Talk:Kannada grammar

Untitled
This article contains almost no useful information about Kannada grammar! Handuo99 (talk) 09:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Using IPA
Would anyone be up for converting the Kannada Script to IPA, as is standard for grammar articles on Wikipedia. As it stands, this article is inaccessible to anyone who is not literate in Kannada. 98.210.158.66 (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Romanisation (IPA etc) and explanations
This article on Kannada grammar contains no system of romanisation that would allow people who are not able to read the Kannada script to understand the content of the page. This would be counterproductive to what the article aims to achieve. I would like to appeal to anyone who can read the Kannada script (a native speaker) to romanise the entire page using IPA (the most common and easily understood romanisation system). I would perform the romanisation. However, as I do not know the Kannada script, I will have to turn to Google translate, which could result in mistakes.

Also, the article contains terms that a layperson may not understand. This article seems to be very comprehensive and well written. However, I think only a person very well-versed in the subject can comprehend the subject matter of the article itself. While still preserving the technical terms, I would like to call upon anyone who can provide a brief explanation of what words like "genitive" and "euphonic" mean. If they are already present, I would suggest that they be made more prominent. A simplification of some of the more technical terms for less knowledgeable readers can aid in making them more knowledgeable in the long run. Please participate in this discussion if you can. Razr99 (talk) 04:32, 3 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The romanization issue is a good point I think. That would certainly help. But explaining a genitive? Really? How about actually using the wiki-link to that topic for those people that don't even know that and still want to read about Kannada grammar. It is what wiki-links were invented for... If readers do not know such things and are too lazy to click on what they don't know, they deserve to not understand.
 * What I am much more worried about is sentences like The Kannada adjectival participle is peculiar, for it takes the place of the relative pronoun that introduces a restrictive relative clause, the verb of the relative clause, and if the relative pronoun is a prepositional complement, of the governing preposition. without a single wiki-link and written like a true tape-worm.

Jcwf (talk) 03:03, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. Glad that you agree on the romanisation point. You example regarding that sentence you provided is also something that ought to be rectified.


 * Regarding your views on the genitive explanations etc: I do not propose that we simply copy over the entire subject matter regarding the genitive case from the main article regarding that subject. That would be inane. However, it would not hurt to simply add another column after the Kannada case terminations simply showing what this case refers to in English.


 * E.g.


 * Currently:


 * {| class="wikitable"


 * genitive case
 * ಅ
 * }


 * My proposal:


 * {| class="wikitable"


 * genitive case
 * ಅ
 * a
 * of/'s
 * Example sentence in Kannada
 * Translation of sentence in English
 * }


 * This will present in a very quick glance what this case means without the person having to click around through multiple articles. The point of this page should be to present the salient points of Kannada grammar to everyone. It should not be to dump a bunch of technical terms and link people to those pages.


 * Please share your thoughts. Thanks!

Razr99 (talk) 07:44, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

The article Kannada alphabet has a romanisation system which one can use, and one can use it to convert romanisations back into Kannada spelling. But this article used different transription systems like having ā and aa and a for the same vowel, and it transcribed two different Kannada letters by sh which one can't retranscribe into Kannada. An Elementary Grammar of the Kannada, or Canarese Language (01, 02, 03, 04) and wiktionary, for example, could then sometimes help to find a Kannada spelling. But the grammar has "Adjective [ಗುಣವಾಚಕ - guṇa-vācaka]" which is different from "adjective – guṇavāchaka", which would lead ಗುಣವಾಛಕ. It also has "Consonants [ವ್ಜಜನ vyañjana]" which is different from "consonant – vyanjana". When seeing WP's improper transcriptions (ā and aa and a, sh), the grammar might be more correct. -84.161.19.85 (talk) 17:23, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * IPA is no romanisation system; and if there are different pronunciations, one needs more than one IPA notation.
 * Agreed that IPA should be avoided in this context. In general, Wikipedia tends to stick to ISO-15919 transliterations of Indic languages outside of descriptions of phonology. That's what the Kannada alphabet article uses and should be used here. Under this scheme, guṇavācaka with  instead of  is preferred, thus ವ್ಯಂಜನ would be  because the nasal, while carrying the sound of <ñ> ಞ is written with diacritic anusvara ಂ. Personally I would avoid hyphenation of compounds in transcription unless present in Kannada. I would argue that transliteration is the most pressing issue in this article, as it's the biggest issue in terms of readability and informational accessibility, but it seems like this article is somewhat orphaned with no revisions made in quite some time.
 * I would propose transliteration and then addition of examples of use of the cases outlined as workflow for improving this article. EricTheLinguist (talk) 06:03, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Naama pada (Noun)
Naamapada or noun is not defined??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.215.170.82 (talk) 09:31, 26 March 2017 (UTC)