@Bhagadatta Should https://stefanbaums.com/baums_grammar_outline.pdf be used for inflection/declension templates? And is the IPA usable? There's a large number of Category:Gandhari proper nouns that IPs have been creating recently. Kutchkutch (talk) 13:19, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Kutchkutch: There seems to be no harm in using that as a source for inflection. As for IPA, I was going to ask you if we could use it for pronunciation. The reasoning for assuming a voiced dental fricative ð is explained in the wikipedia and it is logical to conclude that Gandhari indeed had the /ð/ sound. I suppose we can show the pronunciations provided in that work. -- 𝓑𝓱𝓪𝓰𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓽𝓽𝓪^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴)} 14:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Bhagadatta Regarding pronunciation:

Yes, we can start by showing the pronunciation exactly as they are shown in the grammar and Template:R:Gandhari. The grammar uses [narrow transcription]s instead of /broad transcription/s since the transcriptions provided account for phonological processes. ð is not a phoneme, so it should be surrounded by [] as [ð] rather than /ð/. [ð] in Gandhari is not surprising since the Dramatic Prakrits have /d/ → [ð] / V_V. After/While showing the pronunciation exactly as they are shown in the grammar and Template:R:Gandhari, we'll get a better idea about what do for terms without pronunciation in the grammar and Template:R:Gandhari. Module:hi-IPA shows gemination as CC, but the grammar and Template:R:Gandhari show gemination as Cː. Although I've seen some work on how the Dramatic Prakrits may have been pronounced, it's not as presented as it is in this grammar for Gandhari.

Regarding inflection/declension:

Although the grammar shows the pronunciation for declensional/inflectional endings, perhaps they should avoided initially. Template:R:Gandhari presumably shows the declined/inflected forms that are attested, and, similar to the Dramatic Prakrits, not all stem + endings combination may be attested. Kutchkutch (talk) 13:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)Reply