Talk:Punjabi language

PILA Act and the "Official Language" in Punjab, Pakistan

Note: I have refactored this thread out of the section ("Reverts") above, as the scope has progressed beyond reverts and into the substance of what sources are necessary to characterize a language as "official". EducatedRedneck (talk) 15:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

While I didn't read through the prolonged back-and-forth above, here's my view of the situation:

• The source being used to support Punjabi as an official language is a law, and thus subject to WP:PRIMARY. Laws are notoriously difficult to interpret, and attempting to do so constitutes WP:OR or WP:SYNTH.
• The source further makes no mention of being an "official" language (a term which is poorly defined in this discussion). We are not permitted to rely on our opinions of what constitutes 'official'. We must only report what reliable sources sate.
• I haven't the expertise to assess the reliability of the Britannica source.
• No source is needed to say that Punjabi is not the official language. Similarly, no source is required to show that Portuguese is not the official language. If no reliable source can be found which says it is, then the null hypothesis is that it is not.
• The Punjab Institute of Language, Art, and Culture is already properly referenced in the article itself, in the "Advocacy" section. Note that it does not assert that Punjabi is recognized as an official language, only acknowledges the government-backed establishment of an advocacy group.

I believe UnbiasedSN was right to remove it as a listed "official language", and anyone seeking to put it back in must abide by WP:BURDEN. EducatedRedneck (talk) 16:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@EducatedRedneck and MaplesyrupSushi: Apologies for this long-winded reply, but there's a few things I'd like to break down:

• We are not permitted to rely on our opinions of what constitutes 'official'. – I agree, it shouldn't be our opinion on what constitutes as 'official', neither mine, yours or 'UnbiasedSN'. However, Pakistani sources will not dub it precisely as an 'official' language because that term is reserved and loosely refers to nationally-recognised official languages like Urdu and English. That will make it almost impossible to include any provincial language recognised by any provincial governments, if they are not national languages.
• At the same time, the term 'official' is also ambiguous, and from my perspective it has been kept so for all language-related articles, and I can provide examples of this from other articles, if you'd like. As I mentioned earlier, the infobox states that Punjabi is an official language in Haryana, but the source doesn't mention the word 'official' anywhere. In Delhi, it is merely an additional language, and in West Bengal barely anyone speaks Punjabi, and I'm not even sure if there any areas within West Bengal were Punjabi is spoken by more than 10% of the populace [1]. Yet, we draw the line at Punjab, Pakistan because it doesn't specifically mention the word "official"?
• The source further makes no mention of being an "official" language – Now, bearing in mind what I've said earlier, the act outlines its objectives and specifically states: Whereas it is expedient to provide for the ... promotion and development of language ... in the Punjab and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, followed by the list of objectives of PILAC, as mentioned above. What more interpretation does that require?
• only acknowledges the government-backed establishment of an advocacy group – Again, surely that depends on your interpretation of the meaning of the word 'official'? Why was PILAC established, if not because the Punjab assembly recognised the Punjabi language? If this was in any other country, it would have been more than enough to include it in the infobox. In Pakistan, Punjabi is standardised, taught in schools, with official textbooks from the Punjab textbook boards, along with Punjabi periodicals and publications, along with MNA's speaking Punjabi in the Punjab assembly. All of that is being negated merely because the word "official" isn't present. نعم البدل (talk) 17:35, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

@نعم البدل First, thank you for the detailed reply. This is exactly how it's supposed to work; colleagues trying to find what's best for the encyclopedia! I'll respond point by point.

• That will make it almost impossible to include any provincial language recognised by any provincial governments, if they are not national languages. I think it doesn't have to be so strict. If the provincial government adopts it as a provincial language, that seems sufficient to me. I apologize for my US centrism, but the example that comes to mind is national vs state birds, flowers, etc. The US national bird is the bald eagle, but each state can also have its own state bird. Similarly, I'd imagine regional governments can recognize a language as their local lingua franca.
• Yet, we draw the line at Punjab, Pakistan because it doesn't specifically mention the word "official"? Your insistence starts to make more sense; you're trying to make the encyclopedia consistent across articles. That's a noble goal. Unfortunately, a consensus on this talk page won't be able to influence the other article. Perhaps it'd be useful to bring this up at the Languages Wikiproject. My view is clearly a strict interpretation of WP:NOR, but I'm also new to this subject area. I think posting to that wikiproject and asking, "What sources are considered sufficient to categorize a language as an official regional language?" would be outstanding, and a consensus there WOULD affect other articles, including this one.
• Related to the above, we don't need it to be the Pakistani government that says it's the official language. If there's a reliable source that describes it thus, we can use that. In many ways, it'd be better to have an academic article describe something as official, as they are qualified (and can be verified) to make such syntheses.
• What more interpretation does that require? The issue is that it does require interpretation. For example, an act which intends to promote the Information Technology industry in a country does not make Information Technology that country's official industry. The only thing I can draw from that act, is that it's an act aimed to promote a language (and culture). Such things happen all the time, and while encouraging, don't constitute official adoption by the government, merely encouraging it to grow as a private (or nonprofit) entity. I'll grant that it could also be interpreted to be an official adoption, but the fact that there is more than one way to look at it means it'd be WP:SYNTH to infer one particular interpretation.
• If this was in any other country, it would have been more than enough to include it in the infobox I disagree. If we suppose the US passed an act to recognize and express support for the Chinese Language and Arts Center, that does not constitute adoption of Chinese as the national language. Conversely, Hawaii did declare that "English and Hawaiian are the official languages of Hawaii." Because neither interpretation nor inference are required, that works.

I'll keep thinking about what you said, especially about other articles being inconsistent. Thanks again for your detailed response! EducatedRedneck (talk) 20:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• This is exactly how it's supposed to work – Appreciate it, I did hope for a discussion like this from the start, it's unfortunate how things spiralled down!
• Perhaps it'd be useful to bring this up at the Languages Wikiproject – I will bear this in mind, thank you.

Food for thought,

• Similarly, I'd imagine regional governments can recognize a language as their local lingua franca. – So just a little more context, when it comes to Pakistan, Urdu is considered to be the sole lingua franca/national language (as well as an official language), while provincial languages are spoken in the respective provinces. Realistically, Urdu should also be the sole national-official language, but as things stand, English is an official language alongside Urdu, but it's mainly used for administrative work (or perhaps somewhat of an 'elite' language).
• an act which intends to promote the Information Technology industry in a country does not make Information Technology that country's official industry – while I understand the comparison, I think the emphasis on Punjabi being an 'official' language is stronger, as like I say, it's implemented in every department ie, Education (standardised textbooks, taught as a subject all the way to a PhD, though not a medium of instruction), Publications (ie. Periodicals, Books, Journals), biggest language of the province and the country as per the census, and also having been employed in politics.
• Conversely, Hawaii did declare that "English and Hawaiian are the official languages of Hawaii." Because neither interpretation nor inference are required, that works. – Fair point.

نعم البدل (talk) 05:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Punjabi... [is] implemented in every department ie, [examples] That is very important context! I think my issue was that I didn't see that in the PILA source. I also didn't give it a close read, so perhaps I missed it. If it's not in that source, then it seems like there should be a reliable source describing this somewhere!

That may not be enough to describe it as an "official language" (as it'd require WP:SYNTHing the "pervasively used" datum and the "encouraged by the PILA Act" datum), but it would certainly bear mentioning in the Status section! I took a quick look through, and that section right now says that Despite gaining official recognition at the provincial level, Punjabi is not a language of instruction for primary or secondary school students in Punjab Province (unlike Sindhi and Pashto in other provinces). I note this source is 7 years old at this point, so perhaps there's a more recent one that reflects the state of affairs better.

More importantly, there's an inconsistency. Right above the previous passage, the article states, Eventually, Punjabi was granted status as a provincial language in Punjab Province! Sadly, it doesn't have a source, so I'd like to add the {{cn}} template while I look, but it makes me think that a source must be out there. That would solve this whole "avoiding SYNTH" issue nicely! I'm not too familiar with the subject, so if you could look as well, I'd be much obliged. EducatedRedneck (talk) 15:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I think this is the most reasonable action going forward. UnbiasedSN (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@نعم البدل Forgot to ping you in the above. Whoops! EducatedRedneck (talk) 15:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@EducatedRedneck: – Yep, I didn't receive any ping. Nevertheless.

• I took a quick look through, and that section right now says that Despite gaining official recognition at the provincial level, Punjabi is not a language of instruction for primary or secondary school students in Punjab Province (unlike Sindhi and Pashto in other provinces). I note this source is 7 years old at this point, so perhaps there's a more recent one that reflects the state of affairs better. – Unfortunately not, the recent Punjab Chief Minister did try to invoke some nationalist sensation by pointing towards this, but nothing set in stone. Punjabi is standardised and taught in some schools, but it isn't the medium of instruction anywhere, at least not that I know. Perhaps that's what sets it aside. Regardless, thanks for your reply. نعم البدل (talk) 22:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

It's actually quite simple. We won't call a language an "official language" if it is actually nowhere referred to as such. We don't apply OR to regulations or laws and see whether they fit our definitions of what an official language is.

If a primary source (e.g. national or regional laws/regulations) designates a language as an "official language", that would be a start, although then WP:PRIMARY applies. (But note that legal enshrinement is not necessary for a language to be an "official language". Quite a few languages (e.g. Dutch) are described as "official languages" in quality academic sources because these languages de facto are used in all official contexts even though no law explicitly enshrines the status of these languages.) So it all boils down to the question: do high-quality secondary sources ever refer to the status of Punjabi in Pakistan as one of being an "official language"?

While absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, I want just to note here that three scholarly sources about Punjabi do not mention any official status of Punjabi in Pakistan (although they do not fail to mention its official status in the Indian state of Punjab): the entry "Punjabi" by T.K. Bhatia in the Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World; the chapter "Panjabi" by C. Shakle in The Indo-Aryan Languages; and A Descriptive Grammar of Hindko, Panjabi, and Saraiki, a fairly recent source that wouldn't fail to mention an official status of Punjabi in Pakistan if it actually was fact. –Austronesier (talk) 19:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Austronesier::

• We won't call a language an "official language" if it is actually nowhere referred to as such. We don't apply OR to regulations or laws and see whether they fit our definitions of what an official language is. Hmm, I see, so it has to be definitively be labelled as an official language, and not merely a recognition?
• So it all boils down to the question: do high-quality secondary sources ever refer to the status of Punjabi in Pakistan as one of being an "official language"? – I feel there is a bit of a flaw with this, imo, but as I mentioned above, they're all known as 'regional' or 'provincial' languages, but these languages are never clearly labelled as 'official' languages, even though languages like Pashto and Sindhi are officially recognised by the provincial governments. I'm not sure what your take would be on this.
• a fairly recent source that wouldn't fail to mention an official status of Punjabi in Pakistan if it actually was fact. – True, I have read the Descriptive Grammar (by Elena Bashir), as well as the 'Indo-Aryan languages' by C. Shakle. I do agree here, my only issue was again, whether it's possible they missed this specific act.

Nevertheless, clearly there's no consensus for this, so I don't think it's worth readding it, unless any you feel it should be mentioned in the 'Recognised Minority Languages'?نعم البدل (talk) 22:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Official recognition of a regional language does not turn it into an official language. Only legal regulation that explicitly designates it as such will do so (as in the case of Indian Punjab, but caveat WP:PRIMARY!), or reliable sources that explicitly describe it as such (either based on legal regulation or de facto usage). And I think it is quite a stretch to assume that three high-quality sources independently make the same lazy omission.

It is nothing unusual that a major language does not attain official status in a multi-lingual setting. Javanese is a prominent example: being the most widely spoken language in Indonesia, it is only recognized as a regional language on the national level and only recently gained official status at the provicial level in the Special Region of Yogyakarta.

Heving an entry under the parameter |minority= is of course ok if sufficiently sourced. User:EducatedRedneck already pointed out that we should not rely on government sources alone, but again have to look for secondary sources which support the claim that such an entry entails (see Template:Infobox_language: under |minority=, we give a "list of countries in which it is a recognized/protected minority language. This is intended for legal protection and similar de jure recognition, not simply being listed on a census and other de facto recognition"). –Austronesier (talk) 18:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Austronesier Would a secondary source for "Recognised Minority Languages" infobox require an implicit mention of the words "Recognised" or "protected Minority Language", or is that up to the editor's discretion?

If a source requires an implicit mention of the the word "official" to be classified as official, I assume the same due diligence must be done for the "Recognised Minority Languages" part. Thing is Punjabi's are the majority in Pakistan so minority wouldn't really fit here. UnbiasedSN (talk) 02:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

• Thing is Punjabi's are the majority in Pakistan so minority wouldn't really fit here – It's not something I'm keen on as well. It makes it seem like Punjabi is a minor language in Pakistan, when obv that's not the case. نعم البدل (talk) 06:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, it's starting to look like Punjabi is actively identified as being not an official language. I'm not an expert at all, so perhaps I missed something, but using this Google Scholar search has only yielded several mentions that explicitly identify as not having attained official language status in the Punjab province of Pakistan, with some articles noting that Urdu was selected over it.

Perhaps we should propose a change to the article. In the beginning of the third paragraph of the "Status" section, I propose that we replace

It is, however, the official provincial language of Punjab, Pakistan, the second largest and the most populous province of Pakistan as well as in Islamabad Capital Territory.

with

It is widely spoken in Punjab, Pakistan, the second largest and the most populous province of Pakistan as well as in Islamabad Capital Territory.

Nowiki markup of proposed revision

It is widely spoken in [[Punjab, Pakistan]],<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hussain|first1=Fayyaz |last2=Khan |first2=Muhammad Asim |last3= Khan |first3=Hina |date=2018 |title=The implications of trends in Punjabi: As a covert and/or an overt Prestige in Pakistan |url=https://www.ahbabtrust.org/ojs/index.php/jicc/article/view/188 |journal=Kashmir Journal of Language Research |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=59-75 |doi=10.46896/jicc.v3i01.188 |access-date=April 19, 2024|quote= Punjabi in Pakistan [is] language that is numerically prevalent.}}</ref> the second largest and the most populous province of Pakistan as well as in [[Islamabad]] Capital Territory.

I also propose we remove Despite gaining official recognition at the provincial level, from the beginning of the second paragraph in the "In Pakistan" section.

What do y'all think? EducatedRedneck (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC) EducatedRedneck (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@EducatedRedneck: – Unfortunately yes, in that case the "official recognition" thing has to go.

• It is widely spoken in Punjab, Pakistan[1], the second largest and the most populous province of Pakistan as well as in Islamabad Capital Territory. That's fine with me. نعم البدل (talk) 06:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Noting here that I've implemented the above change. If someone objects, we can discuss it here. Thank you all for a good conversation, and helping us reach a consensus! EducatedRedneck (talk) 19:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Protected edit request on 16 April 2024

Change the image from what it is to ਪੰਜਾਬੀ,please, as the language displayed is not Punjabi. K1r4N-S0 (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

This image? It has Punjabi written in Shahmukhi - پنجابی and Gurmukhi - ਪੰਜਾਬੀ. I don't see why it needs to be changed. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Deativating pending consensus. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Page Protection

@ToBeFree: Hi, could we get the page unlocked now, please? نعم البدل (talk) 09:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello نعم البدل, is there a specific change you'd like to make? The protection will automatically expire in a few days. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: just wanted to add to the 'Software' section. نعم البدل (talk) 15:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Could an {{edit protected}} template already help? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Edits under "Phonology"

@Fdom5997, hello! sorry for the small edit conflict. could I understand why the reverting? my edits were mostly about the visual nature and editing what was already there. Juwan (talk) 22:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

No what you put was not already there. If you are going to contribute, you at least *need* to have a source cited for your contribution. Fdom5997 (talk) 23:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@Fdom5997 could you elaborate? I'll try to find a source if you explain what is wrong. Juwan (talk) 22:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Name of the commute responsible of preparation of the standard date of publication of the standard etc 114.31.137.85 (talk) 13:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Map

This article is discussing about the Punjabi language, and all its varieties/dialects. Even the total number of speakers include numbers from the varieties that are separately enumerated in Pakistan, yet the map depicts only the areas where Punjabi in general is enumerated, disregarding other areas. I would argue that it is misleading and the map should, therefore, be replaced with the one I have recently posted:

File:Punjabi language.jpg

Map of the Punjabi language in South Asia.

It would be a better look for the article, in line with other articles of languages which include similar looking maps. Thanks. SouthAsiaMapped (talk) 15:14, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

"Pentapotamian language" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Pentapotamian language has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 8 § Pentapotamian language until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 17:39, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 February 2025

31.26.231.254 (talk) 16:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

I want to edit, becuase in this post they are many errors

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you. Yeshivish613 (talk) 17:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Eastern Panjabi paragraph to be clarified.

At this moment the paragraph starts with:

                          "Eastern Punjabi" refers to the varieties of Punjabi spoken in Pakistani Punjab (specifically Northern Punjabi)

This does not seem to make much sense. And to someone unitiated to South Asian language classification and geography, it will be outright confusing. I would recommend looking for some other formulation. Yak-indolog (talk) 18:30, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Numer of speakers

In the intro paragraph and the infobox, it feels a bit improper to put the number 150 mil without mentioning (in the body of the text - so the previews show it) that this number is not the number all could agree on and is dependent on counting Saraiki and Hindko in it. I know this is mentioned in a note ... (though it is not clearly mentioned that Hindko and Saraiki are not only counted separately, but also considered separate languages in some classifications). So either there should be a range, or a formulation like "more than 120 mil. (depending on categorization)", or the like. Things that are contested or unequivocal should be accessible to the reader as such. Yak-indolog (talk) 18:36, 29 March 2025 (UTC)