User talk:AxaiosRex

Hi! AxaiosRex (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

—Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Telugu noun declensions
May I know why you are deleting some Telugu noun declensions from my work. Can you tell me the reason/s. I have created them after consulting some Telugu pundits.--Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 12:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hiya! Basically it seemed as though you were using the traditional declensions based off of the way the old grammarians saw Telugu. Yes, there is a lot of precedence for this system, but I (as are all modern academic linguists who have looked into the issue) am of the opinion that Telugu doesn't actually have cases in the same way that Indo-European languages have (or historically had) them. Of course this is mostly a terminological issue, but these "suffixes" in Telugu act a lot more like postpositions than they do case endings. They are invariable (there is only one paradigm), they aren't fusional, and there is precedence in the literature for calling similar systems postpositional systems. If we look at Hindi, for example, we see that nouns have oblique forms that then take postpositions. When we write "is kamre me", no one is calling the "me" a case ending or a part of a declension. Similarly, in "ii gadi lo", the lo should be considered a postposition. Thus, writing declensional tables which include *all* of these postpositions (and there are a lot more than you have listed in your tables) seems like an exercise in pointlessness, considering both how redundant they would be and also how logically inaccurate they would be. I realize this explanation has not been as painstakingly detailed as I wanted it to be, so if you do have any questions feel free to either reply with them or refer yourself to A Grammar of Modern Telugu by Krishnamurti and Gwynn. –AxaiosRex (అక్షయ్⁠రాజ్) 20:29, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Let me accept the fact, that I am not a linguist or Telugu pundit. Can you help with these declensions (of modern system). I would like to discuss with some pundits, if you can give the internet link for "A grammar of Medern Telugu" you are referring to. Thank you for the concern.--Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 05:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * So basically, under my system, suffixes like "-lo" and "-to" are considered postpositional suffixes and not case endings. The only true inflection of nouns in Telugu would be the nominative-oblique alternation, and so that would be the only one shown on any given entry. Each of the suffixes would get its own entry, and they would be explained in an appendix somewhere. The slight variations that we see with long and short forms (-lopala/-lo, -toni/to) and vowel harmony (-ki/-ku, -ni/-nu) would be explained in said appendix along with the processes that condition them. I, sadly, don't have a link to an online version of the grammar (I'm working off a copy I checked out from my university library), but you could look around for a copy of that or any other grammar (I'd say anything written after the 50s or so would be fine, but I don't really know for sure). If you really can't find anything, I can possibly send you a few photocopied pages if you give me a few weeks (I don't exactly know how legal this is, however...). Anything by Krishnamurti is probably good. –AxaiosRex (అక్షయ్⁠రాజ్) 01:06, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarification. Can you make one new Telugu noun declension template with modern thoughts of Krishnamurti. I would like to work on them for the Telugu nouns.--Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 05:47, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Telugu pronouns
I have created two pages ఆవిడ, ఈవిడ today. Can you check them. Thanking you.--Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 05:41, 12 August 2015 (UTC)