User talk:CodeCat

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
(Redirected from User talk:MewBot)
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives: 2009-2010 · 2011 · 2012
Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Using Module Errors for Deprecation Messages101:49, 26 December 2014
Finnish impersonal verbs122:17, 22 December 2014
*klengan - to sound222:17, 22 December 2014
Strange bottery018:33, 22 December 2014
twee handen op één buik202:40, 22 December 2014
{{la-IPA}}/Module:la-pronunc222:37, 21 December 2014
MewBot100:04, 17 December 2014
[]113:46, 10 December 2014
{{diff|31047830|31029876|improper adjustment of inflection tags}}014:21, 8 December 2014
"volo" deletus est?118:08, 1 December 2014
Gender of a Middle Low German word401:58, 1 December 2014
Category:Requests for etymology208:25, 29 November 2014
*flauhs or *flauhaz?202:07, 29 November 2014
Categories that have failed RFDO301:47, 25 November 2014
Term placeholders/requests1000:00, 25 November 2014
politically correct as a politically correct term219:30, 24 November 2014
Something for "News for editors" for November216:14, 21 November 2014
etymology citation423:24, 19 November 2014
{{temp|hu-suffix}} - Part 2813:36, 19 November 2014
Reverting my edition120:51, 16 November 2014
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page

Using Module Errors for Deprecation Messages

I haven't brought this up in the Grease pit or the Beer parlour in order to avoid the usual rabid over-reaction, but I don't think you should be using module errors to tell people a template or module is deprecated: it's overkill, it clutters up Category:Pages with module errors, and it renders old discussions difficult to read as well as putting them in the module error category (what's the point in retroactively warning people that they should have used a different template 5 years ago, 4 years before the replacement template was created). If you want warning messages and cleanup tracking, you can do that without module errors.

Chuck Entz (talk)19:14, 25 December 2014

But then how do we tell people not to use it?

CodeCat01:49, 26 December 2014

Finnish impersonal verbs

I guess every language has many impersonal verbs for which only the 3rd person is used - a typical example could be sataa (to rain). 1st and 2nd person forms such as minä sadan, sinä sadat, minä sadoin are grammatically possible but illogical. Do you think you could develop the Module:fi-verb so that by adding a qualifier, the conjugation table would show only the 3rd person forms? For example, in case of sataa, the conjugation template could look like this:


Hekaheka (talk)22:15, 22 December 2014

If they are possible, then they should be shown because someone might occasionally use them. A sentence like "we rained down on them like hailstones" is perfectly valid in English and not at all illogical, just poetic. The same probably applies for Finnish?

CodeCat22:17, 22 December 2014

*klengan - to sound

Hi CodeCat! I wanted to start an entry for the Proto-Germanic root *klengan and as I see are the most derivative verbs in strong verb class 3, but the reconstructed root *klengan does not end with -aną like all the other Proto-Germanic verbs in strong verb class 3. What do you think?

Here is a table of derivatives:

lang term(s)
Proto-Germanic *klengan, *klennjan, *klennan? (< *glengʰ- < *kel-)
Old Frisian klinga, klinna (3a)
Eastern Frisian klinga (3a)
North Frisian klinke (3a)
Old Saxon klinke (strong and weak)
Middle Dutch clingen, klingen, clinghen, clinken
Dutch klinken
English clink, clinker
Old English clynnan (weak)
Old High German klingan (3a)
Middle High German klingen (strong)
Middle Low German klingen
German klingen (3a)
Old Norse klingja (weak)
Icelandic klingja
Danish klinge (< klingen?)
Bigbossfarin (talk)15:12, 22 December 2014

e becomes i when followed by a nasal and another consonant, so *kleng- is not a possible root syllable in Proto-Germanic, it would be *kling-.

I can't say much about the verb type. According to the Etymologisch Woordenboek van het Nederlands, this is in origin an onomatopoeic word, so it's not surprising that there are many kinds of derivation. What's more, the verb looks like it should be strong class 3, based purely on its shape/sound. So this could have actually caused it to become strong if it wasn't already. This means that the fact that many descendants are strong class 3 does not necessarily mean that the original verb was too.

There are also several verbs in your list which cannot be descendants of this. Those are the forms with -k- instead of -g-, which must come from a separate related verb with -k-. Furthermore, Old English clynnan, and probably also Old Frisian klinna (if it's the same verb) must derive from a different verb too, something like *klunjaną or *klunnijaną. Old Saxon klinke is not even a verb, as Old Saxon verbs always end in -an or -on.

CodeCat15:23, 22 December 2014

Thank you for your help, I think it is not possible in this case to determine if the words were originated by onomatopoeia or derived from Proto-Germanic. Further Ancient Greek klángē, Latin clangere and French clinquer seem to be similar too. ([1]) But I dispute a derivation of the PIE-Root *kel- (as in [2][3]). The special case that -k- appears instead of -g- is also mentioned here as "mit abweichender, wohl expressiver Konsonanz im Inlaut", but I do not know how plausible this is. Old English clynnan and Old Frisian klinna were designed to derive from *klennjan ([4]) and an Old Saxon klinke does not exist.

So as I see it seems to be really difficult to say here what derives from where so I would oppose to create an entry on the Proto-Germanic term at all.

Bigbossfarin (talk)22:17, 22 December 2014

Strange bottery

Don't know whether you've already addressed it or not, but this: diff

--Njardarlogar (talk)18:33, 22 December 2014

Could you have a look at this, maybe? The etymology is a bit strange, although I can't say that it's wrong. I've never heard the expression, actually. But the etymology given is based on some nobody's opinion in an internet forum. That would have to be deleted at any rate, I guess. The legitimate source from onzetaal says nothing about "beuk", nor does this:

Kolmiel (talk)00:52, 16 December 2014

I don't really know anything about it either.

CodeCat01:16, 16 December 2014

Ok. In that case I'm deleting the etymology. It's based on useless sources and more reliable sources mention nothing of the same kind.

Kolmiel (talk)02:40, 22 December 2014

I just want to thank you for your edits last month to this module! I'm just learning Latin and IPA and I find it to be incredibly helpful. When I first came to Wiktionary I was annoyed about the short vowels' (especially [ɛ], [ɪ]) being imprecisely represented as, for example, /e/ and /i/, when Vox Latina and other places on Wikipedia say they have different quality, like the English short vowels. Now Template:la-IPA shows exactly what I expect, including smaller phonetic features (like ae̯ and ŋk, which are hard for me to notice with aural learning). Is there any plan to use a bot to phase out the old pronunciation templates? ~hint~ ;-)

Nice work.

P.S. Out of curiosity, what were your source(s)? Vox Latina or another book or website?

Philosophus minor (talk)03:01, 12 December 2014

I didn't actually make the template, I just improved it some. It already did all those things before I started, so I don't know.

CodeCat14:12, 12 December 2014

Sorry, my mistake! I see now that you didn't change the pronunciation. I assumed, once I saw the template after your edits, that you had improved it's functionality, because I saw a lot of differences in the examples compared to what I've seen on actual word pages. Instead, it must be that very few of them use la-IPA, as seen in this search (6,563 pages matched) (compared to about 3,000 that use la-IPA), and so there are differences in how they are rendered. I think I've seen pages that translate ⟨ae⟩ as /aj/ not /ae̯/, which becomes confusing because the latter is used by the template but not used elsewhere.

Would it be possible then to have all Latin pages use la-IPA, so that precise IPA is given for them? I think that would make it much more consistent, and short vowels are the main thing that would be improved. The template should work for >90% of cases, but words like maior need to actually look like maijor.

Philosophus minor (talk)22:37, 21 December 2014

Greetings! Just wondering if MewBot is still operational and if you had any intention of running it in the near future. The FeedMe page is getting quite long by now. Cheers.

Tempodivalse [talk]23:15, 16 December 2014

It's one of those things that I know still needs to be done, but keep... not doing? I don't know. Part of it is that the script I use to run it needs some serious rewriting, which just makes it less appealing to do.

CodeCat00:04, 17 December 2014


p.s. what is actually the difference between {{term}}, {{t}} and {{m}}? All three occur pretty randomly in etymologies from what I can see (apart from {{t}} for proto-languages)...

Hyarmendacil (talk)03:04, 10 December 2014

{{t}} is for translation tables, it shouldn't be used anywhere else.

The difference between {{term}} and {{m}} is only in the way the parameters are specified: the former takes the entry to be linked to as the first parameter and the language with lang=, while the latter takes the language as the first parameter and the entry as the second. {{m}} takes the same parameters as {{l}}, in other words; that's why many people prefer it. But there is still some disagreement over which one of the two to use, so everyone just uses whichever they prefer. My own preference is for {{m}}.

CodeCat13:46, 10 December 2014

{{diff|31047830|31029876|improper adjustment of inflection tags}}

Please stop your bot doing this.

 — I.S.M.E.T.A.14:21, 8 December 2014

"volo" deletus est?

Hi MewBot:

I love your work and use it daily to help me learn Latin- thanks! I cannot seem to get the entry for "volo" to show - perhaps it's been deleted (?). Can you recover? Fyi and thanks!, 28 November 2014

Do you mean the volo entry? That's appearing just fine for me, and the history shows that the Latin entry has been there for a while. Hope that helps!

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig18:08, 1 December 2014

Gender of a Middle Low German word

Hello, CodeCat,

I hope that you are doing well! :) I have a question, which is actually the gender of Middle Low German havene?

Greets HeliosX

HeliosX (talk)13:50, 24 November 2014

I would guess that it's feminine but I don't know for sure.

CodeCat13:50, 24 November 2014

This is interesting, because its Germanic root was feminine, but its New High German descendant is masculine. There is a New High German word Hafen m (pot), from Old High German hafan m (pot); perhaps it influenced the gender of Hafen (harbour)?

Kluge's old Etymologisches Wörterbuch says "the Middle High German habene [feminine]", the immediate predecessor of New High German Hafen (port), "corresponds phonologically to Dutch haven [feminine] (late Old English hæfene [and] English haven, maybe loaned from Old Norse hǫfn [feminine] "harbour"). Low German haven, Danish havn, Swedish hamn are [masculine]. ("Dem mhd. habene F. entspricht lautlich ndl. haven F. (spätangls. hæfene engl. haven, wohl entlehnt aus anord. hǫfn F. "Hafen"). Ndd. haven, dän havn, schwed. hamn sind M.")

De Vries' NEW entry for haven says "haven znw. v., mnl. hāvene, hāven v., mnd. hāvene v. m. ( > nhd. hafen m.)".

- -sche (discuss)00:54, 25 November 2014

Okay, thanks! :)

Listing up the etymology of New High German Hafen is this right?

*habnō, Proto-Germanic --> hāvene, Middle Low German --> Haven, Low German --> Hafen, New High German

Actually, I encountered multiple possible etymologies for the word, so I am trying to figure out, which one is correct.


HeliosX (talk)16:35, 29 November 2014

The date at which High German borrowed the word is far enough back that it was technically a borrowing from Middle Low German (into Middle High German), but that is otherwise correct. I've updated Appendix:Proto-Germanic/habnō and Hafen to show the sequence.

- -sche (discuss)01:58, 1 December 2014

*flauhs or *flauhaz?

I am not sure whether or not to move Appendix:Proto-Germanic/*flauhaz to Appendix:Proto-Germanic/*flauhs. Vladimir Orel 2003 reconstructs this noun as *flauhs, but Kroonen 2013 reconstructs the same word as *flauhaz. How do you explain umlaut in German Floh/Flöhe and Icelandic fló/flær? Is the plural vlooien of Dutch vlo also umlauted or is the /ooi/ pronounced as a true dipthong? (I'm not familiar with dutch orthography). I can neither find any good Middle Saxon nor Middle Dutch dictionaries in English to see if the noun was also umlauted in those languages as well (note the asterisk next to the Old Saxon and Old Dutch entries).

Nayrb Rellimer (talk)19:06, 28 November 2014

Dutch -ooi- represents a diphthong, yes. Dutch regularly inserts /j/ in a hiatus.

Umlaut in the plural doesn't have to be because of the consonant stem plural ending -iz. The i-stem ending -īz and the u-stem -iwiz can also trigger umlaut.

CodeCat00:31, 29 November 2014

I am aware that -īz and -iwiz also can cause umlaut in the plural, but -ōz and -ōs do not cause umlaut in these languages so this entry needs to be updated to explain the umlaut in both the descendant languages. The main issue is that I can't understand German or Dutch so I can't read most Middle Low German or Middle Dutch dictionaries.

Nayrb Rellimer (talk)02:07, 29 November 2014

Categories that have failed RFDO

I haven't tracked down the discussion, but both Category:Lojban nouns and Category:Lojban proper nouns were deleted as having failed RFDO. Aside from the merits of this individual case, I think we need to come up with a way of preventing Mewbot from creating categories that are validly formed, but shouldn't exist (to use an absurd example: Category:Chinese class 1 strong verbs). Maybe an exception list?

Chuck Entz (talk)16:08, 23 November 2014

If MewBot doesn't create them, it doesn't stop someone else from doing so anyway. So the list would probably need to be built into the category tree modules somehow, so that the module can automatically tag or trigger an error when they get created.

CodeCat16:39, 23 November 2014

The obvious, simple, low-tech solution is to make a page that links to all of the categories that have failed RFD, a bit like WT:RFVA, and periodically check for blue links.

- -sche (discuss)01:21, 25 November 2014

That works too. But harder to maintain.

CodeCat01:47, 25 November 2014

Term placeholders/requests

Re "Showing a request for a term is pointless. How are people supposed to know what term is meant?": From context. Or from any other information that may be indicated, such as the translation. See Zira.

WikiTiki8920:57, 12 November 2014

I can't tell from context what is meant there. It seems more like a crossword puzzle to me. "Guess the word that means X and sounds like Y." Besides, the module is used very generally; we don't want to remove the error checking just for a few specific cases. It's not worth it.

CodeCat21:00, 12 November 2014
Edited by author.
Last edit: 21:05, 12 November 2014

That's the whole point. You might not know the word, but someone else who stumbles upon the page (perhaps by browsing through the category) might know. Either from the idea that it has to be similar to "Zira" or from the translation, or both. If it's an error, then it would still be caught by the editor or whoever is browsing the category. And who ever said it's only for specific cases? This could be used very widely. It hasn't been only because the template hasn't allowed it.

WikiTiki8921:02, 12 November 2014

And what if it isn't?

CodeCat21:04, 12 November 2014

Not every error can be caught. One error I frequently make is {{m|he|מַיִם|máyim}}, which displays as: máyim. If I don't catch it when I'm editing, someone else will when they are browsing the page.

WikiTiki8921:08, 12 November 2014

One tweak I would suggest is checking the namespace: people try out all kinds of nonstandard kluges in their user spaces- do we really want those cluttering up the request categories?

Chuck Entz (talk)03:46, 16 November 2014

politically correct as a politically correct term

I feel that that entry and category need to be linked in some way. Doesn't really matter how, but in some way. Note about the category in the entry and link to the category in the lede are two other ways that could be open if we don't want to categorize politically correct as a politically correct term.

Purplebackpack8900:10, 21 November 2014

I can see your point. If this were a topical category, that would make perfect sense, but topical categories link terms about something, while this kind of category links terms that are something. It would be like adding nominal to Category:English nouns (assuming, for the moment, that there weren't a separate noun sense): yes, nominal is about nouns, but it's an adjective.

Chuck Entz (talk)15:00, 24 November 2014

Couldn't we, for example, get the cat head to read "Terms related to being politically correct?

Purplebackpack8919:30, 24 November 2014

Something for "News for editors" for November

Tweenk (talkcontribs) created a new template, {{pl-decl-noun-cie}}, for Polish nouns ending in -cie because I somewhat requested it. Does the creation of a new template like that count as news for editors?

Lo Ximiendo (talk)05:09, 21 November 2014

I think so. There's no harm in putting it there, especially as there isn't much other news.

CodeCat10:12, 21 November 2014

I added the news myself today. Maybe for the first time ever.

Lo Ximiendo (talk)16:14, 21 November 2014

etymology citation

Hi, you recently deleted the triangular hebesphenorotunda citations page. The citation I gave illustrated the etymology in more detail than seemed appropriate on the primary definition, but is nonetheless interesting and relevant information. May I ask where else I should put that quote?

Origamidesigner (talk)20:10, 19 November 2014

The problem is that the citation does not contain the term "triangular hebesphenorotunda" at all. Citations are supposed to show the term as it is used.

CodeCat20:17, 19 November 2014

Ok, but it explains the etymological roots of the term in detail, attributed to the guy who coined the term. I'm not sure where else to put that information, maybe I should just integrate it into the etymology section?

Origamidesigner (talk)22:41, 19 November 2014

Or maybe that level of detail isn't necessary, and I should just forget about it?

Origamidesigner (talk)22:43, 19 November 2014

It's probably not necessary. Our etymologies mostly focus on how the word came to exist, and leave out anything else.

CodeCat23:24, 19 November 2014

{{temp|hu-suffix}} - Part 2

There is another issue with the new hu-suffix: In certain cases, we want to use the template with a blank first parameter, just to show the suffix and put the word into the correct suffix category. See dinamikus. The terminology in these cases is with -xx ending. This worked fine in the original version, but the new version adds a plus sign: with + -xx ending which does not make sense. I'd like the restore the original functionality.

Panda10 (talk)14:19, 15 November 2014

Why is Hungarian so unique that it needs all this extra stuff that other languages don't need?

CodeCat16:43, 15 November 2014

I can't speak for other languages because I don't know them well. I think it would be a simple change for you. Can you just add it?

Panda10 (talk)17:45, 15 November 2014

Why not remove the "with"?

CodeCat17:49, 15 November 2014

Because the + sign is superfluous in these cases. It is not a root + suffix.

Panda10 (talk)17:54, 15 November 2014

Can you give an example of where this is used? I don't quite understand it right now.

CodeCat17:55, 15 November 2014

Reverting my edition

What is the reason for reversion of my edition? What did I do wrong? Thank you.

Viethoc (talk)20:50, 16 November 2014

You are writing the definitions in Vietnamese. But this is an English dictionary, the definitions should be written in English.

CodeCat20:51, 16 November 2014
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page