Talk:Lyuli

The contents of the Jugi people page were merged into Lyuli on 29 September 2022. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

A fact from Lyuli appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 August 2006. The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that Tajikistani refugees? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/August.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Central Asia Low‑importance Lyuli is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

interesting article, i've never heard of the Lyuli before. It'd be improved by more information on their native language, however - the only reference to it at the moment is the comment that "Luli for clan is tupar". Any other info available? Is it an Indo-Aryan language like Roma, as suggested by their Indian origin story, or is it Turkic like most of the rest of Central Asia? --Krsont 23:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for their language, it's really not a language of the Roma (and the fact of Roma's existence was probably unknown for Luli before the migration). As one article sais, their language is unintelligible for Kirghiz people, and for Russians and Tatars too (my own observations). I don't know about their native language, but they understand Uzbek and Tajik, as they originate fom those countries. --Untifler 09:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've since done some brief research on my own that suggests that it is an Indo-Aryan language, related to but seperate from Roma. The Luli language is mentioned as a dialect of the Domari language on this ethnologue page [1]. Which suggests the Luli are just a Russian branch of the Dom people. --Krsont 09:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian ethnographists who study Luli such as S.Gabbasov and N.Bessonov consider them to be a different branch of "Gypsies", not Dom people. RomanyChaj-रोमानीछाय (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

RomanyChaj, The Dom are gypsies by definition, the Dom and Roma share the same distant origins. There is nothing incompatible in considering "them to be a different branch of 'Gypsies'" or considering them related to Dom people/ 65.28.244.221 (talk) 04:38, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Central Asian Mugat are usually bilingual in Tajik and Uzbek, often also speaking Russian and other languages - in Uzbekistan the community speaks a unique mixture of Tajik and Uzbek as their mother tongue. Tajik or Persian is generally their native language everywhere.

Traditionally, they have a special vocabulary that is NOT in any way Romani, but you can find it on the page titled “Persian Romani”.

We are not Dom and don’t call ourselves gypsies in English, and the origins of Mugat/Ghorbat and Roma or Dom are completely different GharibShah7 (talk) 04:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The traditional occupations are similar to those of the Roma: chiromancy, quackery, musicians, stealing etc. - O Rly? Hakluyt bean 22:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is just the usual racist vandalism that need to be reverted every time it appears. Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 16:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Luli children.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 1 December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot -- talk) 12:51, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply ]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061015060926/http://www.goacom.org/overseas-digest/ImAsy&Race%20(EU)/Cases04/russia04.htm to http://www.goacom.org/overseas-digest/ImAsy&Race%20(EU)/Cases04/russia04.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• 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.—

The persian word مغان spells Mughan ('noon', ن at end) instead of Mughat ('ta', ت at end) . SO would it be Mughan (مغان) or Mughat (مغات)? I am not editing for i am not sure. Can you please correct? 103.94.135.29 (talk) 13:49, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The name in Central Asia is usually spelled “Mugat” in Latin and Мугат in Cyrillic. Another variant is Мугад with final -d, and this is very close to what was recorded in Iran in Sykes’ Gurbati vocabulary from Kerman as مُگّد muggad ‘husband’. People in Afghanistan tend to write it مگت (the final -t is the result of devoicing)

Although some people have spelled it “Mughat” with gh, it’s not correct, the sound is /g/ and not the phone represented by غ. Also the /a/ is short not long so it should be either مگت or مگد

Additionally, we don’t agree with the etymology that derived this name from “fire worhsipper” - it’s quite insulting to us as Muslims and we have our own theories GharibShah7 (talk) 04:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lyuli means nothing more than gypsy and Uzbek people will use the same word for the Romani. The self names of the people are Mugat and Ghorbat. There is also a page for Ghorbat - this one should be renamed Mugat. Also there is no proof the groups in Turkey or Jugi of Iran are actually Mugat/Ghorbat. Yes the Abdal of Turkey are related by language but they are a different population and not Mugat. GharibShah7 (talk) 04:18, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing I would like to add is that nothing is mentioned about the dire circumstances of the community in Afghanistan - there is a page for the peripatetic groups in the country and “Jogi” there is the same as the Mugat. Additionally there are other Mugat communities in Afghanistan who are not considered “Jogi” like the Haidari, their name is spelled as Magat. GW Leitner spelled it Magadd when they came to India, and they also live in Pakistan, and travelled to China historically but none of this is mentioned.

GharibShah7 (talk) 04:39, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are several well-known Mugat people from different countries but the only photo reputation we get is a woman begging with child GharibShah7 (talk) 04:41, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yea I am well aware of this. However there is plenty of linguistic evidence that Mugat and Abdal are related GharibShah7 (talk) 15:41, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely agree with you that Mughat's not romani, nor domari or lomari. They are probably not related to the Abdals either.

Unfortunately, it has become the fashion among English speakers to rewrite any group labeled Gypsy as Romani people, they make the mistake of thinking gypsy is slur, even though these groups are not Romani, nor are they related to them. These groups neither speak the Romani language nor have Romani culture. Not every group that carries the label gypsy are romani people.

The redirect Romani people in Central Asia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 1 § Romani people in Central Asia until a consensus is reached. CMD (talk) 05:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]