Template talk:es-conj-er

Discussion

Why does this template only heads the third persons singular and plural with "usted" and "ustedes"? "Él, ella" and "ellos, ellas" should also be there, because they carry the original sense of these forms, notwithstanding they are used with the sense implied by "usted(es)" too. And I don't understand why are these sort of templates protected, they should be semi-protected. Excuse my ignorance, anyway. ºRYueli'o 00:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC) talk

Usted is there only as a place holder. This template is not about the pronouns, it’s about verb conjugation and verb forms. It is not intended for the purpose of teaching pronouns at all, and there only need be a single term at the head of each column to represent that person. Usted governs the third person, may be either male or female, and it works just fine. The first thing anybody learns when he begins the study of Spanish is that él = he, ella = she, and usted = you. At least in the U.S., even people who have never studied Spanish know what él, ella and usted mean. These templates are protected because of frequent vandalism and edit wars. —Stephen 15:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Where's the logic?

I'm in the process of learning Navajo, and am exploring the possibility of using verb conjugation templates much like what's used for other languages like Spanish. To that end, I'm looking at the template for -er verbs for some hints -- but I'm baffled as to where the logic is for handling sound shifts. How does the template know to turn tener into tengo instead of teno, or querer into quiero instead of quero???

The relevant section of the template is simply:

{{#if: {{{ref_stem|}}}|[[me]]|}} [[{{{1}}}o]]

This doesn't seem to include *any* code for handling the addition of the g in tengo or the i in quiero. Moreover, playing around with the template, I find that inputting nonexistent words that would match similar Spanish sound-shift patterns (like terer instead of querer, or toner instead of poner) does not produce the expected conjugation table, instead just producing something like:

Conjugation
Template:es-conj-er (toner)

The second line here is marked in red, showing a nonexistent page that I could create -- does this indicate that there is a separate template for each verb?

For that matter, assuming that {{{1}}} is the placeholder for the argument, how does the template know that the verb stem is just ten and not the whole verb tener?

In addition, why does {{es-conj-er (tener)|}} produce the expected conjugation table, while {{es-conj-er (tener)}} -- minus the extra | at the end -- produces a conjugation table with {{{1}}} all over the place? Meanwhile, {{es-conj-er (querer)}} works just fine, and adding the extra bar at the end breaks the template...???

Any advice would be most welcome, either here or on my talk page! I'm completely baffled as it is...

Cheers, Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 15:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you're wrong. The “relevant” part ({{#if: {{{ref_stem|}}}|[[me]]|}} [[{{{1}}}o]]) is just for reflexive verbs (for example, sentarse)

As of the conjugations with tengo and similar, I still have no clue how is that handled.

R2D2! 21:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

You need to look at the page for tener. It's using a different template. This template only handles regular verbs. The various spelling changes that occur are handled by other templates desinged for each conjugation pattern, like {{es-conj-er (tener)}}. Each conjugation pattern uses a different template. There are other ways to handle these sorts of changes, such as by specifying particular values to be passed to the template, but that isn't done very often here.

So, the reason the tener template requires an argument is that it needs to be given the verb stem. The template isn't just for tener, but for all Spanish verbs the have the same pattern of conjugation, including sostener, mantener, and tener que. You might find {{gl-conj-ir (u-o)}} an easier template to understand for seeing how spelling shifts can be handled, since that template has written documentation. --EncycloPetey 23:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC)