text:
Talk:Kalmyk Oirat

Untitled

 * Below is some data from the Kalmyk Manual. Maybe somebody can incorporate it? The book is still under copyright protection.

===CHAPTER 5 Notes on the Kalmyk Language===

Kalmyk belongs to the Western branch of the Mongolian language group, which is an important division of the Altaic family of languages. It is closely related to Khalkha-Mongolian, spoken in Outer Mongolia, now the so-called Mongolian People's Republic, to the various Mongolian dialects spoken in Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang-Uyghur Autonomous Region and Manchuria, and to Buriat (Buryat), spoken mainly in the Buriat Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in the USSR and in the adjacent areas.

Kalmyk is spoken in the Kalmyk Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic and by the older generation o£ the Sart-Kalmyks numbering from 2,500 to 3,500 and dwelling in the area of Przheval'sk, near Lake Issyk Kul, in the northeastern part of the Kirghiz Soviet Republic. It is also the mother tongue of about 1,500 Kalmyks living outside of Soviet Russia, in a number of European countries (mostly in France, West Germany, and Bulgaria), and in the United States of America.

According to the 1959 census, there were 106,000 Kalmyks in the USSR of which 91% consider Kalmyk as their mother language. To this figure approximately 1,500 émigrés speaking Kalmyk should be added.

Kalmyk is very closely affiliated with Oirat dialects of the Torghut, Derbet, Bayit, Dzakhachin, Uriankha, Dambi-Ölöt, and Mingat tribes in the north-western part of Outer Mongolia, and of the Torghut in Alashan, Dzungaria, Kuku Nor (Kökö Nūr), Northern Tibet, and other scattered areas of Inner Asia.

The Oirat dialects differ from each other only slightly. N.N. Poppe considers them dialects of one language, i.e., the Oirat language. According to him. Kalmyk differs little from Oirat from the point of view of its phonology and morphology; the vocabulary is, however, quite different.

Poppe included the Moghol language, spoken in Central Afghanistan northwest of Kabul by the so-called Moghols, the descendants of the Moghul conqeurors of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, in the West Mongolian branch, the Oirat and Kalmyk being the other members.

B.Kh. Todaeva, who in 1956 made on the spot investigation of the dialects of Torghuts, Khoshots, and Ölöts in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China, came to the conclusion that the Oirat language ("dialects" in her terminology) consists of two subdialects -Torghut and Ölöt which differ only slightly.

The Oirat adopted an alpbabet of their own in 1648. A learned Lamaist monk, Zaya Pandita, created it on the basis of the vertical Mongol script. The Oirat alphabet of Zaya Pandita (1599-1662) is actually an improved and phonetically more precise Mongolian script. The new script, which was brought closer to the actual pronounciation but was never a phonetic one, was used by all Oirats, among them the Kalmyks in Russia. However, the Zaya Pandita script never succeeded in spreading among the Kalmyks, in part because Tibetian became the liturgical language of the Kalmyk Lamaist clergy.

In spite of repeated attempts to brine it closer to the colloquial Kalmyk language, the Zaya Pandita script (in Kalmyk called todo moŋgol) remained always far apart from the latter. It was accesible only to a limited number of people. Such attempts were opposed by the Lamaist clerey. We should bear in mind that this clergy was brought up and educated in Tibetan which was both the instructional and liturgical language in the Lamaist monastic school. and monasteries (xurul).

The Ruasification of the non-Russian peoples of Russia was another important influential factor. The sole administrative language was Russian, which long ago sucessfully supplanted Kalmyk. There were only a few elementary schools where Kalmyk was taught. Thus the Zaya Pandita sript was destined to die out.

In the later part of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the Zaya Pandita script gradualy fell into disuse until the Kalmyks abandoned it in 1923 and introduced the Russian alphabet, which made it easier tor the illiterate Kalmyks to learn reading and writing. It should be mentioned here that the illiteracy among the Kalmyks was very high.

But soon, in 1930, it was replaced by the Latin transcription. This reform was the result of the Latinization drive for the alphabets of the Turkic-speaking peoples in the USSR. The new Kalmyk alphabet was accordingly based on the Latinized Turkic alphabets. It did not last long, however, and ultimately the Russian alphabet was re-introduced in 1937. The Russian alphabet became firmly established among the Kalmyks (and other peoples, too).

After their return (in 1957) from the forced exile in Siberia and remote areas of Soviet Central Asia (see chapter IV), the Kalmyks began to publish again books, periodicals, newspapers, etc., using the pre-war Russian alphabet. In the latter part of 1957, however, a few othographical changes were adopted, among them the abolition of diaeresis(••) above the vowels а, о, and у and their substitution by new symbols ә, ө, and ү (see the introductory part of the Glossary).

The Kalmyk is divided into three dialects - Torghut [torɣūd], Derbet [dörvəd] and Busava [buzāvə]. The famed Russian Mongolist, B. Vladimirtsov, proposed the following classification of the Kalmyk dialects:

a) Great Derbet [Stavropol'], b) Busava [Don Kalmyks]. a) Ural Kalmyk, b) Orenburg Kalmyk.
 * 1. Derbet (Astrakhan') with the subdialects
 * 2. Torghut (Astrakhan') with the subdialect.

Vladimirtsov admits, however, that the Ural and Orenburg subdialects are insufficiently investigated.

N. N. Poppe, in his earlier articles on the Kalmyk language, considered Busava (Don), Ural and Orenburg Kalmyk as subdialects of Torghut dialect, the other main Kalmyk dialect being Derbet. But in his later work he divided Kalmyk into Derbet, Torghut and Busava dialects.

The Busava dialect is very close to Torghut, and it is spoken by the Don Kalmyks, who before the early 1930's used to live in the Sal'sk district (okrug) of the Don region (oblast') (the region in the southern part of European Russia inhabited mainly by the Don Cossacks). They are the descendants of a group or displaoed Derbets moved to the Don oblast' at the request of the Emperor Peter the Great.

The Derbet dialect, spoken by the Derbet of Astrakhan' (L1ttle Derbet ulus) and Stavropol'

Great Derbet ulus) regions, varies somewhat but insignificantly from the Torghut and Busava dialects in that it frequently has a (I can't read these Mongolian words in Latin)

The dialects spoken by the Ural and Orenburg Kalmyks, the majority of whom were moved to the Kalmyk ASSR in the late 1920's, are also very close to Torghut. N.N. Poppe classifies them as subdialects of Torghut.

In general all Kalmyk dialects are very close to each other, and they differ only slightly. Nothing is known about the dialect of the Terek Kalmyks, who in 1897 numbered some 3,600 people. They too, were moved n the 1920's to the territory of the Kalmyk ASSR.

Until 1934 there existed no standard literary language among the Kalmyks. Both the Torghut and Derbet dialects enjoyed equal rights, although the language textbooks were based on Torghut. W. L. Kotwicz, the chief authority in Kalmyk linguistics, gave the prefrence to Torghut in his Kalmyk grammar. In March, 1934, the decision was reached at the fourth linguistics conference in Elista to adopt the Derbet dialect as the standard literary language.

The single full vowel phonemes of Kalmyk are as follows: i ü  u ɵ  ö  o ä  a

The schwa vowel /ə/ is a highly reduced, indistinct sound. In modern Kalmyk orthography this vowel is disregarded altogether, and there is no special symbol to denote it. The letter ə does exist, but it stands for /ä/.

The vowels i, ü, u, ɵ, ö, o, and a are represented by the following symbols in the present-day Kalmyk alphabet:

--Skipped Section-- A few of the characteristic features of the Kalmyk language are as follows: single- i, ɵ, ä, ü, ö, u, o, a. geminate- ii, ɵɵ, ää, üü, öö, uu, oo, aa. In non-initial syllables, however, the short vowels have disappeared, having been replaced by the schwa vowel /ə/, which has a quality of a highly reduced indictint sound, and syllabic consonants, e.g., ... Notes --Erkin2008 23:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) The presence of two distinctive inventories of vowel phonemes in the initial stressed and non-initial unstressed syllables. In initial position the following vowel phonemes are present:

 * I removed the history part because all the information is already in the Kalmykia article. Can anyone do a fact check on the claim that Kalmucks were not allowed to speak Kalmuck? Andris 16:04, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Fact check done. "Not allowed to speak" was an exaggeration. Corrected. Andris 20:29, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

but i do really appreciate correcting of some paragarphs in the article. I should have been more precise about some details for its a source of true knowledge.thank you, Andris.
 * to some degree it was true.For instance, kalmuck children in orphanages during the exile period were not allowed to speak kalmuck to one another by the institution's authorities (its just one example). even upon having returned back home from siberia, children in schools were not allowed to speak kalmuck, even at some work places the kalmucks were not allowed to speak their language.speaking the language was concidered as expression of kalmuck nationalism, though mass media did exist in the kalmuck language, but it all mainly carried declarative character,"on paper".My name is Arslan. i am a kalmuck, and the witnesses for all that are my parents who were born in siberia, my grandparents who were deported to siberia and all the rest of my family. so saying that we were not allowed to speak our language during the soviet period, i meant the period of exile and after.

 * I am strongly opposing referring Kalmyk people as Western Mongols. Historically, Kalmyks always had very high degree of separation from Mongols. Very well known "formula" introduced by Mongols by the way - 4 Kalmyks (Oyrats) and 40 Mongols. Existence of Mongolia brings another confusion into account making impression that Mongolia is Kalmyk motherland. But historical Kalmyk domain has been divided between Russia, China, Kazakstan and Mongolia. So, Western Mongolia is, actually, just Eastern Kalmyk land. Calmouk 19:24, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Kalmyks are Oirats but not all Oirats are Kalmyks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.20.252 (talk) 23:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's just what I've been most worried about when reading this article. Kalmyk is just a name for two modern Oirat dialects spoken by a shrinking number of native speakers in Kalmykia, while no scientist I'm aware of would label the Oirat in Xinjiang as "Kalmyk". But it would need quite a bit of editing to correct this, and as a precondition for such editing ideally the ability to use a bunch of Russian-language literature that I lack. If anyone was in for that job, I would probably be able to name some useful sources to start with. G Purevdorj (talk) 23:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

 * I added Writing System category Calmouk 21:17, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Altaic reference
I removed an awkwardly worded reference to Altaic (diff) and the associated citation request tag. There seems to be no controversy that Kalmyk belongs to a subgroup of the Mongolic language group, and that Mongolic is a component of the Altaic grouping. It is only the validity of the overall Altaic hypothesis that might be in question, but it isn't a matter of Kalmyk having some specific controversy within the Altaic discussion, which the wording seemed to (perhaps unintentionally) suggest. - David Oberst 10:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Total speakers: 518,500
Are there so many kalmyk speakers in russia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.20.252 (talk) 22:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Classification
I made some changes in the article regarding the classification of Kalmyk. In the end, this must mean abandoning the Ethnologue classification of Mongolic. While I myself would hold that the classification of Luvsanvandan is most appropriate, the classification of Sanzheev (which is in effect a non-classification by justraposing all major entities) might be most unprejudiced. I've conducted the recent changes in accordance with Sanzheev. G Purevdorj (talk) 11:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Kalmyk language template
If you are a native speaker of Kalmyk then you can help translate this template into your own language:

Edit

--Amazonien (talk) 02:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

 * This is not a good idea at all. The template would have to run "This user is a native speaker of Oirat". Kalmyk just WAS the most important dialect of Oirat, but no one seriously doubts that those guys over there in Xinjiang or the Deed mongols speak the same language. It is not entirely my fault that the article on Oirat language is a mediocre stub. Then, we have a second problem. Xinjiang Oirats and Kalmyks use two script systems, Cyrillic alphabet and Clear script, and usually they cannot READ the other script. So which scipt to use in the template? G Purevdorj (talk) 09:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Dialect
See Talk:Torgut dialect (talk it here). --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) (talk) 06:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * The changed link for ISO 639-3 was invalid, otherwise I wouldn’t have reverted this at this point. The claim that Kalmyk is treated as a dialect of Torgut reflects a sourced claim that I wrote on Torgut dialect. While this claim might be problematic and was the reason why 虞海 suggested that it is POV, it does no good to paste an unsourced mirrored claim about the Kalmyk dialect before the issue has been discussed. But I’m in agreement with 虞海 that this problem should be discussed in one place: Talk:Torgut dialect. G Purevdorj (talk) 10:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * The discussion on Talk:Torgut dialect (which is possibly not yet finished) from my point of view seems to point in the direction that the renaming action here might have been wrong. Language is an awkward term, granted, but it is more conventional to use this term for a variety that is a Standard language. Possibly, this usage of the term presupposes that we assume Kalmyk to be a register. The funny thing is that we seem to get into a conflict between two categories of classification: regiolects respective the shunned term dialect vs. Standardized varieties with a lower degree of spoken reality. Eg the normative pronunciation in Khorchin in South Mongolia is set as Chakhar dialect, but no one gives a damn. Anyway, Chakhar is not the Standard language of Mongolian in China, which is termed "South Mongolian" and based on the grammar of Chakhar and Khorchin dialect alike. Another case is Standard Mongolian as spoken in Mongolia which is based on the Khalkh dialect and the language of Mongolian literature. (If we take this definition seriously, the Khalkhas that deviate most from the norm are those of Ulaanbaatar, but de facto they speak on TV and direct the course of language development.) But at least here, there is an approximate correspondence between "Standard language" and an actual dialect. This doesn't hold for South Mongolia, and it seems to hold only to some degree for Kalmyk. As Uwe Bläsing wrote in "The Mongolic languages", "There are two main dialects of Kalmuck. Dörbet is mostly spoken in the west of the Kalmuck Republic, while Torghut prevails in the East. ... The modern literary language is mainly based on the Torghut dialect, though it incorporates a large number of concessions to Dörbet". Here, we have two definitions of Kalmuck in one: 1. a national language (without any necessary linguistic reality); this might be reinterpreted as a cover term for all Oirat spoken in Kalmykia (which might be more or less arbitrary, depending on the strength of Russian language influence on this set of Oirat varieties) 2. a literary language that is related to Torgut dialect, but due to deviations from it is not necessarily spoken. We need to know what THIS article is about, we need a concept that can be defended, and then all the contradictions that are showing up in this article now can be addressed. Any input welcome! G Purevdorj (talk) 08:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

 * You have hit the nail squarely on the head. Sociolinguistic factors are often more important in determining what is a language and what is a dialect than linguistic factors.  Kalmyk is called a language in much of the literature and its "users" consider it to be a language with a name and a clear identity.  (Taivo (talk) 10:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC))

Page error
What is wrong with Kalmyk language? I can’t open it. I only get the message "override function", and everything else is a complete blank. —Stephen (talk) 02:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, it has cleared itself up. Must be my browser. —Stephen (talk) 02:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Recent changes
1. Sufficient to mention Altaic at Mongolic and its immediate sub-knots. 2. “even in social settings” - any communicative situation with more than one participant is social. So you need to refine this statement. 3. “In Mongolia and the People’s Republic of China, the Kalmyk language is called Oirat.” Well, as much as I agree with emphasizing the similarities between Xinjiang Oirat and Kalmyk Oirat, this statement goes a bit too far. Oirat in Russia is called Kalmyk, not the other way round. 4. While I don’t see much wrong in the recent changes, sources (which may well be written in Russian, but then please with page number) would be useful indeed. G Purevdorj (talk) 15:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles on Kalmyk and Oirat in various Wikipedias
Wikipedias in multiple languages contain various articles on Kalmyk, Oirat or both of these. In English, Oirat is the general term for the language, while Kalmyk is a term for its most well-known variety. It is sometimes used pars pro toto, but that's not contemporary scientific use. Now I cannot tell whether or not such a pars pro toto use is okay and conventionalized in a particular other language. Therefore, I undertook it a while ago to check out the content of all articles on Kalmyk and Oirat and classified them into articles on Oirat and Kalmyk irrespective of their name. That is, if you want to reclassify anything in this domain, you have to demonstrate that the articles in question are equivalent with respect to content. A bot clearly cannot check this, and therefore I'd be grateful if this side could be spared from its usually beneficial contributions. G Purevdorj (talk) 14:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

 * You are searching for nothing. All links added are to Kalmyk language at any level, and they should be added there. If some wikipedias have a different article for Oirat they are added to Oirat language. Please don't make problems there they aren't. Hugo.arg (talk) 09:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not making problems out of nothing. I'm stating that the MEANING of KALMYK on different wikipedias is obviously different, thus names are misguiding. Several articles in other wikis use "Kalmyk" to MEAN "Oirat" (i.e. a dialect group consisting of Xinjiang Oirat, Kalmyk "proper", Mongolian Oirat, and possibly Alasha, Deed Mongol and Darkhad), while some (including the article in English wikipedia) use Oirat as the generic term and Kalmyk as a term for a particular variety. Of course, it is the articles about the generic variety that have to related to each other, and on the other hand the articles on the particular dialect. You might want to argue that you want to rename some of the foreign language wikipedia articles, but you must do so on the respective discussion pages. G Purevdorj (talk) 11:23, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

 * As I see, most of Wikipedias use term Kalmyk language as a language of Kalmyks and Kalmyk Republic and only sometimes erroneously use synonym Oyrat. Maybe except Buryat, Kalmyk, and Breton wikipedias which talk widely about these Oirat languages. In my opinion, we should leave interwikis as they are now and also add Japanese and Chinese because they deal about language not the systematic and left article Oirat language without interwiki. Or maybe to add all interwikis to Oirat and left this without. You want to make a forced split but all other wikipedias except English have the only one article about Oirat-Kalmyk and so they all should be connected together. Hugo.arg (talk) 12:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I do see your point, but I dare not say inhowfar we may speak of error, and inhowfar we must speak of convention. Then, even if such a (useful) "forced split" might be less than ideal, I prefer it over your two suggestions. And the bots don't lead to useful results anyway: as you said, Kalmoukeg-oirateg is clearly the same as Oirat, but the bots make it Kalmyk. Maybe you might want to post some request for comment on the Work group central asia and WPLAN? If we come up opinion against opinion, third opinions might be useful. The Japanese article, while treating Kalmyk as the main variety, clearly deals with Oirat as such and should be grouped as such. The Chinese article is in the worst possible state and thus difficult to classify. It withholds all the important context and mixes up the two concepts. By the way, can you explain this maelstrom of bots? G Purevdorj (talk) 13:32, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Bot's now are "attacking" this page because I solved interwiki conflict with my User:Idioma-bot (semi-automatic) way. Now there is no interwiki conflict so bots add interwiki just by scanning interwikis. As in general rule, there should not be interwiki conflicts when one page links to the other page that links in the third at the first's wiki. I try to explain: for example Kalmyk language links to lt:Kalmukų kalba and that links to en:Oirat language, so then we have an interwiki conflict. If the want to solve it we should manage does lt:Kalmukų kalba belongs to Oirat or Kalmyk pages at enwiki? When we fix all the links in all connected interwikis, that conflict is solved and now interwikis could be added in automatic way. And so, thats why I offer to solve that problem now. Later, it could be more linked articles and more confusion. Sure, ideal way would be if all connected wikipedias would have distinct articles about Oirat and Kalmyk but now we have not the worst situation when only one wikipedia has distinct articles. Only need to decide which will have interwikis and which wouldn't. Hugo.arg (talk) 18:47, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * First, would you be willing to accept my idea of a solution (articles ordered according to content irrespective of names, ie two groups of articles with eg Japanese having no article on Kalmyk, but only on Oirat)? If so, if I provide you with a list which article should belong where, could you automatically implement this for the other wikis? I did do so some time ago, but it was an awful lot of work and impossible to maintain. On the other hand, if it would be agreed upon here, would there be a way to barr bots from editing this page? G Purevdorj (talk) 00:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, make a list and I'll fix everything by my bot. After other bots should just follow existing interwiki system like if someone will create an article about Kalmyk in other wikipedia and will make a link here so bots will add it but nothing more. Hugo.arg (talk) 08:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Practically no info on the language
This article is a brilliant example of how linguistic articles on wiki have nothing on the subject matter. There is virtually nothing on phonology, morphology or syntax of Kalmyk. Congratulations people! 62.113.170.146 (talk) 15:30, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Grammar of Kalmyk
https://archive.org/details/GrammarOfTheMongol-kalmykLanguage

https://archive.org/details/grammatikamongo00bobrgoog

http://books.google.com/books?id=1y4OAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=1y4OAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

A.Bobrovnikov "A Grammar of Mongol-Kalmyk language" 1849, Kazan

http://altaica.ru/LIBRARY/bobrovnikov.pdf

Грамматика монгольско-калмыцкого языка (1849)

https://archive.org/details/GrammarOfTheMongol-kalmykLanguage

Grammatika mongolʹskokalmyt͡skago i͡azyka (1849)

https://archive.org/details/grammatikamongo00bobrgoog

Grammatika kalmyt︠s︡kago i︠a︡zyka (1847)

https://archive.org/details/grammatikakalmyt00popo

06:10, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Article name
Kalmyk and Oirat are the same language, which is basically conceded in the literature that makes any kind of argument based on linguistic data or intelligibility. Then, Kalmyk is almost never used as hyperonym for Oirat, while the reverse is quite common. By using the label "Kalmyk language", the consistent hierarchical structure of labeling gets destroyed. Cf. other articles such as Ordos Mongolian where the same principle of labeling is applied. It is true that claims are made in some of the literature to the effect that Kalmyk is a language, but this usually is done by ignoring other Oirat varieties. I don't think this move was a good idea at all, and I would propose it be undone, unless there are any more convincing arguments than the short move log summary that Ezhiki provided. G Purevdorj (talk) 08:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kalmyk Oirat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041224191946/http://www6.gencat.net/llengcat/noves/hm01hivern-primavera/internacional/kornou1_9.htm to http://www6.gencat.net/llengcat/noves/hm01hivern-primavera/internacional/kornou1_9.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:54, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Possible illustration?
I can't read this language, maybe if this image can be used as an illustration on this article, feel free to use it :-) Syced (talk) 02:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Ewoks speak the same language
I wonder if a note should be made about the Ewoks in Stars Wars speaking a language the film producers derived from Kalmyk Oirat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.0.98 (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Differences in the IPA shown in "Alphabet matching table" and "Phonology"
There are some differences between the two sections in terms of what symbols they use. For instance: /ɮ and /ɮʲ/ are the sounds corresponding to Лл/Ll, but /l/ and /ȴ/ are used to denote the sounds in the consonant table. They are written on the lateral row, but this feels like an unclear way to denote them. Additionally Бб/Bb is represented as /p/, /pʲ/ in IPA for the alphabet matching table, but in the consonant table for phonology, /b/ is shown as a voiced plosive.

VegBerg (talk) 15:57, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Name of the language
The actual name of the language is хальмг келн (khal'mg keln). We do not say хальмг өөрдин келн. You should rename the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.26.232.205 (talk) 10:34, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:04, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Todo Bichig Latin.png

Orphaned references in Kalmyk Oirat
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Kalmyk Oirat's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "ethnologue": From Laz language:  From ISO 639-3: Ethnologue report for ISO 639 code: zho on ethnologue.com From Kalmyks: Kalmyk-Oirat, in Gordon, Raymond G., Jr. (ed.), 2005. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 15th edition. Dallas, Tex.: SIL International From Abkhaz language:  From Nenets languages:

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:59, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kalmyk Oirat


text:
Surry County

Surry County is the name of two counties in the United States:

 * Surry County, North Carolina
 * Surry County, Virginia

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Surry County


text:
Sumter County

Sumter County is the name of four counties in the United States:

 * Sumter County, Alabama
 * Sumter County, Florida
 * Sumter County, Georgia
 * Sumter County, South Carolina

title: Sumter County


text:
Sumner County

Sumner County is the name of two counties in the United States:

 * Sumner County, Kansas
 * Sumner County, Tennessee

title: Sumner County


text:
Yǐn (surname)

Yin is a Chinese surname. In 800 BCE, Bo Jifu, a renowned judge during the reign of King Xuan of Zhou, held the position of Yin (equivalent to First Minister or most favored Minister) and changed his name to Yin Jifu. During the era of the Imperial Examination System, three other magistrates took on the surname Yǐn (尹) to denote their Imperial rank and favoured status. It is the 100th name on the Hundred Family Surnames poem.

The Korean surname Yun and the Vietnamese surname Doãn are derived from Yin and traditionally written in the same Chinese character.

A 2013 study found it to be the 79th most common surname, being shared by 3,460,000 people or 0.260% of the population, with the province with the most being Hunan.

Notable people

 * Yiin Chii-ming (尹啟銘; born 1952) Minister of Economic Affairs of the Republic of China (2008–2009)
 * Yin Fu (尹福), creator of a sub-branch of the Bagua martial art; bodyguard to the Empress Dowager Cixi and personal trainer of the Emperor.
 * Yin Han and Yin Zhen, members of the judiciary of the Han dynasty.
 * Yin Lin, a painter of the Tang dynasty.
 * Yin Zhongke, a member of the judiciary of the Song dynasty.
 * Yin Zhangsheng, a painter of the Song dynasty,
 * Yin Wen, a personal tutor of princes of the Ming dynasty
 * Wan Kwong (尹光, born 1949 in Saigon, Vietnam), Hong Kong pop singer, born Lui Minkwong (呂明光 and also known as Jackson Wan Kwong), a singer from Hong Kong, known as "The Temple Street Prince"
 * Yin Li (politician), Governor of Sichuan (2016–)
 * Wan Kuok-koi (尹國駒; born 1955), popularly known as Broken Tooth Koi, former leader of the Macau branch of the 14K Triad
 * Yin Zheng (尹正, born 1986), Chinese actor
 * Terence Yin Chi-wai (尹子維; born 1975), a Chinese film actor
 * Samuel Yin (尹衍樑; born 1950) Taiwanese billionaire businessman and philanthropist
 * Xi Yin (尹希; born 1983) a Chinese-American theoretical physicist
 * Yin Mingshan (尹明善; born 1938 in Chongqing, Sichuan) a Chinese businessman, the chairman of Lifan Industrial Corporation
 * Yin Haoyu (尹浩宇; born 2003), also known as Patrick Finkler. Thai-German actor, singer, songwriter and model, member of the multi-national Chinese group INTO1, a debuted boy group of Produce Camp 2021.

title: Yǐn (surname)


text:
Zhe

Zhe may refer to:

Schools People
 * Zhe (Cyrillic), a letter of the Cyrillic alphabet
 * Zhe, a proposed gender-neutral pronoun (with: zhim, zhers, zhimself)
 * Maclura tricuspidata (or zhè), a tree native to East Asia
 * Že, a letter of the Perso-Arabic alphabet
 * Zhejiang, a province of China
 * Qiantang River, the river after which Zhejiang Province was named
 * Zhe school (guqin), a school of musicians for the guqin
 * Zhe school (painting), painters of Southern School, which thrived during Ming dynasty of China
 * Viceroy of Min-Zhe, title of government official of China
 * Su Zhe (1039-1112), a politician and essayist from Meishan, China
 * Zou Zhe (1636-c.1708), noted Chinese painter during Qing Dynasty
 * Jiao Zhe, a Chinese footballer
 * Feng Zhe (1987- ), a male Chinese gymnast
 * Chen Zhe (1993- ), a professional snooker player from Shanxi, China
 * Li Zhe (disambiguation), various people
 * Shi Zhe (1905-1998), a Chinese interpreter
 * Song Zhe, a diplomat, ambassador of the People's Republic of China

title: Zhe


text:
Summit County

Summit County is the name of three counties in the United States:

 * Summit County, Colorado
 * Summit County, Ohio
 * Summit County, Utah

title: Summit County


text:
Market penetration

Market penetration refers to the successful selling of a good or  service in a specific market. It involves using tactics that increase the growth of an existing product in an existing market. It is measured by the amount of sales volume of an existing good or service compared to the total target market for that product or service. Market penetration is the key for a business growth strategy stemming from the Ansoff Matrix (Richardson, M., & Evans, C. (2007). H. Igor Ansoff first devised and published the Ansoff Matrix in the Harvard Business Review in 1957, within an article titled "Strategies for Diversification". The grid/matrix is utilized across businesses to help evaluate and determine the next stages the company must take in order to grow and the risks associated with the chosen strategy. With numerous options available, this matrix helps narrow down the best fit for an organization.

This strategy involves selling current products or services to the existing market in order to obtain a higher market share. This could involve persuading current customers to buy more and new customers to start buying or even converting customers from their competitors. This could be implemented using methods such as competitive pricing, increasing marketing communications, or utilizing reward systems such as loyalty points/discounts. New strategies involve utilizing pathways and finding new ways to improve profits and increase sales and productivity in order to stay competitive.

Definition
Market penetration refers to ways or strategies that are proposed or adopted so as to be able to create a niche in the already existing market. Although it can be performed throughout the business's life, it can be especially helpful in the primary stages of setup. It helps establish the business's current station and which direction it needs to expand in to achieve market growth. Successful outcomes stem from careful monitoring by key staff and leaders. Timing is key to successful market growth; this can be dependent on the overall market welfare, the business's competitors, and current events. Questions, brainstorming, and discussions can help distinguish whether it is the best time for market growth. These can include questions surrounding market share increases or decreases. Sales can be declining but show opportunity for the business, which could be the perfect time to make alterations so as to grow market share. Market penetration can also be helpful when sales are proving to slow down, in that customers often need to be re-introduced to a company or reminded why they need a company's goods/services. With consumers' attention span becoming less and less, organizations need to constantly keep on top of competitors to stay relevant.

Some factors of market penetration are holding costs, advanced inventory management practices and technology (e.g., ongoing replenishment and vendor-managed inventory), supply chain problems, and economies of scale (e.g., Chang and Lee 1995, Chen et al. 2005, Gaur and Kesavan 2005, Gaur et al. 2005, Hendricks and Singhal 2005, Huson and Nanda 1995, Lieberman et al. 1996).

Market penetration, market development, and product development together establish market growth for a company. Overall the major growth opportunities they implement attempt to peak sales through stressing current products in present markets and present products in new markets. This includes developing new products for existing markets, subsequently. It is about finding new ways to boost sales and keep customers loyal and increase market share. When implementing change, companies must be careful not to compromise their existing revenue or customers. If the packaging or visual aspects of a company are altered drastically, existing customers may not recognise a brand and opt for a competitor's product or service. Too much alteration can make consumers wary, so change must be implemented in a subtle manner so as to only increase market share and build on profits. Managers and leaders should monitor this throughout the entire process to ensure smooth changes. Clear planning will also help minimise this risk and will lead to improvements and a boost in market share.

A few different options for market penetration are:
 * Developing a new marketing strategy to entice more customers to purchase or continue purchasing.
 * Become price competitive as a swaying factor for customers to choose a product or service over another company.
 * Use special promotions or offers to grab attention.
 * Utilise the Boston Matrix to decipher which product or service benefits further investment and time and which can be disregarded.
 * Purchase a competitor's company (in mature markets) to expand market share.

For a business to come up with a decision using the grid, key personnel must consider numerous factors such as market penetration, product development, market development, and diversification, which measure brand popularity, defined as the number of people who buy a specific brand or a category of goods at least once in a given period, divided by the size of the relevant market population. Market penetration is one of the four growth strategies of the Product-Market Growth Matrix as defined by Ansoff. Market penetration occurs when a company penetrates a market in which current or similar products already exist. A way to achieve this is by gaining competitors' customers (part of their market share). Other ways include attracting non-users of a product or convincing current clients to use more of a product/service (by advertising, etc.). Ansoff developed the Product-Market Growth Matrix to help firms recognize if there is any advantage to entering a market. The other three growth strategies in the Product-Market Growth Matrix are:
 * Product development (existing markets, new products): McDonald's is always within the fast-food industry but frequently markets new burgers.
 * Market development (new markets, existing products): Apple introduced the iPhone in a developed cell phone market.
 * Diversification (new markets, new products):

Market penetration refers to the successful selling of a product or service in a specific market, and it is a measure of the amount of sales volume of an existing good or service compared to the total target market for that product or service. Market penetration involves targeting on selling existing goods or services in the targeted markets to increase a better market share/value. It can be achieved in four different ways, including growing the market share of current goods or services; obtaining dominance of existing markets; reforming a mature market by monopolising the market and driving out competitors; or increasing consumptions by existing customers.

Another alternative to calculating market penetration is if the dividend growth rate is more than the ratio of the percentage population of wealth distribution ratio then market penetration is possible.

Market penetration is a way to determine the success of the business model and marketing strategy for a product. To check the success, one must have a way to gauge the amount of the targeted market and how many potential localized or otherwise customers there are that would be susceptible to a product. To this end, Charles Hill came up with a five-step system to understanding advertising's influence on the market. Market penetration is a tool for understanding the potential earnings of a business and is integral to calculating a resourceful business model.
 * 1) Identify the demographic most suited to a product. Even though other demographics may use a product, it is about identifying the largest demographic so that the majority of advertising is tailored to them (e.g., candy for children, salad for adult women who may be dieting).
 * 2) Decide upon the area in which they live. Location is important and wholly depends on the reach of a brand. If a company operates at a national level, then the entirety of the country will have to be averaged to reach the largest number of people. The smaller the area, the more specific one can be about the people of each demographic within it.
 * 3) Knowing the size of the market is integral to understanding market penetration.
 * 4) Understanding competitors' market penetration. What benchmark should one go for? Based on the penetration that other products have reached, calculate the number that should be reached in the demographic by multiplying the total number of the demographic by whatever the percentage that other products are reaching.
 * 5) Calculate the number of customers that a business needs to sell to in order to earn a profit and then compare that to the number other competitors are reaching; if the business does not make a profit with average market penetration, it's time to rethink the business strategy.

In an emerging market
A model was theorized for market penetration by Yan Dong, Martin Dresner and Chaodong Han.

This is meant for emerging markets but the connection extends across to more established markets as well. The model illustrates that market penetration and understanding of the number of people that will be reached with a product is indicative to how much stock must be ordered and both that and market penetration are of utmost importance for financial performance. However, emerging markets are difficult to predict as they are categorized by large amounts of growth. This means demand is hard to forecast and therefore inventory supply as well. The connection between emerging market penetration and inventory supply are bridged by several factors such as advanced inventory management, technologies and holding costs. So while the market penetration may dictate how much supply is needed other factors must dictate how much inventory it is prudent to keep. Understanding market penetration for an emerging market is more difficult due to the lack of established competitors and similar products. Emerging markets are susceptible to large companies and are sought after by globalized businesses due to the increase in disposable income the average person will have and weak local competitors. The weakness of local competitors is due to their poor customer service and limit in resources as they don't have the capital and reach that large corporations have. The four big emerging markets are Brazil, Russia, India and China as they were the fastest to recover after the 2008/2009 economic crisis. These markets are untapped potential for revenue and a good spot for globalization for dominant company's. Large market penetration is the key to fully tapping these markets.

Purpose
As a strategy, market penetration is used when the business seeks to increase sales growth of its existing products or services to its existing markets in order to gain a higher market share. This strategy is often used during the early stages of the business or before it enters the market, in order to prove the market existence and show market size for its products or services, also to gain an understanding to the number of competitors and how well they are doing. Hence, the business can decide on either it is a good to enter their target market or not, and how it can make its products or services more attractive to consumers than its competitors. During the operation of the business, if the sales are decreasing or flatlining comparing to previous years, then it is also appropriate to apply market penetration strategy to seek for opportunities to increase sales. Therefore, it is unnecessary to this strategy if the sales are increasing. However, it is exceptional if the sales growth trend shows the gross increase but is much less significant comparing to its competitors, because this could indicate the business's market share is actually shrinking, then this strategy can be a good approach to try regain its market share.

To achieve the goal of higher market share, the primary idea is that the business has to either increase sales volume to their existing customers by encouraging for more frequent or greater usages, or expanding the population size of customers in the current market by attracting potential new customers to buy its goods or services. Since the market penetration strategy is conducted based on established capabilities and characteristics of the business and the market, therefore it contains the lowest risk out of the four strategies in Ansoff's product-market growth matrix. Hence, a business should give special consideration to conducts it, since this strategy is important for the evaluation work on the intended market and the existing businesses within this market. Especially when the business or product or service is about to enter the market or during its initial stage, and when it is not comfortable with risk-taking, or the owners of the business do not intend or not in a position to invest heavily into it. The amount of risk involved with each of the four types of Ansoff's strategies increases from market penetration to market development, to production development, to diversification. Because the both market and product development involve with one aspect of new developments, changes, and innovation. The diversification strategy is with most risk because the business is growing into both a new market and product, and thus contains with most uncertainties.

Market penetration is not only a strategy but also a measurement (in percentage) for popularity of a brand or a product in the category, in other words, the number of customers in the market that buys from a brand or product.

Price adjustments
One of the common market penetration strategies is to lower the products' prices. Businesses aim to generate more sales volume by increasing the number of products purchased by putting on lower prices (price competition) for consumers comparing to the alternative goods. Companies may alternatively pursue strategies of higher prices depending on the demand elasticity of the product, in the hope that it will generate an increased sales volume and result in higher market penetration.

Penetration pricing
Penetration pricing is a marketing technique which is used to gain market share by selling a new product for a price that is significantly lower than its competitors. The company begins to raise the price of the product once it has achieved a large customer base and market share. Penetration pricing is frequently used by network provider and cable or satellite services companies. Many of the providers will initially offer an unbeatable price to attract customers into switching to their service and after the discount period has ended, the price increases dramatically and some customers will be forced to stay with the provider because of contract issues.

Penetration pricing benefits from the influence of word-of-mouth advertising, allowing customers to spread the words of how affordable the products are prior to business increasing the prices. It will also discourage and disadvantage competitors who are not willing to undersell and losing sales to others. However, businesses have to ensure they have enough capital to stay in surplus before the price is raised up again.

Increased promotion
Businesses can also increase their market penetration by offering promotions to customers. A promotion is a strategy often linked with pricing, used to raise awareness of the brand and generate profit to maximise their market share.

More distribution channels
A distribution channel is the connection between businesses and intermediaries before a good or service is purchased by the consumers. Distribution can also contribute to sales volumes for businesses. It can increase consumer awareness, change the strategies of competitors and alter the consumer's perception of the product and the brand, and is another method to increase market penetration.

Product improvements
Product management is crucial to a high market penetration in the targeted market and by improving the quality of products, businesses are able to attract and out-quality the competitors' products to match customers' requirements and eventually lead to more sales made. Product improvements can be utilised to create new interests in a declining product, for example by changing the design of the packaging or material/ingredients.

Market development
Market development aims at non-buying shoppers in targeted markets and new customers in order to maximise the potential market. Before developing a new market, companies should consider all the risks associated with the decision including its profitability. If a company is confident about their products, believes in their strengths, and is enticing to new consumers, then market development is a suitable strategy for the business.

Construction
Market penetration can be defined as the proportion of people in the target who bought (at least once in the period) a specific brand or a category of goods. Two key measures of a product's 'popularity' are penetration rate and penetration share. The penetration rate (also called penetration, brand penetration or market penetration as appropriate) is the percentage of the relevant population that has purchased a given brand or category at least once in the time period under study. A brand's penetration share, in contrast to penetration rate, is determined by comparing that brand's customer population to the number of customers for its category in the relevant market as a whole. Here again, to be considered a customer, one must have purchased the brand or category at least once during the period.

title: Market penetration


text:
Stars: The Best of 1992–2002

Stars: The Best of 1992–2002 is a compilation album and DVD from the Irish band the Cranberries, released in 2002 by Island Records. Some of the tracks on the album are different versions of the songs provided in earlier albums. The album also contains two new tracks: "New New York" and "Stars".

The first seventeen tracks contain all of the band's singles through 2002 in chronological order.

Track listing
All lyrics by Dolores O'Riordan. All music by Dolores O'Riordan and Noel Hogan, unless otherwise noted.

The limited edition version of this CD includes five live tracks recorded in Stockholm:

Awards
In 2002, they won an award in Taiwan for best selling international band with the album Stars: The Best of 1992–2002.

DVD
Stars: The Best of Videos 1992–2002 is a DVD album by Irish rock band The Cranberries. It compiles 17 of the band's promotional videos including their new single "Stars", along with alternate takes and live recordings of several songs and a documentary entitled 99 Love Life & Rock 'n' Roll.

 * 1) "Dreams" (Everybody Else Is Doing It, So Why Can't We?, September 1992)
 * 2) * Director: Peter Scammell
 * 3) "Linger" (Everybody Else Is Doing It, So Why Can't We?, February 1993)
 * 4) * Director: Melodie McDaniel
 * 5) "Zombie" (No Need to Argue, September 1994)
 * 6) * Director: Samuel Bayer
 * 7) "Ode to My Family" (No Need to Argue, November 1994)
 * 8) * Director: Samuel Bayer
 * 9) "I Can't Be with You (No Need to Argue'', February 1995)
 * 10) * Director: Samuel Bayer
 * 11) "Ridiculous Thoughts" (No Need to Argue, July 1995)
 * 12) * Director: Freckles Flynn
 * 13) "Salvation" (To the Faithful Departed, April 1996)
 * 14) * Director: Olivier Dahan
 * 15) "Free to Decide" (To the Faithful Departed, August 1996)
 * 16) * Director: Marty Callner
 * 17) "When You're Gone" (To the Faithful Departed, November 1996)
 * 18) * Director: Karen Bellone
 * 19) "Promises" (Bury the Hatchet, March 1999)
 * 20) * Director: Olivier Dahan
 * 21) "Animal Instinct" (Bury the Hatchet, July 1999)
 * 22) * Director: Olivier Dahan
 * 23) "Just My Imagination" (Bury the Hatchet, September 1999)
 * 24) * Director: Phil Harder
 * 25) "You and Me" (Bury the Hatchet, March 2000)
 * 26) * Director: Maurice Linnane
 * 27) "Analyse" (Wake Up and Smell the Coffee, September 2001)
 * 28) * Director: Keir McFarlane
 * 29) "Time Is Ticking Out" (Wake Up and Smell the Coffee, March 2002)
 * 30) * Director: Maurice Linnane
 * 31) "This Is the Day" (Wake Up and Smell the Coffee, June 2002)
 * 32) * Director: Olivier Dahan
 * 33) "Stars" (Stars: The Best of 1992–2002, October 2002)
 * 34) * Director: Jake Nava

Alternate takes

 * "Dreams"
 * "Ridiculous Thoughts"
 * "When You're Gone"
 * "Analyse"

Live favorites

 * "Daffodil Lament" ('94 Astoria UK)
 * "Empty" ('94 Astoria)
 * "Sunday" ('96 tour)

Live at Vicar Street

 * "Time Is Ticking Out"
 * "Linger"
 * "In the Ghetto"
 * "Ode to My Family"
 * "Shattered"
 * "Animal Instinct"
 * "Loud and Clear"
 * "I Can't Be with You"
 * "Analyse"

'99 Love Life & Rock 'n' Roll
Also on the DVD is a 26-minute documentary entitled '99 Love Life & Rock 'n' Roll and directed by Ciaran Donnelly. In it, the band members speak about their career, expectations for the future, and how some songs were composed, like "Linger" and "Zombie".

title: Stars: The Best of 1992–2002


text:
The Gathering (band)

The Gathering are a Dutch rock band formed in Oss, North Brabant in 1989. The band's lineup currently consists of founding brothers René Rutten (guitars) and Hans Rutten (drums), Silje Wergeland (lead vocals), Hugo Prinsen Geerligs (bass) and Frank Boeijen (keyboards).

The band's earliest releases were categorized as atmospheric doom metal with influences from extreme metal acts like Celtic Frost and Hellhammer, undergoing numerous vocalist changes before breaking out in 1995 with Mandylion. It was the Gathering's first album to feature lead singer Anneke van Giersbergen and the band's first to chart in the Netherlands. With van Giersbergen, the band's sound shifted from gothic metal to one influenced by shoegaze, post-rock and trip hop, starting with their fifth studio album How to Measure a Planet? in 1998.

In 2007, van Giersbergen left the group to focus on her new band Agua de Annique. The band replaced her with Wergeland, of the band Octavia Sperati. The band went on hiatus from 2014 to 2018, and their most recent album, Beautiful Distortion, was released on 29 April 2022.

Early years (1989–1994)
Founded by brothers Hans and René Rutten and vocalist Bart Smits, The Gathering formed in the city of Oss in 1989. Soon after they were joined by Hugo Prinsen Geerligs, Jelmer Wiersma and Frank Boeijen to complete their first line-up. The Gathering's earliest recordings were categorized as atmospheric doom metal with influences from death metal acts like Celtic Frost and Hellhammer.

In 1990 they recorded a demo tape entitled An Imaginary Symphony which met some positive reactions from the underground metal scene due to their unusual use of keyboards in metal-oriented music. A second demo, "Moonlight Archer" was recorded in April 1991, was picked up by several music journalists. Both demos suffered from poor production; however they did help establish the band's name on the live circuit opening for bands such as Dead Head, Invocator, Samael, Morbid Angel and Death.

After signing with Foundation 2000, the group released their debut album Always... in 1992. On this album, Bart Smits was accompanied by Marike Groot on vocals, who also joined the Gathering on stage for most of the gigs. The album sold nearly 20,000 units over the next few years in Europe. In 1992 both Smits and Groot left the group due to musical differences; the other members wanted to change direction towards a lighter, more progressive sound. Smits went on to form his own project, Wish, to explore a darker, heavier sound.

In 1993 the group recruited two new vocalists, Niels Duffhues and female counterpart Martine van Loon. A second album, Almost a Dance, was recorded and released in 1993 by Foundation 2000. The album was met with much criticism aimed at Duffhues' punk-ish tone being decidedly out of step with the music, and the album was largely written off as a result. The group collectively acknowledged their disappointments with the album and started writing new material and looked for a new vocalist.

Century Media years (1995–2001)
In 1995, The Gathering released Mandylion, their third album and first to feature lead vocalist Anneke van Giersbergen, through Century Media; proving to be their breakthrough and selling over 130,000 copies in Europe. Two singles were released from Mandylion, "Adrenaline/Leaves" and "Strange Machines", the latter which reached number 37 on the Dutch singles charts and helped raise the group's popularity in Europe and the United States. Tours of Belgium and Germany, as well as appearances at the Dynamo Open Air and Pinkpop Festivals further established the bands presence in the European metal scene. 1997's Nighttime Birds was stylistically and musically a companion piece to Mandylion sold over 90,000 copies and saw the group tour throughout Europe.

In 1998 the group acknowledged their growing influences and their need to experiment with a double album, How to Measure a Planet?. Produced by Attie Bauw, the album is a radical departure from the group's established sound. Upon release, the album received excellent reviews from critics who appreciated the band's absorption of new styles such as shoegaze and trip hop into its sound. Positive reactions came from all over the world, including the United States, where they played 14 shows during the summer of 1999.

In 1999 the band formed their own record label, Psychonaut Records, with the view of releasing their own music and taking creative control over how their music is marketed and distributed. Always... was re-released in 1999, followed by Almost a Dance in 2000, both re-mastered and fitted with new artwork. However, the band were still under contract with Century Media, they released a live album Superheat (2000) which was recorded in several Dutch venues during 1999.

Another successful chapter in The Gathering's career followed with the release of if then else (2000). The album is filled with diverse, intense and emotional rock songs, more compact than its predecessor. Fifteen months of touring ensued, taking them to virtually every nook and cranny of Europe, with a little sidestep to Mexico, and ending with a small Dutch club tour in October 2001.

Independent years (2002–2008)
In 2002 the band members took a break and tended to their private lives. During this period, they ended their contract with Century Media. The Gathering had to run their newborn label Psychonaut Records and their 12½-year anniversary was coming up. To celebrate this with their fans, they released the mini-CD Black Light District on their own label.

In early 2003, Souvenirs was released. Sleepy Buildings, a semi-acoustic live album, followed in 2004. This album was the last one featuring Hugo Prinsen Geerligs as the bass player. He was later replaced by Marjolein Kooijman.

In 2005, The Gathering provided the music for a CD-ROM titled "Passengers in Time: The Musical History Tour". This CD accompanied a history study book written by Professor Wim Kratsborn and the band did not consider it to be an official release of theirs.

The band released a DVD in 2005, entitled A Sound Relief. This contained more gentle semi-acoustic songs. But this is not their first DVD. Century Media had released In Motion without band permission at 2001. Nevertheless In Motion  had an acceptable success. The next plan was to release in 2007 a second DVD (recognized for the band) A Noise Severe which features the more hard rock sound of The Gathering. This DVD was recorded in Santiago, Chile at 24 March 2007 at the Caupolicán Theatre.

In April 2006 they released their eighth studio album called Home. They had toured in March in North and South America and, after a brief pause to let van Giersbergen treat a laryngitis problem, they continued their touring schedule with European dates and music festivals throughout 2006.

The Gathering toured throughout the U.S. and Canada with Lacuna Coil in early 2007. On 5 June 2007, it was announced that Anneke was leaving The Gathering to spend more time with her family and her own band, Agua de Annique. The band scheduled a final tour stop on 4–5 August 2007 at the Ankkarock Festival, Finland. The Ankkarock Festival was announced as the final performance with Anneke as vocalist.

Silje Wergeland era (2007–present)
In February 2008, The Gathering released a boxed set entitled Sand and Mercury - The Complete Century Media Years. This boxed set was limited to 3000 copies worldwide, and contained 10 discs including a selection of studio, live and compilation albums. The set also contained the audio from the In Motion DVD as a new live album, also entitled In Motion.

In September 2008, The Gathering released a collection of all their old material from 1989 to 1993 on a double CD. The album contains the demos, the never released promo 1992, live tracks and the Celtic Frost cover of "Dethroned Emperor". The songs were from the period of the first line-up with singer Bart Smits. All songs were restored and mastered by Mike Wead (King Diamond / Mercyful Fate) and was released by small Dutch independent label Vic Records.

The Gathering's ninth studio album, The West Pole, was released in May 2009, shortly after being joined by a new singer, Silje Wergeland.

On 16 May 2011, the band released the single "Heroes for Ghosts" via their Bandcamp page, as well as announcing a South American tour. The song would be featured on the then-forthcoming album.

On 12 September 2012, the band released their tenth studio album, Disclosure.

The Gathering celebrated their 25th birthday as a band with two sold-out reunion concerts at Doornroosje in Nijmegen on 9 November 2014. It was the first time that four of their singers (Bart Smits, Marike Groot, Anneke van Giersbergen and Silje Wergeland) performed together, and the band's first performance with van Giersbergen since her departure in 2007.

On 8 December 2016, they surprise released a double-disc of outtakes, demos & unreleased songs from the recordings of Souvenirs and Home, called Blueprints.

In June and November 2018, they played several shows in the Netherlands and did a small tour in Greece.

On 29 April 2022, the band released their eleventh studio album, and first in nearly 10 years, Beautiful Distortion.

Etymology
Frank Boeijen on the origins of the name of the band:

"The name the Gathering has been made like eleven years ago when we started this band. We were all between 15 and 17. We were watching a lot of movies those days. One of the movies spoke about immortality and that you could kill the immortals with cutting their head off [it's the first Highlander Frank is speaking about]. In the first part of the movie, they speak a lot about the gathering. There will be a gathering once with all the immortals. We thought it was a nice name for a band, and that's how we created this name. And you can feel it's a cool name for five people who come together to make fine music." [sic]

Members
Current lineup Former members
 * René Rutten – guitars, flute, keyboards, percussion (1989–present)
 * Hans Rutten – drums (1989–present)
 * Hugo Prinsen Geerligs – bass, guitar, triangle, flute, add. keyboards and piano, percussion (1989–2004; guest 2014; 2018–present)
 * Frank Boeijen – keyboards, synthesizer (1990–present)
 * Silje Wergeland – lead vocals, keyboards (2008–present)
 * Jelmer Wiersma – guitars (1989–1998; guest 2014)
 * Bart Smits – lead vocals (1989–1993, guest 2013 and 2014)
 * Marike Groot – backing & co-lead vocals (1992–1993; guest 2014)
 * Niels Duffhues – lead vocals, guitars (1993–1994)
 * Martine van Loon – backing & co-lead vocals (1993–1994)
 * Anneke van Giersbergen – lead vocals, guitars (1994–2007; guest 2014)
 * Marjolein Kooijman – bass, backing vocal (2004–2014)

Timeline

Discography

 * Always... (1992)
 * Almost a Dance (1993)
 * Mandylion (1995)
 * Nighttime Birds (1997)
 * How to Measure a Planet? (1998)
 * if_then_else (2000)
 * Souvenirs (2003)
 * Home (2006)
 * The West Pole (2009)
 * Disclosure (2012)
 * Afterwords (2013) - also categorized as a remix album and EP
 * Beautiful Distortion (2022)

title: The Gathering (band)


text:
Talk:Isle Royale National Park

March 2004 merge
I am not sure we want to do this merge. Isle Royale is the largest island in the park but not the only island in the park. Look at Yosemite National Park, Yosemite Valley, etc. Rmhermen 16:16, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Besides we know have an article about a park that starts out about an island and only talks about the park halfway through. Bad form. Rmhermen 16:16, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * I personally think the island should have its own page, and that the park page should be about the park per se, with a "box" like all the other national parks. -- Decumanus 16:24, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I just saw a lot of redundant information and didn't think there was enough to merit separate articles. The opening to the NP article is just as it was before the merge. If you want to separate, that's OK with me, but I'd like to see less redundancy and a clearer distinction between them. Bkonrad | Talk 16:26, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree with you that is was a mess before the merge.-- Decumanus 16:27, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I reverted the merge. And now I see that I originally wrote what I was complaining about. Now we can work on fixing it. Rmhermen 18:40, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

Reworked article - still needs something on lighthouses and shipwrecks. What else? Flora? Rmhermen 22:53, Mar 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * Great start Rmherman. I'll take a closer look when I get a chance. Bkonrad | Talk 23:20, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Merge: reprise
Though I see it has been tried unsuccessfully, I'd still like to see this national park article merged to Isle Royale; I think it can be properly done. Isle Royale is the only notable island in the park, unlike Yosemite Valley which is only 1% of the park it is in. The other islands in this park could easily be described in the main island article; they aren't notable except as islands in the National Park or as small islands near the much larger island.

As for merging into the Island article instead of the Park article, the island was here first and is notable and unique in itself, with quite a bit of history prior to the park. However, there are arguments for keeping it here, such as the presence of the infobox.

There isn't anything to say about the park that you couldn't say in a section of the article about the island, or vice versa. In fact, this article says almost everything that is said in the other article. Leaving them separate, when they are about almost the exact same subject, makes for redundancy and/or partitioning of information. If some people agree with me, (and there isn't much disagreement) I'll tackle it. -DDerby- (talk) 03:39, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that the articles could and should be merged. My inclination is to merge Isle Royale into Isle Royale National Park, as the National Park includes the entire island and surrounding area, and the park is currently the sole use and attraction of the island. Isle Royale could redirect to Isle Royale National Park, or it could simply be a one paragraph geographic summary with link to the national park article.  -- BlueCanoe 18:27, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I personally prefer a redirect over write about the geography and leave out the history, etc. Which is why I also prefer to merge into Isle Royale - the history goes back long before the park, and the area can be described in the island article. -DDerby- (talk) 21:06, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I've no problem with leaving things as they are (I was the one who attempted to merge the two a while back a discussed above). However, if there is to be a merge, I would very strongly prefer that the island article be merged and redirected to the National Park article. There are quite a few such national park articles that seem to have a standard naming convention and an active wikiproject working on them.  But before merging, consider that there are precedents for having separate articles on the geological feature and nearly coterminous park: Yosemite Valley and Yosemite National Park, Channel Islands of California and Channel Islands National Park, Mackinac Island and Mackinac National Park (among others). older≠wiser 22:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

As almost two months have past without action, I am tempted to remove the merge notice, but I'll give it a few more days. My vote: Merge the island into the Nat'l Park, as the NP also has a few smaller islands and therefore (technically) the island is a subset of the NP. Also, the island article is less developed. — Eoghanacht  talk 22:08, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

 * No action, I'm removing the merge notice. -- dcclark (talk) 21:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Date of authorization
hey everyone, i am doing a project on isle royale, and i just put in the date of authorization, i hope this helps someone in the world

{BF}Doom
 * I removed it as the content of the box is standardized at WikiProject Protected Areas. Also it is not clear what this date signifies. Rmhermen 16:19, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Island dimensions
Minor quibble - the article says the island is over fifty miles long, but I believe the maximum length is closer to 45 miles (and maybe short of that). Can someone confirm the number? (I've hiked it four times so I have a pretty good idea, but can't precisely measure from my maps.)

 * You are correct, the island is 45 miles long according to the NPS website. I corrected the dimensions in the article and added a reference. Epolk 23:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Nearest City
Lately we've had some changes: nearest city was Duluth, MN, it got changed to Thunder Bay, Ontario, and reverted. It seems from the map that Thunder Bay is much, much closer than Duluth. Since we've had some reverts already, I'm posting here first: what's up? Why the changes back to Duluth? -- dcclark (talk) 22:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I would image that is has to do with nationality but clearly Thunder Bay is the closest of the two. On the other hand, Grand Portage, Minnesota seems to be about as far away. Park headquarters are some 56 miles away in Michigan. Rmhermen 22:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I would say that Grand Portage isn't anywhere near large enough to be the nearest "city." Houghton, Michigan as the HQ, might be a good choice, but I think it's still farther than Thunder Bay. -- dcclark (talk) 23:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Grand Portage and Thunder Bay are around 20-25 miles away - Park headquarters more than twice that. Grand Portage is the nearest place to get a ferry to the park, Thunder Bay is the closest if you have your own fairly large boat. Thunder Bay is still the best bet, I'd say. Rmhermen 03:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Not to sound like some kind of nationalist, but I prefer the closest U.S. city since it is a U.S. park. In the case of let's say Waterton Lakes National Park, I would prefer the closest Canadian city as it is a Canadian Park, even though it is closely aligned with Glacier National Park (US) which borders the park on the south and even though they are essentially one park and recognized as the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park. Probably a silly notion on my part, but similar to how I prefer American measurements for distance, etc in article pertaining to the U.S. and metric for all other areas that this measurement system is standard.--MONGO 03:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, this begs the question: what is the point of the "nearest city" field? Is it for potential travellers? In that case, something in the same country makes sense. Is it for locating the park geographically? Then the nearest city, no matter which country, is probably best. Personally, I think the latter is the case, but I'm open to other ideas. -- dcclark (talk) 04:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not beholden completely to demanding it be the way I state. There is much ambiguity as to what constitutes a city. In some of the articles I have written, I state the nearest point of population, be it even a village or where the nearest post office is located. Sometimes I mention the nearest city as being where the protected area is Headquartered at...even though this may be some distance from the site in more remote locations. It's actually quite arbitrary. But I think the most important thing is the coordinates, which should be at the point of most visited entry to a protected area, and not at the city itself. If someone wants to reinsert Thunderbay, that's fine, I just prefer we find a U.S. location in this case. I encounter the delimma even on areas well inside U.S. territory, as in the case of Vermilion Cliffs National Monument I put down St. George, Utah, even though the entire protected area is located in Arizona. I suppose the question I ask is that since this is a U.S. Park, do the majority of U.S. citizens that visit the park enter Canada to do so, to catch the ferry, or do they access the park from the south. I am not familiar with the information, so I suppose where ever the closest launching point for a trip would be is fine.--MONGO 04:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * There is no ferry from Canada at all. The only ferries are from Grand Portage, pop. 500 or so, and from the Keweenaw, over twice as far away. Most people do come by one of the ferries, although some fly in on floatplanes or use their own boats. Which ferries carry the most people I couldn't say. Rmhermen 05:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I changed it because "Duluth is the nearest city" is objectively incorrect. The "nearest city" is Thunder Bay. The "nearest city in the same country" is Grand Portage. The "nearest city in the same state" is Eagle River. The "nearest city of over 5,000 in the same country" is Houghton. Up the population requirement to 10,000 and you get Marquette, way the heck on the other side of the Keweenaw. Duluth finally qualifies if you increase the population requirement to 20,000 (which it meets easily), but you still have to leave the (yes, it's nationalist) country requirement in there because Thunder Bay is even bigger. It's not Wikipedia's place to interpret what "nearest city" really means or to second-guess what people might want this information for. Maybe they want to look up weather forecasts (for which Duluth is useless), maybe they want to find it on a cities-only map that doesn't have parks outlined (not really relevant in this case, but for other parks)... it doesn't matter. If they're looking for how to get there, Thunder Bay makes more sense, because people actually do it that way. Maybe not a lot of Americans, but more than sail all the way from Duluth, a city with no discernable association with the park. Because of the ferry service, Grand Portage certainly makes more sense from the travel-info perspective, but Copper Harbor is probably marginally more-heavily used (judging from ferry service capacity). But really, if they're looking for instructions how to get there, they should be consulting Wikitravel (which is intended to give guidance), not Wikipedia. (And if it's guidance you want to give, that's where you should be giving it.) Bottom line: Either "nearest city" means the objectively nearest city, or it should be renamed to whatever elaborate criteria you're actually using, or it shouldn't be included in the infobox at all. 161.57.55.36 14:33, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge III
I have proposed a merger of Isle Royale into this article, which I support and is supported by a majority of those commenting above. Please discuss at Talk:Isle_Royale. Thank you. Kablammo (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

 * The last merge discussion was years ago and the majority did not support it either time. Rmhermen (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Not by my count. Look above at Talk:Isle_Royale_National_Park; two years ago five editors supported a merge, and no one opposed it; they only differed in which article should be merged into which.  In any event I am copying this discussion to Talk:Isle_Royale so the discussion can be centralized.  Please post further comments there.  Thank you.  Kablammo (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

 * As one of the participants at that time, I did not support the move, I offered a suggestion if the merge were to proceed. I don't see any reason to alter my opinion at this time. older ≠ wiser 03:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

 * You are correct-- my apologies. I will cross-post to the other discussion page.  Kablammo (talk) 04:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

'''In order to keep discussion in one place, please post comments at Talk:Isle_Royale. All above comments have been copied there.'''

Withdrawal of merge proposal
As neither this merge proposal (discussed more fully on the Isle Royale talk page) nor the two articles themselves have attracted much interest, and as there is neither a consensus to merge nor much work being done on these articles, I am removing the merge proposal.

For the reasons I mentioned above, I will leave further editing of these to articles to others, as I frankly don't know where to put new additions and Wikipedia has many other projects which could use attention. I hope that those who take an interest in Isle Royale will be able to give it the treatment it deserves.

Some thoughts:

 * Midcontinent Rift has some good sources on geology.
 * Geological history of Isle Royale, now the third link under External links for the Isle Royale page, does not really add anything and contains some unscientific information.
 * There is a book by a member of the Sivertson family with some good human history on Island Royale. It would be a useful resource.  The history of those families on the island did not end with establishment of the park.
 * There are a number of published sources on the wolf study. Wolves and Moose on Isle Royale has many; this is a useful starting point as well.
 * The ecology sections of these articles are entirely unreferenced—as a matter of fact the articles only share 7 footnotes between them.

Best wishes. Kablammo (talk) 16:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Ships section
Ships section is a little confusing to read. Perhaps if we just went through them instead of essentially organizing by day tripping vs. other it would help? North8000 (talk) 13:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The day tripping part was originally supposed to mention the third way of reaching the islands - by private boat mainly from Minn. and Ontario. Often just for fishing and picnicking for the day although some will camp. Some campsites are boat access only. Sea Hunter and Isle Royale Queen both run same day schedule - but Sea Hunter and Voyageur are run by the same company. meanwhile the official park boat is now mentioned third in the list. Suggestions? Rmhermen (talk) 14:51, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (Just brainstorming, this may be a bad idea):  Move the private boats material up to "access" and then just cover the ships in the ship section?  North8000 (talk) 20:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll try a few things.  Please revert or tell me if you do not think it is an improvement. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 02:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Isle Royale National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070818011134/http://www.mnmodel.dot.state.mn.us/chapters/chapter3.htm to http://www.mnmodel.dot.state.mn.us/chapters/chapter3.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:48, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

People living on Isle Royale in the 1930s and 1940s.
Just a note that I have a book ISBN 0962436933 Once Upon An Isle: The Story of Fishing Families on Isle Royale by Howard Sivertson (Wisconsin Folk Museum, 1992). The back cover: "...The scenes and companion stories illustrate the vanished heritage of the fishing families who lived on Isle Royale...the humor and hardships of a lake fisherman's life in the 1930s and 1940s." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:3390:92D0:A9FD:257E:F09F:2D21 (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Cool....thanks. North8000 (talk) 16:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Isle Royale National Park


text:
Talk:List of grammatical cases

Finno-Ugric
What if we made a sublist with the cases that only occur in Finno-Ugric languages?

Perhaps we should make the "example languages" more comprehensive and include all known languages that distinguish that particular case. Kwertii 16:16, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I included references from Panu Mäkinen at the University of Jyväskylä for a couple of Finnish cases. By the way, at which point (especially in Finnish) can you tell, if a grammatical construction is a case? On the websites I took as references, there are many examples of Finnish words in the mentioned cases, if somebody has got problems to find such. However, references from this source could still be added for these Finnish cases: Nominative, Genitive, Accussative, Essive 193.185.137.35 (talk) 01:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

name change
I renamed this article "List of language cases" because "List of cases" is not specific enough. For example, "List of cases" could refer to legal cases. Kingturtle 22:02, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your consideration, but the new title doesn't make any sense. I'll move it to List of grammatical cases. — Timwi 21:36, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

dedative case?
Concerning the "dedative case" - is there such a thing? What is the point of having a case with no example languages given? Vice 11:53, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

postpositional case
The postpositional case and oblique case are the same - and usually referred to only as the oblique case Bish

Constructed languages
Is there really a point to mark constructed languages as such? I see no point in distinguishing them apart except to belittle their existance as languages. (Yes, I speak a constructed language, and yes, I am offended.) D. Wo. 08:17, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)

 * I see no problem with including the most well-known conlangs, especially Esperanto, Quenya and Klingon. LudwigVan 01:49, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cases explained?
Don't you think we need a working definition for a case before we begin to list them? --Djacobs 18:54, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

English possessive?
Is it accurate to list English with a possessive case? While the "'s/Ø'" morpheme certainly began as an inflection in Old English, and English remains just barely, by the skin of its teeth an inflectional language, and you can see its inflectional parallel in Modern German today (though German's genitive equivalent is dying out in the vernacular), at this point "'s/Ø'" has transformed into a clitic, having neither the quality of an agglutination, nor really of its inflectional origins. Besides undergoing context-dependent sound changes between voicing and devoicing, it doesn't adapt to the word it's suffixed to at all. All nouns take it, without discrimination (yielding weird examples where a plural noun is taking a normally singular possessive clitic, like "the children's"). It's far more similar to the "-ing," "-'ve," "-'d," phenomenon of verb contractions, less contractions than clitics themselves, than true inflectional relics like "oxen" or the oblique declensions of the personal pronouns.

Given that, is it appropriate to list the possessive as a case of the English language? Or if so, should it be noted at the top that these cases include examples of clitics, not just inflection? That broadening would bring a lot more languages into play for examples of grammatical cases. Japanese, for example, fits the inflectional requiremnt, and would fill into locative, nominative, accusative, possessive, instrumental, and dozens of other cases, perhaps rivaling Hungarian's fetish for them.

 * The same goes for Swedish, listed somewhere as having possessive or genitive case. (I didn't understand all of the above post, but I think this is a relevant reply.) Jørgen 21:18, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * English has a distinct possessive case for many pronouns: I, you, he, she, we, and they, and possibly others I'm not thinking of. None of these can take the clitic 's (except in compound constructions like "John and I's", and even then it sounds strange and isn't universally accepted as correct). (I'm ignoring it and who, because while we do write its instead of it's and whose instead of who's, that's an orthographic convention that's not reflected in the spoken language.) Ruakh 14:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Finnish Distributive-temporal case
Finnish seems to have this case as well-- this should be edited in. Some examples:

päivisin 'dayly', maanantaisin 'on each monday', tuntisin 'hourly', öisin 'nightly', etc. Pretty productive. --Alcarilinque 23:06, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * It isn't a case in Finnish, because adjectives don't agree with it (you can't say "*pimeisin öisin"). Muhaha 20:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Arabic vocative: is it a case?
I always understood Arabic to have three cases: nominative -u(n), accusative -a(n) and genitive -i(n). These do not require prepositions. The vocative form uses the preposition يا yā with either the nominative case (without nunation) or the construct state form of the noun. I doubt this would truly be classified as a case, or else there would be many more cases, such as inessive (في fī "inside" + genitive), which is much more of a typical Finno-Ugric case than a Semitic one. LudwigVan 01:49, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Arabic has three cases : nominative (-u) for verb subject, accusative (-a) for verb direct object, and a other case (-i) for all prepositions. This prepositional case is sometimes called genitive (or oblique, or even dative according the mother thongue of the grammarian) although a genuine genitive (name complement) exist in arabic, but is zero marked (simple juxtaposition). Now, that is what grammians are used to say, because to tell the true, earing vocals in arabic is sometimes beyong "naked hear" capacity.
 * Maybe I change the main article. AlainD 11:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

What about non-productive cases? (e.g. Dutch genitive)
What is to be done with non-productive cases? Dutch genitive case is really only used in archaic phrases, and is no longer productive. I guess the answer depends on the purpose of this list. If the intent is to list all cases in all languages, then we could include things like Dutch genitive (perhaps with a note). However, then the list is far from complete. If we just want a few good examples for each case, then Dutch genitive is a really bad choice. Thoughts? Junes 21:40, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Derechative and esquertive; Arrocon
Where did these come from? I don't find any hits for them on Google except for this page. Do they occur in non-constructed languages?

What is Arrocon? A conlang?

Regarding the definitions of the terms, I would think that, if such cases exist, esquertive would be "on the left of" and derechative "on the right of," based on the obvious similarity of the names with Spanish (a la) izquierda (esquerda in Portuguese) "left" and (a la) derecha "right". Correct me if I'm wrong.

Semantic cases
Except for maybe the partitive, the current table List_of_grammatical_cases is very disputable. The prepositional case should be in the "Morphosyntactic alignment" table, and the vocative could go either there or in "Relation". I have already removed "Disjunctive" because that isn't even a case (and the article has been accordingly renamed and rewritten and recategorized). CapnPrep 17:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Latin locative
Is locative really to be considedred as one of the Latin cases? As far as I know about Latin there are/were only traces of locative manifesting themselves in (sporadic?) use of the genitive of geographical names to denote location in. 85.8.0.197 00:06, 13 January 2007 (UTC) It isn't 'sporadic', and is productive. If you name a new city, you can still produce locative forms to refer to it. While most forms are identical with the genitive, not all are. A case falling into disuse is still a case. 134.84.238.161 (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

the Finnish cases
The "prolative", "temporal" etc. aren't real cases in Finnish because they don't agree with adjectives. Removed. Muhaha 20:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

A mising Arabic case
There is an Arabic case that is only used with place-nouns (e.g. in front, behind, above, beneath). The declensions are the same of the acusative case.

e.g. the word amaam أمام means "front." When it is declined in the construct accusative case amaama it will mean "in front of" or "at the front of."

This is just exactly like the described 'temporal case,' but it is for place-nouns instead of time-nouns.

 * So what evidence makes this case different from the actual accusative? It seems that it's just the plain old accusative case, which happens to alter the meaning of some nouns a bit. If it's morphologically the same, it simply is the accusative. — N-true (talk) 22:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

and what makes the temporal case different from the accusative?

If you can't see the difference then don't worry about it.

The accusative is the case of "objects" of the other words, especially verbs. The case I'm talking about is an "adverbial" case used for adverbs not for objects. In Arabic grammar it is called ظرف مكان "condition of place," like how the nouns in temporal case are called ظرف زمان"condition of time."

If you mean that the declensions are the same for the two, then, well, I have seen cases overlap in your list (like Arabic mentioned to have both genitive and prepositional cases, although both cases have exactly the same declensions).HD1986 (talk) 10:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

 * I didn't add the temporal case. I don't know anything about it, it might be just a disguised accusative as well. But if they share the exact same declension paradigm, they're essentially the same case. So this would mean, the accusative has a wider function than just marking the direct object. This is in fact quite typical of many languages. — N-true (talk) 10:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. I suggest fixing the thing about Arabic. Arabic has only three cases, the nominative الرفع, the accusative النصب, and the genitive الجرّ (although the last two may be used for quiet different things).

The list does not indicate the Arabic cases correctly. HD1986 (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Ablative case?
The ablative case is listed twice, under 'Motion from' and 'Relation'. They link to the same page, but they don't seem to be the same thing. Why? Xerxes b (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I think that's a matter of naming. It has two functions, motion away from something, and a broader function for different grammatical/syntactical functions as in Latin. One should perhaps rename one or the other, but they do overlap in certain ways and the old name Ablative stuck for Latin and some other well-known languages. — N-true (talk) 20:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Before I mess this page up even more
When trying to put under Allative case, that Sumerian contains an allative case, I messed up the page a little, and would like to know how to fix it. I didn't edit charts on here before and have been offline for a while. Sorry.

Thanks, Abdishtar (talk) 00:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

 * The answer is easy: The Sumerian language has no allative case, it has Directive and Terminative. See for that the excellent German article for Sumerian and the Sumerian Grammar by Dietz Otto Edzard. — N-true (talk) 09:00, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

 * This really is a matter of terminology; the -šè case used to be called allative in earlier literature but is now more often referred to as terminative, for whatever reason. It really functions as a lative (allative, illative, "I'm going to location X") and more rarely as a terminative. "Directive" isn't even in our list.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 14:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Cases in Portuguese
The article lists 6 cases for Portuguese: accusative, benefactive, comitative, dative, distributive-temporal and genitive. All of these are recent additions to the text. I could imagine some rudiments of old inflections or newborn case-like derivational suffixes on enclitics, e.g. in the pronouns, but claiming that they are cases in the present Portuguese language seems strange. Could somebody please confirm this and provide sound references. --Surfo (talk) 16:55, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Argumentive-agentive distinctions?
Are there any languages that mark the argument of an intransitive verb or the agent of an intransitive verb which does not (necessarily?) imply an object differently from the agent of a transitive verb that implies an object? Or, rather, that mark the argument of a mediopassive verb differently from the agent of an intransitive verb?

For example, in the sentence "John runs", the word "run" could be interpreted as either intransitive or mediopassive depending upon interpretation. If the transitive form is interpreted as being primarily causative ("John ran his dogs ten miles") then the intransitive form implies an unstated object and the subject is an agent, not just an argument. Otherwise, the verb can be thought of as not a "pure" intransitive verb, but a mediopassive one, and "John" is simply the argument, but not necessarily an agent.

Is there a name for a case which marks an argument of a "mediopassive" intransitive verb differently from agents of transitive/intransitive verbs? This would seem a very logical way to mark cases (or to leave unmarked and contrast with other, marked cases) and such a system could easily have been the basis for nominative-accusative, ergative-absolutive, and active-stative systems. --Þorstejnn (talk) 23:27, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Lative and illative found in German?
I don't think this is correct - I can neither find reference nor any mention in the articles about those cases to German. Also, German grammar specifies 4 cases, and even in older germanic grammar, those cases aren't found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.248.172.82 (talk) 12:10, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Are privative and abessive the same thing?
Privative is listed in the "relation" section, and abessive is listed in the "state" section, both described as the lack of something. The link privative case redirects to abessive case. I'm not too knowledgeable about grammatical cases, but are these the exact same thing? Should their entries not be merged, or at least moved to the same section?

Justin Kunimune (talk) 19:09, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

'Serbo-Croatian' discrepancy
In this list, the item 'Serbo-Croatian' is referred to at one occasion, while both 'Serbian' and 'Croatian' at another. Is there consensus on how to refer to it? Adamchess7347 (talk) 09:17, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Morphosyntactic alignment; objective case examples
If the objective case is used for indirect objects as well as direct objects, it seems to me like 'book' should be in boldface as well as 'her'. If true, would someone mind making that change? And if false, perhaps add a note or explanation in that entry? Thank you!

peatswift (talk) 15:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Initiative case vs. Egressive case
I can find no discernible difference between the initiative case and the egressive case, and I do not understand why they need to be listed separately. On further review of the page for the initiative case, there are no citations for it, and the page is listed as having "multiple issues." I also couldn't find any external resources on it at all. help??????

Schneedesu (talk) 22:24, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of grammatical cases


text:
Talk:Software engineering demographics

Can someone find data on the number of software engineers in the EU, Japan, India, etc? Or at least point to where such data can be found? Thx.

 * For UK figures see Office for National Statistics Edward 21:58, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Software engineering demographics


text:
Stone County

Stone County is the name of several counties in the United States:

 * Stone County, Arkansas
 * Stone County, Mississippi
 * Stone County, Missouri

title: Stone County