delete Odette Henriette Jacqmin article. Gantuya eng ( talk) 16:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Completely agree with you. I have already taken action by asking from the admin who deleted the article, see User_talk:NJA#Deleted article on Lipstick (band). I wish s/he would have tried a regular deletion in which case we could have simply made the article significant by contributing sources etc. By the way, the article you just mention might indeed be in danger of being deleted, for it does not cite a reason why it should be significant. On the other hand, that is what we will soon endeavour to show for Lipstick. G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC) reply

In both cases, WP:MUSIC is relevant to figure out what is needed. It shouldn't be difficult for Lipstick, but I'm not sure about Jacqmin. If she really has only one album out, then that may not be enough. Also remember that it isn't enough to "know" that a band/musician is notable, you must demonstrate it by citing reliable sources. -- Latebird ( talk) 17:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Latebird, you might even be wrong. The Mongolian internet is extremely short-lived (e.g. I still haven't managed to obtain a CD of the famous, but old band Dain ba Enh), and Uruuliin budag is not active anymore. I did not find any website (i.e. at Banjig) that gives some info about them. They obviously have had three albums

• Khelj amjaagüi hair
• Unplugged
• Khüree khüükhnüüd

but I don't know at what (if any) label (they don't have many of these and tend to go without), and I don't know the years. Their current inactivity is mentioned in an evgüi article [6] in Öglöönii sonin, Mongolia's only daily tabloid, and the Mongolian embassy in the US mentions them as representative of Mongolian musical culture [7] ... I could do with some help from Ganaa, or somebody else ... G Purevdorj ( talk) 18:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC) reply

(Bidend mongol rock pop hiphop hamtlagiin tuhai nom oguulel heregtei. Hun ene sedviin tuhai magister, doktriin ajil bichih yostoi. Bi PhD-gee hamgaalsnii daraa mongol sudlaliig zaah yum bol iim ajliig hyanahaar belen baihiimaa. Harin odoogiin baidald ch iim ajliig dagah huniig olj bolno. (Bolomj arai muu baigaa bolovch) Bonn hotod bolno, mongold ch boloh baih. G Purevdorj ( talk) 19:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)) reply

Well, those are already several references and three albums to demonstrate notability, which will make any future deletion attempts difficult. Once I re-created the deleted Kiwi (band) and Lumino (band) with this kind of information, they were not challenged again. We'll see what else is needed after NJA has moved the old article into your userspace. Btw.: User:Lnemekhbayar appears to be our resident (rock) music expert. Maybe he also has some good ideas. -- Latebird ( talk) 19:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC) reply

After a quick search, all I could come up with is : http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/55/493.html. Will keep on searching. Lnemekhbayar ( talk) 10:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC) reply

http://www.freedom.mn/index.php?module=menu&cmd=content&menu_id=1&id=328 - explains why they were called "Lipstick". Lots of other irrelevant stuff, no album info, no biography, no awards, no nothing :) Sorry. Lnemekhbayar ( talk) 11:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC) reply

The first article you point to was the first article I encountered as well, but I discarded it and then didn't manage to find it again. The other article is not without interest as well, it can be used in combination with the website of the embassy. And we do have the info that they are Mongolia's first women band (and that they are famous as such) which (while not in the criteria given) is another claim to notability. Thanks for your effort! G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Lipstick isn't the first women band. I remember Erdenes band in 1989-1990. Gantuya eng ( talk) 15:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply

It is a silly question to ask, but can you provide references for the existence of that band? (Bi chamd itgej baina daa, harin eniig bas barimtlan uzuuleh heregtei biz. Manai eh uusverees uzvel dandaa anhnii gej bichsen bish uu?) G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Don't know whether it was the same way in the USSR and Eastern Europe. In the MPR, almost every organisation (all were public agencies) would purchase a set of electric instruments--guitars (solo, ryhtmic and bass), synthesizer (it was called electric organ, not much computerised) and drum set together with the amplifiers. Then the younger members of the staff would be invited to organise an amateur band. Mostly they copied songs from Soyol Erdene or Bayan Mongol, the professional bands, and fewer songs with their own original arrangement. Many of them would be made to come to the Radio, where there was the single audio studio to record their songs. Sometimes they were also shown on the TV. If such TV concerts included such amateur bands and professional bands, then the difference could be heard. However, the sound of the amateur bands improved by the end of 1980s perhaps because of lesser psychological pressure due to relieved censorship and increased experience. Also the percentage of their original arrangements increased against the imitations of popular bands. If the staff of the institution were mostly women, then the band could be exceptionally female. One of such bands were Erdenes. It was a financial institution, that's why the band is Erdenes (Treasures). Also many secondary schools, junior colleges and universities had electric instruments. Our school band was called Tsuurai. A later band was Ulaan Sarnai, which was famous beyond the school. Some school bands were girls only. The band of the Palace of Pioneers was called Ulaan Tug. That was part of the facultative course of "wind and electric instuments". Also each district had a culture palace which had a pseudo-rock band along with the folk ensemble. Also there were culture palaces by major economic sectors like Palace of Construction Workers, Palace of Railway, etc. So the famous Urgoo band (Bolooj guitarist, Barkhas singer) belonged to the Palace of Construction Workers. The famous band Mungun Khurhree (Zundari bass-guitarist, singer B. Chimegsaikhan, famous songs: Uuchil, Zuudnii shuvuu, ) belonged to the Domestic services centre. Guess it was in the Urt Tsagaan. Even the Theatre of Opera and Ballet had a quasi-rock band Uuriin Tuya where the bass guitarist was a ballet dancer. Ineemseglel band (Dolgion, Tsogdelger, Gankhuyag, Oyundelger) belonged to the Radio and TV. Unfortunately, electric instruments were not available in sale to individuals in the MPR. Only organisations were allowed to order them in the USSR, CSSR or perhaps in the GDR. There was a case that an organisation wanted professional musicians to play its electric instruments. However, it didn't have budget for salary of musicians. Then it employed graduates of the Music School as porters. These amateur bands, and perhaps the professional bands too, had opportunities to play at various discoteca to earn additional income. Don't know whether this income was legal within the MPR legislation. So this is a kind of an outline of the popular music of the MPR. Gantuya eng ( talk) 12:37, 28 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Toim bichsend tun bayarlalaa. Ih yum sursan. Hamtlagiin dund bi zovhon ineemseglel hamtlagiin neriig sonsson. (Ted neg udaa germand ochood german sonintoi yarilclaga hiisen tul medne.) Harin eniig Wikipedia-d hereglehed bas hecuu. Bichsen barimt bish l dee. Minii uudnees bodvol, chi durtaiyaa iim zuiliig Music of Mongolia deer bichij bolno. Uruuliin budagiin tuhai oguullegt chi eniig ooroo zassan deer yum shig. Uruuliin budag 1990 onoos hoish anh bii bolson emegteichuudiin hamtlag baival eniig ch bichij bolno l doo. Mendchilsen G Purevdorj ( talk) 12:54, 29 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Another very short, but interesting article : http://www.olloo.mn/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=63149 - apparently they are the first girl band to perform live (as opposed to lip-syncing) and with their own instruments. Lnemekhbayar ( talk) 10:52, 10 January 2010 (UTC) reply

I have restored the contents of Lipstick (band) to your sandboxat User:G Purevdorj/Sandbox ·Maunus·ƛ· 11:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks a lot, Maunus! Somewhat edited and recreated the article, see Talk:Lipstick_(band)#Recreated article. G Purevdorj ( talk) 13:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Please note that the official Mongolian romanization in Inner Mongolian is not based on Cyrillic ISO9. Neither a transliteration of Mongolian script is used. It's a transcription based on the voice of Xulun Hoh Banner.

P.S.: official Mongolian toponym transcription (MLPYA):

a e i ô û o u n b p h g l m s x t d q j y r w f k c z

-- 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ( talk) 14:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply

What you say about transcription and Shuluun Köke is not exactly true, but, first of all, why are you telling me this? About which article are you talking, and what do you suggest to revise? Only with such information can I give you a proper answer to your post. Regards, G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Found your reason now. Don't agree with your revert. As far as common English terminology is available, it takes precedence over Chinese pinyin-aligned transcription systems. G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks to everyone's efforts to the GA Sweeps process, we are currently over 95% done with around 130 articles left to be swept! Currently there are over 50 members participating in Sweeps, that averages out to about 3 articles per person! If each member reviews an article once a week this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. At that point, awards will be handed out to reviewers. Per my message last month, although we did not review 100 articles last month, I still made a donation of $90 (we had 90 reviews completed/initiated) to Wikipedia Forever on behalf of all GA Sweeps reviewers. I would like to thank everyone's efforts for last month, and ask for additional effort this month so we can be finished. I know you have to be sick of seeing these updates (as well as Sweeps itself) by now, so please do consider reviewing a few articles if you haven't reviewed in a while. If you have any questions about reviews or Sweeps let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 02:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi G. I am uncertain about what exactly is your exception to the tense section. Is it the claim that Greenlandic is tenseless, or the claim that it has grammatical tense? I would like to note that I for one don't see how this that contentious. The majority of specialists in Greenlandic agree that the expression of time is not part of the system of grammatical rules in Greenlandic, but are instead conveyed in many different optional ways including derivational suffixes on verbs, through pragmatic inference, through aktionsart in verbal stems, through mood (causative and contemporative moods have a temporal component). In fact the only scholars who believe Greenlandic should not be classified as "tenseless" are Hayashi and Spreng (not really well known specialists) - and their argument is basically that since Greenlandic can express temporal relations it isn't tenseless - they do try to show that morphemes like -ssaa- are sufficiently obligatory to be called a future tense, data from other researchers who have done more work (Fortescue, Bjørnum, Bittner, Sadock) shows that it is not correct to describe its use as obligatory tense marking. In short the "Greenlandic has grammatical tense" claim is the minority claim in the literature. I don't think it is fair to characterise any of those opinions as "screwed" since it is basically a disagreement about what toi call "grammatical tense" - does if "grammatical tense" has to be expressed in a neat system of required morphological marking on verbs then Greenlandic doesn't have it - if "grammatical tense" is simply the ability of a language to express temporal relations systematically then it does. If this isn't clear from the section as it is written now, then it is a problem with my writing, that I would appreciate your help in correcting. ·Maunus·ƛ· 08:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Hayashiand Spreng 2005: 3 claim that -sima- is an aspect marker. All other claimsconcern Inuktitut, not Greenlandic. The only place where such claims can bemirrored on Greenlandic is an independent scientific article. For a lexiconentry on Greenlandic, Hayashi and Spreng is simply n/a. On the other hand, Mahieuand Tersis 2009 do claim (without any serious discussion) that a future -nonfuture distinction exists in Greenlandic.

The problems with the analysis of Mahieu and Tersis 2009 are manifold. Their understanding of aspectuality is seriously outdated. And if a suffix „has“ fivemeanings of which only one or two can be realized with a particular verb root(or in a particular sentence!), then this suffix does not have five „meanings“,but probably one gesamtbedeutung. The interpretation of (2) on 173 is careless, assuming a time reference where the translation indicates none. Given that sucha time reference would be highly atypical, it is safe to conclude that we havean aspectual perspective here, not a temporal one. 176a-e are essentiallyworthless without the proper definition of circumstances or at least a numberof examples for each of these uses. You cannot take such statements at facevalue (or directly enter them into a lexicon, for that matter). The idea thatthis can be checked with tests based on the addition of other suffixes is notentirely bad, but it is out of discussion to accept such a risky test withoutthe discussion of a number of sentences taken from texts.

If we follow Mahieu and Tersis 2009, we would claim obligatoriness for -ssaa-, which (according to what you noted) appears to be wrong. A tendency of -sima- todevelop into a tense marker (that can be applied in the presence of time adverbials without aspectual connotations) would not be surprising, but giventhe negligence for the analysis of the interaction of -sima- with particularverb or aktionsart classes, it would be careless to take even this statement atface value. (When reading this stuff, it was unfortunate that the pagesprobably discussing the interpretation of bare verb stems (174-175) weremissing from the Google book.

It is inany case very hard to tell what should be done with this literature withouthaving had a look at the other literature.

An article on tense in Greenlandic will have to discuss bare verb stems, -sima- and -ssaa-in some detail. But you might go the following way:

“The majority of researchers<references, all with page numbers> hold that-ssaa- (or other markers claimed to express future that might replace it insome particular circumstances) are not obligatory future markers and canusually / often / always be left out in the presence of time adverbials or afuture time reference that is clear from the context. A minority of researchers<and references> hold that -ssaa- is indeed obligatory, arguing that …”

You could probably write on -sima-:

“-sima- is claimed< Mahieu And Tersis 2009> to denote aspectual and temporalmeaning, the pure temporal meaning being a development of recent decades. They reportsome evidential nuances as well, with -sima- and the marker XY contrasting withregard to XZ.”

After summarizing other existing analyses of -sima-, a careful (!) evaluation of the respectivereliability of these analyses could be given: “None of these analyses …”. Thenyou could note the need for further research.

The discussion of unmarked verbs cannot be done without a reliable source besideswhat I have read so far. The matter is complicated and would call for a short discussion of all of the literature, but you might come up with a proposed new text that is based on majority and minority views, with the respective arguments. But these arguments must make more sense than "the interpretation of (2) on 173" in order not to be entirely worthless.

G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Hayashi and Spreng Explicitly claim that the Inuktitut data is completely compable to Greenlandic. When you write Mahieu & Tersis you mean Trondhjem right? ·Maunus·ƛ· 05:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC) reply

In the article of Hayashi and Spreng I checked all instances of the word "Greenlandic" and did not find such an equation. Their lead should not be interpreteted in this way, but I might have overlooked something else. Irrespective of that, as long as they don't actually cite Greenlandic data and argue with them, they are irrelevant for Greenlandic, as a mere hypothesis of this kind could not be taken at face value. With Trondhjem you're right, I mistakenly quoted the editors. G Purevdorj ( talk) 10:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC) reply

AH, sorry you're right Hayashi and Spreng doesn't make that claim, although it is implict that their conclusions are thought (by them) to be valid for all inuit languages. This removes some of the problem, since then there is a wide consensus among all Greenlandic scholars that West Greenlandic is "tenseless". My aim with the section is not really to discuss or evaluate claims about the existence of tense in Greenlandic (that lies outside of the scope of an encyclopedic article in my opinion) but rather to survey and summarise what scholars have written about tense in Greenlandic, and to describe the ways in which Greenlandic expresses temporal relations according to the scholars that have worked with these questions. I am not going to evaluate the different claims or the analyses on which they are based. I would ask you to consider whether your personal expertise in the area of tense and aspect maybe preventing you from looking dispassionately at the aim of the article whioch is not to "tell the truth" about tense in Greenlandic, but merely to summarise what others have written. It is outside of either of our competences to evaluate the adequacy of the descriptions gioven for Greenlandic (as we do not know the langauge well enough) and it is oputside of the scope of an encyclopedic article to evaluate the claims of equally reliable sources against eachother (Trondhjem I believe is a native speaker and has written her Phd about tense in Greenlandic - by all means a reliable source even if you don't hare her theoretical view of aspectuality). I am uncertain of how to proceed with this and what it is that you want from the section. I will urge you to either try your own hand at rewriting the section (I will happily supply you with the full scan of Tronhjem 2009 and any other sources you might require on wednesday when I am at my office) - or fail the article if you find that to be appropriate. I cannot approve it along the lines you have laid - I am not qualified to do so, I am unsure U understand what you mean and if I understand it right I think it is outside of the scope of an encyclopedic article. ·Maunus·ƛ· 12:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC) reply

I have written you an email as an answer, so that you have my proper address in order to send documents. Note that there is also a minor problem with the lead section for which the review is "on hold". I wouldn't have minded myself, but I interpret the guideline on lead in the way that the lead of this article must be longer. Please see my note on the assessment page! G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC) reply

I have answered your email. ·Maunus·ƛ· 14:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Answered your email as well. And one correction: 173 is okay, I somehow conflated the current content of the article with that example. She states it is "present" perfect, which is just appropriate. G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Hallöchen Benutzer:G Purevdorj! Hier gäbe es noch sehr viel zu tun. Gruß Reiner Stoppok -- 77.188.150.191 ( talk) 21:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Momentan mache ich mir eher Sorgen darüber, wie ich mit all dem, was ich ohnehin tun muss, fertig werden soll, d.h. ich suche nicht unbedingt neue Aufgaben. Aber wenn du irgendwelche spezifischen Fragen bzgl. der mongolischen Sprache(n) hast, bin ich gerne bereit, mit Rat und ggf. auch Tat zur Seite zu stehen. Korrekturlesen bei Sprachartikeln geht auch okay. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Ups, das ging ja schnell! Einen Artikel de:Umschreibung des Mongolischen mit chinesischen Silbenzeichen o.ä. ( web) würde ich begrüßen. ;) -- Reiner Stoppok ( talk) 22:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC) PS: Natürlich auch den Ausbau der de:Liste von Mongolisten. Oiratisch und Ordos leuchtet in der deutschen Wikipedia noch rot. - Frage eines Laien: Wie wird eigentlich die Arbeit von d'Ohsson heutzutage bewertet? reply

Artikel schreiben oder übersetzen momentan eher nicht. Mongolistenliste lässt sich nicht ganz ad infinitum, aber doch ins Sinnlose erweitern. Habe erst einmal ein paar bekannte Namen zugefügt. Die "Umschreibung des Mongolischen mit chinesischen Silbenzeichen" ist ein Thema, was am besten im Artikel über die Geheime Geschichte mit behandelt werden sollte - auf dem jetzigen Entwicklungsstand vom deutschen Wikipedia ist das noch keinen eigenen Artikel wert. Der Artikel zu Ordos dialect ist auch im englischen Wikipedia recht dürtig, was daran liegt, dass ich auf das Erscheinen eines bestimmten Buches zu diesem Thema warte. Der Artikel Oirat language ist recht soziolinguistisch, aber könnte übersetzt werden. Wenn man will, kann man da auch noch das ein oder andere aus Torgut dialect einbauen. Über d'Ohsson weiß ich nichts weiter, da ich über mongolische Geschichte nur das Allgemeinwissen eines Mongolisten habe und für mongolistische Geschichtsschreibung kaum kompetent bin. G Purevdorj ( talk) 10:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Das de:Ögedei-Khanat (zh) hat auch noch keinen Artikel. ;) -- Reiner Stoppok ( talk) 15:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC) PS: Danke für die Ergänzungen! reply

Erneut: historisch. Ich habe auch auf dem englischen Wikipedia bisher nur an drei historischen Artikeln gearbeitet, und das auch nur aus der Not heraus, schwerwiegende Fehldarstellungen zu bekämpfen. Im Prinzip ist mir lieber, wenn ich von den Fehlern gar nicht erst weiß. Ein Artikel, der noch nicht geschrieben worden ist, ist im Hinblick auf mögliche Fehler unproblematisch. G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for taking the time to copy edit the Vedda language article. Taprobanus ( talk) 23:39, 25 February 2010 (UTC) reply

You're cunning to say so, hehe. Just did one single minor edit and then dived into issues concerning body snatching for the rest of the evening. I might want to make up for the praise that you gave before it was due ... One point: do you know IPA, and do you have any sources that use it? Usually, you cannot use mere orthography in a phonology section ... G Purevdorj ( talk) 00:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC) reply

No I dont know IPA but I can try to copy it from other articles based on the citations I have. It probably what I need to do:(( Taprobanus ( talk) 15:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Or, If I scan you the sources, is it possible for you to help out on the IPA portion of the article ? Taprobanus ( talk) 13:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC) reply

It is, in principle, but please remind me of that after one month or at least no less than two weeks. Must still do some notable stuff on Greenlandic language, which wouldn't be that much but for my offline life. G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Sure no problem, Vedda language(s) took 30000 years to become almost extinct, what is 1 month delay in wikipedia. Thanks :))) Taprobanus ( talk) 06:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC) reply

It is in pdf, if you can turn on your e-mail option via Wikipedia, then I can e-mail it to you. Thanks Taprobanus ( talk) 16:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks to everyone's amazing efforts in February, we have reviewed all of the articles and are now finished with Sweeps! There are still about 30 articles currently on hold, and once those reviews are completed, I will send you a final message about Sweeps process stats including the total number of articles that were passed and failed. If you have one of these open reviews, be sure to update your count when the review is completed so I can compile the stats. You can except to receive your award for reviewing within the next week or two. Although the majority of the editors did not start Sweeps at the beginning in August 2007 (myself included), over 50 editors have all come together to complete a monumental task and improve many articles in the process. I commend you for sticking with this often challenging task and strengthening the integrity of the GA WikiProject as well as the GAs themselves. I invite you to take a break from reviewing (don't want you to burn out!) and then consider returning/starting to review GANs and/or contribute to GAR reviews. With your assistance, we can help bring the backlog down to a manageable level and help inspire more editors to improve articles to higher classes and consider reviewing themselves. Again, thank you for putting up with difficult reviews, unhappy editors, numerous spam messages from me, and taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 02:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC) reply

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I award you this Barnstar of diligence in recognition of the extremely careful review that you carried out of Greenlandic language. The review caused the article to improve above and beyond the quality the nominator had aimed for. Thanks for your time and efforts! ·Maunus·ƛ· 08:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks! G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC) reply

On behalf of Wikiproject Good Articles, I would like to express our gratitude to you for your contributions to the Sweeps process, for which you completed seven reviews. Completion of this monstrous task has proven to be a significant accomplishment not only for our project, but for Wikipedia. As a token of our sincere appreciation, please accept this ribbon. Lara 14:22, 27 March 2010 (UTC) reply

You might note that at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Mongolian language, also introduced some extraneous text around some numerical characters. This may be due to a combination of your browser and Skype trying to identify and highlight telephone numbers. Thank you.-- Rumping ( talk) 12:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC) reply

It's not my responsibility to notify anyone that I have deleted a page. I didn't have any concerns about the article — I simply came across it while deleting pages in CAT:CSD, observed that it met the speedy criteria, and deleted it. Perhaps you should take up your concerns with CynofGavuf, who tagged the page for speedy. Nyttend ( talk) 21:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply

You can find the page at User:G Purevdorj/Nomin talst; I've restored all of the revisions except for the last, which included nothing except the addition of the db-band tag. Nyttend ( talk) 21:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:56, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Re your message: The sole claim that the band is Mongolia's first hip hop band doesn't meet the notability guidelines. I have restored the article into your user space at User:G Purevdorj/Dain Ba Enkh. -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 20:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Hui, the article didn't even have any content that it would've been necessary to restore ... G Purevdorj ( talk) 08:32, 22 April 2010 (UTC) reply

ng: shift-n (but not in "twnggalag", "ayngg a", etc) гэж бичих, эсвэл ng: shift-n (but not in "...ngg..." and "...ngg a") гэж бичвэл дээргүй юу?

Бас "German keyboard" гэснийгээ арай түгээмэл болговол зүгээр биш үү? "Latin keyboard" ч гэдэг юм уу? Тэгэхгүй бол чиний зааврыг хүмүүс зөвхөн герман хүмүүст зориулсан заавар байна гэж бодох байх. Би тэгж бодож байсан. Gantuya eng ( talk) 10:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC) reply

I apologize if this is the wrong way to get in touch with you, and I'll gladly try again if you tell me how I should go about asking you a question. In the meantime, something quite simple:

You provided some of the most recent edits to the article on the Chatino languages of southern Mexico/Oaxaca. I would like to quote the example provided in a text, but I hesitate to do that without knowing its origin. Do you have any idea where it came from? One small note: Mongolian and Chatino -- you are very adventuresome, I have to say. I am impressed. Rosina Lippi (Sara Donati) rosinalippiATTpobox.com

Hi Rosina! I am an expert on Mongolian, but don't tend to make too extensive edits elsewhere, though I can (as on Greenlandic). The edits on Chatino language (do I get that right) are by User:G.broadwell which is not me. I did not edit that page. If you want to contact somebody, so so on her talk page. Giving your own email address (and even with "@"!) will just greatly increase the risk of spam. G Purevdorj ( talk) 23:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC) reply

The examples were provided by User:GeorgeAaronBroadwell who is a professional linguist working on Zapotecan and Muskogean languages and a professor at SUNY Albany. I am fairly sure that the examples are from his own research. ·Maunus·ƛ· 23:36, 16 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you so much, this is valuable information. I don't know how I got so confused about who edited that Chatino page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.84.221 ( talk) 01:00, 17 August 2010 (UTC) reply

After conducting a month of fieldwork on an Otomi dialect and becoming much more familiar with the Otomi literature than I was a year ago AND receiving a lot of newly published literature by excellent Otomi scholars I am ready to give a second look at possibly getting Otomi language to GA status, hopefully in a friendlier editing environment. If you could look at the article again and give me some ideas to improve it that would be excellent. I have recently changed a couple of things in the typology and phonology sections since the existing descriptions were sort of fanciful and editorializing. Any comments you might have will be appreciated. ·Maunus·ƛ· 23:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Taking a look at the proportions of the article, the course to GA seems to be in sight. But before leaving Tokio at the 25th, I will not find any time to breathe. G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC) reply

In Russian Wikipedia was created a "Mongolian Peoples" templare. It is wery important for us to have your opinion at this question. If you want I can translate this template content to you. And one of the questions is Түмэд - are this yastan an Oirad or Southern Mongol? Bogomolov.PL ( talk) 17:07, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Synchronically speaking, Tümed are Southern Mongolian, not Oirat. Their dialect is related to Kharchin, belonging to the Khorchin dialect group. I don't know the history of this tribe, though. ru:Категория:Монгольские народы Хунну, Ухуань, Сяньби, Жужаньский каганат don’t fit the category: they are historical people that might or might not be related to the Mongolic people - we just don’t know. I don’t know Мужун, but they seem to be pre-Mongolic, too. I don’t know Дулаты and Жалайыр (Jalait would be modern Southern Mongolian. And Jalait might be a historical plural form of Jalair.) Меркиты is not entirely clear, maybe Turkic, but in any case made Mongolian by Chingis Khan. The rest is okay. Other questions? G Purevdorj ( talk) 20:15, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanx a lot, I will translate your opinion to my collegues. Bogomolov.PL ( talk) 21:39, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi G, maybe you could chip in some suggestions on how to improve the article on Aorist at Talk:Aorist. There's some dispute going on and new voices would be appreciated by everyone. ·Maunus·ƛ· 20:32, 16 September 2010 (UTC) reply

I don't think your recent change of grammatical gender to sex in the article on Mongolian language is correct. Gender doesn't only mean grammatical gender - it also means socially constructed gender. "woman" and "womanish" is socially constructed gender. Calling it implies that the use of the forms depend on biological sex - i.e. which chromosomes and genitals the referent has. I don't think that is supported. I think you should change it to gender or social gender - sex gives the wrong connotations imo. ·Maunus·ƛ· 00:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC) reply

You're right, ultimately, MM marks social gender (as info about sex is not necessarily available e.g. for a shaman). But that is the terminology of biology and sociology (including sociolinguistics). General linguistic terminology rather seems to draw a line between grammatical gender and biological/"social" sex, and it is quite trivial that a language does not encode biological info prior to social info, so no confusion will ever arise. (The trend to replace "sex" in every instance by "gender" might even affect linguistics, but I distain it. I often think of writing my opposite sex when I read [social] "gender" on official applications.) But I see that this is a lexicon article for the general public where unnecessary terminology should be avoided (even if it is justified about which I am just poundering). So social gender (but no way gender only!) should be an improvement. Changed it. G Purevdorj ( talk) 07:35, 10 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the excellent feedback for improving Samoan language. Much appreciated. teinesaVaii (talk) 01:49, 20 November 2010 (UTC) reply

		The Wiki Lei Barnstar
		You deserve a Lei garland for your help and feedback towards improving Samoan language. Thank you and mahalo! teinesaVaii (talk) 07:13, 22 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Oh, thanks. But my suggestions (while they might indeed be good) took me not much more than half an hour. After you made some improvements, you may want to notify me again so that I can take another look at the article. I am quite good at that. However, implementing some of my suggestions (e.g. about the case chapter) might be difficult for a non-linguist, but of course you can try if you have suitable literature. Unfortunately, I don't tend to have the time to do such things myself. I'd be happy if I got more of my own research work done. Or to come to know more about Kurudu, for that matter, hehe. G Purevdorj ( talk) 20:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi,

I yesterday stumbled upon a small, easy-to-use and free program from Microsoft that lets you create your own keyboard layout, e.g. one that maps the 'ö' on your keyboard to the trad. Mongolian 'ö'/'ü'. I already created a more or less phonetic keyboard layout for Cyrillic Mongolian yesterday (one where you type 'Ulaanbaatar' and get 'Улаанбаатар'), and it took me less than an hour. Thought it might be interesting for you too. The name of the program is MSKLC.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year,

Yaan ( talk) 11:35, 26 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, Once I read somewhere in Wikipedia about "wikivampire"s. These people thoroughly study the rules of Wikipedia and use them to suppress other wikipedians every time referring to various Wiki rules. Especially they are active against new members and quickly discourage them from further participation. Do you know what actions should be taken if a person whom you identify as a "wikivampire" annoys you? ༄༅།།གང་ཐུ་ཡཱ།། ( talk) 06:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Bi iim baidald oroogui baina. Chi bol haayaa haayaa wikipedia-giin durmiig tiim nariin dagahgui hun l dee. Tegeed nogoo hunii durdsan asuudaltai holbootoi wikipediagiin zarchmiin tuhai unshij, ooroo baga saga durmees zorchson uu gej medej avchaad durmiig iluu sain deeshluuleh bolj bolno. Assume good faith! gesen ug. Iim bolomj uneheer baihgui baigaa bogood neg hun chamd uneheer huchirtei bolj baigaa yum bol wikipedia-giin durmiig chamaas sain medeh hunees asuuj bolno. Administrator-oos asuuj bolno gesen ug. Ter ug ni bas nogoo hun wikipediagiin zarim zorchmoos zorchij chamaig deerelhej baigaa yum bol teriig tanij, nogoo hunii esreg arga hemjee barij chadna. Minii zovlol chamd baga saga tuslaasai gej naidaj baina. Amjilt! G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Danke schön. ༄༅།།གང་ཐུ་ཡཱ།། ( talk) 16:57, 18 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Chinii userpage deer bichsen hun baga zereg yosgui baisan, harin bas TIIM hargis evgui bish l dee. Neg yum chamaas asuuyii daa: "Greater Mongolia" gedgiig mongoloor yuu gedeg ve? G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:05, 18 February 2011 (UTC) reply

"Greater Mongolia" -- "Даяар Монгол". ༄༅།།གང་ཐུ་ཡཱ།། ( talk) 04:16, 19 February 2011 (UTC) reply

If possible, please comment at Talk:Changkya Khutukhtu about the correct Mongolian equivalent of this title. I'm almost certain that it should be Жанжаа хутагт (Janjaa Hutagt), but I'd like additional input before adding that to the article.— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 18:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC) reply

You may be interested in this deletion discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crenglish. Happy editing, Cnilep ( talk) 06:29, 25 March 2011 (UTC) reply

An article that you have been involved in editing, Mongolian language has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments good article reassessment page . If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Rcsprinter ^{Gimme a message} 17:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC) reply

1. Are you sure ᠮᠣᠩᠭᠣᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡᠨ (Monggol helen) is written in Oirat dialect? I knew that ᠮᠣᠩᠭᠣᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡ (Monggol hele) is the standard form in Chahar-Halh dialect, and -n would possibly be a suffix of Monggol hele in Chahar-Halh dialect, so I am not sure if ᠮᠣᠩᠭᠣᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡᠨ (Monggol helen) is the correct Hudam rendering in Oirad dialect.
2. I'm sure that in Hudam the word “Oirad” is Oyirad in both Chahar-Halh dialect and Oirad dialect, but is it still Oyirad in Todo? I'm sure in a Todo publication in Xinjiang the term “Oirad” is rendered in such a form: the “bar” between o and i is a horizontal bar (like this: ᡆᡅᠷᠠᡑ), rather than a slash; that is, look like a Hudam middle form a/e rather than a Hudam middle form i/y.
3. I noted that you changed the MONGOLIAN VOWEL SEPARATOR to a NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE, but I don't think it's the correct rendering. However, the MediaWiki system mis substitude the MVS to a general space.

–– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 12:44, 8 April 2011 (UTC) reply

1. „ᠮᠣᠩᠭᠣᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡᠨ ᠦ ᠣᠶᠢᠷᠠᠳ ᠠᠶᠠᠯᠭᠤ“ is standard Mongolian script, but it does not render Oirat in any way. As it means “Oirat dialect of the Mongolian language”, it is probably not intended to. The suffix -n is present because -n always precedes the genitive case in a number of words. The rendering is definitely correct. (There is not such a thing as a Hudum rendering in the Oirat dialect - you may either write script Mongolian basically corresponding to Middle Mongolian or Todo bicig corresponding to Oirat.)

2. I am not sure about this. The only thing that I am sure about is that there should be only ONE SINGLE correct rendering. I was looking for a source for this, but I could not find any at the place where I am. If you have a source, please forward it to me!

3. I am not sure what exactly I did, but it had the effect that the script now gets displayed correctly in my browser in the normal reading mode (albeit not in the editing mode; what is displayed there looks weird).

G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:41, 8 April 2011 (UTC) reply

1. Could you identify whether this (I mean, the content, not the title, even though I didn't get the content right now) is Oirat dialect in Hudam or General Mongolian?
   1. You're not likely to be the first one who told me Hudam cannot be used to write Oirad. But as far as I know, the Qinghai subdialect of Oirad is written in Hudam, HISTORICALLY (i.e. they've never used Todo).
2. Why? Under many cases (espc. in Hudam) Mongolian may have different written form. Even in English there're different spellings (color vs. colour).
   1. ISBN  978-7-228-12652-1
3. It's a bug in MediaWiki, I've reported it to WP:VP. After its fixing, we may substitude NNBSP with MVS.
   1. Your text may looks “correctly”, but with a closer look you'll note that there's a small space between helen and ü. –– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 07:36, 9 April 2011 (UTC) reply
      1. You're right, and I was wrong. NNBSP is the correct rendering, and in Unicode the space always appears, even though it shouldn't be there. –– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 07:39, 9 April 2011 (UTC) reply
      2. The issue can be shown here.

File:Unicode Mongolian NNBSP issue - Vertically.PNG

–– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 04:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC) reply

1. No, I cannot. I own the book, but like all paper stuff I own about Oirat it is stored at a place where I will not go for months.

2. I finally found what I was searching for: http://www.kalmykamericansociety.org/HKK/HKK01.htm. Line 4 from the left, word 4 from below (or line 6, word 1 from below): oyirad. Clearly two downward strokes, the first being slightly shorter, but still much longer than an "a". This settles the issue how to spell it.

3. Yeah, I see it. The right version is the correct one.

G Purevdorj ( talk) 08:21, 9 April 2011 (UTC) reply

1. Hope one day you may help identify it (Thanks a lot).
2. I doubt whether there're 2 alternative spellings. The book ISBN  978-7-228-12652-1, is called " čing ulusiyin üyeyin torγud qošuud-yin čγöš" in Hudam Mongolian. It can not be found in Google Books, but the ISBN is correct. The book is about Torgud and Hoshud seal in Hudam, Chinese, and Manchu, but the whole book is written in Todo and Chinese.

   The text laid on the left is "Oirad", but it's too small to distinguish.

3. The right one is performed by ᠮᠣᠩᠭᠣᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡᠨ᠎ᠦ ᠣᠶᠢᠷᠠᠳ ᠠᠶᠠᠯᠭᠤ (ᠮᠣᠩᠭᠣᠯ ᠬᠡᠯᠡᠨ᠎ᠦ ᠣᠶᠢᠷᠠᠳ ᠠᠶᠠᠯᠭᠤ), but it can never be rendered correctly under Mongolian Baiti and Mongol Usug, only in MongolianScript. –– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 11:34, 9 April 2011 (UTC) reply

–– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 10:35, 9 April 2011 (UTC) reply

2. So do I. Probably "oyirad" only. The word you referred to is indeed to small to distinguish that, although it is definitely the word under discussion. G Purevdorj ( talk) 11:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Reply:

2. Next time when I go to NLC I'll make a copy.

3. Unfortunately, according to page 11 of:

Myatav Erdenechimeg, Richard Moore, and Yumbayar Namsrai "Traditional Mongolian Script in the ISO/IEC 10646 and Unicode Standards" - Technical Report No.170, UNU-IIST, P.O.Box 3058, Macau, Aug 1999.

MVS should never be used on text such as "helen-ü" (page 11), but on "han-a" (page 5). So the right form will never be performed within Unicode.

I think this should be written in Mongolian script#Font issues.

–– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 12:45, 9 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Oirat Hudum?

• 1. Could you help me distinguish if Tangsug Aora (you have to use Internet Explorer to browse it correctly) is a website in Middle Mongolian or Oirat? It's written in Hudum.
• 2. Could you help me verify if this dictionary contains Oirat dialect in Hudum?

–– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 09:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC) reply

2. The dictionary contains entries in clear script, a phonetic rendering of the words (no transcription!) and short explanations in hudum script. I could not navigate that book, though: is there a download link somewhere? G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:11, 11 April 2011 (UTC) reply

1. I scanned over that website. All but 3 texts are in Hudum bicig, and from the two texts I looked into more closely no signs of Oirat grammar (not to mention spelling!) were apparent to me. At Jang üile and at Sonin medege, there were altogether 3 texts in Todo bicig. So it does not appear that any in-text mixes occur. G Purevdorj ( talk) 07:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Lately, there has been a spate of edits of various language articles from several IP address in 95.[235-239].*.* range, primarily concerned with adding letters to their alphabets or providing (or modifying) the languages' native names:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/95.235.107.131 - 2011-03-02
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/95.239.197.196 - 2011-03-01
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/95.250.96.249 - 2011-04-12
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/95.238.96.77 - 2011-03-18 - this was detected by other editors working on those articles, and the IP blocked for a month
• http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions/95.238.97.15 - ditto
• http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions/95.238.108.19 - 2011-03-11 - toying with letters-of-alphabet articles; don't know to which extent this has been reverted

While I have no idea on what's right and what's not for most languages in the list, in those rare cases where I do have some idea, the edits were obviously nonsense ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Dungan_language&diff=prev&oldid=423681882 - no such letter in Dungan; no one could now what the "native name" of the Merya language was, as the language is long extinct and not recorded; Evenki language's alphabet certainly does not have a bunch of letters with macrons). Others may be not nonsense, but not particularly beneficial either (just an arbitrary change of a transcription system, etc). Even if the guy is not just inventing things from the thin air, he must be using some rather questionable source. Myself and a few other editors have reverted the edits from those IPs that we could find, but I figure that there may be more. I am just letting you know because many of these edits were on Siberian languages' article, including the Buryat language, on which you are/were working - so you may want to keep an eye on edits from this IP range, in case they strike articles on your watchlist. Regards, -- Vmenkov ( talk) 01:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks! I noticed your reverting on Buryat and then looked up your edit history, so I knew what was going on. I then looked at that edit again and it turned out to be nonsense - y vs. j is a matter of convention, but kh vs. h (which is a matter of convention for Mongolian proper) is phonemic in Buryat. I overlooked that first, but now I am on the watch! G Purevdorj ( talk) 06:09, 14 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, G Purevdorj. I saw you listed at Category:User mn-3 and read your userpage which says you're familiar with Mongolia and its languages I was hoping you could help me with the traditional Mongolian script.

My second son is going to be born soon and I'd like to tattoo his name on my arm. My first son's name is tattooed in traditional Chinese around my wrist, but I'd like my next son's name to be tattooed vertically down my arm to "balance" it with my left arm which has a large pictorial tattoo. Mongolian is the only vertical language I can think of, and I think it's quite pretty, too.

Because you are familiar with the Mongolian language and alphabet, would you be willing to write/draw my son's name and upload it somewhere like Commons, Flickr or Image Bucket for me? Hand written is fine, as is a computer generated image from a Font. His name will be McKenzie Hunter, Hunter being his middle name, not his surname (I'm not sure if Mongolian names do the last-name-first thing like the Chinese, but I don't want it to come out as "Hunter McKenzie" lol!).

Please feel free to say no if you're uncomfortable or unwilling. Thank you in advance, Matthewedwards :  Chat  07:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Chinese and Japanese script is commonly used vertically. As you already have Chinese, using Japanese Katakana vertically might be an option for you.

When written by somebody familiar with it and in cursive manner, Mongolian script can really look great. I am uncertain how well somebody who cannot read Mongolian is able to do this. But ultimately, you must know that yourself.

There is no easy way to convert that name into Mongolian script. I can do it, but somebody else might do it differently. For a tattoo, that is not sufficient, it should be the standard way. There is a dictionary of how to spell foreign names, but I don’t have it and can have a look at that only during a journey in June. I am 80% sure that I will find there what you are searching for. So if you are willing to wait so long and remind me around the 7th of June, I will be able to answer you within max. 10 days.

G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:50, 2 May 2011 (UTC) reply

That would be really great, thank you. I have a Post-It note stuck to my monitor already! Matthewedwards :  Chat  18:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi again, I'm giving your talk page a bump because you said to around the 7th. Best, Matthewedwards :  Chat  16:21, 5 June 2011 (UTC) reply

That would have worked, normally. But given the current political situation in Inner Mongolia (about which you may have read in the news if you read them thoroughly), I had no choice but to reschedule my trip. If things settle down (as they do, slowly), I will get there around the 1st of July. But you should write an email then, for currently and still after three weeks it will not be feasible for me to use wikipedia in China. G Purevdorj ( talk) 07:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC) reply

It took a while, but finally I could access that dictionary. ᠮᠧᠺᠧᠨᠽᠢ ᠬᠠᠨᠲ᠋ᠧᠷ Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 05:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC) reply

A while back, I posted a new proposal for Tibetan naming conventions, i.e. conventions that can be used to determine the most appropriate titles for articles related to the Tibetan region. This came out of discussions about article titles on Talk:Qamdo and Talk:Lhoka (Shannan) Prefecture. I hope that discussions on the proposal's talk page will lead to consensus in favour of making these conventions official, but so far only a few editors have left comments. If you would be interested in taking a look at the proposed naming conventions and giving your opinion, I would definitely appreciate it. Thanks— Nat Krause^{( Talk!· What have I done?)} 20:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I'm not competent to contribute to this matter. G Purevdorj ( talk) 23:46, 1 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I attempted to add Tibetan script to the template of the names of the Zunghar Khanate. But it can't be seen in the article, why? Gantuya eng ( talk) 02:33, 2 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Dear G. Purevdorj,

You are knighted for defending the defenceless and from now on nobody shall dare to address you otherwise than Sir G. Purevdorj.
ᠡᠷᠬᠡᠮᠰᠡᠭ ᠨᠣᠶᠠᠨ G. Purevdorj ᠲᠠᠨ ᠢ ᠬᠦᠯᠦᠭ ᠪᠠᠭᠠᠲᠣᠷ ᠣᠨ ᠵᠡᠷᠡᠭ ᠳᠣᠷ ᠳᠡᠪᠰᠢᠭᠦᠯᠵᠦ ᠪᠠᠢᠢᠨ ᠠ᠃
ᠮᠣᠩ᠋ᠭᠣᠯ ᠣᠯᠣᠰ ᠲᠣᠰᠠᠭᠠᠷ ᠲᠣᠭᠲᠠᠨᠢᠯ ᠢᠠᠨ ᠰᠡᠷᠭᠦᠭᠡᠨ ᠮᠠᠨᠳᠣᠭᠣᠯᠣᠭᠰᠠᠨ ᠣ 100 ᠵᠢᠯ ᠣᠨ ᠣᠢ᠃
Gantuya eng ( talk) 01:37, 11 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Why exactly did you merge all the Buriat languages into one page? -- Al™ 22:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Because there are no Buryat "languages", all being quite close to each other, and moreover there is no meaningful evidence I am aware of (which does not mean that it might not exist) that shows country borderies are the most important criterion within Buryat dialectology. The material I have read did not draw much from countryline distinctions. G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:25, 20 July 2011 (UTC) reply

You asked to be informed if Hangul Supremacy was nominated for deletion. That has happened. Cheers. VI _WS ^talk

I think I can get that list to work. I can just copy & paste into the AWB list box.

I assume that articles that consist of nothing other than a lead sentence, an infobox, and a classification, such as Northeast Bantu and Southern Bantu, should be rated 'stub', correct? I also ranked Ye-Maek language and Yurumanguí language as stubs. Let me know if any of those should be 'start' class. — kwami ( talk) 05:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Well, I got it down to 65 articles, anyway. Now looking for ones which don't have assessment boxes yet. — kwami ( talk) 06:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi Kwami!

The two articles you name are up to your discretion. I have a tendency to rate articles on extinct languages with little record and a decent discussion as C class, even though they may be rather short, but with no perspective of ever getting to B class. The two articles you cite contained some info, but were still less informative than they could have been. For my intuition, they nicely fall in-between stub and start class, and it is good to hear that another linguist shares this intuition.

And then it was so many articles you created! The remainder will be much more fun to rate. Thanks a lot!

G Purevdorj ( talk) 07:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply

If there was something on phonology in a language article, even just a consonant inventory, or if there were competing classifications or a few pronoun reconstructions in a family article, then I rated them start class. But if it was just a list of languages in a family, then that would be more like list class, except that they aren't list articles. So I class'd them as stubs, but in a few cases I left them for you, rather inconsistently, I'm afraid. Yes, in the case of extinct scarcely attested languages, then a paragraph or two got them start class. I think I did give out a few C's as well.

I can only get my last 100 articles from toolserver.org, and the earliest of those had not yet been tagged for assessment. Though there's a gap between the articles I can get there (all assessed now) and the ones that showed up on the unassessed list. I have no idea how many articles were missed, but probably not more than a couple hundred.

Also, I moved a few to other wikiprojects: Linguistics for grammatical or sociolinguistic stuff, writing systems for orthography. Names and foreign words still here, though they don't really seem to belong. — kwami ( talk) 08:27, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Well, that goes further than my practice. If an article contains a complete phoneme inventory, a few comments on it plus one substantial paragraph on something else, then it becomes start class. Even my article on Khorchin dialect did not fulfill that yet, while Chakhar dialect is a good example of what I'd consider start class. C class already means that there are close-to-sufficient (if not yet professional and well-edited) chapters on at least two domains of language description (e.g. Gbe languages, Belarusian language) or a full, but insufficient treatment of everything (e.g. Gan Chinese, Kalix lanugage). Reassigning articles to new categories if they don't fit in into WP languages is always a good and useful activity. G Purevdorj ( talk) 10:01, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply

I'll leave the rest to you, then. More consistent that way. But I will try to remember to take a look at toolserver every once in a while so you don't get back-logged with obvious stubs again. — kwami ( talk) 10:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi G. I am thinking that our article on Language should be an FA, would you like to help me with this? Your ideas on structuring of the article and you deftness as an editor wouyld be greatly appreciated. I am asking other Language specialists for help as well on writing sections for the article on their topics of specialization. I think the article deserves to be better. Thanks! ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 15:23, 14 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Yes, upgrading this article is worthwhile. And it could imagine that most things necessary here are already in our head. One important thing is giving a glimpse and cognitive grammar, for it will be very intuitive to the reader. Where and how (and whether) the different sublinguistics should be represented is another question. G Purevdorj ( talk) 07:20, 15 October 2011 (UTC) reply

The section on structural linguistics is very short and it could well be followed by a section on poststructural approaches like cognitive and semiotic linguistics. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 12:49, 15 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Actually, they use it a lot, see http://www.google.de/search?q=%D0%BC%D3%A9%D1%80%D3%A9%D0%BD+%D1%85%D0%BE%D1%82&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:de:official&client=firefox-a .

Ich bin beeindruckt, aber ja, das zeigt, dass ich unrecht hatte. Es ist mir nur oft passiert, dass Leute es nicht mochten, wenn ich hot für Aimagzentren benutzt habe. Danke jedenfalls! G Purevdorj ( talk) 10:54, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Wahrscheinlich darf man hot nur in Verbindung mit dem Ortsnamen benutzen, weil Mongolen sonst davon ausgehen, dass UB gemeint ist? Yaan ( talk) 20:58, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

hot ganz für sich allein ist UB, ja. Ich denke aber, ein Satz wie Mörön saihan hot yum aa ist auch nicht unproblematisch. Aber ich hab keine Zeit, mich mit der Frage ernsthaft zu beschäftigen. Das bräuchte zwischen 30 Minuten und 3 Stunden Forschungszeit. G Purevdorj ( talk) 08:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Za yaah ve :) Yaan ( talk) 21:51, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Term "Aru Monggol" defined in the book "Mongolian summary history" (1936) written by Anandyn Amar. "Aru, Oebur" derived from Arkhangai, Ovorkhangai, maybe early from it. In 1947, decided to use term Oebur Monggol while already term Ar Mongol expanded in public. Thus, Oebur Monggol exactly means Front (side to the sun) Mongolia or Southern Mongolia. Its name isn't derived "breast" or "inner", "Breast Mongolia? No." Please, don't revert my edit. If you knows Oebur Mongol etymology, please explain or confirmed link?. -- MongolWiki ( talk) 08:11, 26 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi G Purevdorj! I wish you to have a great Christmas holiday and also be happy upon the arrival of the New Year. Let's try to have a peaceful and even more friendly Wikipedia (and everyone will also be more friendly with each another). Thanks a lot! -- Chinyin ( talk) 03:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Сайн найздаа шинэ оны баярын мэнд дэвшүүлэн сайн сайхан бүхнийг хүсэн ерөөе! Эрдэм ном чинь арвидаж аз жаргал бялхах болтугай! Gantuya eng ( talk) 14:38, 30 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Bayarlalaa, naizaa! Ene jil chin' Mongol Yastan gesen wikigiin tosol baiguulagdaj hyatad undestnii uzeltei hunii erhend orj ongorch baigaa ene huuchin jilees baga saga saihan boloosoi! Chamd bas mongold amjilttai, taashaal avch boloh saihan shine jiliig husye! Odoogiin baidal oncgui ch gesen haayaa Wikipedia-d orj baigaarai! Bi odoogiin baidlaar huuchin huudsaa hamgaalj l baina, harin mongolch setgeltei zurgaa doloo hun hezee negen cagt angli wikipedia-d oldvol nogoo anduudiig mongol yastnaas gargaj, ter WT-iin durem dahin mongoliinh bolgoj bolnoo. Odoogoor harin zugeer l wikipedia-d engiin mayagaar saijruulj bolno. G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:44, 30 December 2011 (UTC) reply

ᠬᠠᠲᠢᠨ ᠲᠡᠢᠢᠮᠣ ᠰᠢᠦ᠃ ᠢᠷᠡᠭᠡᠳᠦᠶ ᠰᠠᠢᠢᠬᠠᠨ ᠪᠣᠯ᠋ᠨ ᠠ᠃ᠬᠠᠲᠢᠨ ᠲᠡᠢᠢᠮᠣ ᠰᠢᠦ᠃ ᠢᠷᠡᠭᠡᠳᠦᠶ ᠰᠠᠢᠢᠬᠠᠨ ᠪᠣᠯ᠋ᠨ ᠠ᠃ᠬᠠᠲᠢᠨ ᠲᠡᠢᠢᠮᠣ ᠰᠢᠦ᠃ ᠢᠷᠡᠭᠡᠳᠦᠶ ᠰᠠᠢᠢᠬᠠᠨ ᠪᠣᠯ᠋ᠨ ᠠ᠃ Gantuya eng ( talk) 04:44, 31 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Also, you've got mail.

Viele Gruesse,

Yaan ( talk) 06:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Ebenfalls viele Grüße und ein schönes neues Jahr! Die Email hab ich dir schon beantwortet - mehr oder minder. G Purevdorj ( talk) 19:11, 4 January 2012 (UTC) reply

I am interested in you comment on the article Standard Zhuang that you made namely that you consider 'the total absence of information on the language itself'. Since the article does contain some information, I was wondering what type of information about the language you feel is missing, so that the article may be improved. Johnkn63 ( talk) 18:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello! I've noticed you're a contributor to many articles relating to the Mongolian language, so I thought I might ask you a question, if you don't mind.

According to http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1800.pdf, U+183E ᠾ and U+183A ᠺ both become х in Cyrillic. What differentiates these two? Should I render хийморь as ᠾᠢᠶᠮᠣᠷ or ᠺᠢᠶᠮᠣᠷ? Am I correct in skipping ь? Or am I doing something completely wrong altogether? Thanks in advance for your time. Eternal Rains ^Contrib. 01:47, 10 January 2012 (UTC) reply

"H" is not a traditional Mongolian letter and only occurs in loanwords. These are words such as "hlor" 'chlorine' хлор. Now if you want to write in Mongolian script, you must consider that its orthography is much older than the Cyrillic one and can only partly be deduced from it. So you have no additional knowledge, you have to look into a dictionary for the old script. There is one online that is given as external link on Mongolian language. For хийморь, the correct spelling is ᠬᠡᠢᠢᠮᠤᠷᠢ. Soft sign almost always corresponds to Mongolian script "i". G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:39, 10 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for showing me that I was wrong in assuming that the Cyrillized version could be transliterated directly into the traditional script. I browsed through each of the external links on Mongolian language in turn, but I could not find the traditional script dictionary you mentioned, only ones for Mongolian in the Cyrillic alphabet. Am I missing something obvious? Eternal Rains ^Contrib. 02:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC) reply

There is a link: http://www.linguamongolia.com/dict1.html. But I notice now that it won't be very helpful to you: you can either search for English words, or for Mongolian script in transcription. The entries are Lessing-like: resembling an older, but not-well defined stage of the language. Either way, I have not been able to locate keimori in it (but it has both kei and mori). Else, you will have to buy a dictionary, either on paper or electronic. I can make suggestions if you like. G Purevdorj ( talk) 12:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Guten Abend, G Purevdorj! 2011 war ich zum ersten Mal in der Mongolei und habe bei Wikipedia einige deutsche, englische und spanische Artikel geschrieben über Orte, die ich besucht habe. Da das Land und die Menschen mir so gut gefallen haben, möchte ich autodidaktisch die Sprache lernen. Ich habe begonnen, das Buch "Einführung in die Monglische Sprache" von Hans-Peter Vietze durchzuarbeiten und komme gut zurecht damit. Die Menschen in der Mongolei freuten sich jedes Mal sehr, wenn ich versuchte, Mongolisch zu sprechen. Leider kenne ich hier aber niemanden, der Mongolisch spricht und mir einige Texte aus dem Buch vorlesen könnte. Könntest Du einige Lektionen des Buches für mich auf Kassette oder USB-Stick o.ä lesen und mir dann schicken, oder kennst Du jemanden, der dies tun könnte? Anfallende Kosten würde ich erstatten. Hoffe, bald von Dir zu hören/lesen. Viele Grüße, -- Torbenbrinker ( talk) 22:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Ich bin nicht sicher, dass das Lehrbuch von Vietze ein guter Weg ist, um sich Mongolisch beizubringen. Die Texte sind, möchte man sagen, alle ein bisschen angestaubt. http://mongoliacourses.org/, was auch auf Mongolian language unter External links zu finden ist, bietet Kurse an, die man als Selbstlerner durchgehen kann. Ich würde annehmen, dass sie auch Audiodateien zur Verfügung stellen, aber das müsstest du selbst mal überprüfen.

Was das Lesen einiger Texte angeht: Ich selber habe etwas Akzent und bin also kein ganz ideales Vorbild. Aber wenn es nicht um zu viel Zeugs geht, kann ich schon jemanden finden, der sie für dich vorliest. Alles weitere können wir aber über Email besprechen. Du findest meine Emailadresse in der Toolbox links! Schöne Grüße! G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Guten Abend, G Purevdorj! Vielen Dank für Deine ermutigende und schnelle Antwort. Freue mich schon. Tut mir leid, aber ich habe bei der Toolbox lange gesucht (hatte mit der "Toolbox" bis jetzt noch nie zu tun) und konnte Deine Email-Adresse nicht finden. Könntest Du mir bitte einen Tipp geben, wo genau sie dort steht? Vielen Dank und viele Grüße,-- Torbenbrinker ( talk) 20:17, 5 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Am linken Feldrand unter der Suchleiste befindet sich ein Kästchen namens Toolbox, und der fünfte Eintrag von oben ist „E-mail this user“; setzt wohl voraus, dass du eingeloggt bist, aber biste ja. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/G_Purevdorj. G Purevdorj ( talk) 20:56, 5 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Can you visit my talk page please? -- Chumwa ( talk) 09:04, 5 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello,

We're still not sure what language is used in this article: Аав but we think it's either Mongolian or Kazakh. So could you please translate the article title and content (it's very short) as soon as possible?

Article title: Аав

Text:

Өглөө эртлэн босохдоо таныгаа би үгүйлдэгээ мэдэрдэг Өмөг 
түшиг тань үрдээ амьдрал бэлэглэдэг байсан 
байна Хэзээ ч би ганцаардана гэдгээ мэдэхгүй эрх 
тэнэг байж Хэрвээ та байсан бол...

Thanks, Blowing Top Hat 02:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC) reply

I see the article was already (duely) deleted. The language is Mongolian, the title reads "father" and the content is a stylized praise to one's father. G Purevdorj ( talk) 11:35, 5 April 2012 (UTC) reply

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Languages for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. - Mabeenot ( talk) 04:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi G Purevdorj, have not talked to you for some time, how are you doing recently? I think it is better to respect other people or entity the best way we can, including their self-identification etc. Manchu rulers for example identified themselves as Chinese entities, so we in general should try to follow them. But for the sake of neutrality I only changed Manchu to Qing, which is the official name of the empire (i.e. Great Qing), not to anything else such as Chinese or so, because I also want to respect Mongol people who did not see Qing as Chinese at least with respect to Mongols. In general it's better to not hold a view containing centrism, such as looking from certain angle or aspect. In this case "Qing" instead of Manchu or Chinese is already the comprised solution (and the most neutral one), which may avoid potential disputes as well. Could you please check that? Thanks a lot! -- Chinyin ( talk) 21:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC) reply

The question is WHEN Manchu rulers started to identify themselves with China. Neither Nurhaci nor Hong Taiji did. But it was during the time of this ruler that the Mongolians in the territory of what is now Inner Mongolia accepted (Mongolian: dagah, German sich anschließen) Manchu rule. The renowned rulers from Enkh Amgalan to Tengeriig tetgegch, while often portrayed as entirely Chinese, were more ambivalent, but clearly tried to retain a separation between Manchu and Han. Only for the rulers after Tengeriig tetgegch I might accept your claim with some qualification. The problem with the word Qing is that it suggests a continuous Chinese state (whether or not it actually MEANS it), which in this 3000-year-sense never existed, and Han rule, which it wasn’t in the first 150 years. So it is quite important to be clear here and use "Manchu", not "Qing". G Purevdorj ( talk) 06:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC) reply

OK, thanks for the reply. So you basically mean it gradually changed from Manchu to Chinese over the years, right? But then calling the whole period as Manchu would seem to be simplistic (the same can be said for calling the whole period Chinese). On the other hand, Qing was the official name of the empire from the 17th century on, which Mongols also recognized that. We can equally treat Qing as a semi-premodern empire, with Manchus being rulers (but increasing being Chinese), instead of from certain angle as simply belonging to Manchu or Chinese. Thanks for understanding. (BTW: one subheader originally started with "Post Qing" [instead of "Post Manchu"], which clearly avoided the problem.) -- Chinyin ( talk) 15:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks a lot! -- Chinyin ( talk) 21:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Can you type the text from en:File:Flag of Tuvinian Peoples Revolutionary Party (1921).jpg and en:File:Tprpflag.PNG?-- Antemister ( talk) 09:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC) reply

• tangnu tuva-yin arad-un qubisγal-tu
• nam-un töb qoriyan-u tug.
• ᠲᠠᠩᠨᠦ ᠲᠤᠧᠠ ᠢᠢᠨ ᠠᠷᠠᠳ ᠤᠨ ᠬᠤᠪᠢᠰ‍ᠭᠠᠯ ‍ᠳᠤ
• ᠨᠠᠮ ᠤᠨ ᠲᠥᠪ ᠬᠤᠷᠢᠶᠠᠨ ᠤ ᠲᠤᠭ
• ‚banner of the central committee of the Tannu Tuvan people’s revolutionary party’

I wonder what that final sign might be, though ... a full stop? It is basically missing in the first picture, which else is much more legible. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:56, 29 May 2012 (UTC) reply

Eh, do not trust the blue drawing... A blue communist flag is not reliable, the FOTW image was drwan according to a black-white depiction. Another question, what's the translation for that text in the flag here?-- Antemister ( talk) 20:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC) reply

Simply "Tuvan people's republic". G Purevdorj ( talk) 06:33, 31 May 2012 (UTC) reply

Is the transkription above a correct transliteration or an english transcription?-- Antemister ( talk) 20:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC) reply

neither. it is a correct and scientific transcription, the most common one, as deviced by Poppe. it is entirely possible to use a transliteration, but as the script itself is defective, any strict transliteration would misrepresent the underlying phonemes. Poppe's transcrption, on the other hand, is phonemic. G Purevdorj ( talk) 23:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC) reply

OK, a last request: Can you also transcript that "Tuvan people's republic" in Mongolian script? (Are the no capitel latters?) and separate the right and the left column of the text in the party's banner, for a graphist who wants to redraw that flag.-- Antemister ( talk) 21:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC) reply

It's already on that page! No capital letters. Separated columns in text above. G Purevdorj ( talk) 19:54, 4 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Tuvan People's Republic does only contain the transcription of the cyrillic text, not the one of the mongolian...-- Antemister ( talk) 21:16, 4 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Right ... but I added it now. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:41, 4 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Another minor request: Can you add the mongolian name/transcription of the Tuvan People's Revolutionary Party?-- Antemister ( talk) 19:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi, thank you for rating the Arabic nouns and adjectives article. As per your suggestion, I've added some additional sources. Please take a look and let us know what you think. Thanks, Azylber ( talk) 06:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi G. I am working on Language and I could really use your help - I am out of my league in trying to write the sections on syntax and morphology. If you have time to read them and fix my mistakes I would be grateful. I've tried to work in some of your comments from the talkpage, but I also want it to be a very general overview based on generalist sources. Its a difficult to achieve the balance between sufficient accuracy and excessive detail - especially since I am not sufficiently familiar with the theory. Best regards. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 00:08, 13 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your edits to the syntax section - I must admit that I don't know how to choose theory neutral vocabulary for those syntactic concepts. If you have time to make more substantial edits that ould also be greatly appreciated. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 12:56, 25 August 2012 (UTC) reply

• Also if you happen to have time to look at Otomi language, I've nominated it for GA again (last time was in 2009). I now have Palancar's 2009 reference grammar of Queretaro Otomi (excellent grammar) and considerably more field experience with Otomi, so I think I'll be able to bring the article up to scratch this time round. My main concern is how to condense the grammar section which I think does stray into excessive detail at times. Any comments or suggestions short of a full review will be greatly appreciated. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 15:59, 27 August 2012 (UTC) reply

I apologize for being slow in the uptake on the Otomi review. The thing they call semester suddenly arrived and stole all my time. I hope its ok with you to take it slow. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 14:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC) reply

I'm not very much present at Wikipedia myself now, so just take your time. G Purevdorj ( talk) 10:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC) reply

I think I've reacted to all of your current comments at the Otomi GA now. Still no rush. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 16:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi!

Could you elaborate a bit on your translation to "Blue Hill"? If I am not mistaken, the 'x' in the transscription system used in China is for an "sh"-like sound (e.g. Xilingol), so this is less straighforward than it looks.

All the best, Yaan ( talk) 13:14, 13 September 2012 (UTC) reply

In der Tat. Da hat mich meine Wahrnehmung getrogen. Habe meinen Edit rückgängig gemacht. G Purevdorj ( talk) 10:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC) reply

For all it's worth, the county government's info page on the town says: "清乾隆40年（公元1775年）前，土尔扈特部落的蒙古族牧民在此居住放牧，因其地东面有两座孤山包而得名，“和什托洛盖”为蒙语，意思是“双山包”". That is, "Before Year 40 of Qianlong era (1775 AD), the Torghut Mongol pastoralists lived here; because there are two solitary hills east of here, the place received the name 'He-shi-tuo-luo-gai', which in Mongol means 'a pair of hills'." You can try to restore the original Mongol out of this... -- Vmenkov ( talk) 23:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Thank you. In Oirat, the final s in the word for 'pair' has turned sh, so that's a sure candidate! Glad anything has come out of my first clumsy editing after all! G Purevdorj ( talk) 10:06, 31 October 2012 (UTC) reply

There is a discussion here about whether the article on tense should be about tense as a semantic concept or as a grammatical category. Maybe you want to chip in. I am chipping out myself because my patience is too short, but a calm and reasonable and theoretically well grounded editor like you might be able to make the difference and put an amicable end to the discussion. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 13:17, 13 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello! I imagine you may be the only (or one of the very few) contributor to the Santa language article who actually knows the language. So I'd like to ask your opinion on one recent edit. Sure, the photo is taken in Linxia City, and there are Dongxiang people in the area... but does the photographer actually make a claim that this is not simply a Koranic Arabic inscription, but the Dongxiang language written in Arabic script?! (Now, I don't know Arabic either, so I can't say anything about the inscription either)... -- Vmenkov ( talk)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mongols#the_.27urban_legend.27_.28myth.29_of_the_battle_of_Samara_Bend_-_how_to_address.3F

Thanks

Not my cup of tea. G Purevdorj ( talk) 12:07, 13 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello G. Purevdorj, would you take a look at WikiProject Indigenous languages of California and see if the assessment is at all similar to what you have done elsewhere with languages? It was not clear to me how to rate importance-- other than rating the languages people are still attempting to speak as more important. Your suggestions or participation would be welcome. Djembayz ( talk) 00:32, 14 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi! I just checked through the C class quality ratings. I reversed one of your ratings for WP language because there was no treatment of morphology. I felt tempted to downgrade Ohlone languages but it can be argued that this is very weak C class. The problem here is that a good language description is easy to determine, but it is less intuitive with language families. Cf. Altaic languages, however, that is still and justifiably C class and much better than Ohlone languages. Southern Sierra Miwok language is close to B class, but not yet there. Overall, though, your ratings in C class would correspond to my ratings. As for importance, I never did a single importance rating (while I deleted the ratings of others in some cases), because I think there is no such thing as importance for WP languages where all languages should be considered equally important and almost all articles are language articles. Your project may take another approach, though. Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 17:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC) reply

They have a Cyrillic/Mongol bichig word list in Unicode and with additional images. Do you think it is something that could be added to the Mongolian Script articles? Yaan ( talk) 15:52, 14 October 2012 (UTC) reply

I saw a word list and a table on http://toli.query.mn/static/script, but none of the Mongol script was in Unicode. Would you tell me where to look? G Purevdorj ( talk) 18:14, 14 October 2012 (UTC) reply

I was somewhat imprecise. Their dictionary search offers Mongol bichig in unicode. Though they also have a big csv file for download which might contain the same data as the dictionary (not able to confirm this on my tablet). Yaan ( talk) 20:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC) reply

One might add it as a resource, but the Mongol script is still quite marginal in it, so I won't, but I wouldn't revert anyone who does. An Inner Mongol dictionary (or a classical one like Lessing or Kowaleski) would be something different. G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello! I've seen you around on Indigenous languages of California articles ... Would you consider becoming a member of WikiProject Indigenous languages of California, a WikiProject which aims to expand and improve coverage of Indigenous languages of California on Wikipedia? Please feel free to join us. -- Djembayz ( talk) 19:01, 14 October 2012 (UTC) reply

I nice way to put an invitation, but currently I'm closer to having too much Wikipedia than too little. Just maintaining :-). G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:31, 15 October 2012 (UTC) reply

I replied on my talk page. -- Mahmudmasri ( talk) 16:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Könntest du bitte den mongolischen Namen (in mongolischer Schrift and tarnskribiert) dort hinzufügen?-- Antemister ( talk) 19:01, 23 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Habe dich ja in dieser Sache schon einmal angefragt: Ein kompetenter Grafiker hat Vektorgrafiken für diese beiden Flaggen gezeichnet:

• 
  Parteiflagge
• 
  1926-1930

Leider fehlt noch der Text, denn diese Schriftart versteht Inkscape eben nicht. Jetzt hast du doch sicher ein Programm (oder kennst ein solches) mit dem man die traditionelle Mongolische Schrift senkrecht schreiben kann. Könntest du das machen und dann eine PDF-Datei daraus erstellen? Das ließe sich dann weiterverarbeiten.-- Antemister ( talk) 09:56, 3 November 2012 (UTC) reply

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Script_on_the_Tuvan_PRP%27s_flag_and_the_Flag_of_Tannu_Tuva.pdf G Purevdorj ( talk) 13:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi, can you take a look at the images generated by user:唐吉訶德的侍從 and added to the Yuan dynasty article? I have noticed that the 'ulus' is wrong (e.g. here) so maybe the rest contains errors as well. Unfortunately I cannot even figure out the correct writing of "Yuan" in modern Mongol bichig. I will send him a message on commons about the 'ulus', if you spot any other errors maybe you could contact him as well.

Schönen Sonntag noch, Yaan ( talk) 14:16, 4 November 2012 (UTC) reply

Yuan is correct. If you like, you can even look up such things yourseöf, e.g. in Lessing's dictionary. G Purevdorj ( talk) 08:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC) reply

Nochmal das mit dem ich schon mal hier vorbeikam: Kannst du den Schriftzug in File:Coat of Arms of the People's Republic of Mongolia (1940 - 1941).png in ein PDF schreiben?-- Antemister ( talk) 20:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Text_on_Mongolian_coat_of_arms_1940-41.pdf. G Purevdorj ( talk) 16:09, 19 November 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi Purevdorj, I have been reviewing Quenya for GA, and I am thinking that I would like to ask your opinion about the article. You can see my comments on the review page. It is of course a little complicated by the fact that it is a constructed language and one cannot necessarily require the kind of comprehensive treatment one would expect for a natural language. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 19:47, 13 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Maunus! Good to see you back at WP! Still, I haven't gone into Conlangs before, and I won't do so now. G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Turkish language is up for featured articole review and it looks likely that it will be delisted unless someone with expertise in Turkic takes a look at it. You might want to weigh in at the review page. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 13:05, 3 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for notifying me. I hope that my commentary demonstrated that the article seems to fulfill FA requirements. I have suggested a few minor edits, though, so if you have about an hour (or even slightly less) to spare, you might even want to implement some changes. Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 18:23, 3 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Yes, concrete critiques are a lot easier to do something about. And I agree with your commentary of shifting the burden. I don't really have any literature on Turkish though. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 18:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC) reply

The only thing that I'd really like you to do is to take care of the phonology section. There is one reference to an IPA manual that has to be looked up. The other issues are probably just in for deletion ... G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:08, 3 February 2013 (UTC) reply

	The Original Barnstar
	A lot of good work, just noticed you save the Mongolian lawyer's bio, evidently notable. Thank you. In ictu oculi ( talk) 17:43, 20 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Thank you! While I am mostly down to maintainance work these days, but retaining the few articles on Mongolian culture that exist really seems to be of some importance, especially as there are few other editors left that could take care of them. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:35, 20 February 2013 (UTC) reply

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dayan_Khan

Father Of Jahangir Khan(subway manager)

Father Jahangir Khan(SUBWAY)

Geed haytsan bna — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.72.235 ( talk) 01:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC) reply

Could you please weigh in on my last comment on Talk:Mongolic languages? I see that this topic was discussed a couple times in 2008, but it doesn't look to me like a clear conclusion is stated.— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 22:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC) reply

By the way, do you know much about Daur? If the "Mongolic languages" article is correct, Daur is pretty close to Mongolian (i.e. descended from the Mongolian of Chingis's day?) and yet Daur (along with Mongghol) is the divergent of the close relatives. However, the Daur are seen as the modern descendents of the Khitan. Is Daur a contact language with a Borjigid superstrate and Khitan as substrate? Are Khitan archaisms identifiable in Daur?— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 19:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC) reply

I don't understand "is the divergent of the close relatives". As for the part of your question that I do understand: while we can probably assume a non-Mongolic original population for Santa (as we can for Khamnigan), I have no clue about Dagur population history nor about a possible Khitan substrate. G Purevdorj ( talk) 04:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC) reply

I meant to say that it is the most divergent of the narrowly-defined Mongolic languages (I'm getting this from the Wikipedia article, not from any independent knowledge). I didn't see much about Daur on Google scholar. It might be an interesting area for future research.— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 14:02, 23 May 2013 (UTC) reply

As far as its grammatical system is concerned, Dagur is closer to Central Mongolic than the Shirongolic languages (which are close to each other and linked to Oirat/Ordos via Shira Yugur) or Moghol. Moghol has a very particular syntax. Overall, I wouldn't say that Dagur is so divergent, even though its status as a language (in contrast e.g. to Buryat which I'd call the northern dialect group) is completely unproblematic. G Purevdorj ( talk) 03:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC) reply

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi G Purevdorj! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editors are welcome! (But being multilingual is not a requirement.) Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch ( talk) 22:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Юун утгагүй юм бичээд байгаа нөхөр вэ. Ancientsteppe ( talk) 08:10, 22 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Bi helshinjleliin üüdnees, bas odoogoor Wikipedia-d mongol helnüüdiig angilsan baigaa jurmiin door mongol hel ayalguunii tuhaih medee wikipedia-d chanar saitai baihiin tölöö zütgej baina. (Ene jurmiig öörchlöh bolomjtoi, harin ene talaar büdüüleg zan bish, harin nariin helshinjleliin medleg heregtei.) Cham shig utgatai, utgagüi gesen yalgaag arai tanij chadahgüi, bas shinjleh uhaanii orond uls tör esvel büür ar'stnii üzliig tavih hüseltei hün bol wikipediaas zailshiisen deer baihaa. Mongol erdemted bol gadaad ulsiin erdemtdiin orolcoh baidliig ihevchlen tiim nariin meddeggüi bolovch ug ni haricangui sain demjij baina. Tegej üzeh yum bol chinii sonirhliig chamaas arai sain hamgaalj chadah, medlegtei hün bol (Wikipedia-d bish, harin mongol helshinjleliin door) baigaa. Chi ööriinhöö oilgohgüi züiliin tuhai yarih shaardlagagüi dee. Ulamjlalt mongol zangiig erhemleh sanaatai yum bol mal mallaj üzehgüi yüü? G Purevdorj ( talk) 14:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Чи өөрөө жинхэнэ бүдүүлэг этгээд байна, юу юу гэнэ ээ?Би бас арьсны үзэлтэн болоо юу?Юм л бол барууны эрдэмтэд тэгэж байна гэх юм, монгол эрдэмтдийнхээ үзлийг барьсан нь дээр байх, би тэр дагуу л хамниган хэлийг өөрчилсөн.Монгол эрдэмтэд зарим зүйл дээр алдсан байж магад, тиймээс дандаа монголыг барина гэж туйлширах шаардлага алга.Монголоор зөв бичиж чадахгүй бол бусдынхаа санаа бодлыг харьцуулж бай.Юм хэллээ гээд бөөн юм болоод өмхөрөөд ялзраад битгий яваарай, монгол хүн юм бол.Битгий балай хэрүүл хийгээд бай, мөрөөрөө яв.Хэрүүл хийх гэж вики-д ороогүй. Ancientsteppe ( talk) 04:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Chi herüül hiih sanaagüi bol helnii tuhai yamar neg yumiig bichihees ömnö ene sedviin tuhai delhiid süüliin üyed yamar nom ögüülel garsan ve gej harahgüi yüü? Chinii wikipedia-d nemeh züil yeröösöö chinii huviin sanaa bish, harin dandaa erdemtdiin süüliin oilgolttoi niiceh sanal baival bid hoyor ch gesen margaldahaa bolij bolno. Harin chi (yeröösöö barimtgüigeer esvel huuchirsan barimtiig l hereglej) sayahnii mayagaar nairuulah yum bol busdad zövhön saad bolno gedeg ni oilgomjtoi biz. G Purevdorj ( talk) 06:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Чи гадаадад байсаар байгаад монголоор ойлгох ч үгүй, бичиж ч чадахгүй болж.Буриад, монголын хамниганчууд үндсэндээ монголжсон, өвөрмонголынх нь бүрмөсөн монголжоогүй байх, тэнд хийсэн миний засвар монгол номноос оруулсан, хол зөрөөгүй байх.Гэхдээ надад зарим сэдэв сонирхолтой биш учир бүх юман дээр маргаад яваад байх сонирхол алга.Гадны эрдэмтэд харь сэтгэхүйгээр монголд ханддаг, энд тэнд бичсэнийг чинь харахад чамд монгол гэсэн үзэл бүрэн суугаагүй байгаа нь харагдаж байна, монгол эрдэмтдийн номыг барьсан нь зөв байх шүү. Ancientsteppe ( talk) 08:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Mongol uls dah hamnigan ayalguu her zereg halhchilsan gej mash nariin, chinii barag shüümjilj chadahgüi mayagaar bichsen neg nom garsan. Yu Wonsoo gesen erdemten bichsen. Ömnö ni ANU-iin Andrew Shimunek gesen ANU-iin erdemten Mönh-Amgalan bagshiin tuslamjtaigaar hamniganii ügiin san her ih mongoljson gej üzüülsen neg sudalgaa hiisen. Mongol ulsiin hamnigan golduu halhiin ayalguunii shinjtei bolson, harin bas buryatiin zarim shinj temdeg ba övörmöc heden onclogoo hadgalsan baina. Eniig hel gej heleh zohisgüi ni zöv. Hölönbüiriin hamniganii övörmöc shinj üünees todorhoi gej Janhunen üzej baina. Haramsaltai ni ter ayalguug Janhunen-ees öör sudlaach sain sudlaagüi tul tüünii sanaag hüleen avahad hecüü, hüleen avahgüi baihad ch gesen hecüü. Ganc.han nariin zadlan shinjlel tüüniih tul harin ogt toohgüi baij bolohgüi. Üünees bolood „Khamnigan“-iig yamar ch bolgoomjgüigeer mongol helnii töv ayalguunii ded ayalguu gej üzej bolohgüi baih. Tend Buryat shinj barag mongol ulsiin hamnigan ayalguunaas hüchtei tul bas yag töv nutgiin ayalguunii ded ayalguu, buriat nutgiin ayalguunii ded ayalguu gevel ali ni ch zohihgüi. Tiimees „Khamnigan Mongol“ gej üldeevel amarhan. Chinii sanaag ilerhiilehiin tuld ene ögüüleliig „Khamnigan Mongolian“ gej nerleh heregtei. Tegvel „Mongolian language“ (töv ayalguu ba züün ayalguu)-nii ded ayalguu bolno. „Khamnigan subdialect“ gej bichvel ali helnii ali ayalguunii ded ayalguu gej yeröösöö garahgüi baina. Iimerhüü medee ögüüleliin neriin door baih yostoi.

Bi bol mongol helnüüdiin ayalguunii baidal medeej hüssen hemjeegeer medehgüi baina. Iimerhüü asuudliin talaar medlegtei hümüüs gehdee mash hovorhon. Mongol ayalguunii sudlaliig büh talaas ni medeh hümüüs gevel MUIS-iin Gantogtoh, ÖMIS-iin Sechenbaatar, Bayancogt, TÜYS-iin Manglai, Solongosiin Yu Wonsoo zereg cööhön hün l baigaa. Üünii door bas heden hümüüs ulam nariin mergeljiltei. Jisheelbel Tulguuri bol horchin ayalguunii sudlaliin hamgiin ner medlegtei sudlaach. Iimerhüü hünii bichsniig hereglej Wikipedia-d oruulj ayalguunii angilaliig ulam günzgiirüüleh bolomjtoi l doo. Harin uls töriin taliig ch gesen anhaarahgüi bol bolohgüi. Mongol ulsiin ayalguunii sudlaliin baidal yer ni mash hecüü bolson, irgen ulsiin ayalguunii sudlal 1979-ii zarligiin daguu l hiigdej baigaa. Bi ch gesen yamar ch heeriin turshlagagüi hün bish. Bi hoyor aman ayalguug baicaaj üzsen. Medeej hamniganii nutagt shuud yavaagüi tul ene talaar nomnoos l ish tataj bolno. Harin chi ch gesen wikipedia deer ööriinhöö medlegees bish, zövhön hevlegdsen sudalgaanii materialaas ish tatah erhtei. Hevlüüleegüi huvi hünii medleg bol wikipedia-d oroh yosgui l döö. G Purevdorj ( talk) 03:20, 24 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Answered on my talk page. Place to bring things to admin attention is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. — kwami ( talk) 17:02, 4 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mongolian language may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)

Literacy for Life. P.7-8</ref> Earlier government campaigns to eradicate illiteracy, employing the traditional script, had stone, which is most often dated at 1224 or 1225.<ref>E.g. Garudi 2002: 7. But see Rachewiltz 1976)</ref> The Mongolian-[[Armenian language|Armenian]] wordlist of 55 words compiled by [[Kirakos zero in SM, AM, Ph in some instances where UM indicates /p/, e.g. ''[[Deel (clothing)|debel]]'' > Khalkha ''deel''.<ref>Janhunen 2003c: 6</ref> the reconstruction of agreement in social gender in Middle Mongol.<ref>Tümenčečeg 1990.</ref>]] *{{cn icon}} Siqinchaoketu [=Sečenčoγtu]. 1999). ''Kangjiayu yanjiu''. Shanghai: Shanghai Yuandong Chubanshe.

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 00:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC) reply

I replied to your complaint on that notice board. Orgio89 ( talk) 02:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Purevdorj,

Contrary to what I used to believe, current Safari versions on OSX and (with some bugs) iOS can display Mongol bichig if

1. (IOS or OSX) appropriate Mongolian fonts are linked to in the website's source text, or
2. (OSX only) appropriate Mongolian fonts are installed on the local machine.

For an example of the first approach, see http://www.president.mn/mng/. The important part is line 30-35 in http://www.president.mn/mng/css/bootstrap.css. To make this work, one would need to decide on a font that can be stored somewhere on wp and then (hopefully) can be linked to inside an style-attribute somewhere in the existing Mongol Bichig template. This approach would work on all devices, regardless of the fonts the user may or have not installed.

The second approach would just specify a sequence of font families for traditional Mongolian. This will only display correctly if the user has installed at least one of the font families mentioned - i.e. if he is either particularly interested in Mongolian or in exotic fonts.

Any suggestions?

Regards,

Yaan ( talk) 08:25, 12 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Computer- und programmtechnisch bin ich weitgehend Laie, entsprechend leider keinerlei Anmerkungen. Schöne Grüße, G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:00, 12 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Purevdorj,

I thought I had Mongolian Braille worked out, but I've found a parallel text of traditional Mongolian and braille that is completely different from Cyrillic Mongolian. It looks like we might need two sections for the article, but my attempts to read the traditional script have been rather pathetic. If you have the time, could you transliterate this for me? (in proper Cyrillic orthography, not just letter-by-letter).

Thanks if you can, — kwami ( talk) 09:09, 24 November 2013 (UTC) reply

The reasons why-

Uyghur_people#Origin_of_modern_nationality

Talk:Karluk_languages

Simplified picture of the situation

Old Turkic > Old Uyghur (spoken in the Uyghur Khaganate) > Western Yugur language

Old Turkic > Karluk > Xakani Karluk (spoken in the Kara-Khanid Khanate > Chagatai language (spoken in the Chagatai Khanate) > Uzbek and Eastern Turki (a.k.a Modern Uyghur)

Now because some guys at Tashkent made a decision in 1921, we have errors over the following articles.

Bible translations into Uyghur

Uyghur alphabets

How can we clearly explain the situation to a reader- that the Old Uyghur language is the ancestor Western Yugur, and not modern Uyghur? The two languages shouldn't be even put together on the same article - Old Uyghur+Western Yugur never used the Arabic alphabet, Karluk+Modern Uyghur never used the Syriac derived alphabet, they have separate histories, and all this mumbo jumbo needs to get sorted out. Rajmaan ( talk) 06:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Added a few links in the info boxes of the langs, but it's not my area. How does the article Turki fit in? — kwami ( talk) 08:06, 8 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Modern Uyghur was specifically called "Eastern Turki". You know, there is an article on Assyrian continuity. Perhaps we need a Uyghur version of that article. Several sources admit that it is anachronistic to use the term "Uyghur" to refer to the ancestors of modern Uyghurs. [8] [9] [10] [11] Rajmaan ( talk) 08:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Well, Bible translation into Uyghur does somehow refer to both. One could possibly address the problem by dividing the article into two sections, "BT into OU" and "BT into NU", delete the "history" nonsense that implies a continuity and then state in the introduction that we are dealing with two different Turkic languages. Same applies to Alphabets. Alternatively, one might even split both articles into one article for NU and one for OU. In any case, all of these articles will have to contain a clear, referenced statement about the history and unrelatedlness of the Uyghur languages. Seems repetitive, but else the potential for misunderstanding is very high. G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:48, 8 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Okay, I changed Turkic, Tungusic, Koreanic, and Japonic to match. — kwami ( talk) 07:50, 12 February 2014 (UTC) reply

There would have been a slight point for Koreanic and Japonic (which could be non-Altaic even if Altaic was valid), but it would still not do much good. "(controversial)" is informative enough, though I wonder when we will arrive at the point when Altaic is as "controversial" as Nostratic (and thus doesn't need to be marked at all). G Purevdorj ( talk) 08:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC) reply

I believe the day is truly near, my friend. "Controversy" will lead to chaos which leads to utter confusion; blessed are we for this guide. 76.236.121.35 ( talk) 11:36, 31 May 2014 (UTC) reply

I know images & maps are supposed to have alt text for the blind, but the language infobox has never supported it. I considered adding support, but since our support rate would only be 0.05%, it hardly seemed worth the effort. What do you think? We've added a module to the template which flags all unsupported parameters, and I've been clearing them up. This was one. — kwami ( talk) 21:42, 24 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Okay, I added support. Can you tell if it's working? — kwami ( talk) 21:53, 24 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Very low on time, so I cannot find out how a blind reader would actually access WP. G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:08, 25 March 2014 (UTC) reply

No problem. I can ask at tech support. — kwami ( talk) 20:11, 25 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Are there any modern sources that comprehensively cover the Old Uyghur language so we can create a new article and write on all its grammar, syntax, etc. i have reliable sources that mention Old Uyghur as a seperate language (as in seperate from Karakhanid Xakani language, the ancestor of modern Uyghur) that we can create a small stub article but that would be it. I found several old sources in German at Talk:Western_Yugur_language. Rajmaan ( talk) 20:10, 25 March 2014 (UTC) reply

even though both Kara-khanid Karluk and Old Uyghur initially evolved from Old Turkic language, they became distinct enough and became different literary languages of seperate political entities (the Karakahnid Khanate and the Kingdom of Qocho), which would justify splitting them from the Old Turkic article. Dwyer split Old Turkic into "East Old Turkic, Old Uyghur, and Karakhanid". Rajmaan ( talk) 20:17, 25 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Are you willing to translate w:de:Fünfsprachenspiegel into English wikipedia? Rajmaan ( talk) 05:07, 4 August 2014 (UTC) reply

I started a short translation, but how is the word itself translated? G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Ist in dieser Vorlage alles korrekt transkribiert, mit all seinen Sonderzeichen?

{{Literatur | Autor=Bagaryn Shirėndėv, Magsarzhavyn Sanzhdorzh | Herausgeber=William A. Brown, Urgunge Onon | Titel=History of the Mongolian People's Republic | Reihe=Harvard East Asian monographs | Band=65 | Verlag=Harvard University Press | Ort=Cambridge | Jahr=1976 | Seiten=175 | ISBN=0-674-39862-9 | Originaltitel=Bu̇gd Naĭramdakh Mongol Ard Ulsyn tu̇u̇kh | Originaljahr=1969 | Originalort=Ulaanbaatar | Originalsprache=mn | Übersetzer=William A. Brown und Urgunge Onon }} -- Antemister ( talk) 14:17, 5 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Sorry to be so late. "Urgunge Onon" is probably already a conventionalized spelling, so that is ok. "Nairamdakh" with a regular "i", and then just "tüükh". Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:21, 18 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mongolian language may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)

Literacy for Life. P.7-8</ref> Earlier government campaigns to eradicate illiteracy, employing the traditional script, had stone, which is most often dated at 1224 or 1225.<ref>E.g. Garudi 2002: 7. But see Rachewiltz 1976)</ref> The Mongolian-[[Armenian language|Armenian]] wordlist of 55 words compiled by [[Kirakos zero in SM, AM, Ph in some instances where UM indicates /p/, e.g. ''[[Deel (clothing)|debel]]'' > Khalkha ''deel''.<ref>Janhunen 2003c: 6</ref> E.g. ''{{IPA|*imahan}}'' (''{{IPA|*i}}'' becomes {{IPA|/ja/}}, ''{{IPA|*h}}'' disappears) > ''{{IPA|*jamaːn}}'' (unstable ''n'' drops; vowel reduction) > /jama(n)/ 'goat' and ''{{IPA|*emys-}}'' (regressive rounding assimilation) > ''{{IPA|*ømys-}}'' (vowel velarization) > ''{{IPA|*omus-}}'' (vowel reduction) > /oms-/ 'to wear' the reconstruction of agreement in social gender in Middle Mongol.<ref>Tümenčečeg 1990.</ref>]] *{{cn icon}} Siqinchaoketu [=Sečenčoγtu]. 1999). ''Kangjiayu yanjiu''. Shanghai: Shanghai Yuandong Chubanshe. [Category:Languages of ]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 20:22, 17 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Ene mgl nertei hereglegch mongol talyn hamag batalgaag ni ustgachihlaa. Yamar uchirtai etgeed ve. [12]. Sczc ( talk) 16:42, 9 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Bi Yastanovogiig sain tanihgui l dee. Tegseer bi bas ene asuudald gol boloh arheologiin argazuig sain meddeggui. Yastanovgiin bodloor chinii ish tatsan eh sudlald argazuin asuudal baigaa gej bi oilgoj baina. G Purevdorj ( talk) 07:55, 11 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Сайн байна уу? As you saw [13], I have trouble with a guy who thinks content with reliable sources can be removed without clarifying why they should be. I appreciate if you share your opinion with us at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages#Mass deletion of language articles by Ryulong. -- Nanshu ( talk) 14:56, 9 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Stop canvassing, Nanshu.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 17:21, 9 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Auf der dt. Wp wird nicht ganz klar woher der dt. ("russische") Name herkomtmt. Zwei Begriffe werden genannt, und von beiden könnte man "Kalgan" herleiten. Bekmmst du auf die schnelle raus was da stimmen könnte?-- Antemister ( talk) 12:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Happy new year!

Which of the two spellings is more correct? Yaan ( talk) 19:28, 1 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Na ja, wenn du 300.000 vs. 300.000 googelst, weißt du, dass beide Varianten ziemlich „korrekt“ sind. In Wörterbüchern findet man auch mal die eine, mal die andere. Aber das heißt nicht, dass es keine bessere Lösung gibt. Und die kannst du mit deinen eigenen Mongolischkenntnissen fast schon selbst erkennen. Eine Orthographie суварга würde auf eine Aussprache sʊwɑ̆rɢ hindeuten, aber die Lautfolge rɢ am Silbenende entspricht der Silbenstruktur des Khalkha nicht besonders (vgl. auch Svantesson et al. 2005: 66). Dahingegen ist sʊwrɑ̆ɢ durchaus aussprechbar, weshalb also суврага vorzuziehen ist (womit ich mich der Meinung des authoritativsten Wörterbuchs, dem von Tsevel, anschließe). Die Schreibweise суварга ist meiner Ansicht nach eine Imitation der klassischen Schreibweise ᠰᠤᠪᠤᠷᠭ᠎ᠠ „suburg-a“, die damals natürlich auch noch die Aussprache wiedergab, da der Vokal [a] am Wortende ja noch vorhanden war. G Purevdorj ( talk) 10:04, 2 January 2015 (UTC) reply

[/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Uniquark9_repeatedly_deleting_content_and_refusing_to_engage_in_constructive_discussion_on_talk_page.2C_telling_another_user_to_edit_war|ийшээ] ороод монгол хэрэглэгчдийн байр суурийг хамгаалахад оролцооч. энд идэвхтэй 2,3 хан монголчууд байгаа. бүгд блоклогдчихвол хянах хүнгүй болно, орлох хүн орж иртэл удна, яагаад гэвэл англи хэлтэй, түүх мэддэг, интернетэд идэвхитэй юм хийдэг хүн маш цөөхөн. гадаадынхан монголчуудыг бүгдийг нь блоклуулах гэж оролдож байна.

Энэ хэлэцүүлэгт орно уу: Category talk:Mongol states. Category:Mongol rulers-г Mongolic ч гэдэг юм уу арай өөрөөр нэрлэх шаардлага байна уу? Хятадууд Сяньби, Киданыг Mongol гэсэн өгүүлбэр оруулахаар устгадаг. Mongolic rulers гэхээр арай тохиромжгүй санагдаад байна, өөр ямар нэр байвал дээр вэ? Mongol гэхээр 13-р зуунаас хойшхийг хамарна, Mongolic гэвэл Сяньби гэх мэт эрт үеийн бүх угсаатныг хамарна гэж зарим гадаад хэрэглэгчид маргаан үүсгээд байдаг. Khiruge ( talk) 06:08, 25 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Mongolian гэхээр бас маргаан үүссэн. Сяньби, ИМУ гээд бүгдийг нь нэг ангиллалд багтаавал зүгээр байна. Өөр ямар хувилбар байж болох вэ? Khiruge ( talk) 11:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC) reply

"Proto-Mongol" geed bolj magadgui, "Mongolian" geheer yostoi bolohgui gedegt bi sanal negtei. Proto-Mongolic language door nemegdsen olon ulsuud ni nadad arai heterhii shig sanagdaj baina, yaagaad gevel helshinjleliin üüdnees neg aimgiin heliig neg baga ch todorhoilj chadahgui yum bol Proto-Mongolic language(s) gej arai helj bolohgui yum baina. Eniig zovhon negent batalsan helnii talaar hereglej bolno. G Purevdorj ( talk) 13:45, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Уул нь монголчууд хүннү, сяньби, хэрэйд, язгуурын монгол гээд бүгдийг нь зүгээр л монголчууд гэдэг. Монгол хэлэнд монгол гэсэн нэг л утгатай нэг л үг бий. Хүннү, сяньби, жужань, киданыг эртний буюу өвөг монголчууд түүнээс хойшхийг нь дундад зууны үеийн монголчууд гэж манай түүхчид ангилдаг. Гадны судалгааны материалд сяньби, киданыг яг монгол гэлгүй монгол хэлтэй ард түмэн гэж нэрлэх тохиолдол бий. Mongol улсууд гэсэн ангилалд Сяньби, Киданы улсуудыг оруулчихад буруудах зүйлгүй, ингэж ангилахаар зарим нэг дайсагнасан үзэлтэй гадны хүн, ялангуяа хятадууд засаж өөрчлөөд байдаг. Киданы хуудсан дээр Монголчууд төслийн темплейт байсаныг нэг барууны хэрэглэгч Mongols төсөлд киданчууд хамаарагдахгүй гээд устгасан байсан. Энэ уул нь тийм сүйдтэй хэрэг биш, бүгдийг нь Mongols гэчихээр Монголын талд ашигтай болчих гээд байгаа тул байж суух газраа олохгүй байх шиг байна. Чи Монгол улсуудын жагсаалт дээр болсон хэлэлцүүлгийг уншсан байх. Mongolic state гэсэн ангилал үүсгээд хэрэглэж болох нь уу гэдгийг дахиж энд тэндээс лавлаж хараарай. Нэг ангилалд бүгдийг нь багтаавал сайн байна. Прото-монгол, монгол гэж 2 ангилал үүсгэж болно. Монгол улсуудын жагсаалтыг Прото-монгол, монгол гэсэн 2 тусдаа хуудаст хуваавал дэмий байх. Монгол улсуудын жагсаалтын хятад хувилбарт хүннүгээс авахуулаад бүх монгол улс байсаныг 12, 1 сарын хавьцаа хасаад зөвхөн 12-р зуунаас эхлэхээр болгосон байсан. Хятад хуудасны хуучин хувилбарт манж улс зэрэг Монголд байсан гадны улсыг биш яг монгол гаралтай гэсэн улсуудыг оруулсан байсан ч хүннү, сяньбиг монгол гэх нь хятадад ашиггүй байсан бололтой. Өвөг монгол хэл хуудсан дахь миний засварыг үлдээх хэрэгтэй учир нь би Proto-Mongols гэсэн хуудсыг тийш нь чиглүүлсэн, Proto-Mongols гэж хэн юм бэ гэхээр тэр хуудсан дахь мэдээллийг харах ёстой юм. Хүннүгээс бусад нь маргаангүй, хүннүгийн ард тайлбар бичиж болно, тийм эрдэмтэд тэднийг монгол хэлтэй байсан гэж үздэг гэх мэт. Хүннүгийн хэлний талаар надад орос хэл дээр судалгааны материал бий. Би тэрийг монгол дээр товчилж орчуулна, чи англи руу орчуулж энд тавихад нь тусалвал сайн байна.Туслахгүй бол хийж байгаа зүйлийг минь өөрчлөхгүй байхыг хүсье. Археологийн талаас нь маш их зүйлийг манай археологчид хэлж чадна. Khiruge ( talk) 17:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Sain uu Khiruge!

Chinii sanaag oilgoj bain. Mongol ulsiin erdemted, bas zarim gadaad hümüüs üneheer ingej boddog. Harin bas tüühch boloh minii zarim naiz ni ene bügdiig mongol heltei ulsuud baisan gej üzeh ni arai heterhii ündeslel muutai, hümüüs sain barimtalj chadaagüi gej üzej baina. Mongol ulsiin olon tüühch nar ündestnii üzeltei holbootoi asuudluudad iim aihtar nariin bish ajilladag gej bi ööriin turshiltaas sain medej avsan. Tiimees odoo yag yamar ulsiig ug ni mongol gej üzej boloh ve gesen asuudliig güicet hariulaagüi üyed “mongol” esvel “proto-mongol” geh met ügiig hereglehees tatgalzahaar baina. Minii mergejil boloh helshinjleliin üüdnees hitan ba tabgach hoyoriig (proto-)mongol uls baisan gej ergelzeegüi esvel tun ergelzee bagatai. Hitanii talaar chamaig lav demjij bain, heregtei bol barimtiin ündsen deer üzüülne. Busad ni bügd ergelzeegüi gej bi ööriinhöö mergejliin üüdnees tatgalzaj baina. Tabgachaas bish tedniig bagtaasan Xianbei ertnii mongolchuud baisan gesen sanal ündeslel batalgaa saitai gesen üzliig demjihgüi bain. Tegeed arheologiin üüdnees yaaj ertnii mongolchuudiig ertnii türkchüüdees tanij boloh ve?

Hünnügiin talaarh materialiig chi nadad tanilcuulbal bolno, harin iimerhüü sudalgaag sain hiideg Alexander Vovin, Juha Janhunen geh met iimerhüü törliin materialuudiig yer ni sain meddeg erdemted eniig durdaagüi tul ündeslel saitai bish baih gej uridchilan bodoj baina. Medeej neg üzej bolno, bi neg üzeheer belen bain.

Odoogiin baidlaar nadad WP deer yum hiih zav arai heterhii baga bainaa. Tüühchiin asuudald bi yer ni orolcdoggüi, hehe. Tabgach, Hitanii talaar chamd demjleg heregtei baival demjij bolno. Ene talaar caashaa zörchil garval nadad heleerei! Busdiin talaar chi ööröö med dee, bi tun sain barimt üzsnees naash demjihgüi, mongol heltei holbootoi huudasnuudad garahgüi bol bi bas barag esergüücehgüi gej bodoj baina.

G Purevdorj ( talk) 15:42, 5 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. The 18th edition of Ethnologue just came out, and if we divide up our language articles among us, it won't take long to update them. I would appreciate it if you could help out, even if it's just a few articles (5,000 articles is a lot for just me), but I won't be insulted if you delete this request.

A largely complete list of articles to be updated is at Category:Language articles citing Ethnologue 17. The priority articles are in Category:Language articles with old Ethnologue 17 speaker data. These are the 10% that have population figures at least 25 years old.

Probably 90% of the time, Ethnologue has not changed their figures between the 17th and 18th editions, so all we need to do is change "e17" to "e18" in the reference (ref) field of the language info box. That will change the citation for the artcle to the current edition. Please put the data in the proper fields, or the info box will flag it as needing editorial review. The other relevant fields are "speakers" (the number of native speakers in all countries), "date" (the date of the reference or census that Ethnologue uses, not the date of Ethnologue!), and sometimes "speakers2". Our convention has been to enter e.g. "1990 census" when a census is used, as other data can be much older than the publication date. Sometimes a citation elsewhere in the article depends on the e17 entry, in which case you will need to change "name=e17" to "name=e18" in the reference tag (assuming the 18th edition still supports the cited claim).

Remember, we want the *total* number of native speakers, which is often not the first figure given by Ethnologue. Sometimes the data is too incompatible to add together (e.g. a figure from the 1950s for one country, and a figure from 2006 for another), in which case it should be presented that way. That's one use for the "speakers2" field. If you're not sure, just ask, or skip that article.

Data should not be displayed with more than two, or at most three, significant figures. Sometimes it should be rounded off to just one significant figure, e.g. when some of the component data used by Ethnologue has been approximated with one figure (200,000, 3 million, etc.) and the other data has greater precision. For example, a figure of 200,000 for one country and 4,230 for another is really just 200,000 in total, as the 4,230 is within the margin of rounding off in the 200,000. If you want to retain the spurious precision of the number in Ethnologue, you might want to use the {{ sigfig}} template. (First parameter in this template is for the data, second is for the number of figures to round it off to.)

Dates will often need to be a range of all the country data in the Ethnologue article. When entering the date range, I often ignore dates from countries that have only a few percent of the population, as often 10% or so of the population isn't even separately listed by Ethnologue and so is undated anyway.

If Ethnologue does not provide a date for the bulk of the population, just enter "no date" in the date field. But if the population figure is undated, and hasn't changed between the 17th & 18th editions of Ethnologue, please leave the ref field set to "e17", and maybe add a comment to keep it so that other editors don't change it. In cases like this, the edition of Ethnologue that the data first appeared in may be our only indication of how old it is. We still cite the 14th edition in a couple dozen articles, so our readers can see that the data is getting old.

The articles in the categories linked above are over 90% of the job. There are probably also articles that do not currently cite Ethnologue, but which we might want to update with the 18th edition. I'll need to generate another category to capture those, probably after most of the Ethnologue 17 citations are taken care of.

Jump in at the WP:LANG talk page if you have any comments or concerns. Thanks for any help you can give!

— kwami ( talk) 02:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi, Could you say something on this edit war? user Rajmaan is claiming Oirats are not Mongols and the "Mongol" identity was defined by the Qing. No one supported him, but he keeps posting his claims. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Oirats#Edit_warring Thanks. 142.255.6.214 ( talk) 07:28, 17 March 2015 (UTC) reply

In Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mongols/Members and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mongols/Archive_2#There_is_a_problem you have revealed the discord and problem that currently still having. Shall we try to actually solve the problems instead of allowing them continue to last? Thanks! -- Evecurid ( talk) 18:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mongols. Hope we can see a circle of people working together as you said pretty soon. BTW, this will be my only account from now on to edit Wikipedia articles. -- Cartakes ( talk) 22:45, 17 April 2015 (UTC) reply

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you so much for many pages you created and correct edits you made on Mongolian language related topics. UBContributor UBcontributor ( talk) 05:20, 25 April 2015 (UTC) reply

I thank the contributions made on Mongolian language related topics by both of you and other people too. Hope we all can work together well. -- Cartakes ( talk) 22:47, 25 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you! Well, yes, I hope I can find the time to come back to this and improve them at one point. During the last years, I am more busy working on the scientific basis of those articles ... G Purevdorj ( talk) 02:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC) reply

There is a discussion going on at Talk:Mongolic languages (under the section "Janhunen") where your expertise in the field would be most appreciated if you have the time or inclination. Thanks. -- Taivo ( talk) 01:33, 15 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi G Purevdorj! As you are the leader of the previous Mongolia workgroup of Central Asia, I think you must be interested in this. As mentioned in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mongols, I have found that there currently in fact lacks a wiki project dedicated to Mongolia during my edits to or creation of other articles. The previous Mongolia workgroup of Central Asia no longer exists due to the rename caused by existing discord at that time, but we can't always stay with this. Why not have a separate wiki project dedicated to Mongolia? In my opinion, WikiProject Mongolia or WikiProject Asia / Mongolia will probably be the best, as opposed to WP Mongols, which I have found should probably fall under the Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups. WP Mongols will also cover historical Mongol-related topics such as various Mongol khanates, but not necessarily on some topics such as the Mandarin Chinese, even though it is one of the official languages of Inner Mongolia. On the other hand, WikiProject Mongolia may fall under both WP Asia and WP Mongols, as Mongolia is a Mongol-majority country. Thanks for your consideration! -- Cartakes ( talk) 11:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Any thoughts on this? Thanks! As the former workgroup vanished some time ago, really hope to see a separate WikiProject or so for Mongolia soon. -- Cartakes ( talk) 20:07, 22 August 2015 (UTC) reply

I have to admit I was one of those who tried to force a "rename" of the Mongolia Workgroup at that time, which was not agreed by its former members. But I think after all these events the discords before it or it resulted should be over by now. Should we restart the discussion any time soon? Thanks for your advice! -- Cartakes ( talk) 00:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Note however I was having mental illness at that time, and always thought some people who were around at the discussion were helping me when in reality they didn't. Even worse, it seemed that something the opposite had been done. The illness became more severe with the occurrence of these events (both at that time and those occurred afterwards) and I was sent to hospital. It has taken me a long time to make recovery until now. Hope you can understand what actually happened. Thanks! -- Cartakes ( talk) 20:20, 4 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Haven't been around for a while, and my overall time situation leaves me rather little room for Wikipedia. Not sure about naming, geographic entities such as Mongolia might work, but the point is how the scope of the project is defined. No need to go ahead with founding any project if you don't at least have 5-6 active editors. G Purevdorj ( talk) 08:55, 28 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

хэрэйд хуудасны ихэнхийг нэг түрэг вандализм хийгээд устгасаныг админ тэр чигт нь үлдээчихлээ. вандализмыг нь буцаах хэрэгтэй байна. хүмүүсийн нэрийг нь түрэг гэж зарим нь тайлбарладаг ч овгуудынх нь нэр нь судрын чуулганд тэмдэглэгдсэн, дандаа "д/т" гэсэн монгол хэлний олон тооны төгсгөлтэй, монгол үг байж болохоор байдаг. хэрэйд найман монголд байсан, нэр нь монгол, монгол гаралтай гэсэн онолыг бүгд биш гэхэд зарим эрдэмтэд дэмждэг тул тэднийг монгол гэж үзэх нь ор үндэсгүй зүйл биш. Түрэгийн буман хааны өөр нэр нь Түмэн, 2-улаа монгол үг, гэтэл түрэг хэрэглэгч монгол талын онолыг устгасан байна. рашид-ад-дин тэднийг монгол гэж тэмдэглэсэн, зарим хүн 13-р зуунд монгол гэдэг нь угсаатны нэр биш улс төр-нийгмийн нэгдлийн шинжтэй нэр томъёо байсан гээд байдаг, энэ бол үндэсгүй хэрэг. түрэгүүд найман, хэрэйд гэх мэт /12-р зууны аймгуудын бараг ихэнх, жалайр, буриад, ойрд, хиад боржигин, татар, түмэд гэх мэт, Чингис хаан хүртэл/ 12-р зууны олон аймгууд түрэг байсан, монголчууд түрэгийн нутгийг булааж авсан, газар нутгаа буцааж авъя гэсэн суртал ухуулга идэвхитэй хийдэг, монгол дахь казахууд бүгд керей /хэрэйд нэрний өөр хувилбар эсвэл хэрэдтэй огт холбоогүй гэсэн 2 өөр үзэл бий/, найман овгийнх. вандализм хийгээд хүн урьд нь блоклокдсон, өөр айдигаар орж ирсэн байна. хэрэйдийн зарим хүний нэр түрэг байж болох ч зарим нь илэрхий монгол нэр. түрэгийн буман хаан монгол нэртэй ч түрэг улсыг түрэг угсааны /монгол бус/ гэж үздэгтэй харьцуулж болно. гумилёв гэх мэт эрдмтэд түрэг улсыг байгуулсан ноёлогч ашина овог монгол гаралтай гэж үзсэн. Мөн энэ хуудас анх дахин чиглүүлэгч хуудас байсан байтал Qaraei, хэрэйдээс баахан юм хуулж янз бүрийн зүйл зохиож бичээд ямар ч шаардлагагүй давхардсан хуудас болгосон, хэрэйд киргиз гаралтай гэсэн үндэсгүй, батлагдаагүй зүйл тэнд оруулсан.

Hnn, minii meddeg helshinjleliin nom oguuleliig ter huudast omno ni, odoo ch gesen ish tataagui. Oor talaas ch gesen ter huudasiig sain, undesleltei bolgoh ni hecuu, medleg ish shaarddag ajil. Chamd ene medleg baival hiij bolno shd. Nadad bol odoohondoo baihgui, eh oguulel haih sanaa harin baihgui. G Purevdorj ( talk) 05:08, 12 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm a learner of Mongolia from Serbia, mostly active on Wiktionary, adding Mongolian (Khalkha) words. A verification of this word was requested, but I have no access to printed media in Mongolian, could you find a few citations using this word for me? (I think that lyrics of published songs might be valid as well) Crom daba ( talk) 18:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Sorry about the late answer. On http://www.bataar.mn/10024403 has a discussion about the word itself. http://www.ub.life/p/6507 contains a discussion of selfies with supposedly interesting features that the poster should have checked in advance. http://unuudur.mn/article/75658 has the word in an entry in a major newspaper, also with explanation: Өөрөг авахыг зааж өгнө 'Teaching you how to take selfies'. What is notable is that this word tends to come with explanations, be they explicitly metalinguistic (өөрөг = селфи) or via a өөрөг зураг (i.e. selfie picture). The word has definitely less currency than селфи, but it is gaining some ground. It doesn't seem to be attested in 2010 or earlier, but as of now, I would be willing to put it into a dictionary, possibly with qualifications such as 'urban slang' etc. Morphologically, contraction from Өөрийн хөрөг as suggested on http://www.bataar.mn/10024403 is conceivable, as is an irregular analogy to зураг. G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:26, 30 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Hey, thank you Purevdorj! Unfortunately our attestation policies demand durably archived material, excluding websites. Printed media would be ideal, I don't know what magazines are like in Mongolia, but Daily Mail and Serbian tabloids sure mention selfies a lot.

Although if you feel that this word qualifies as a protologism, we shouldn't include it anyway. Crom daba ( talk) 17:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC) reply

I am not in Mongolia, so I will have to take recourse to online sources. But http://unuudur.mn/article/75658 is the website of a newspaper, and the article found there (M. Sugaraa: Öörög avahiig zaaj ögnö) should be in the printed edition of said newspaper from 2015-07-07. There’s also an article in the Ünen of 2016-11-25 on a selfie that cost the life of 76 Indian persons (Өөрөг буюу SELFIE зураг 76 энэтхэг хүний аминд хүрэв, http://www.unen.mn/content/68888.shtml). The term is current enough not to be explained at its every occurrence, e.g. http://time.mn/content/201501-63299, 2015-5-17, sorry, it’s a web source, albeit one by a news service). The term had already gained some currency by 2015, so it is not a neologism waiting to be accepted or rejected, but it is a new word that appears to have gained currency at least in a considerable number of social circles, if not mainstream society. It is not particularly uncommon in Mongolian language change to first introduce a foreign word (English or English/Russian сельфи in our case) and then to replace it with a newly coined Mongolian term. Since the word is young (first relevant Google hit for 2014, and definitely absent in 2011), expecting that as many as 50% of speakers know or use it would be putting requirements too high. I would be totally fine with entering it into a dictionary. G Purevdorj ( talk) 07:55, 4 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your help. Crom daba ( talk) 23:04, 4 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Happy new year! I have added a rather obvious (IMHO) solution to an old question at the Mogholi language talk page. Yaan ( talk) 11:56, 8 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks, that contribution is definitely helpful! G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Just curious: why did you remove it? To me it looks a lot like a straightforward loanword from Chinese, and i think it is also pretty much in everyday use. Yaan ( talk) 21:27, 7 August 2017 (UTC) reply

There's an alternative term, tarvas, that might or might not be more widespread (within the Mongolian state, that is). At any rate, shiigua has not the superiority over tarvas that Orange has over Apfelsine. Since I felt that some more details about this word would be necessary for a complete picture to emerge, and since the format of the lexicon article doesn't leave room for that, I felt that removing this example would render the article less problematic for expository purposes. I agree that the word is widely used, and my reasons for removing it are by no means imperative (zwingend). G Purevdorj ( talk) 11:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC) reply

Can you help us with your expertise in Mongolic languages at the talk page of Gurbantünggüt Desert? -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 18:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Nein, keine Ahnung, leider. Ich habe kurz darueber nachgedacht und auch ein paar Woerterbuecher gewaelzt, aber ich habe nichts sehr Einleuchtendes gefunden. tünggü könnte sich auf eine Grassorte beziehen, auch auf eine Schlinge (Ramstedt 1935: 415). Ohne Kontext nicht sehr passend. Stammesnamen sind auch ganz beliebt bei Worten, die in -d enden, aber drei tungusische Volksgruppen grade in dieser Gegend? Ich habe wenig spezialisierte Literatur zu Ortsnamen zuhause, und erst recht nicht fuer die Dzungarei. Natuerlich bin ich auch so noch nicht ganz mit meinen Resourcen am Ende, aber mehr als die bisher investierte halbe Stunde will ich da nicht reinstecken. G Purevdorj ( talk) 22:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. -- Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive: On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages. -- Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC). reply

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. ( t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Mongolian language has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 01:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply