Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word User talk:Octahedron80. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word User talk:Octahedron80, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say User talk:Octahedron80 in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word User talk:Octahedron80 you have here. The definition of the word User talk:Octahedron80 will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofUser talk:Octahedron80, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Latest comment: 1 year ago15 comments3 people in discussion
In your description of MON NGA, you said that certain Mons prefer to use the MON NGA. Didn't you mean that they preferred to use the Burmese NGA?
Do you expect Mon Pali to be encoded with Burmese NGA or with MON NGA? Our resident Mon seems to have been using MON NGA for kinzi in Pali, which I suppose we should expect from him. At present I'm addressing the issue by manually including the form with MON NGA where appropriate. RichardW57 (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
It is a little misunderstanding. As I learned from many references, င and ၚ are both used at the same time in Mon language. င is actually most used on -င် because it does not need to have a "tail" to disambiguate. So, -ၚ် is not quite incorrect but it is not prefered. (I ever asked Mon Wikipedia to use ၚ instead of င, but they only wish to replace -ၚ် with -င်.) ၚ is used as initial or medial (subjoined) that never spells with င. However, SEALang uses ၚ every position because they might not know this detail. What we need to do is to make -င် main entries instead of -ၚ်. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
I'm going to have to rephrase that paragraph, because I can't see which nga you're talking about. After examining the backing store, I read that paragraph as:
"It is a little misunderstanding. As I learned from many references, င and ၚ are both used at the same time in Mon language. င is actually most used on -င် <NGA, ASAT> because it does not need to have a "tail" to disambiguate. So, -ၚ် <MON NGA, ASAT> is not quite incorrect but it is not prefered. (I ever asked Mon Wikipedia to use ၚ instead of င, but they only wish to replace -ၚ် <MON NGA, ASAT> with -င် <NGA, ASAT>.) ၚ is used as initial or medial (subjoined) that never spells with င. However, SEALang uses ၚ every position because they might not know this detail. What we need to do is to make -င် <NGA, ASAT> main entries instead of -ၚ် <MON NGA, ASAT>." --RichardW57 (talk) 11:01, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
You should have a right font to see these shapes differently. Windows 10 that has default Myanmar Text so -ၚ် <MON NGA, ASAT> is well seen. For other system, it may need to use Noto Sans Myanmar. If you use Padauk, it hides the tail. --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:31, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
I remember discussions of how to encode the Mon nga. One suggestion, which I favoured, was to encode the tail, so stand-alone Mon nga would have been encoded as something <NGA, *TAIL OF NGA>. It seems that that would have been the right decision. None of the other solutions envisaged using a mixture of the already encoded character NGA and the new character in Mon. As to <MON NGA, ASAT>, do you have pre-Unicode examples of nga with asat and tails? The examples of Mon from Thailand in show the lack of a tail below asat. Incidentally, there's a bit of Thai Mon Pali on p9. <SA, VIRAMA, SA> for <GREAT SA> looks like needing a new flag for inflection - both non feminine genitive/dative singulars and second person singular imperative middles. (The future tense is always treated as unpredictable.) It looks to me that the tail below in <MON NGA, ASAT> is at most optional; I'm not sure it isn't just wrong. Maybe I'll knock up a version of Padauk (would Paduak be a legal name ?:-) with glyphs derived from MON NGA in red. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:52, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
To document every word, it seems to me that I need inflection tables for both words in <NGA, ASAT> and words in <MON NGA, ASAT> when there is a possible Mon Pali context for the word. Or can we induce the search engine to treat NGA as a match for MON NGA. It doesn't at present. At least, I can't get Wiktionary searches for သၚ်္ဃ with MON NGA to find the alternatve form သင်္ဃ with U+1004 NGA. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:52, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Anyways, Mon Pali uses င as 咽頭べさ (Intubesa) states it. I never see real Mon Pali text but it should be similar to Burmese Pali, just different at ၛ and some vowels.
Both common nga and Mon nga can make kinzi form. Ask him if he knows about this technical problem. Or you may ask some Unicode members which proper way to do. --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:39, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Martin wrote there, "Thus a Mon kinzi is encoded using U+105A U+103A U+1039". Perhaps because he's in the pay of missionaries, he tends to concentrate on the vernacular and seems to forget Pali. It's a shame we have no answer on the matter from @咽頭べさ. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:52, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Another issue, do not call င as "Burmese" nga because it is rude for them. (Mon lost their kingdom because of Burmese.) I call it common nga instead. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Area covering Old Mon Country known in history as Hongsgwaddy or Rehmanaya, conquered by the Burmese in 1757.
Mon State created by Ne Win Government in 1974, comprising Moulmein and Thatan districts.
We Mon people are not Burma Country but Mon Country. The Burmans do not have their own alphabet to this day, the alphabet used by the Burmans is the alphabet that the Burmans attacked and looted from the Mon people. We the Mon people call the Burmans human animals, because this is because the Burmans call the Mon people, တလိုင်းTa Laing and destroy Mon literature and Mon history. The name Ta Laing is not a Mon name but a conspiracy by the Burmese king Aung Zeya. The name Ta Laing has nothing to do with the Mon people and is a hate word coined by Burmese kings. The Mon people are called Thai Raman by most Thais. Those who have never been to Burma also know the Mon people as Raman or Mon Khmer. Ta Laing is the name of a Shan tribe and has nothing to do with the Mon people, most Burmans fabricate hate speech to persecute ethnic minorities if you want to read authentic Mon history, please read this link, I will continue to write about this history as much as, I can every day thanks.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 13:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
@RichardW57 By the way, I compared with some languages. For example, Persian always uses KEHEH (ک) and FARSI YEH (ی) for every appearance of them, insteadof COMMON KAF (ك) and COMMON YEH (ي). Malay (and its siblings) always uses KEHEH (ک) and KEHEH WITH DOT ABOVE (ݢ). Those characters will specially change their forms for their languages. Thus, MON NGA (ၚ) should be always used to write Mon in every position by intention, neither it has tail or not (it's font's issue), instead of COMMON NGA (င). --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:52, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
@Octahedron80,กูอยากจะขอเบอร์โทรมึงสักหน่อยอยากจะคุยกับมึงดีๆถ้ามึงพูดภาษามอญไม่ได้กูด่ามึงหน้าเลยยังไงมึงก็ไม่ใช่คนมอญมึงจะมาเถียงกูได้ยังไงล่ะทำไมมึงทำร้ายภาษามอญ ๒ ครั้งแล้วนะมึงทำไมไม่ได้มาสอบถามกูสักหน่อยมึงจะมั่วอย่างเดียวมึงบ้าไปหรือเปล่ามึงหยุดทำให้กูโกรธได้ไหมได้ไหมผมคุยดีๆนะมึงจะรู้ตัวเองหรือเปล่าคำสะกดภาษามอญไทยแล้วคำสะกดภาษามอญพม่าไม่เหมือนการผสมได้ยังไงวะมึงก็มั่วอย่างเดียวไม่ได้มาสอบถามคนมอญ--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 07:40, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
I already sent you a message at thwikt. Wiktionary relies on references because the natives could make mistake sometimes. And please do not talk in rage. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:45, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This IP altered the etymology of วัง(wang). They seem to have a bit of a history doing this - would blocking them be a good idea? — surjection ⟨??⟩ 11:32, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
(เขา)ว่ากันว่า... is clearly SOP: เขา(they) / ว่า(say) / กัน(altogether) / ว่า(that). You may notice that Thai pronoun as the subject is often omitted in speaking. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion
Hi User:Octahedron80: I was wondering if you could help me look into Module:shn-pron and whether there's an issue recognising the (ွႃ) vowel rhyme: it is generating a "Lua error in Module:shn-pron at line 92: Data for vowel (ွႃ) is missing." message. Thank you! -Hintha (talk) 17:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Hintha, ၵျွႃး is completely misspelled, ၵျွႃး is written according to the pronunciation of the Burmese language, ၵျွႃး is not in Shan literature at all, I speak Shan language, I understand Shan literature at the first level, check out the ၵျွႃး Facebook discussion at this link, if you want to know about ၵျွႃး , you can ask User Saimawnkham who is proficient in Shan literature, thanks.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 15:26, 23 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Did you check the reference already? It might be the special case of spelling as it directly borrowed from Burmese. (Every language has exceptions, I think.) --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:44, 23 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
I've added a non-durable semi-quotation to protect against grammar Nazis. The spelling looks very like a fact. I've also replaced the invocation of the undocumented template {{shn-verb}} by {{head}} as the template/module lacks a transliteration override. The transliteration should be reviewed. --RichardW57 (talk) 23:46, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
It will appear in Roman script in the transliteration of inscriptions. If that is the system that @Namdamon has in mind, it merits consideration, though any words should also appear in either the native (script code Lana) or the imperial (script code Thai) script as their main lemma. It would help to have some documentation for the scheme, because it uses ill-documented, perhaps even idiosyncratic, extensions of IAST. I am willing to try to help out. --RichardW57 (talk) 13:42, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Unicode names 017
Latest comment: 2 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion
Hi. We have images for block 017, but not the names. Do you think you could create Module:Unicode data/names/017? Or is that not needed because the names are generic?
@咽頭べさ ไม่สะกดผิดครับคุณ ผมก็เพิ่งเช็กมา หนังสืออ้างอิงก็ลงไว้แล้ว คุณอยากดูรูปไหมล่ะ (คนเขียนพจนานุกรมคือแก่-ตายหมดแล้ว คุณคิดว่าพวกเขาไม่เชี่ยวชาญหรือ?) คุณก็รู้ว่า มอญไทยกับมอญพม่าต่างกัน และบางคำอาจใช้ต่างกัน ดูอย่างภาษาจีนก็ได้ ภาษาจีนมีหลายถิ่น บางทีใช้คำสลับกันหน้าหลัง AB หรือ BA ก็มี เราก็ต้องบันทึกไว้หมด ผมไม่ได้บอกว่า တၞးထဝ် ของคุณผิด แต่ในขณะเดียวกัน ထဝ်တၞး ของผมก็ไม่ผิดเช่นกัน เพราะพวกเขาใช้กันมาแบบนี้ คุณจะเอามอญแบบที่คุณรู้เท่านั้นไม่ได้ครับ ขอให้ใจกว้างด้วย // Both are correct in different regions. It is common phenomenon in linguistics. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:33, 15 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi. I see you've been adding {-}{emojibox} to the top of a lot of articles. The {-} forces a page of blank space before the text begins, and so needs to be deleted. But the box doesn't align properly otherwise. I've tried fixing it, but no luck. Could you please format the box so that it aligns properly? Meanwhile, I've been moving it to the end of the articles so it doesn't displace the text. Thanks. kwami (talk) 08:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
The template is actually experimental. It should not be merged into character box since some emojis consist of multiple characters. You may want to delete instead. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
OOF
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I don't remember which term you mentioned because I have reverted myself a lot. I usually open a few pages/wikis at the same time so I might save at wrong one. --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:28, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
สงสัยอีกคำ
Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Do you know which city this Twitter user and the person featured in the video are from? We should not be making assumptions that words exist across the country. I also only see/hear 麥生, not 麥生糖. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }18:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
Teochew (or Chinese) people spread throughout Thailand. Can we pinpoint which one is? Who adds these towns at first? It should be only one per dialect (just Thailand-MN-T) because they are not different between cities. Thailand 's Chinese communities don't live so far away like China. (The whole Thailand is large as just one Chinese province.) If you want exact point, I could say Bangkok because it's the biggest community. Or it must be listed recklessly tens of them. 麥生糖 is in Twitter's thread already said to be grammarful, that Thai word is partly borrowed. 麥生 also mean malt, but Thai didn't call the malt แบะแซ. (We call มอลต์ either.) So two Teochew words 麥生 and 麥生糖 happen. Octahedron80 (talk) 23:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
The data mainly comes from what is recorded in 泰国华人社区的汉语方言, which has data from three subdialects of Thailand Teochew. It unfortunately doesn't have an entry for 麥芽糖 so I can't confirm from there. I don't think we should just blindly put data in all Thailand dialect points because we assume that there are no differences between cities. Even within one Chinese province, there's plenty of differences. Are there people in Bangkok (or another city/town) that you can confirm these two words with? — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }14:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for being particular. I've left Bangkok in there. In the future, I guess it would be fine if you would put data under 'Thailand-MN-T' unless we have more data (like from 泰国华人社区的汉语方言). — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }15:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
รัก
Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Urak Lawoi' language is officially announced to be written in Thai script. The issue is that the difficulty of transliteration/pronunciation will be the same level as Thai language; it might have some tokenizing problem. And thanks god they have no tone. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:02, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Oh interesting, I know the language uses the Thai script, but wasn't aware that it's going to be official. I wonder, do you know if there is guideline for transliteration? It'll be good for my knowledge. For the tokenisation, I have worked on a solution similar to Module:lo-translit. As far as I know, it doesn't use the entire Thai alphabet. — oi yeah nah mateamazingJUSSO ... ! 12:45, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Hi, I just found that this appendix does not have the complete character list yet, so I tried the same wikitext used in other page, but it would not work. Do you know how to fix that? --TongcyDai (talk) TongcyDai (talk) 19:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi,
Thank you for your effort on Lao. Have you seen a Lao dictionary, which uses a transliteration system, which is very similar to Paiboon? It has similar symbols and what's more important, it has tone marks.
If you're interested, I can get the title and make some screenshots. It's in our city library. It's expensive to buy, though, although it's rather small, it's the same format as the one used by Template:R:th:BPBecker. (Similar dictionaries exist for Burmese and, if I'm not mistaken for Khmer).
Latest comment: 7 months ago7 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I see that you transcribe ꪻ in narrow transcription as , but from what I know Tai Dam does not have /ɰ/ in its phonology, or does it have /aɰ/. It does have have /əw/ though, and that’s what ꪻ represents in Tai Dam according to what I have read. But perhaps my sources are wrong? Can you clarify why you use /aɰ/ instead of /əw/ for ꪻ? Thank you. Monarchatto (talk) 04:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
P.S. Proto-Tai /*aɰ/ is the common vowel in Tai languages.
I see. But when I translate it (I don’t speak Thai), it seems like Alifshinobi never said it was /aɰ/, but they did say /aɯ/, /ai/, /ɤ/ were used by the Thai dialects, and only /aɯ/ was used in the Lao and Vietnam dialects. Maybe it wasn’t able to translate well or I missed something. Monarchatto (talk) 00:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
In fact, I feel like I definitely hear /aɯ/ in songs like this one from 0:50 - 058 (in words like ꪻꪊ,1 ꪻꪠ, ꪻꪬ꫁)
Weirdly, it uses low form cho in the video (for example: ꪻꪌ - chaw) and transcribes it as “ch”, but at the same time for the high form of it it uses the high form of cho (for example: ꪋ꪿ꪺ - chua) instead of ꪍ. So because of that, and also because Tai Dam has no / t͡ɕʰ/ in its inventory, that it must be an error and was meant to be <ꪻꪊ> instead. If I’m wrong about this, please correct me. Thank you
All letters in Tai Viet script is based on Tai Dam (Black Tai). Some letters (sounds) are used to express loanwords and names (esp. Vietnamese, Chinese). That means /t͡ɕʰ/ is allowed in Tai Dam. However, <ꪻꪌ> might be the misspelling of <ꪻꪊ> in the video. Instead, the current Tai Viet script cannot be fully used to write Tai Dón (White Tai); some letters are still missing. Tai Dón uses different alphabet (letter set) against Tai Dam. They are in the proposing process. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Oh I see. That’s interesting. Good to know, thank you. Still though, what are your thoughts on how ꪻ is pronounced in the video? Do you think it’s /aɯ/ or /aɰ/? Monarchatto (talk) 04:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
/aɯ/ vs /aɰ/ is the same. It feels like /ai/ vs /aj/ and /au-ao/ vs /aw/. The second case should be used because it ends the syllable (final, no more consonant). --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Romaji entries
Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I just replace with template which it is made for. And no one seems to revert in the moment. By the way, I just learn Japanese that the extend katakanas and romajis do not appear to have matching hiraganas because they are made for foreign words. (No usage means not exist) See also w:Hepburn romanization. If each hiragana in question has some reference, we can add it back. Octahedron80 (talk) 23:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Pwo dictionary?
Latest comment: 5 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I've just come accross A Pwo-Burmese-English dictionary, and I can't figure out which Pwo lect it is. It looks like Northern Pwo, and features things like wá ("husband") but s/θwí ("blood"), yet it's written fully in the Burmese script. Do you know anything about it perhaps? Should we start documenting Northern Pwo in Burmese script? The dictionary itself is seemingly also published in Thailand, which adds to the confusion... Thadh (talk) 13:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Thadh I am making Northern Pwo in Thai script at thwikt. I could compare that blue book with Omkoi. Same etyma should have same vowels and tones (or very close to, at least) if they are same Northern Pwo. There are 4 tones in open syllables, middle, low, falling, and high. Use Kato's tones, they can be noted by middle dot, no dot, under dot, and double dots, respectively. There are 2 tones in (air-)checked syllable (ˀ), falling (but pratically became high) and low.
I compared some words. I assumed the book read similar to Omkoi:
Omkoi แม๊ (wife) (Thai sound: แม้) but the book says မာ့ (ม้า) (Thai sound: ม่า).
Omkoi มี้ (rice) (Thai sound: มี่) but the book says မေဝ် (เม่ว) (Thai sound: เหฺม่ว).
Omkoi แว (bamboo) but the book says ဝး (ว๊ะ) (Thai sound: วะ).
Omkoi เอ้ง (ginger) but the book says အိင် (อิ่ง).
Omkoi แง̱ (evening) but the book says ဟှး (ง๊̱ะ ?). (ง with macron below, ง̱, stands for consonant /ɰ/)
So different, I conclude that the book is not Northern Pwo. Instead, I think it should be Eastern Pwo, judged by how it writes using Mon alphabet.
Todays where a book was printed is not important. My Dai Lue dictionary was printed in China but its publisher located in Chiang Mai. --Octahedron80 (talk) 19:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
I compared the tones and vowels with Hpa-an Pwo by Kato, and it's not Eastern Pwo, at least not a usual dialect. It might also be a Southern Pwo lect, I'll take a look tomorrow if the tones match, but I don't think so... Thadh (talk) 20:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Okay, I've checked more words, and it's just Hpa-an Pwo it seems... Somehow the tone for "husband" was the other way around than Kato has documented. I'm in the process of making User:Thadh/Pwo with a small comparative vocab of the various lects, so I know what we're working on. Feel free to add words to it if you're interested. Thadh (talk) 15:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sanskrit noun in etymology
Latest comment: 4 months ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Hi. I just corrected the Sanskrit noun given in the etymology sections here: สังเคราะห์ and สงเคราะห์. In Monier Williams' Sanskrit dictionary there is no entry for *saṅgraha given that the consonantal cluster -ṃg(r)- in Sanskrit is mostly converted to -ṅg- in Pāli. So if you happen to find evidence for *saṅgraha, feel free to readjust it. Bogormconverſation08:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Bogorm Lots of सङ्ग्रह in please check that. (It's only my source.) My little knowledge only knows that nasal clusters in Sanskrit are converted into anusvāra (ṃ) in Hindi. Perhaps संग्रह is a special case. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
सङ्ग्रह appears in multiple Nepalese results at a first glance, so I am doubtful as to whether it can be attested in Sanskrit results. Perhaps it is worth mentioning it as a Nepalese cognate. Pinging more knowledgeable contributors of Sanskrit who could determine if सङ्ग्रह is an admissible Sanskrit spelling (albeit absent from Monier Williams' dictionary) or संग्रह is the only one: @Syzarn @AryamanA @Caoimhin ceallach. Bogormconverſation19:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
संग्रह(saṃgraha) is indeed the correct spelling of the word in Sanskrit. The prefix सम्-(sam-) becomes सं-(saṃ-) before consonants. See Otto Böhtlingk, Richard Schmidt (1879-1928) “संग्रह”, in Walter Slaje, Jürgen Hanneder, Paul Molitor, Jörg Ritter, editors, Nachtragswörterbuch des Sanskrit (in German), Halle-Wittenberg: Martin-Luther-Universität, published 2016. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 22:08, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply