Talk:Tanchangya language

Bangladesh Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BangladeshWikipedia:WikiProject BangladeshTemplate:WikiProject BangladeshBangladesh articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Bangladesh To-do list:

Add more images to Bangladesh Liberation War and related pages
Clean up Climate change in Bangladesh, it needs a lot of work
Clean up History of Bangladesh after independence, it needs NPOV
Improve Bangladesh back to FA as it was demoted (see discussion)
Improve Bengali language back to FA as it was demoted (see discussion)
Improve Bengalis and related pages
Take a look at the requested articles.
Make a MRT line 3 article.
Extend, add an infobox and a map of New Eskaton to New Eskaton.

Languages

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Article Issues[edit]

Verifiability[edit]

This article is in need of a serious overhaul. Of the four unique sources, one (Ethnologue) requires a paid subscription and the other is self-published and the other by Phukan is self-published. Anything contradicting Ethnologue or Glottolog classification should be immediately verifiable through peer-reviewed sources before inclusion, as it's notable enough that multiple sources would be expected.

Classification[edit]

Both Ethnologue and Glottolog cite Tanchangya as Indo-European and a language cannot belong to both Tibeto-Burman and Indo-European families. Terms cited as "Ancient Tanchangya language" are of questionable relevance. It's unclear if these terms are being argued as a substrate or as something else.

It's also inaccurate to say that the gap between Sanskrit and Pāḷi rendered the words "almost untraceable". Some forms cited such as 'manus' for 'man' appear to be tatsama while others are obvious tadbhava with regular sound correspondences.

The presence of phonemic tone is also not indicative of Tibeto-Burman origin. Numerous languages in the region, such as Rohingya, Sylheti, and some Eastern Bengali dialects have had tone arise from glottal features. The chart describing terms of Tibeto-Burman origin is insufficient to establish affiliation. Religious terminology is especially susceptible to being loaned and is inappropriate to use to establish lineage.

Copy Editing[edit]

The grammar, spelling, and cohesion of this article are in need complete review. While writing this article in South Asian English would be appropriate, the conventions used in this article do not adhere to established convention.

It's also unclear why lexical items are written in Bengali-Assamese script if the script cited as being used for the language is Tanchangya.

EricTheLinguist (talk) 00:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a Bangladeshi, with ties to the CHT. in CHT alot of ethnic groups have their own scripts, Tanchangya and chakma use the Chakma script, Marma use the Burmese script. But these are pretty much reserved for Chakma or Marma classes at schools (Tanchangya isn't taught at schools yet) and religious use, along side being used rarely in day to day life. Mostly everything is written in Bengali script or sometimes even latin. ইজিয়ান (talk) 09:26, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]