Talk:Pradesh

RFD discussion: February 2022

The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Pradesh

Not used in English as an independent term. It’s equivalent to an English entry Nadu (which occurs in the name Tamil Nadu). ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 17:47, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Keep (pending further comment) - normally I would agree, but for a different reason: it’s because we don’t have English definitions for things like County. The capitalisation suggests it’s a proper noun, and where we do have entries like that it’s almost always a shortening of some longer name. The question of whether pradesh (the hypothetical noun) sees any use in English isn’t relevant to Pradesh. That all being said, the fact that pradesh doesn’t seem to be a word at all, while Pradesh sees a consistent level of use in a very specific way (that clearly suggests a definition) makes me reconsider. It’s basically a suffix that looks like a word, but this is beyond my level of linguistics. Theknightwho (talk) 20:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

The term Pradesh (in English) is not used with the name of all provinces of the country, it just occurs in 5, and is just part of the whole name in such provinces. The English term used is ‘state’. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 20:43, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that. I have addressed that point in some detail. Theknightwho (talk) 20:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

We currently have Uttar Pradesh, making Pradesh unnecessary. But we could alternatively define short names only for politicial subdivisions of India, like

Uttar - the name of a state of India, full name Uttar Pradesh

and then we would want the current definition of Pradesh. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:27, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

When you put it like that, it would feel quite strange to have all these province names with the same non-word in, without having an entry explaining what that non-word is. Theknightwho (talk) 20:40, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

The place to explain such things is in the etymology, with links to the words in their original languages- which is where the actual combining of morphemes actually occurred

Nah, Uttar is meaningless in English. The name Uttar Pradesh is the only legitimate (per usage) transliteration used in English. In Hindi, उत्तर (uttar) means ‘north’ and प्रदेश (pradeś) means ‘province’. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 20:43, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

I can find a limited amount of use as a short form for various province names, a bit like referring to New Jersey as Jersey, e.g. google books:"in Pradesh" (some hits are conflating different columns, but some are genuine, like these). So, keep with that definition ("Short for..."). (I suspect "Uttar" et al are also attested as short forms.) Otherwise, we could consider {{only used in}}-ing it. - -sche (discuss) 21:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

In the 1991 quote, Pradesh Council is Indian English for ‘State Council’, and is therefore (likely) not a usage of the term Pradesh. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 22:26, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

This seems to just reinforce the point I made above. I've now looked it up, and it seems to be a clitic:

1. A morpheme that functions like a word, but never appears as an independent word, instead being always attached to a following or preceding word (or, in some cases, within a surrounding word)."

More specifically, it's an enclitic. Theknightwho (talk) 23:22, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

I can’t follow the argument. If the current definition is correct, then this is not an English noun, just like Pulau, “part of the name of some islands of Indonesia”, is not an English noun. It is part of a proper noun, but we do not recognize "Part of a proper noun" as an acceptable part of speech for which we can have entries.  --Lambiam 00:53, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

We recognise morphemes. The current definition is inadequate, but if we can have -ed and -ly then we can have this. The fact that a space separates it isn't relevant. Theknightwho (talk) 02:04, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

This isn't a morpheme in English. It never has any meaning or function of its own, and is never combined with anything new in English- it comes already pre-combined as part of a borrowing from another language. It's also not a clitic- those are morphemes that are attached to another word. "Pradesh" isn't attached to "Uttar", they just happen to always occur together. It's like the "San" in "San Francisco" and "San Diego", or the "Los" in "Los Angeles" and "Los Alamos"- it means something in the original language, but not in English. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:43, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I’d agree with you if its inclusion had no semantic relevance or was a one off, but it does. Not only that, it’s included in the names of 5 Indian states, and (apparently) the term for State Council. This is why I said it’s a clitic: it has the appearance of a word, has no semantic meaning on its own, but it does when following certain other terms.Theknightwho (talk) 14:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Keep per google books:"in the Pradesh". —Svārtava ^[t•u•r] 03:20, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Keep- per GBooks hits, and also if dictionary.com, definitions.net etc. can define them, so can we. --Rishabhbhat (talk) 03:25, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

It even seems to be inflected like an English noun - google books:"Pradeshes". 70.172.194.25 03:29, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Note. If kept as a common noun, the definition should be changed to: “A state (administrative division) of the Republic of India”. — This unsigned comment was added by Lambiam (talk • contribs) at 13:50, 11 February 2022.

Keep per the above Google Book queries. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 10:48, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Keep per the above Google Book queries (“in the Pradesh”, “Pradeshes”). J3133 (talk) 16:02, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

• RFD-kept, but def needs to be rewritten. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 13:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)