Talk:ཁོང

@Wyang A couple of questions:

1. Is ་ ( ) actually part of the lemma?
2. Is the Tibetan cognate ཁོང (khong) as our translation tables claim or ཁོང་ (khong) as zh.wikt claims...

—Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 23:10, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The tsheg should only be placed between syllables, and is not part of the spelling. See WT:ABO. Also, before you start creating a bunch of entries, we should have a conversation about whether we want to merge it into bo altogether. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:15, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: Yeah, I was going to wait for Wyang (or anyone) to respond, since I'm not too comfortable with the script. And a lot of Sikkimese lemmas seem identical to Tibetan lemmas. Thanks btw, I'll move it. —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 23:46, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

nvm, I see you moved it. —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 23:47, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

As @Wyang noted at RFV, there seems to be a history of spelling it as Classical Tibetan (like other Tibetan dialects). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:48, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: Ethnologue claims 42% "lexical similarity" with Tibetan, weirdly. —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 23:52, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The languages are quite divergent, but their individual words are just spelled similarly. DerekWinters (talk) 00:50, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

@Aryamanarora zh.wikt ends the title of their Tibetan entries with the tsheg (zh:Category:藏语) ... a practice I introduced; zh:ཁོང་ was also created by me. With Sikkimese, I would be in support of its merger into Tibetan (before I see any evidence of phonetically written Sikkimese). Wyang (talk) 08:42, 21 August 2017 (UTC)