Talk:Lal

India Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthroponymy

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the study of people's names on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy articles

Etymology fixed

An explanation of this edit: Persian Wikipedia's لعل corresponds (or links) to English Wikipedia's garnet. I found the Pashto meaning using Major H.G. Raverty's Dictionary of the Puk'hto, Pus'hto, or language of the Afghans (see here). --Kuaichik (talk) 23:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

so what you trying to say ? --DMulla (talk) 00:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

here the persian part of the Oxford press There is also a homonymous word lal in Hindi, from Persian meaning ‘ruby’, ‘red’, which may have increased the popularity of this name --DMulla (talk) 00:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

please consult with academic sources like the name dictionary oxford press that defines Lal and basic knowledge of the word. --DMulla (talk) 01:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I checked with a Persian dictionary, and I found out that "لعل" does mean "ruby" in Persian after all. But I still maintain that it does not mean "red" in Persian or Pashto, and it also means "garnet" in Persian (though apparently not in Pashto).

What I am trying to say is that "لعل" means "garnet" or "ruby" in Persian. However, it does not mean "red" in Persian. There are at least two words for "red" in Persian, but "لعل" is not one of them. If you still think it means "red" in Persian, you need reliable sources to back up that claim.

Regarding some other concerns you appear to have:

That source may be an authority on American family names, but it certainly does not dictate the meaning of Persian words or the etymology of Urdu words.
I added the "citation needed" tag to the first sentence because no sources have been provided to show that "(l)al...is derived from the Indo-Iranian word meaning ' Red '." Just because it looks like the Persian and Pashto word "لعل" doesn't mean that's necessarily where the Urdu word comes from. Furthermore, even the source you quoted says that the name "Lal" is of Sanskrit origin, not of "Indo-Iranian" origin. And finally, "Indo-Iranian" is usually used to refer to an entire language family. Which of the Indo-Iranian languages is it that has this "Indo-Iranian word meaning 'red,'" from which the article claims "Lal" was derived?
The language is Hindustani, not "Hindustan."
Lal is not even a word in Sanskrit, therefore lal cannot mean "red" in Sanskrit.
I see you are new to editing here. So, please refrain from personal attacks, such as this edit summary, where you assume that I am "blind."

Having said all that, thank you for your interest in this article. I assume and strongly hope that your contributions to Wikipedia will be, overall, constructive. --Kuaichik (talk) 03:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps your are having a hard time communicating in several areas. It was never mentioned that Lal was derived from urdu, the term Lal in urdu means red as well. It clearly states in the dictionary of names oxford press that Lal means red and ruby in persian. Further the word also appears in Pashto with the same usage and meaning. The term has more than one meaning and the script is one. (example the word 'beat' could mean a rhythm or 'beat' could mean physical beating. Understand ? --DMulla (talk) 04:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand all of that. But you're missing my point: it does not mean "red" in Persian, and that source is not an authority on the meaning of Persian words!

Understand? Now please, stop speculating about what fundamental physical/mental problems I may be having. --Kuaichik (talk) 04:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and another thing: it doesn't mean "red" in Pashto, either! In fact, you don't even have a source for that claim. --Kuaichik (talk) 05:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue addressed here

This time I also replaced "Indo-Aryan" with "other South Asian." There is no such thing as an "Indo-Aryan" country; "Indo-Aryan" can be used to describe a set of languages or a migration, not a country. So, I replaced it with something that was more accurate. I think (I hope!) it still captures the original intended meaning, since the only "regions with significant populations" of speakers of Indo-Aryan languages listed in the article Indo-Aryans are all in South Asia. (In fact, they could also be described as being primarily in the Indian Subcontinent, but just in case "Lal" is also used in Afghanistan or something...!). --Kuaichik (talk) 04:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]