Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
Wiktionary talk:Rohingya index. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
Wiktionary talk:Rohingya index, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
Wiktionary talk:Rohingya index in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
Wiktionary talk:Rohingya index you have here. The definition of the word
Wiktionary talk:Rohingya index will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
Wiktionary talk:Rohingya index, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
IP adresses in the range 212.138.64.170 - 212.138.64.179 have recently added words of an alleged language called Rohingya. The same IPs are responsible for the bulk of the content of the Wikipedia articles on the w:Rohingya language. Googling for Rohingya language is not very revealing, but the Wikipedia pages suggest that the words added here could just be modified or Latinized spelling variants of actually existing words conceived by the (probably small number of) people behind the above IPs, and in this case might be deletion candidates (e.g. dabai, rwasígri) Ncik 01:36, 13 Jul 2005
- There is no reference to this at http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=Myanmar . There seems to be a political agenda behind these entries. In the absence of independent information about Arakanese and its dialects I'm inclined to go along with Ethnologue. The thing that I look for in these write-ups about an obscure language is the historical context, and that seems to be absent here and on Wikipedia. This should really be in rfd. Eclecticology 04:26, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Ethnologue:mhv doesn't have reference to any script used for Arakanese/Rohingya in Burma. There may not even be a standard yet. Random googling suggests several scripts have been used in the past. Try asking the user if there already exists a standard he could use, but failing that, I don't see anything wrong with this. —Muke Tever 16:41, 13 July 2005 (UTC)Reply