User talk:Pharamp/2009

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Removing wikilinks[edit]

Could you explain this edit? The template does not require wikilinks to work, but we usually want them present anyway. Pages without explicit wikilinks on the page are not counted in our page total, so removing these links in some cases could artificially reduce our page count total. --EncycloPetey 17:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I see this here. Mh, maybe I didn't understand well... Please tell me I would like to know and make correct things. --Pharamp 17:54, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a new template {{count page|[[Wiktionary:Page count]]}} that is added to pages to increase the page count when there are no wikilinks. I think it is easier to just include the square brackets, and there is no reason to remove those links. --EncycloPetey 17:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, doing an edit to remove the link is fairly pointless; at best it does nothing, at worst it reduces the page count until AF adds the count kludge. The idea (now) is that you needn't worry about either explicitly adding the link (e.g. inside {plural of} or not. There are better things to spend energy on. Robert Ullmann 18:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I would like to say that I have understand your English. Anyway, when I create a plural do I have to put square brackets or not? Thanks. --Pharamp 18:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
You do not have to, when you create a plural. But, if you do not include the brackets, a bot will add the code {{count page|[[Wiktionary:Page count]]}} to the page. So, if you do not want that code to be on the page, you must use the square brackets. --EncycloPetey 18:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


I have made this change. The words you listed were not synonyms; they were alternative forms. Synonyms are separate words with the same meaning. We use "Alternative forms" or "Alternative spellings" when it is the same word spelled differently.

Also, the {{context}} should only be used in front of a definition. It adds a category that says the current word is "rare". We use qualifier to explain other words mentioned in the entry. --EncycloPetey 18:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Can we use "qualifiers" also for -nyms sections? --Pharamp 18:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

For -onyms, we use {{sense}}. See the listen entry for an example. --EncycloPetey 18:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


When you mark the primary stress, please use the primary stress character like this. The apostrophe is not an IPA character. --EncycloPetey 20:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


The gloss in a translations box should match one of the specific definitions on the page (in a shortened form). It should not be the entry word. For example, on "earthquake", labelling the translations as "earthquake" is incorrect, it should say "a shaking of the Earth", so that users will know which definition the tranlsations apply to. Compare the entry for listen, which is a model for page layout. --EncycloPetey 19:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I saw lots of trans-top with the name of the entry. Anyway, okay. Thanks to teach it to me. --Pharamp 19:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


Hi, what (other than adding pronunciation and {{also}}) were you hoping to achieve by this edit. Correct me if I'm wrong but AFAIK it does not matter whether fr (the ISO code) or French (the language name) is used in such instances. 50 Xylophone Players talk 20:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Please may you explain in a simpler English? I really don't understand. --Pharamp 20:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I think I understand. Maybe. So, there wasn't wikilink so I added it. And normally I put "fr" but it works with "french", of course. But I think the meaning of my edit was another, don't you think so? --Pharamp 20:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I saw that you added pronunciation, etc. which is good but I was just curious as to whether you why you changed fr to French. Also you don't have to change hérésies to [[hérésies]] if you don't want to; see Wiktionary:Page count. Keep working on those pronunciations! :) 50 Xylophone Players talk 20:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay, there's not a specific reason for that, I was working on it and so I change French to fr. I really hope that my little contributions can help/be appreciated. I saw that you're an admin, so please tell me if I do something wrong =) And we also have lots of interests in common like French/Japan/Japanese/Pokémon/Wiki^^ Me too I'm 15. So, please check my errors sometimes... *núna bæ bæ* --Pharamp 21:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Heh, how coincidental, finding someone with interests very much like my own here on Wiktionary of all sites. Anyway, sorry if I rubbed you the wrong way. As they say "every little bit helps"! 50 Xylophone Players talk 22:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
There are no problems, sorry if with my poor English I can generate them when there aren't! Cheers!! Pharamp 18:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Icelandic Pronunciations[edit]

Hi, I have noticed that you have been adding IPA pronunciations to some of the entries. Thank you for doing that! But on a few entries I noticed that a character which isn't in the IPA, δ, being used. This is mostly in entries with an eth (Ð / ð), like in sagnorð, föðurbróðir, and varða. I think the correct character for it is ð (or θ before an unvoiced consonant). 00:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Hellu, normally I copy the IPA pronunciation from other wiki projects, in this case I copied it from the French Wiktionary. As you can see here, the X-SAMPA for "varða" is "D" (voiced dental fricative) so the eth is the correct symbol. Now I corrected sagnorð, varða, föðurbróðir and móðurbróðir. Excuse me for errors, I'm still learning :) And I noticed that the templates {{is-noun|gender|gen indef sing|nom indef plur}} and {{infl|is|verb}} are not frequently used (see varða, when I put them). --Pharamp 11:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


I know the {{homophones}} doesn't support lang= for any use right now, but I recommend adding it for any French uses of that template. It shouldn't be hard to adjust the template to automatically categorize words into, say, Category:French words with homophones, which could be a useful category. However, the language would have to be specified for this to work. --EncycloPetey 17:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I will do that from now, but I added a lot of {{homophones}} in French words, so why there isn't a bot for correct it (like in IPA pron)? Are there any planning to build one? Mh, and also I don't understand the utility of Category:French words with homophones, because all French words have homophones and a few plural nouns aren't the homophones for their singular. Of course, French entries with {{homophones}} are not all French entries, but in a future big development of the wikiproject the category would be absolutely useless. --Pharamp 17:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
User:Robert Ullmann has a bot that adds lang= to {{IPA}} based on the language section, and that bot could be adapted to work for {{homophones}}.
I admit that the category is not as useful for French, but they are much rarer in English and many languages have few or no homophones. In most languages, words that are pronounced the same are also spelled the same, and so are heteronyms. --EncycloPetey 17:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there a discussion about this categories? Thanks. Ah! also here there's not reported the new {{homophones|word}}. Adding {{homophones|word|lang=xx}} I think will help your project. --Pharamp 17:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed that {{homophones}} supports only 5 words and ignores the sixth etc. See manger or marier. Is there anything wrong in the syntax I've used or the template doesn't work with more than 5 homophones? It must be changed, French infinitives have 6 homophones each! --Pharamp 10:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The limit is in the template itself. To support 6 homophones, the template would need to be changed. --EncycloPetey 03:51, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, again Pharamp. my recent edit seems to have sorted out your problem. Happy editing! :) 50 Xylophone Players talk 17:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Ahah, merci beaucoup, j'suis très reconnaissante =D now we have only to resolve the problem explained on User_talk:Pharamp#-ai... and I will restart my edits! --Pharamp 18:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
reconnaissant? I might be missing something but I think you've mixed up some words. 50 Xylophone Players talk 00:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
See here. "Qui a de la reconnaissance, de la gratitude." Unfortunately en:wiktionary is not very complete on French words. But you know that =) Bye bye --Pharamp 16:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


Hiya, are you sure that these forms are homophones of the infinitive? I always understood that final <-ai(s)> is pronounced /-ɛ/. Ƿidsiþ 11:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

For answer, fr:manger say that. And also -ai is different from -ais (ex. future "mangerai" and conditional "mangerais"), I don't know if in IPA there's a different symbol, but the real pronunciation has (a near imperceptible I admit) difference, but this difference is still here. My mother tongue teacher use it and tought us this. --Pharamp 11:18, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Er....OK, you might be right. But your edit to musiques you are using a stress sign. French does not have stress. (Well, more specifically stress is not phonemic in French, so we don't use in in our phonemic transcription.) Ƿidsiþ 16:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

It was here. Normally I copy IPA from previous versions or other wikiprojects, I don't know anything at all of IPA, I just try to learn it but I haven't school lessons etc. so... please correct me everytime :( --Pharamp 16:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Having done some research, I feel that you are mistaken about verb forms in -ai. Final <-ai> is, as I thought, pronounced /ɛ/, just the same as <-ais>. It follows that manger (/mɑ̃ʒe/) is not homophonous with mangeai (/mɑ̃ʒɛ/); and that mangerai and mangerais are homophones. This is supported by the pronunciations given in my Collins-Robert. Ƿidsiþ 20:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I will answer you tomorrow after searching a confirmation or not. Just wait and keep in touch :) Thanks. --Pharamp 20:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
fr:mangeai agrees with you and Collins-Robert that it's pronounced /mɑ̃.ʒɛ/. Nonetheless, I believe they're homophones for many native speakers: those who do not distinguish terminal /-e/ from terminal /-ɛ/. Supporting this claim is the homophones list at fr:manger, which was put there by Urhixidur, a native speaker of French. So the question is, can two words be homophones despite using different phonemes? (Or, can two phonemes have the same phone in certain contexts?) Put another way, is the "homophones" section used to identify words that can be pronounced the same, or words that are always pronounced the same? My preference would be to allow pairs like mangermangeai, but with some sort of note like "(for many speakers)". —RuakhTALK 20:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
I agree, for most dialects of modern French, terminal [ɛ] in any context has a tendency to get "closer", ie towards [e]. Though while other printed dictionaries continue to make the distinction, it would probably be wrong for Wiktionary to go out on a limb with it. I don't know. Ƿidsiþ 21:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, most other printed dictionaries don't do "homophones". I'm not suggesting that we give the same IPA for both forms, only that it might make sense to list them as homophones-for-many-speakers, since they are. —RuakhTALK 01:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, the Robert does them, and it's for all practical purpose 50% of the French dictionaries :-P. It's most English dictionaries that don't do them. Circeus 04:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Actually, for that matter, the TLFi (my preferred dictionary because of its free-th and online-th) also gives homophones for some words. I guess what I should have said is that they don't list forms of a single verb as each other's homophones: you won't see mangé(e)(s) listed as a homophone of manger. (Or does the Robert even give those?) —RuakhTALK 19:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
FWIW, as Canadian, "ais" and "ait" are /ɛ/ for me, but I was firmly taught the /e/ pronunciation for the first person singular of the passé simple.
Here's what Grevisse (§794 c) says on the subject:
J'ai se prononce [ʒe] or [ʒɛ]. Au passé simple et au futur simple, -ai se prononce souvent [ɛ] aussi, mais la prononciation [e] est préférable pour éviter la confusion avec l'indicatif imparfait et le conditionel présent. Elle résiste mieux au passé simple aprce que ce temps est surtout utilisé dans le registre soigné.
While the later bit is rather prescriptive (though accurate from my point of view, as the distinction holds much better on my side of the Atlantic), it does overall establish clearly that both pronunciation are found, with [e] being the original one. Circeus 00:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oddly, my reference (which I believe is meant for Americans and anglophone Canadians, so IMHO is likely to be more descriptive but less comprehensive) agrees that in « la langue standard », verb forms in -ais and -ai are /-ɛ/ and /-e/, respectively, but disagrees about the contrary trend:
Il faut dire que, quoique standard, cette distinction entre [e] et [ɛ] en syllabe accentuée et ouverte n’est pas observée par beaucoup de Français. Il existe en outre de locateurs qui ne prononcent le [ɛ] ouvert en syllabe accentuée et ouverte que dans certaines situations, pour élever leur niveau de langue. En outre, certains dialectes (surtout ceux du Midi de la France) n’ont pas de variation en syllabe ouverte, prononçant systématiquement un [e] fermé dans toutes les syllabes ouvertes et un [ɛ] dans toutes les syllable fermées.
RuakhTALK 01:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I was also surprised by that. I can buy it as spelling pronunciation: "ai" being /e/ is mildly anomalous. In any case, Pharamp's own confusion clearly demonstrate there is a tension in both direction there. Circeus 04:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
  • This is fascinating stuff. It's amazing to see how much ‘official’ disagreement there is. We should probably copy this research to somewhere more useful (Wiktionary:About French?), and leave Pharamp alone! Ƿidsiþ 17:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you so much -__-' I'm here for what? Anyway, you have to wait for my reply (if you still need it), I will ask and get another more "official" opinion tomorrow, seen that I'm confused. --Pharamp 18:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I quote, from the Académie Française website. The Grévisse (French reference for the "bon usage") recommands the discrimination between é and è pronunciation to avoid the confusion between the passé simple form and the imparfait form (so as for the futur simple and conditionnel présent). This is the eternal debates between French language norms and French language uses that often differ. From a French person that teaches French. —This unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) at 11:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC).
For what it's worth, I was taught the [e] pronunciation for '-ai' as well by my Belgian-French speaking former teacher. —Internoob (Talk|Cont.) 22:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

A question about Icelandic[edit]

Hi again, might you be able to have some input here? 50 Xylophone Players talk 23:01, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


Hi, Pharamp. Check this edit out. I finally found the "prefix + suffix" template you were looking for. Have fun :) 50 Xylophone Players talk 12:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

This will be very useful, yes! Thank you so much!=) Pharamp 12:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


The etymology for acide appears to be inconsistent with other sources; what reference did you use for this etymology? Namely, that the Latin word acidus comes from Ancient Greek ἀκίς, where other sources say it comes from aceō, unless you meant that aceō was from Ancient Greek? Caladon 16:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I just used the wikti:fr:acide page for this etymology. I don't know anything about Ancient Greek, but I think that all good "physical" Latin dictionary have the correct etymology for acidus and aceō, but I have no dictionaries here at the moment. The resource I use to consult for French entries is the Centre National de Ressources Textuelles et Lexicales, anyway it doesn't mention Greek derivations for acide... Pharamp 19:25, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Exotic Italian words[edit]

Hi there. I have been trying to think of Italian words for you with exotic etymologies - without much success. All I can think of is words that have entered the language unchanged (such as sumo#Italian or kayak#Italian) - but I shall have a further think. By the way - could you add the pronunciation to the Italian noun sumo - I think it is stressed on the o. Cheers. SemperBlotto 15:17, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I've just added what you asked on sumo#Italian: the stress is on sumo (we don't write sumò), but as long as it is a foreigner word, we don't have to put any stress on hyphenation section, but just on the IPA/SAMPA string. I've also updated kayak#Italian (and it has the stress on hyphenation) and kayak#French. Please give it a look (format before all), I've found I've made some errors, but I guess I've fixed them at last. Cheers, ask me when you want! Pharamp 18:09, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


One minor thing: The lang= parameter in {{X-SAMPA}} does not do anything (unlike {{SAMPA}}). You don't need to add it. Cheers, —Internoob (Disc.Cont.) 00:04, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I know it, but maybe in the future will do something... and I hope for a hidden category like "[Language] words without IPA/X-SAMPA" for having a quick list of entries where we miss the pronunciation :) so, does this increase enormously the kb or can I continue to add it? I'm going to do the best thing. Pharamp 12:04, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
I see your point. It adds almost nothing to the kb, so you can continue to add it. —Internoob (Disc.Cont.) 18:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Oki! Takk! Also, EncycloPetey asked me to put lang=xx on the homophones template, and proposed to do a request to the Robert Ullmann bot. Would you please do that for us (X-SAMPA, hyphenation and homophones)? I guess that could be very useful. Pharamp 18:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Woooo I have another request! I just discovered that Tbot can import IPA from other wiktionaries to en.wiktionary. So, can we create a bot that catches the IPA from fr.wiktionary, convert it to X-SAMPA and add the string to French entries? It will be all automatized and less work for us. What do you think about it? Pharamp 19:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
I already use lang= for {{homophones}} because it make the links go to the ==French== sections. I will make a habit out of using lang= for {{X-SAMPA}} too if you want me to. I don't normally use {{hyphenation}}.
Unfortunately, I don't know how to go about making a bot. That's a good idea, though, because IPA is easily converted into X-SAMPA. —Internoob (Disc.Cont.) 21:55, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Do you think that's a good idea we can propose somewhere? Maybe a more expert bot-user could help doing it if wiktionarians find it helpful... I don't know - it is just an idea. Pharamp 13:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I think it's a good enough idea. But as I said, I don't know who or where to ask. —Internoob (Disc.Cont.) 23:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


No wonder...both of the Italian-English dictionaries that I was using as a reference were compiled in the year 1846 :o. I need to go find a new one, then :) Razorflame 20:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's okay to have also these words of course, just put {{rare|lang=it}} if it is the case, or simply ask someone else if you are not sure... like you did!^^ And also, if you have some questions about formatting French entries, I can help you. :) Pharamp 20:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


Hello there. Please don't add periods after each syllable in the IPA of entries. Please follow the examples that can be seen on the entries. Thanks, Razorflame 20:12, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Mh, all entries on the French Wiktionary have periods, and I used to put them everytime. Is it incorrect? Or is it correct only for French? I can easily read IPA, but I don't know a lot about writing it. Pharamp 20:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
I believe that all entries made here don't have periods, although I cannot be too certain about those languages outside of the Esperanto language because I haven't studied the IPA outside of the Esperanto language. All I know is that there are no periods in the Esperanto IPA. Cheers, Razorflame 20:22, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
No, entries here do have periods to separate pronounced syllables. Razorflame, please do not give advice in areas where you have no knowledge. --EncycloPetey 20:32, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Whoever said that I didn't have any knowledge in Esperanto IPA? I believe that I am one of the only ones who adds them to every single new article I make, yeah? Razorflame 20:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Please don't get angry both. Razorflame, just be sure of your knowledge before teaching something to do which can become a policy for the user :) Pharamp 20:24, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused now. What I have to do? Wikipedia marks periods in Esperanto... Pharamp 20:35, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

It's fine to create an initial pronunciation here without marking syllable breaks, especially if you don't know where they go. However, we do want to have the syllable breaks marked, if you know where they should go. --EncycloPetey 20:44, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks :) :) :) Pharamp 20:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


The Italian verb endings with -ndo are the equivalent of adding -ing to the end of the verb in English, right? Razorflame 19:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the usage is similar. -ando and -endo mark the gerund tense (like mangiando > eating).
The auxiliary is stare instead of essere (to be, used in English). You can use it in 3 ways:

  • with the present, exactly like in English (but in Italian it never has a future sense):
    I'm eating. (now)
    (Io) sto mangiando. (adesso, ora)
  • with the past, and you use the imperfect:
    I was eating.
    (Io) stavo mangiando.
  • with the future, for marking an action you will currently do at a specific time:
    If you call me at one o' clock, I'm eating. (I'm not sure if the English is ok sorry XD)
    Se mi chiami all'una, starò mangiando.

Hope this can help. If something is unclear, I try to explain myself better :) Pharamp 20:13, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Yep, that helps immensely. It is like in Spanish, the -ando -iendo, -endo endings of verbs: corriendo. I bambini mangiando le mele. Razorflame 22:00, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that's true, it is exactly like Spanish. Estar comiendo! But the sentence is not correct. What do you want to say? (I'm going to sleep now, so wait a reply for tomorrow morning!) Pharamp 22:37, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I figured out the problem with the sentence I bambini stono mangiando le mele adesso. :) I was trying to say The boys are eating the apples now. I added in the stono (which I believe to be the sixth person present form of the verb which means are), and I added adesso to say now. Razorflame 22:42, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

It's stanno, even if it ends in -are, stare is irregular, but it is very important to learn it by heart :) Also, the adverb is not strictly needed in this type of sentences and can sound strange, but it is gramatically correct :) Pharamp 09:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. So if I wanted to say that the boys are going to be eating the apples, it would be something like I bambini staranno mangiano le mele? Razorflame 10:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
The translation is: (I asked a friend)
  • I bambini staranno mangiando le mele. < > The boys will be eating the apples.
I'm sorry that my English is not very good for everything... but I hope that helps anyway... :) Pharamp 11:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Yep. That helps tremendously. Now I can say things like Io starò scrivondo dei articoli su la English Wiktionary ;) Razorflame 11:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
YEP! It is (in the sense of "later I will"):
  • Io starò scrivendo degli articoli sul Wikizionario inglese.
Wikizionario is masculine, and national adjectives go at the end. Try to take a look at i#Usage_notes_4, the introduction of this article (especially the second pink table), before the chapter "I. The preposition a." and this other article (but you say poltrona instead of "poltrono"). I'm here for everything! Pharamp 14:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
What is the difference between degli and dei? Furthermore, sul must be a combination of su and la right next to each other, yeah, kind of like Spanish's de and la right next to each other becoming del, yeah? Scrivondo is the present tense, so scrivendo is the future tense? Thanks for the help, Razorflame 20:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
There are no differences between degli and dei, but you use dei or degli according with pronunciation reasons/rules. Also, dei is also a noun, the plural of dio, so we use degli dei instead of dei dei, but this is the only one exception. Further:
Then: "scrivondo" doesn't exist x) it is scrivendo, the gerund (present), and scrivere is the infinitive (present). We don't have a future tense for infinitive/participle/gerund, just present and past for each of the three (but I noticed that wiktionary marks only the past participle). For anything else, I'm here. Kisses! Pharamp 20:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
So in Io starò scrivendo degli articoli sul Wikizionario inglese the dei between articoli and degli is implied? Razorflame 20:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure I have understand sorry :) But read this:
  • i is used before masculine plural words beginning with a single consonant other than x or z, or the plural noun dei;
  • gli is used before masculine plural words beginning with a vowel, x, z, gn, or multiple consonants including pn, ps, and s+consonant, and before the plural noun dei.
...on i#Usage_notes_4. These rules affect also their compounds dei and degli. I hope to have replied! Pharamp 20:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, earlier, you said that you wanted to write degli dei instead of dei dei, so that is why it had to be degli articoli. What I was trying to find out was is there an invisible dei in between degli and articoli that is implied, i.e. it is there, but not written? Razorflame 20:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Mmmmmmmh I don't know, but I read that i is a reduced form of gli, so, etymologically, maybe "dei" is a shorten form of "degli"... but I'm not sure at all. And it's not really so important^^ Pharamp 20:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I've understood now. No: you wanted to write degli dei instead of dei dei, so that is why it had to be degli articoli. This is not the reason, the reason is purely phonetic I imagine. Degli dei is the only exception against the rules above, seen that using the rule "some gods" will be a repetition (dei + dei). Pharamp 20:53, 13 January 2010 (UTC)