A form depends on its setting

Wilson calls the basic noun form absolute and distinguishes it from an oblique form. For a large masculine class, his horse example changes its final a to e in the oblique singular. That same e also appears in the absolute plural. Consequently, recognising an ending is not enough to decide either the noun’s number or its role. The surrounding words and the row of the paradigm must be read together.[2]

Follow one noun through the table

The Lodiana boy paradigm makes the contrast visible in Gurmukhi. ਮੁੰਡਾ appears in the singular nominative row, while ਮੁੰਡੇ appears before the marker ਨੂੰ in the singular dative row. The direct plural is also ਮੁੰਡੇ; before that marker, the plural row instead prints ਮੁੰਡਿਆਂ ਨੂੰ. The distinction concerns the complete construction, not a new meaning of boy. Reading the singular and plural columns together prevents their partly shared shapes from being confused.[1]

Not every noun changes visibly in the oblique singular. Wilson’s regular account leaves many consonant-final masculines and feminine forms unchanged, then records exceptions and additional Salt Range patterns. Oblique therefore names a grammatical use or form within the description; it does not promise an audible extra syllable on every noun. His stated local alternatives should remain attached to the area he describes rather than being silently substituted into a different paradigm.[2]

Direct does not simply mean subject

An object can also occur in a direct form. Wilson explicitly allows the absolute as an accusative, and the Lodiana syntax gives objects without a separate object marker. These examples caution against equating direct with subject and oblique with object.[1][2]

A 2011 computational grammar likewise separates direct and oblique noun forms, storing case information so a complete noun phrase can supply the form required by its construction.[3]

Sources & notes

Source records include access dates and, where known, limits on what was examined. Checks used AI assistance; independent human or specialist review has not been completed.

  1. Lodiana American Presbyterian Mission Press; J. Newton attribution in the archive catalogue; Rev. J. Porter, press superintendent. A Grammar of the Panjabi Language; with Appendices ↗Historical descriptive and teaching grammar · Source date: 1851 · Locator: Printed p 8 / PDF 21, boy paradigm; printed p 72 / PDF 85, sections 110–111; original title PDF 6, preface PDF 8–9 and errata PDF 13. Accessed 2026-11-02.The specified pages of the actual 1851 Bodleian/Google scan were read. Displayed script examples were checked against rendered pages. The original title names the press and superintendent; the archive catalogue attributes J. Newton. The preface addresses readers familiar with Urdu and acknowledges regional variation. Its terminology and examples are historical descriptions, with no recording or complete account of present-day usage. Purist judgements and social hierarchies are not adopted. Later revised editions and editorial additions were not used.Return to Script form 1 ↑Return to Script form 2 ↑Return to Script form 3 ↑Return to Script form 4 ↑Return to Follow one noun through the table, paragraph 1 ↑Return to Direct does not simply mean subject, paragraph 1 ↑
  2. J. Wilson; acknowledged assistance of Munshi Mahbub Alam; Punjab Government Press. Grammar and Dictionary of Western Panjabi, as Spoken in the Shahpur District, with Proverbs, Sayings and Verses ↗Historical district grammar and dictionary · Source date: 1899 imprint; preface September 1898 · Locator: Printed pp 8–9 / PDF 26–27, Absolute Singular and Oblique Singular; p 12 / PDF 30, postpositions; original title PDF 7 and preface PDF 11. Accessed 2026-11-02.The specified pages of the actual BSB original-edition scan were read. The title date 1898 and printing imprint 1899 are distinguished. Wilson credits Munshi Mahbub Alam and limits collection to historical Shahpur. Salt Range alternatives retain their local scope. Colonial purity rankings, caste characterisations and unseen earlier works are not adopted. Roman forms were not converted into newly asserted script spellings or certified pronunciation.Return to A form depends on its setting, paragraph 1 ↑Return to Follow one noun through the table, paragraph 2 ↑Return to Direct does not simply mean subject, paragraph 1 ↑
  3. Shafqat Mumtaz Virk, Muhammad Humayoun and Aarne Ranta; RANLP 2011 / Association for Computational Linguistics. An Open Source Punjabi Resource Grammar ↗Computational grammar research · Source date: 2011-09 · Locator: Printed pp 71–72 / PDF 2–3, section 3.1 and the direct/oblique noun-form representation; actual seven-page paper, printed pp 70–76. Accessed 2026-11-02.The actual seven-page primary PDF and bibliography were read. The authors explicitly build on Humayoun and Ranta’s 2010 morphology. Their computational model acknowledges incomplete coverage; it is not a complete learner grammar or a current accuracy benchmark. Damaged extracted transcriptions are not reproduced. The unfinished compound-verb agreement identified by the authors is not taught as correct.Return to Direct does not simply mean subject, paragraph 2 ↑
Help improve this entry. Suggest a correction with a source.
Record PH-LAN-0074 · English edition · human review not performed