Talk:Malay language

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Glottal Stops and Tonic Syllables[edit]

Hi everyone. I have decided to ask these questions in the hopes that someone - maybe a native speaker or a someone with more expertise on the subject - can add these clarifications to the "Phonology" section of the article, because it has been sometime since I am looking for these answers, and I am sure more beginning students of these languages have been having the same doubts as me:

1. I think I read somewhere that in Malay and Indonesian there is an "automatic" glottal stop before each word-initial vowel (even if this vowel is preceded by a word ending in a consonant), and between any vowels - with the exception of diphthongs, obviously. I did not gave this much thought though, until I realized that that was the way the words were being pronounced in the "Rosetta Stone - Indonesian" language learning software. So here is the question: In the "RS-I" software, are the words being pronounced like that just to make them more easily intelligible for beginners like myself, or are they really pronounced like that in everyday conversations? For instance, a simple sentence like

Apakah ada seorang pria di atas rumah itu?

Would be pronounced

[ʔa'pakah 'ʔada se'ʔorang 'pria di 'ʔatas 'rumah 'ʔitu]

Or, in normal (or maybe fast-paced) conversation,

[a'pakah'adase'orang'priadi'atas'rumah'itu]?

(' = Tonic Syllable)

2. In the same software ("Rosetta Stone - Indonesian"), the tonic syllables of some words seem to be the last one instead of the penultimate, even when the vowel in this syllable is not the schwa, and some words even seem to "change" their tonic syllable according to who is saying them. So here is the other question: Are the accentuation rules really just

"If the penultimate has a schwa, the last syllable is the tonic one; if the penultimate does not have a schwa, the penultimate is the tonic one;"

Or is this wrong?

Thank you very much, XVoX 23:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Javanese a Malay dialect?[edit]

"However, many Malay dialects are not as mutually intelligible: for example, Kelantanese pronunciation is difficult even for some Malaysians to understand, while Javanese tends to have a lot of words unique to it which will be unfamiliar to other speakers of Malay."

So Javanese is a dialect of Malay? Hayabusa future 02:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think so. However it seems Malaysians also regard Kelantanese, Yawi, and Minangkabau of Negeri Sembilan as a dialect of Malay, so why not? :-p--Gombang 10:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Be mindful of WP:OR. __earth (Talk) 11:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, it isn't. I've just fixed that.E.Cogoy 17:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speaking of Malay dialects, Minangkabau language can be considered a Malay dialect because it uses many Malay words, although they were slight differences in pronunciation, e.g., itiak = itik, for "duck" & goriang = goreng, for "fry/fried". --121.218.215.16 (talk) 12:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The hatnote[edit]

Please see Template talk:Distinguish#Incompatible wording for Distinguish2

For now I have changed the hatnote to

Not to be confused with the Malayalam language, spoken in India.

--83.253.36.136 15:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The last paragraph of this subsection notes,

Although each language of the family is mutually unintelligible, their similarities are rather striking.

However, I have it on good authority that Māori and Hawaiian, for example, are very much mutually intelligible. Perhaps this should be changed to read, although many languages of the family are mutually unintelligible?

75.35.227.117 06:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC) --~~~~Insert non-formatted text hereReply[reply]

Hmmm... that's interesting. Maybe is should read thusly.
Joemaza 21:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed. However the reduplication section probably needs further elaboration. A few examples might be good.
Especially since recently quite a number of terms in ICT and sciences have been created using partial reduplication such as papan kekunci (keyboard), tetikus (computer mouse),pepaku (spike) and something less recent jejari (radius)

--Danazach (talk) 22:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Orthographic notes[edit]

I took out the note about 'x' representing /ks/, /z/ and /s/ because it is unnecessary. Another note, the one about "k" at the end of word being pronounced as a glottal stop should not be under orthography, it is a phonological phenomenon, just like the final vowel reduction - /a/ to schwa in some varieties128.175.180.149 (talk) 05:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shouldn't this article include Indonesian?[edit]

The article on the Indonesian language begins as follows: "Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia) is the official language of Indonesia. Indonesian is a standardized dialect of the Malay language that was officially defined..." According to the Indonesian article, Indonesian is a form of Malay. According to this article, Malay is only similar to Indonesian. This article says that Indonesia adopted Malay as its official language but then goes on to refer to only the official register of it used in Malaysia (and Singapore & Brunei?). Shouldn't the wording of the introduction be changed, and the speaker statistics be changed to include Indonesian? And then shouldn't the point be made that the orthography being used in the article is Bahasa Malaysia, with a "main article" link to Indonesian?GSTQ (talk) 22:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, on closer inspection this article is riddled with inconsistencies. I'm going to fix them up so that Indonesian is included as another official register of the Malay language.GSTQ (talk) 00:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think you missed the point of the quotation if you think that the absence of "in Indonesia" was important. The quotation does not purport to include the Malay of other countries. It says Indonesian is a 20th century name, not the 20th century name. The point of the quotation was that Indonesian is a variant of Malay, and that this is not original research. I am familiar with the debate about what constitutes a language. All I'm trying to resolve here is how this article, and indeed all of Wikipedia, deals with this situation, and frankly since both Indonesia and Malaysia's constitutions claim Malay as the national language of each it seems a pretty uncontroversial claim that they are the same language.GSTQ (talk) 04:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anybody interested to learn about history and relation bahasa Indonesia & bahasa Melayu can visit here:- http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1077&context=ies Yosri (talk) 11:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would like to adress this Malay -Indonesian issue once again: Should Indonesian register as just "a dialect of Malay?" Should Indonesian included in this Malay article, such as speaker of Indonesian included as speaker of Malay thus inflated the numbers of "Malay speaker" worldwide. Admit it, although Indonesian is second language to most of Indonesian, the number of Indonesian speakers are far surpassing Malay speaker, check the entry and compare the wikipedian articles numbers in Malay and Indonesian, you'll get the point. Malay is not an extinct language here in Indonesia, or turn and evolve into Indonesian language as some foreigners might naively perceived. Malay language still survive in Eastern coast of Sumatra and coastal Indonesian Borneo (Kalimantan) as Malay language, pretty much the same to Malay spoken in Peninsula. Malay in Indonesia have its native speakers, Indonesian (almost) not. Today in Indonesia Malay is considered as one of regional language, enjoying same status as Javanese, Sundanese, Minangkabau, and many other native languages in Indonesia. I would like to highlight this issue with different perception held in Malaysia and Indonesia.

The different evolution between Indonesian and Malay has led to a rift between the two standards. This is based more upon political nuance and the history of its standardization than on cultural reasons, and as a result there are asymmetrical different views regarding the other standard among Malaysians and Indonesians. In Malaysia, the national language is Malaysian; in Indonesia, it is Indonesian. The Malaysians tend to assert that Malay and Indonesian are merely variants of the same language, while the Indonesians tend to treat them as separate, albeit related, languages.

Treating Indonesian as the same as Malay or regarding its relations as British-USA english is a wishful or even worse, foolishly naive thinking. It is two separate language. Numbers of net language choice, Indonesian subtitles in Upin and Ipin aired in Indonesian television, vice versa Malay subtitles in Indonesian Sinetron aired in Malaysia, all testify them as two different entity (today). I believe this article took Malaysian side on insisting that Indonesian is the same as Malay. Here in Indonesia we have two of them, Malay spoken in Sumatra and coastal Borneo and Indonesian spoken in whole of Indonesia. Merging its speaker etc. is not doing justice to its history and its contemporary fact. I think Indonesian should be mentioned as took its base on Malay, yet its elements (number of speaker etc.) should not included in Malay language article.Gunkarta (talk) 12:41, 6 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

400 millions?[edit]

Where does the figure of 400 millions Malay speakers come from? Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Pattani and East Timor together only make some 265 millions inhabitants. Meursault2004 (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

400 millions? - Answer[edit]

I'm not really sure about this amount of speakers but I want to add: Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, East Timor, Southern Thailand, Southern Phillippines.

I think It's about 300 Millions something... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.53.192.107 (talk) 12:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that will be less, since clearly, Indonesian people (except those who specialize study Malay language and Malay ethnic in Sumatra and Borneo) CAN'T speak it. Therefore can not be categorized a speaker. They (include me) may understand up to certain % of the meaning but when we reply, certainly we will speak Indonesian Language.

contradictory information on official name of the language in Malaysia[edit]

  • the second paragraph says

In Malaysia, the language is now officially known as Bahasa Malaysia, ("Malaysian language"). Singapore, Brunei and southern Thailand refers to the language as Bahasa Melayu ("Malay language").

  • the third paragraph contradicts this, saying:

In Malaysia, the term Bahasa Malaysia, which was introduced by the National Language Act of 1967, was in use until the 1990s, when most academics and government officials reverted to "Bahasa Melayu," used in the Malay version of the Federal Constitution. According to Article 152 of the Federal Constitution, Bahasa Melayu is the official language of Malaysia. "Bahasa Kebangsaan" (National Language) was also used at one point during the 1970s.

So which is it ? -endorf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Endorf (talkcontribs) 18:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Map[edit]

It'd be great if this page had a map showing usage of the Malay language and derivitives. Mathiastck (talk) 20:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Consider making a "real" language group article[edit]

I think similar to other language group article in wikipedia like Slavic Languages family, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_languages. This page does not describes Malay language as a group of language, but instead, more toward "Malaysia Language". Therefore things like grammar, etc should be put in special page about the language. After some searching in the wikipedia, I found an article which better described about the Malay as a language group which is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malay_languages even the link for Standard Malayan Malay is linked to this page while the Standard Indonesian Malay (formal) is linked to Indonesia language. (114.59.163.169 (talk) 14:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Malaysian Malay and Indonesian is still mutually intelligible, which I doubt is the case with Slavic languages. Gombang (talk) 04:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Based on my knowledge they are mutually intelligible, if you have time you may want to check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differences_in_official_languages_in_Serbia,_Croatia_and_Bosnia, which I think similar (not the same of course) to malay language case. The point is this article describe about Standard Malayan Malay (a language) while at the beginning it declares itself as "Malay refers to a group of languages closely related".
However in the process rather than focused on describing the difference between the group variety (which is linked as other article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varieties_of_Malay)). On the other hand, it describe (In full part) "Simple phrases in Malay" and "Colloquial and contemporary usage", which (especially the last one) clearly refer to the Standard Malayan Malay.
Therefore there is a problem since in the information box, its even says as "Official language in Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia (Indonesian language)[4], East Timor (Indonesian language as working language)" which may cause misconception of reader that "Standard Malayan Malay (instead of Malay as a language group) is officially used in Indonesia and East Timor", which is not.17:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.163.0.56 (talk)
The article originally described the Malay language as a single language, not as family of languages, IIRC. Whether we can categorise Indonesian and Malaysian languages as a single language is disputable, of course. Gombang (talk) 03:56, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is quite interesting since we are talking about languages in evolution. One thing that people should remember is that in our time there are two standard Malay, that is Malaysian (English- & local dialects-influenced) and Indonesian (Dutch-, Javanese-, & Betawi-influenced). Brunei has their own standard, but it is not significant and basically based on Malaysian. People in Indonesia tend not to say Indonesian language as Malay because ethnicity in Indonesia is mostly perceived as based on language grouping. Linguistically, however, Indonesian is a Malay variety. Saying Indonesian is not Malay will make Malay language paraphyletic. Malay language (with all its varieties) is part of Malay languages. I agree that this article need a thorough review. Kembangraps (talk) 18:42, 11 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Official in Indonesia (and Timor)?[edit]

I think the Malay is not the official language of Indonesia. As stated by official website of Indonesia government the official language of Indonesia is "Indonesian Language". On the other hand, the term "spoken in Indonesia", is clearly right, since Malay language spoken by Malay ethic in Borneo and Sumatra. Malay in Indonesia can be considered used as local dialect in some parts of Indonesia and not an official langauge. This is similar to Sunda Language, Jawa Language, etc which is spoken by its ethic member. (114.59.163.169 (talk) 14:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Indonesian language IS a variant of Malay. Saying Indonesian is not Malay makes Malay language paraphyletic. Kembangraps (talk) 18:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, Kembangraps is right. The Indonesian language is just a variant of Malay. For example, I speak Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian language) but I can understand Malay and are able to speak it if needed. Agent 78787 (talk) 17:42, 25 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indonesian and Malay are some centuries separated?[edit]

"Indonesian and Malay are separated by some centuries of different vocabulary development." The fact is, Indonesian version of Malay was developed early of 20th century. Indonesian as unifying language (as called in Youth's Oath 1928) is even not older than a century. Unless 100 years can be said as "some centuries", correction is needed here. Kembangraps (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Role of "youngsters"[edit]

"I noticed that it is making broad generalizations without any evidence."

I have the same problem with some text under "Origin", viz.

"... while Indonesian contains many words unique to it that are unfamiliar to speakers of Malay (some because of Javanese (bahasa Jawa), Sundanese (bahasa Sunda) or other local language influence, and some because the language has been modified by youngsters)."

Although I have already cleaned up the grammar and pronunciation of this part, I have serious doubts about the final clause:

"some because the language has been modified by youngsters)."

I believe this to constitute nothing more than opinion, and have seen no evidence for it. Thus, after a short pause for reflection - say a week or so - I intend to remove that clause unless someone can offer support for it.

Another factor (for which evidence may exist) should perhaps be mentioned, and that is the fondness of official Indonesian for constructing new portmanteau words and abbreviations, e.g. "Kapolda", found in news reports, which I can only guess to be a contraction of "Ketua Polis Daerah". Again, we would need suitable sources (but I have none) before adding to the article.

yoyo (talk) 08:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, Indonesian officials are fond of abbreviations. I think we can add that, although we should find some reliable source for it. By the way, your guess of the meaning of Kapolda is close, it is "Kepala Polisi Daerah" (which has basically the same meaning with your guess). Gombang (talk) 17:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indonesian hatnote[edit]

I do not mean to express my opinion about the similarities and the differences between Malay and Indonesian, as i don't know either, but the hatnote that says "Not to be confused with the Indonesian language, a variety officially spoken in Indonesia." is not appropriate. The idea of "Not to be confused" hatnotes is to disambiguate between different meanings of similarly sounding words. "Malay" and "Malayalam" sound similar, but "Malay" and "Indonesian" are completely different.

Besides, the fact that Indonesian is closely related to Malay is mentioned in the opening paragraph.

I am removing that hatnote. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:31, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The reason for that is that Indonesian is also called 'Malay', or 'Indonesian Malay'. — kwami (talk) 17:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand that, but to the best of my understanding this hatnote is supposed to disambiguate article titles and not article subjects. If we don't have it for Dari/Persian and for Valencian/Catalan, then i understand that it shouldn't be here, too. Or is the situation here significantly different?
If someone is looking for information about Indonesian and gets here, then the first sentence will send him to the right place. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:52, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Different Dialects of the Malay Language.[edit]

There are lots of Malay Dialects spoken in South East Asian. This works like the Chinese or Indians that has lots of dialects where outsiders almost can't tell the differences. These different dialects can be detected if a researcher stayed and listen carefully on different speakers.

Much of the cause of these differences are the many Malay Kingdoms around South East Asia before that developing the language on their own ways. Some are not too different and some are totally hard to understand. Until today, there are still 10 official Malay Kingdom with Kings or Sultanates, that are the 9 Kings or Sultanates of Malaysia and One Sultan of Kingdom of Brunei. However, there are also unofficial Malay Kings such as in Southern Thailand, Southern Philippines, and some parts of the Indonesian Islands such as in the Sumatra. Other lost Malay Kingdoms are the Pattani of South Thailand, Temasik of Singapore, Sulu of South Philippines, Malacca of Central Malay Peninsula, Acheh of North Sumatra, Palembang of Middle Sumatra and many more. Much of the lost kingdoms are because of the Colonization age. In Malaysia alone, the Malay Language are varied according to different states (Kingdoms). There are the Northern Malay Dialects spoken by the State of Kedah, Penang, Perlis and Northern Perak. The Johore-Riau Dialects are spoken in Selangor, Johore, Malacca and Singaporean Malay. The Unique Dialects that spoken only in their own states are the Nogori Dialects Spoken by the State of Negeri Sembilan Natives, the Perakian Dialects spoken by the Perak Natives, The Terengganu Dialects spoken by the Terengganu natives, the Pahang Dialects spoken by the Pahang Natives, the Kelantanese Dialects spoken by the Kelantan Natives, Sarawakian Dialects spoken by the Sarawak Malays and the Sabahan Dialects spoken by the Sabah Malays. The Southern Thailand of Malay area in Pattani spoke much similar to the Kelantanese and the Southern Thailand of Malay area in Narathiwat spoke much the same with the Northern Malay Dialects (Kedah Perlis). The Southern Philippines of Malay Area (Mindanao and Sulu) can be understood by the Sabahan Malays and the Kadazans becaus it is quite close to their Dialects.

A very common Malay Dialects that being considered as Official Malay Language (Bahasa Melayu/Bahasa Malaysia) are the Johore-Riau Dialects. These Dialects has been officially used in the government sectors, Mass-media (Printed and Electronics) and schools. A very unique dialects and considered as hard to understand are the Kelantanese, the Terengganu, and the Sarawakian Dialects.

If you find out that there are lots of Malay Dialects in parts of Malaysia-Singapore, Southern Thailand, and Southern Philippines. These are not too much if to compare with the diversity of Dialects in Indonesia. That would be covered in the different topics. Snoiprocs16 (talk) 15:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

merge[edit]

IMO grammar at Malaysian and Indonesian should be merged here, to avoid a content fork. The two standards differ primarily in vocab, but there's very little diff otherwise. We could leave a summary, but currently we have a lot of detail. I tagged the sections at Indo that IMO should be here; at Malaysian, it's primarily phonology that's dup'd, tho I'm guessing we'd want to leave at least a basic chart, as at Indo.

Titles are good, though we might want to consider 'Malaysian Malay' and 'Indonesian Malay' to clarify that these aren't languages any more than American English and British English are. Only prob w that is that 'Indonesian Malay' might be construed as native Malay spoken in Riau and Sumatra, which is called Bahasa Malayu rather than Bahasa Indonesia in Indonesia. — kwami (talk) 08:06, 9 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My apologies – I’m not completely sure what you are suggesting. It seems you are not suggesting a merge of pages, but merge/rearrangement of content across pages. Am I right? In which case I'm am largely supportive of your recommendations - although American and British English underestimates the differences.
The Indonesia project editors should be consulted on these issues, and I have not got their views yet, but my thoughts related to broader issues on these articles are:
  • Malay language, Indonesian language, Malaysian are all related but distinct enough subjects for their own pages. Perhaps the “Malaysian” title needs reassessment.
  • I certainly support a re-organisation of content between these. While a degree of overlap is inherently necessary, at the moment overlap IMO is excessive and confused. But, with the creation of the “Malaysian” article, we are now on the right track.
  • If the Malay article is to continue to promote Indonesian as being Malay (which I think is at best careless – at worst disingenuous), then what I’m calling the “Malaysianness” needs to be correspondingly toned down. 20m vs. 200m is simple maths.
  • Indonesian language should not be moved to Indonesian Malay. I don’t get that. I have never heard to it referred to it as such. It is overwhelmingly (ie, always) referred to as Indonesian across the world. Actually, there is one place I have seen it referred to as such: here on wikipedia. But it was unreferenced and likely WP:OR efforts that, if I may be cynical and cheeky for one brief moment, I suspect may have been written by a Malaysian. ;-)
  • British English vs. American English comparisons are probably not that helpful. The differences between Malaysian and Indonesian varieties are much more pronounced – and they are generally referred to as distinct languages. There would be differences in almost every sentence in a comparison, rather than the occasional "garbage"-"trash" and "petrol"-"gas" differences.
  • Given that “Malay” was always a/the lingua franca throughout Maritime Southeast Asia and that Indonesian is based on a variety that had its origins in Indonesia not Malaysia, I think lines like (and I'm paraphrasing ehre) “Malay is the official language in Malaysia and also Indonesia as Indonesian” is a little careless, and at worst, disingenuous.
  • I’m concerned that the articles are increasingly becoming grammar and vocab guides. An encyclopedia should focus on general descriptions of the language including its history/development and where and where it is used and varieties. Not on how to use it. Wikipedia language articles are not “how to” guides. If the grammar content is merged into Malay language, then that article needs to be less Malaysia-centric with Indonesian as an after thought. Ie, the new Malaysian language needs to be kept. But, even better, would be to remove most of the text book stuff.
  • We’ve mentioned the varieties of Indonesia and Malaysia. What about Brunei? Is it “Malaysian”?
  • East Timor uses Indonesian (after Portuguese, Tetum of course). It does not use Malay/sian.
Cheers --Merbabu (talk) 00:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Malaysian and Indonesian are the same language. They're even based on the same dialect of Malay: that of the Johore-Riau court, a sultanate which was divided between Malaysia and Indonesia. In the ELL2, they are treated under a single title, "Malay"; the article on Indonesia states that the national language is Malay, which was renamed Indonesian as part of the national independence movement. They are only separate languages in the sense that they are separate national standards, but the differences are almost entirely in the vocabulary, and then not in the basic vocab. I'm sure you know the situation better than I, but when I'm in Indonesia, people say I speak Indonesian, and when I'm in Malaysia, people say I speak Malaysian, yet I speak the same language in both countries: I only make a few minor changes to grammatical words, such as tak.
I agree 'Malay' should be balanced and not cover Malaysian. The reason that it does that until recently it was the article for Malaysian. The way I see it, 'Malay language' should cover the language as a whole, with only summaries of the Malaysian and Indonesian standards. 'Malaysian language' and 'Indonesian language' should cover the standards in detail, with only summaries of the material in the main article.
Brunei has always gone by the name "Malay", but I don't know if it's a separate standard. The colloquial language is clearly a distinct dialect, though, as are all of the 'local Malays'.
East Timor of course also uses Malay through the Indonesian standard.
A couple cites from ELL2:
"On the Malay Peninsula and on the adjacent southern islands, Malay developed literary varieties at the various royal courts. The most prestigious one was the literary classical Malay of the Riau-Johore kingdom, which had its roots in the literary tradition of the earlier sultanate of Malacca. ... The existence of two standard varieties of Malay, namely Malaysian (called ‘Bahasa Melayu’ in Malaysia) and Indonesian (‘Bahasa Indonesia’), is mainly the result of an agreement reached between the British and the Dutch, who in 1824 drew new boundaries of their colonial territories. The mainland part of the Malay-speaking area became part of the British realm, and Sumatra together with the offshore islands became part of the Dutch realm. The treaty divided the former Riau-Johore Sultanate into two separate entities, with Johore belonging to the British and the Riau archipelago belonging to the Dutch. Because of this political demarcation, the influential Riau-Johore variant of Malay was now spoken in two distinct territories, which were to become Malaysia and Indonesia. Since this prestigious Riau-Johore court language played a major role in the formation of the standard languages of both countries, Malaysian and Indonesian remained closely related and are dialects of one and the same language. The differences between the two are most obvious in the vocabulary. The phonological, morphological, and syntactic differences are few and not very significant. There are a considerable number of cases in which Malaysian borrowed an English word and Indonesian a Dutch word, e.g., tayar vs. ban ‘tire’ or fius vs. sekering ‘fuse.’ Other variations occur when one of the two national variants has borrowed a European word, while the other one is a retention or an innovation, e.g., Malaysian dulang ‘tray’ (retention) vs. Indonesian baki ‘tray’ (from Dutch bakje) or Malaysian panggung wayang ‘cinema’ (innovation) vs. Indonesian bioskop (from Dutch bioscoop). There are cases when both Malaysian and Indonesian share the some word but with minor phonetic variation, e.g., Malaysian kerusi, Indonesian kursi ‘chair’ (from Arabic kursī). In some instances the Malay word underwent different semantic changes, e.g., Malaysian pusing ‘turn, revolve’ has the meaning ‘dizzy’ in Indonesian. Furthermore, Malaysian has borrowed more from Arabic than Indonesian, while Indonesian has undergone considerable Javanese and Jakarta Malay influence. In Indonesia, the establishment of Malay as the national language was not disputed; its choice was not regarded as favoring any one ethnic group, since ethnic Malays constituted no more than 10% of Indonesia’s population. Furthermore, various forms of Malay had long been established throughout the Indonesian archipelago." ("Malay", pp. 6232-6233)
"During the time of Dutch colonial control (until 1942), the official language was Dutch but, because Malay was more widely known, it became increasingly important both as an administrative language and as a medium of instruction in schools. Riau Malay, the dialect spoken in central Sumatra near Singapore, became the standard. In the early part of the 20th century, Malay became associated with the nationalist movement for independence. In 1928 young nationalists declared Bahasa Indonesia, their new name for Malay, to be the national language. Their aspirations were not fully realized until independence came in 1945, and Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian) was decreed to be the national language." ("Indonesia: Language situation", pp. 4545-4546)
There is no separate article for "Indonesian" or "Malaysian". — kwami (talk) 01:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Same language or not, I was distracted by your suggestion that the two were no different than British and American English. Fortuantely none of the WP articles appear to suggest that. The excerpt you provide above is encouragingly more in line of what I think wikipedia language articles should cover - rather than the "Language X for beginners" guides that the Indonesian language article is increasingly becoming.
Yes, such info belongs at Wikibooks. You can start gutting the article of all the 'how-to' stuff if you like. I don't think anyone would mind. — kwami (talk) 01:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And yeah - I haven't really looked in detail at the articles, but a combination of removal and your initial suggestion for merging to Malay Language for the technical details seems sound in principal. cheers --Merbabu (talk) 01:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I somehow agree with Kwamikagami in the sense that this whole wikipedia article needs to be revamped and provide a more neutral content. Both Indonesian and Malysian Malay are based on the same lineage, hence the article on Malay should focus more on the common history - i.e. Old Malay, Classical Malay before it diverges into two different Malay used officially in three different countries in the middle 20th century. Once it comes to the point of divergence, a brief info of each standards (regulated by the language council of each country) is provided and should be linked to each article that touches more detail of each standards. --Danazach (talk) 12:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In the French WP I found an article "Grammaire du malais-indonésien", but also an article "Indonésien". Although a newcomer in WP, I took the initiative of transferring the most "linguistic-style" paragraphs from the first article to the second, without encountering any criticism. I agree that the differences between Indonesian and Malay are tiny, but the person who does not know anything on Indonesian will not likely start their browsing with "Malay". Therefore I also think that some basic introductory article on Indonesian should remain besides a fully detailed Grammar of Malay and Indonesian (or Grammar of Indonesian and Malay!). Acsacal (talk) 14:15, 26 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am of the opinion that Malay should be a generic term (all encompassing covering Indonesia, Malaysian, Brunei, Singaporean, Sarawakian, Kelantanese, Southern Thai etc). This article used Malay that is connotatively biased towards Malay used in Malaysia, because the term Malay tend to be officially linked to the official language of the government of Malaysia, in comparison to the, pardon my language, politically-connived term Indonesian. (Compare it with Brunei which also uses the term Malay).
Had Indonesian uses the term 'Malay' to call their dialect, there's no doubt that this article will have more of Indonesian content. --Danazach (talk) 12:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree completely with the approach you outlined above. I also agree that the Malaysian details of this article need to be moved to Malaysian language. (That's cleanup remaining from the recent split.) As for the Malaysian connotations of the word "Malay", that's why we have separate articles. Someone looking up "Indonesian" will be directed here as the main article.
Either that, or we could merge all three articles into one, parallel the Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, and start w s.t. like "Malay, also known as Malaysian in Malaysia and Indonesian in Indonesia, is a ...". — kwami (talk) 20:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge more or less done, and I expanded a bit, though this article needs a lot of work! — kwami (talk) 13:11, 24 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The loss of Malay's noun prefix in this article[edit]

I have added the awalan "juru-" into this article, since it is one of the five Malay noun prefixes. To note, Malay has five awalan or prefixes such as peN-, pe-, peR-, ke-, and juru-.

This was edited by me by referring to the Dewan Bahasa & Pustaka (DBP)'s grammar book, that is Tatabahasa Dewan Edisi Baharu. This loss of facts or information should be avoided in the future.

Master of Books (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Origins of the Word and Uasage of Malay/Malayu[edit]

I would like to propose the following

The Etymology of Malay or Malayu goes back to the 7th century and is derived from what the Kshatriya ruling class of the Srivijaya Kingdom (the bunts and the Nairs), who were from South West region of India speaking Malayalam a Dravidian dialect named from Ancient times from Malaya Mountains where it originated. This is evidenced by the Balinese Kshatriya's who claim ancestral origin from south west India Kshatriya casts. Some historian promote that the word Melayu derives from the Sanskrit] term Malaiur translated as "land of mountains" which is erroneous since Sanskrit nor any other Prakrit has a similar word in context. During the time of the first unified Kingdom of the region the local people must have identified with the rulers and started to refer themselves as such, So when the European colonist first arrived the must have proclaimed themselves 'Malayu' or any such other similar variant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoeticOne (talkcontribs) 08:13, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you have any reliable sources per WP:V? thanks --Merbabu (talk) 09:17, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Infobox standard languages noted[edit]

Should we include the as Indonesian, as Malaysian, and possible others such as as Bruneian in the infobox after each country such as the IP just added to East Timor? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 06:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does the term "Malaysian language" even exist in English?[edit]

Can somebody give a reference to the term Malaysian language being the official English translation of the Malay term Bahasa Malaysia? The English translation in Malaysian English has always been, simply, Malay language. As in most things in Malaysia, the English term Malay refers to Malay ethnicity and native language, while Malaysian refers to nationality of all races, or in the context of the whole nation.

Malaysian language, to my best knowledge, can only be referred as an improper noun, as in Kadazan is a Malaysian language. Bahasa Indonesia is officially translated as Indonesian, but Bahasa Malaysia is still Malay language in Standard Malaysian, Singaporean, and Bruneian English. While I understand the need to separate between the general Malay language (in reference to the lingua franca of the region) and Bahasa Malaysia, I do not agree with the term Malaysian language without citing references.

To highlight my point further, see how ridiculous this sentence sounds: Malaysian is the official language of Brunei, and one of the four official languages of Singapore. The English version of the constitution of all these three Commonwealth countries clearly used the term Malay language, and not Malaysian language - even in Malaysia.

--Anggerik (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So, if you understand the distinction between Malay and Malaysian (and thus presumably the justification for two articles) how do you propose to distinguish them? This discussion may be of assistance. Also, in my opinion, slapping on a dispute tag at the top of the article straight away, is not the most constructive thing to do. Remember, wikipedia is "live" and it's primarily for readers. It's not a draft waiting for issue. How do you know your so called "dispute" is not quickly resolved to everyone's liking? Such a banner should be a last resort. --Merbabu (talk) 21:21, 17 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The dialect has been called Bahasa Malaysian by politicians in Malaysia for the past few year, "Malaysian language" is just the english translation. That sentence doesn't sound ridiculous anyway, it's like saying that "German is the official language of Austria", which is perfectly true. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 01:12, 18 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I perfectly agree with the current arrangement with three distinct articles on Malay language in general, and Malaysian and Indonesian variants. The article for the Malaysian variant should be renamed to Bahasa Malaysia or Malay language (Malaysia). I have never encountered the term Bahasa Malaysian or Malaysian language in official usage to refer to the language, and could not find any reference to them online. In Malaysian English, the language is both referred to either Bahasa Malaysia[1] or Malay language[2] (based on references from Malaysian National News Agency (Bernama), the former is seven times more common). Malaysian cannot be compared with the term German, but Malay can. The term Malaysian only exists after 1963 following the formation of Malaysia: Singapore was part of it for a brief two-year period, while Brunei and Southern Thailand never were. Malay language is native to Singapore, Brunei and southern Thailand, as much as it is to Malaysia - referring the language of these countries as Malaysian language is absurd. The article for Bahasa Malaysia should cover only Malaysia, while Singapore, Brunei and Southern Thailand sections should remain only under the general Malay language article. Bahasa Malaysia (or the wrongly translated Malaysian language) is a political term that refers to the official language of Malaysia, and the standard variant of Malay language in Malaysia as regulated by Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Although Bahasa Malaysia literally translates to Malaysian language, this does not make it correct, since the official term in English already exists. It is even more incorrect when its usage is extended to Malay-speaking areas outside the borders of Malaysia.--Anggerik (talk) 10:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bahasa Malaysia is not English. Ethnologue calls it 'Standard Malay', which it says is an official language of Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei. ELL2, on the other hand, says there were two pre-Brunei standard varieties of Malay, 'Malaysian' and 'Indonesian', as in Malaysian and Indonesian remained closely related and are dialects of one and the same language. They don't use the term attributively, though, so I don't know whether they'd prefer 'Malaysian language', 'Malaysian Malay', or s.t. else. It would seem that they would not prefer 'Standard Malay', though, as Indonesian is also standard Malay. In the ELL article on Malaysia, they simply call the language 'Malay' (at the time that was written, Malaysia called their standard language Bahasa Melayu); in the article on Indonesia, they say that Indonesian is just the local name for standard Malay. They distinguish it from the Malay language as a whole in Indonesia, meaning all the pre-standardization dialects throughout the archipelago. So, 'Malay' is the name of the language, 'Malaysian' and 'Indonesian' the standards of that language. Our problem is figuring out which noun to tack on after 'Malaysian'.
Then there's Prentice D J (1990) 'Malay (Indonesian and Malaysian)', in Comrie B (ed.) The major languages of East and Southeast Asia. There are lots of hits in GBooks for 'the Indonesian and Malaysian language'.
In Functional change: the case of Malay constituent order, Cummings says, "Eventually, the concerns of the Chinese and Indian populations were addressed by the renaming of the language in 1963 from Bahasa Melayu, 'the Malay language' (rendered here as Malay), to Bahasa Malaysia, 'the Malaysian language' (rendered here as Malaysian). The implication is of course that Malaysian is the language of all the citizens of Malaysia [...] For these reasons, I have selected modern Indonesian rather than Malaysian literary writing as the representative of "Modern Malay" in this dissertation."
So, again, 'Malaysian' is the name of the language. In Media consumption and everyday life in Asia (Kim 2008) the phrase "Malaysian language" is used for Malay specifically. There is of course as you point out a difference between a Malaysian language and the Malaysian language, but that's no different from an English language (a language of England) and the English language, and needs to be dab'd by context. — kwami (talk) 21:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bahasa Malaysia *is* English. The references from Malaysian English language newspapers mentioned above bear out that very point, not to mention the American English page at CIA world fact book. As with other languages, whether it's the predominant use needs to be established by consensus, and adhering to WP:COMMON, and bearing in mind in the national dialect used in the country in question.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Malay consonants[edit]

Since when c and j are [t͡s] and [d͡z]? I just noticed it under the Phonology heading and I remember most sources saying it's [t͡ʃ] and [d͡ʒ] respectively. – Fanatix 08:22, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that, but hadn't had a chance to revert it.
Wow, that was back in April! — kwami (talk) 13:06, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Standard language" and "Indonesian Malay"[edit]

The hatnote says: "This article is about the standard language. For the different variants and dialects, see Malay languages."

This is rather confusing: My impression is that it's about the common language of which the languages of Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei are official varieties. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another problem is that this article mentions the term "Indonesian Malay" several times. It is unclear whether this refers to the official language of Indonesia (Indonesian language) or to the language of Indonesian Malays. The section Differences between Malaysian and Indonesian#Perception says that these are two separate things. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cleaned up both. Hopefully it's now clearer. — kwami (talk) 00:35, 28 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks a lot.
I changed "Countries besides Indonesia where Indonesian Malay is an official language" to "East Timor, where Indonesian is an official language", which is simpler. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 07:14, 28 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

someone fix that map.....[edit]

ummm yeah. Malay is not spoken in the Philippines (unfortunately, which I as a Filipino, find to be VERY DISCGRACEFUL).

can someone like...upload a map where Philippines is NOT colored AT ALL? there are BARELY any Malay speakers in here. maybe there's "some" Malay speakers in Mindanao and Sulu but, again....its a bare amount. they just work as language translators, between Malays and Filipinos. thats not really a true speaker.

it may SEEM like there is but there isn't. "Filipinos" these days are too busy glorifying their Spanish and American conquerers while the Malays and Indonesians loathed them. its always great to reflect on a history, but Filipinos these days brag too much about it instead of finding their way back to their Malay roots REGARDLESS of being Catholic or Muslim, and again...this is unfortunate and discgraceful and embarassing to our southern neighbors. PacificWarrior101 (talk) 01:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101Reply[reply]

I'll fix the map, but I have some questions:
Pattani Malay in Thailand is a separate language. Brunei as well, but there Malay is the official language. I'll remove all the yellow countries. — kwami (talk) 02:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
IDK about Pattani Malay. if its simply a form of Malay then it is Malay. like Indonesian, its a seperate language but it is form of Malay so it counts. Creoles and dialects of Malay count as well. i wouldn't suggest removing Thailand and Singapore, but only Philippines because in Thailand and Singapore they have a LEGIt amount of Malay speakers. maybe just remove Sri Lanka and espeically Philippines. PacificWarrior101 (talk) 05:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)PscificWarrior101Reply[reply]
Just because it's called "malay" doesn't mean it's the same language. Whether Pattani should count is not an easy question, but it isn't Malacca Malay, which is what this article is primarily about. Malay creoles would not count, any more than English creoles would count under English. — kwami (talk) 11:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
no i guess its not an easy question. well, i read an article on ethnic Malays, and Yawi is listed as one of their languages. Malay is Brunei's language but as Bruneien Malay. if Malay creoles don't count then dialects should. it seems that Patanni is a dialect and is the language spoken by ethnic Malays from Thailand. like Castilian...its a dialect of Spanish and is mostly spoken. maybe you should make Patanni Malay a different color maybe? idk. AIK is that Philippines should not be colored at all. PacificWarrior101 (talk) 20:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101Reply[reply]
More like saying that Portuguese is a dialect of Spanish. Brunei Malay doesn't count, but Brunei is on the map because its official language is Malaccan Malay. Pattani is on the map, as is Cocos Malay, but with a note that they're not really the same language. — kwami (talk) 20:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

whoever fixed that map.....thank you.[edit]

It's really great to see it fixed. Really. Thanks. Terima Kasih! Salamat talaga! PacificWarrior101 (talk) 03:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101Reply[reply]

Adding pronunciation[edit]

Could someone add the Malay pronunciation to the Hassanal Bolkiah article abd Al-Muhtadee Billah?

Issues in the Origin and History section[edit]

  • Older historical documents from the early 19th century made only reference to "Johore sultanate" "Johore empire" or simply "Johore" with "dominions of Johore (mainland), Pahang, Linggin (Lingga),  Rhio (Riau) and other subjects of the sultan". (The Edinburgh Review-1852), (Begbie & Banerjee-1834)(Newbold-1839)
  • The use of the term "Riau-Johor" was in fact led to a fallacy among the Dutch in the 19th century which is still widespread today even among the scholars of Indonesian language. (sneddon) This is possibly resulted from the historical origin of Indonesian language which was often treated with political-sentiment rather than linguistic , thus the term Riau-Malay became more favorable to the  Indonesian nationalists. To avoid being accused of non-neutrality and intentionally hurt the feeling of Indonesian nationalists, I will use the term "Johor-Riau sultanate" and "Johor-Riau Malay" instead of simply "Johor sultanate" and "Johor Malay".



  • In the article Arabic language, the oldest known Arabic inscription was found in Syria, but I never saw any of the editors to state "The arabic language is originated in Syria". The statement "Malay language originated from sumatra" is too simplistic, naive and possibly offensive. It failed to adress the complexity of the historical of development of many varieties of Malay that involves divergence and convergence over a long period of time and it denies any historical development of the same language in other parts of the archipelago (e.g the language of 1303 Terengganu inscription is actually more understandable to modern Malay speakers than the 1380 sumatran Minyetujoh inscription). Moreover, there has been debate about the relationship of the so called "Old Malay"  in the Srivijayan inscriptions with the modern Malay and there is an uncertainty whether the Old Malay sumatran was directly ancestral or not. Indeed, it would be difficult to establish direct ancestral link between the 7th century Old Malay variety and any variety of 1000 and more years later. (sneddon)
The Kedukan Bukit Inscription is the oldest known specimen of Malay, the Old Malay, ever found today. Most of historian agree this language was the ancestor of today Malay. Until there is an archaeological findings in peninsula proven otherwise, the Sumatran claim stands. Check other Srivijayan inscriptions (such as Talang Tuwo inscription), and you will find a lot of Malay vocabulary still similar or the same with modern Malay/Indonesian. Most of historian agree the diffussion of Old Malay is credited to Srivijaya influence as well as later diffussion of Classic Malay credited to Malacca Sultanate. Removing Sumatran aspect of Malay language is unhistorical and possibly a peninsula-centric oppinion.Gunkarta (talk) 02:37, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • What is the relevance of Melayu kingdom here? the historical record of this kingdom is relatively sparse,  mostly  rely on a simple description by I ching. Malayu kingdom only known to history via I ching account and no geographical description of the kingdom ever made by I ching that corresponds with any specific location except "half way sail from Palembang to Kedah". Thus, the contentious opinion that relates the kingdom with Jambi should be left exclusively in the Malayu kingdom article, not here where we are discussing about a language origin.
I think it has something to do with etymology, since other than a language the term Malay (Melayu) is also use to describe historical kingdom, river and ethnic group.Gunkarta (talk) 02:45, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've reverted your edits. They were made without sources, and there's nothing to be gained in removing information about Sumatra. CMD (talk) 16:34, 11 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ive included my reasons here and they are sourced too. Instead of playing hide and seek, why dont u read and answer my curiosity here first before making any reverts. I have no problem admitting that the oldest inscription related to malay was found in Sumatra, my concern is the claim that Malay language is originated from Sumatra.(سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 20:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC))Reply[reply]
I agree with you, it is irrelevant on mentioning Nagarakretagama here, it is best leaved on Srivijaya, Majapahit, and Malay kingdom article.Gunkarta (talk) 02:06, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As I mentioned earlier, I have no problem with Old Malay being developed in Sumatra based on the discovery of some Srivijayan inscriptions. My primary concern is with this sentence (ive repeated this twice already) - The Malay language originated in Sumatra, where it has its closest relatives and From the island of Sumatra, the Malay language spread to peninsular South-east Asia (later known as Malaya and subsequently known as west Malaysia - these sentences sounds like the entire historical development of Malay language (Old Malay, Classical Malay and Modern Malay) is attributed solely to the Island of Sumatra which appeared to be purely a Sumatra-centric and Indonesia-centric opinion. As I highlighted above, James Sneddon in his book The Indonesian language, its history and role in modern society (page 36-37) has made it clear that there are no historical evidences of direct ancestral link between Old Malay and Classical Malay. The relationship between the two, whether ancestral or not, remained debatable. The historical development of the same language in other parts of the archipelago, add extra weight to this argument. Considering the fact that the language of 1303 Terengganu inscription which is more understandable to modern Malay speakers than the 1380 sumatran Minyetujoh inscription.Therefore you can say Old Malay was developed in Sumatra but you cannot say the Malay language ORIGINATED from Sumatra.(سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk))
There was around 7 century span between Srivijayan Old Malay inscriptions and later development of classic Malay in Malacca in 15th century. It was enough time for the language to be diffused and evolved. One branch to Aceh, another to Terengganu. The most plaussible possibility that Malay did evolved from Old Malay. Also in Sumatra there is a closest relative of Malay, the Minangkabau language. Where ever the closest relative reside, possible home of origin is suspected. Then again the strait of Malacca is not that wide, the debate of Sumatra vs Peninsula is about the question which parts of the region supports human habitation, trade and sophisticated culture that enabled a kingdom to flourish. The answer is Sumatran rivers systems and peninsula's narrow kra isthmus, the archaeological findings supported it. Prior to Malacca sultanate, other than Kedah, most of other parts of southern and mid section of Malay peninsula at that times only a backwater mangrove coast. Gunkarta (talk) 03:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will make this very clear that never  in any of my comments intended to claim the origin of Old Malay from Malay peninsula. Neither did i asserted the peninsula as the place of origin for Malay language itself, even though there are clear evidences spanning over 6 centuries of the ancestral link between modern Malay language with the Malacca Classical Malay. This discussion has nothing to do with Peninsula vs Sumatra, or which side of the straits  more advance than another, let alone with the backwater mangrove coast thing.(huh?)
What im highlighting is the missing ancestral link between the Old Malay and Classical Malay which was noted by some scholars. The precise relationship between the language of Srivijayan inscriptions to Classical Malay is problematical due to - no later inscriptions from Srivijaya have been found and the inscriptions contain affixes which are familiar from the related Batak and Javanese languages but are not found even in the oldest manuscripts of Classical Malay. In contrast, the ancestral link  between the Old Javanese and Modern Javanese can be easily determined based on the numerous inscriptions and records, spanning over a period of six centuries from the earliest of 804 CE. It may be the case that the language of the Srivijayan inscriptions is a close cousin rather than an ancestor of Classical Malay. (Teeuw 1959)
It was enough time for the language to be diffused and evolved. One branch to Aceh, another to Terengganu. - The Srivijayan "linguistic influences" over other places in the archipelago are never historically proven. Of course you can find such theory written in some history books, but it should remain as a theory, not fact. If it is true, why we can find the closer mutual intelligibility of the language of Terengganu inscription (1303) with modern Malay compared to the language of South Sumatra (the so called "homeland of Malay language") itself of the same period?, this is based on the  Tanjung Tanah manuscript from Adityavarman time (1345–1377) of Dharmasraya. This signifies that the development had also occured in other places. The Minangkabau language is a variant of Malay, similar to Kedahan, Pattani, Kelantanese, Trengganese, Sarawakian and Bruneian, all of these are close relatives to Malay language too. Moreover, the history of Minangkabau is quite recent compared to Kedahan, Pattani and Kelantanese.
The most plaussible possibility that Malay did evolved from Old Malay. - "Plaussable possibility" are obviously words of assumption. No specific evidences can be used to link the Old Malay with Classical Malay, except some theories and assumptions made by linguists and historians. Thus, it is safe for us to say that  "evolution from Old Malay" is a theory and should be treated as such here. 
Your insistance on the sentence  "The Malay language is originated in Sumatra" is an attempt to push this theory into an undisputed fact which is ( i return back these words to you) unhistoric and possibly a Sumatra or Indonesia-centric opinion. It completely ignored the six hundred years development of Malay language that was triggered in Malacca and it is as naive as saying "the English language originated in Germany" only because the Old English had striking similarities with German and possibly brought to Britain by the Anglo Saxons.(سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 12:43, 13 July 2012 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Talk page formatting and etiquette[edit]

Please be very aware of how your posts are presented here, how text is rendered, etc. It's really confusing to read who has said what. If you want your comments/posts to be clear, then I suggest the following be adhered to:

  • Do not use bullet points to start your post. Only use bullet points if it is very clear that they are part of your post. You may need to check the indenting to ensure they are seen as within your post.
  • The wikipedia format quotes are really confusing. And why start a comment with one? Unclear and poor writing
  • Editors should not insert their responses within another editors comments. WP:TALK is very clear that an editor's comments should not be modified by someone else. If someone does it do me, I either remove their comment or place it somewhere else.
  • Using another name in your signature, and even another language/script is very confusing to others. This is English wikipedia, and hence we use English with Roman script. Please observe. And don't hide your actual name from the signature.

Not all of my points above are necessarily part of policy, and you do not have to abide by them. On the other hand, they will help you get your message across. You may all think the above section is clear because you made the comments and you remember who said what, but for the first time reader (like me) it's a confusing mess, and I for one, cannot be bothered trying to work it out and hence your points are, at least in part, lost on me. --Merbabu (talk) 23:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Riau-Johor or Johor-Riau?[edit]

There's a really silly edit war going on here. Unless it can be established convincingly with reliable sources that Johor-Riau is the accepted term then the current Riau-Johor phrase should remain. It is the status quo for a long time, and there is no consensus yet to change it. Even if you someone does bring evidence/references to this talk page that they believe proves Johor-Riau is "correct" they must not change the article until consensus is reached here first. If it is changed again without agreement being reached first, then I will ask administrators to watch or even protect the page. And I'm happy to do this with any other editing dispute. cheers --Merbabu (talk) 23:47, 14 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

JR outnumbers RJ by about 2.5:1 in GBooks, and 6:1 at GScholar. I'd used RJ because that's the term in ELL2, which was my primary source. — kwami (talk) 00:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It may looks silly to you, but "Riau-Johor" is a strange term where the name of a sultanate, once an empire is put behind the name of its former constituent dominion that existed only as an independant entity in the early 19th century. Using Gbooks & GScholar search counts to justify the usage of a term is even more silly than this edit war.
Since none of you even bother what i've wrote above (or perhaps pretending its not there), i wil rewrite this here. Older historical documents from the early 19th century made only reference to "Johore sultanate" "Johore empire" or simply "Johore" with "dominions of Johore (mainland), Pahang, Linggin (Lingga),  Rhio (Riau) and other subjects of the sultan". (The Edinburgh Review-1852), (Begbie & Banerjee-1834)(Newbold-1839)
The use of the term "Riau-Johor" was in fact led to a fallacy among the Dutch in the 19th century which is still widespread today even among the scholars of Indonesian language. (Sneddon) This is possibly resulted from the historical origin of Indonesian language which was often treated with political-sentiment rather than linguistic ,(Cumming) thus the term Riau-Malay became more favorable to the  Indonesian nationalists.(سڠ ڤڠليڤور لارا (talk) 07:10, 15 July 2012 (UTC))Reply[reply]
I don't think you read what I wrote.
We do note that the "Riau Malay" that Indonesian is based on has nothing to do with Riau Malay, that it's a political fiction.
J (or "Malacca-Johor") does seem to outnumber both JR and RJ, and is the name we use here at WP, so should be used in this article as well. — kwami (talk) 07:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I believe you can write both Riau-Johor or Johor-Riau, or Lingga-Johor-Riau. It depends on where the capital was. After all, the capital moved quite often, not only in Johor mainland but also in Riau Islands (Bintan?) and Lingga Islands. The capital before the old sultanate split up by the Dutch and the British was in Daik (Lingga Islands), by the way. Gombang (talk) 13:38, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can't simply change the name of a classical kingdom just because its capital moved. Going by your stupid Indon logic, then the Roman Empire should have different names in history just because its capital moved to several cities (Rome, Mediolanum, Ravenna, Constantinople). Based on the 18th century & 19th century colonial writings contemporary to the time of Johore empire, there were no stupid and confusing terms like "Riau-Johor" or "Johor-Riau", or "Lingga-Johor-Riau" ever mentioned. The sultanate was simply known as Johor, Johore or Johore empire. The terms like "Riau-Johor" or "Johor-Riau", or "Lingga-Johor-Riau" are simply new inventions by Indonesian nationalists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.170.203 (talk) 02:28, 12 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Old english malay dictionaries and grammars[edit]

http://www.lexilogos.com/english/malay_dictionary.htm

These old dictionaries contain the Malay words in both Jawi script and Roman script, so it will help non malays identify terms in Jawi script, and also they are significant and unique because modern english malay dictionaries only use Roman script and not Jawi anymore, so they should be put into the further reading section.

Jawi and Romanised

https://books.google.com/books?id=Y0Q8AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA484&dq=genting+tile&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bY6xVOPVJImcgwSRtYHABQ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=genting%20tile&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=4Vo46n39CicC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

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

http://books.google.com/books?id=Y0Q8AAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=e8QTAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=4Vo46n39CicC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=N65FAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=5H9FAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=Pq5FAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


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

http://books.google.com/books?id=a91GAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

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

http://books.google.com/books?id=b39FAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


http://books.google.com/books?id=F6MTAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


http://books.google.com/books?id=w4VBAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


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


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


http://books.google.com/books?id=relNgWfO7eEC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Romanised only

http://books.google.com/books?id=oc5BAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=P0UPAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=359kAAAAMAAJ

http://books.google.com/books?id=f9EOAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

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

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

A practical Malay grammar

http://books.google.com/books?id=opw0AQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

English, Sulu, Malay vocabulary

http://books.google.com/books?id=t4RBAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

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

http://books.google.com/books?id=xaM0AQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.readanybook.com/author/andson-cowie-william-clark-cowie-192229

ENGLISH, SULU, AND MALAY VOCABULARY

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41560760?


ENGLISH, SULU, AND MALAY VOCABULARY W. E. Maxwell and T. H. HAYNES Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society No. 16 (DECEMBER, 1885), pp. 321-384 Published by: Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41560760 Page Count: 64


http://www.jstor.org/stable/41607025?


ENGLISH, SULU, AND MALAY VOCABULARY (Continued) T. H. Haynes Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society No. 18 (DECEMBER, 1886), pp. 191, 193-239 Published by: Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41607025 Page Count: 48

Teaching Malay

https://archive.org/details/cu31924011084948

Grammar

https://archive.org/details/practicalmalaygr00shelrich

https://archive.org/details/simplebutcomplet00pear

https://archive.org/details/grammarofmalayan00mars

https://archive.org/details/agrammarmalayan00marsgoog

https://archive.org/details/agrammarmalayan01marsgoog

https://archive.org/details/colloquialmalays00wins

https://archive.org/details/grammairedelala00favrgoog

https://archive.org/details/grammairedelalan00favr

A Malay manual with grammar, reading exercises, and vocabularies

https://archive.org/details/malaymanualwithg00freerich

Dictionary

https://archive.org/details/aeg2034.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/afu7967.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/dictionaryofmala00marsrich

https://archive.org/details/dictionaryofmala01howi

https://archive.org/details/dictionnairemal00favrgoog

https://archive.org/details/dictionnairemal01favrgoog

https://archive.org/details/afu7933.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/afu7933.0002.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/kitbpadameniatk00richgoog

https://archive.org/details/ahy2565.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/afu7946.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/afh0364.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/maleischnederla00tuukgoog

https://archive.org/details/afh0364.0003.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/afu7948.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/afh0364.0002.001.umich.edu

Grammar and Dictionary

https://archive.org/details/grammardictionar00craw

https://archive.org/details/grammardictionar02craw

https://archive.org/details/malaygrammar00winsrich

Vocabulary

https://archive.org/details/cu31924081220968

https://archive.org/details/vocabularyofengl01swet

https://archive.org/details/malayenglishvoca00sheliala

https://archive.org/details/afu7962.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/afu7954.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/afu7962.0002.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/anr0813.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/anr0813.0002.001.umich.edu

A lexilogus of the English, Malay, and Chinese languages : comprehending the vernacular idioms of the last in the Hok-keen and Canton dialects

https://archive.org/details/lexilogusofengli00malarich

The Singapore triglot vocabulary (English, Malay, Chinese)

https://archive.org/details/afu7959.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/singaporetriglo00shelgoog

A manual of the Malay language. With an introductory sketch of the Sanskrit element in Malay

https://archive.org/details/manualofmalaylan00maxwrich

https://archive.org/details/amanualofthemala25604gut

A Malay reader (romanized) for the use of pupils in the second standard of the vernacular schools of the Straits Settlements

https://archive.org/details/malayreaderroman00strarich

Malay Texts

https://archive.org/details/kitabperboewatan00klin

https://archive.org/details/wasiyatyanglamay33klin

https://archive.org/details/aeq4245.0001.001.umich.edu

https://archive.org/details/cu31924008136537

Dutch-Malay

https://archive.org/details/cu31924020365494

Bibles

https://archive.org/details/kitabindjilsoetj00klin

https://archive.org/details/hetnieuwetestame04klin

https://archive.org/details/wasiatjangbeharo00klin

https://archive.org/details/wasiyatyanglamay11klin

https://archive.org/details/wasiyatyanglamay22klin

https://archive.org/details/zaboorijaitoeseg00veth

Malay phonetics

https://archive.org/details/cu31924084672934

The Malay orthography

https://archive.org/details/malayorthography00hudsrich

Glossaire explicatif des mots de provenance malaise et javanaise

https://archive.org/details/GlossaireExplicatifDesMotsDeProvenanceMalaiseEtJavanaise

Mémoire, lettres et rapports relatifs au cours de langues malaye et javanaise fait à la Bibliothèque royale pendant les années 1840-41, 1841-42, et à deux voyages littéraires entrepris en Angleterre, pendant les années 1838 et 1840 (1843)

https://archive.org/details/mmoirelettreset00dulagoog

Catalogue of Malay manuscripts and manuscripts relating to the Malay language in the Bodleian library

https://archive.org/details/cu31924023611746

The natives of Sarawak and British North Borneo; based chiefly on the mss. of the late H. B. Low, Sarawak government service

https://archive.org/details/nativessarawaka01lowgoog

Rajmaan (talk) 18:36, 16 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41492943?


THE MISSING SECOND EDITION OF C.H. THOMSEN AND ABDULLAH BIN ABDUL KADIR'S ENGLISH AND MALAY VOCABULARY JOHN BASTIN Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Vol. 56, No. 1 (244) (1983), pp. 10-11 Published by: Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41492943 Page Count: 4

History of Chinese Malay Dictionaries[edit]

History of Malay Chinese Dictionaries

http://books.google.com/books?id=BCmcEkjWOI4C&pg=PA75#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=5jz6acTOquoC&pg=PA79#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=VToJrBPbQ9AC&pg=PA493#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=hhvDD2NHv9gC&pg=PA143#v=onepage&q&f=false

Malay, Achinese, French, and English vocabulary. With a concise Malay grammar By A J W. Bikkers[edit]

http://books.google.com/books?id=C4sCAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=PHo9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA137#v=onepage&q&f=false

A vocabulary of the English, Bugis, and Malay languages, containing about 200 words[edit]

http://books.google.com/books?id=2_9PkY6SBgQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/007704411

https://archive.org/details/vocabularyofengl00sing

21:16, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Ethnic dialects[edit]

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41493568?


BABA MALAY DIALECT TAN CHEE-BENG Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Vol. 53, No. 1 (237) (1980), pp. 150-166 Published by: Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41493568 Page Count: 17

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41493734?


The Malay Chetty Creole Language of Malacca: A Historical and Linguistic Perspective Noriah Mohamed Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Vol. 82, No. 1 (296) (June 2009), pp. 55-70 Published by: Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41493734 Page Count: 16

Brunei Malay[edit]

A Vocabulary of Brunei Malay H. B. Marshall Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society No. 83 (APRIL, 1921), pp. 45-74 Published by: Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41561363 Page Count: 30

Malay manuscripts[edit]

http://guides.lib.umich.edu/islamicmsstudies/onlinecollections

Adat

Agama

Bahasa

Hikayat

Kitab Tib

Lain-lain

Salasilah dan Sejarah

Syair

Undang-undang

Ambonese Malay

http://eap.bl.uk/database/overview_project.a4d?projID=EAP276;r=41

http://eap.bl.uk/database/results.a4d?projID=EAP276

Linguistics[edit]

Auroux, Sylvain; Koerner, E.F.K.; Niederehe, Hans-Josef; Versteegh, Kees: History of the Language Sciences / Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaften / Histoire des sciences du langage. 1. Teilband edited by Sylvain Auroux

http://books.google.com/books?id=JqxnjTKaQvQC&pg=PA333#v=onepage&q=Malay&f=false


http://www.jstor.org/stable/25817713?


MALAY: A SHORT HISTORY K. ALEXANDER ADELAAR Oriente Moderno Nuova serie, Anno 19 (80), Nr. 2, ALAM MELAYU IL MONDO MALESE: LINGUA, STORIA, CULTURA (2000), pp. 225-242 Published by: Istituto per l'Oriente C. A. Nallino Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25817713 Page Count: 18


http://www.jstor.org/stable/3488474?


Malay C. O. Blagden Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London Vol. 1, No. 1 (1917), pp. 97-100 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the School of Oriental and African Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3488474 Page Count: 4


http://www.jstor.org/stable/41493148?


EARLY MALAY PRINTING: an Introduction to the British Library Collections ANNABEL TEH GALLOP Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Vol. 63, No. 1 (258) (1990), pp. 85-124 Published by: Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41493148 Page Count: 40

Ming dynasty Chinese-Malay vocabulary list[edit]

Hanlin_Academy#Foreign_language_vocabularies

A Chinese Vocabulary of Malacca Malay Words and Phrases Collected between A.D.1403 and 1511?

A Chinese Vocabulary of Malacca Malay Words and Phrases Collected between A. D. 1403 and 1511 (?) E. D. Edwards and C. O. Blagden Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London, Vol. 6, No. 3 (1931), pp. 715-749 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the School of Oriental and African Studies Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/607205

http://books.google.com/books?id=dxwiAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA366&lpg=PA366&dq=Gempita+mist&source=bl&ots=DoA1Mpi5cM&sig=2NAfnprwoKpdOT_rqA9oIYOWDPc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SH9rVMaUBYSjgwSWsYPYBQ&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Gempita%20mist&f=false

Page 95

http://books.google.com/books?id=s1cLAQAAMAAJ&q=Gempita+fog&dq=Gempita+fog&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vH9rVO6jFsGfNv32gYgN&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAQ

Rajmaan (talk) 01:55, 13 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

History of Malay Chinese Dictionaries

http://books.google.com/books?id=BCmcEkjWOI4C&pg=PA75#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=5jz6acTOquoC&pg=PA79#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=VToJrBPbQ9AC&pg=PA493#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=hhvDD2NHv9gC&pg=PA143#v=onepage&q&f=false

Noun plurals?[edit]

The article currently says there is no grammatical plural, but Reduplication#Function_and_meaning claims the same thing I had thought: that plurals are indicated by reduplication. Can someone clarify? —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:00, 19 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reduplication does several things, including emphasizing plurality, but there is no general rule that you must reduplicate every noun with a plural referent. "Hearts" is just hati, not hati-hati. Try the article on Malay grammar. — kwami (talk) 07:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2015[edit]

Please, how to make that all and only Indonesian IP users get redirected to Indonesian language when trying to view this article. Thank you. 202.73.225.84 (talk) 22:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC) 202.73.225.84 (talk) 22:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No. Wikipedia is not censored. Also, please follow directions in the future: "This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. 'Please change X' is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form 'please change X to Y'." You did basically exactly what they instruct not to do. You might consider discussing the topic of Bhasa Indonesia/Bhasa Melayu here on the talk page now that you can no longer spam-vandalise the page as consensus is the heart of Wikipedia. You might be surprised to find that people might agree that Indonesian and Malay should not be separated into separate articles and actually get the change you are looking for. Ogress smash! 23:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indonesian and Malay[edit]

Is Indonesian and Malay the same language. When I am trying to access a website and set the language to Malay, the webpage shows the Indonesian version of the webpage, like flirchi.com. I think they are the same language. Please merge Indonesian and Malay Wikipedia. Thank You. 139.193.86.20 (talk) 07:00, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nope, you are wrong if you said both languages are 100% similar just because you surfing a self-publish website who even did not know the differences. I am a Malay speaker so we know a lot of difference between the two languages. Read this, this and as well this conversation to know more about the Indonesian language which are totally different from Malay language. ~ Muffin Wizard ;) 07:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indonesian and Malay language in Android[edit]

I set a smartphone language to Malay. When I am running an Android app which has Indonesian language resources but no Malay language resources (such as Cymera), while the smartphone language is set to Malay, the application used the default language (usually English) and not Indonesian language. Why? Does Android know that Indonesian is similar to Malay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.73.225.18 (talk) 13:39, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redirect based on IP[edit]

I want to redirect this page to Indonesian language for all and only Indonesian IPs. How this can be done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.62.17.217 (talk) 00:32, 1 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Malay language. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:23, 31 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Malay language. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:03, 14 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Malay langauge" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Malay langauge. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 18:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requesting wider attention[edit]

I felt article Islamic_literature is in bit of neglect so I added my note on talk page there, requesting to take note of Talk:Islamic_literature#Article_review. If possible requesting copy edit support. Suggestions for suitable reference sources at Talk:Islamic_literature is also welcome.

Posting message here too for neutrality sake


Thanks and greetings

Bookku (talk) 08:27, 21 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aurat (word)[edit]

The terms "Aurat", "Arvad", "Avret", and "Awrath" may refer to: Women of Asian religious or cultural descent and identity.

Self nomination for AFD since article copy pasted to Draft:Aurat for incubation because IMHO current article title Aurat (word) is misleading and confusing leading to western systemic bias and stifling the article growth. Please find Detail reason at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aurat (word)

I invite project members to review current and potential sourcing and weigh in on the AfD discussion. Thanks! Bookku (talk) 02:58, 10 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requesting small help[edit]

Hello many greetings,

Requesting your proactive contribution and support in updating Draft:Aurats (word) in relation to the related languages you know well.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 03:20, 12 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bahasa Indonesia =/= Bahasa Melayu in Indonesian context[edit]

Bahasa Indonesia or Indonesian language is indeed originated from Bahasa Melayu, but calling it Bahasa Melayu or Malay would make it complicated in the Indonesian context as Bahasa Melayu is one of the regional languages in Indonesia 202.43.95.31 (talk) 19:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

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 nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recognised language in Aus[edit]

I fail to see how Malay could be a “recognised minority language” in Australia, seeing as we do not recognise any language in any official capacity. 101.112.0.95 (talk) 22:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I'm removing that. Also Burma and Philippines. — kwami (talk) 22:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Melindo, again.[edit]

@Bebasnama: Before you add "Melindo" as alternative name for the Malay macro-language again, I advise you to carefully read the source that you have cited. The volume is correctly entitled Melbourne Studies in Education, the relevant chapter is "Language and Values in Indonesia" by Sue Nichterlein. Here's a courtesy link for all editors with a Internet Archive account:[21]. In this chapter, the author describes attempts in the 1950s to create a unified standard language from Indonesian and Standard Malay (as then used in Malaya) under the umbrella term "Bahasa Melindo". This project was aborted in the Konfrontasi period. So the "Melindo" language never has come to be, and the term is simply not used as an alternative name for Malay/Indonesian as a pluricentric language.

The associated "Melindo spelling" (Ejaan Melindo) is discussed some sources about the Malay/Indonesian spelling reform proposals of the 1950s, 60s and 70s.

This footnote of history might be an interesting addition to this article (or History of the Malay language), but it's nothing to be mentioned in the infobox. Austronesier (talk) 19:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]