User talk:Qorilla

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

Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

  • Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing page for a similar word, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
  • Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary, though it may be a bit technical and longwinded. The most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
  • If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
  • The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
  • A glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
  • If you have anything to ask about or suggest, we have several discussion rooms. Feel free to ask any other editors in person if you have any problems or question, by posting a message on their talk page.

You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! Ƿidsiþ 17:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

csöves[edit]

Could you explain the third meaning and its translation of the adjective section? How does it mean homelessly which is an adverb? Thanks for adding/correcting Hungarian entries. --Panda10 01:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Maybe it's not so widespread. I searched google for "elég csöves" and found these for example:
  • Mindenesetre cink-spray-ben nem árt valami márkásat venni, mert vannak állítólag elég csöves löttyök is.
  • Mondjuk nekem eddig se volt bajom hogy sok kép van meg minden (sőt!). de most képzeljétek el elég csöves lenne az újság ha állna egy fehér háttérből pár screenshotból meg a szöveg és ennyi.
  • Battery [energiaital] elég csöves kb mint az NRG mindenhol lehet kapni és a legolcsóbb
  • Elég csöves iskola de már nem sokáig mert májustól felújítják!
  • ez így elég csöves, hogy ír az ember, aztán semmi válasz.
So sometimes it just means simply "low quality", but sometimes actually homelessly or homeless-like (csöves kinézete van=csövesül néz ki) <- here the -ül is an adjective suffix, not the noun suffix like in ajándékul. Qorilla 10:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I changed the context in the entry from informal to slang and removed the "homelessly" translation since it's an adverb, not an adjective. Homelessly and homeless-like are not the same to me. The first is an adverb, the second is an adjective. If you'd like to add an explanation that the adjective meaning came from the noun meaning of "homeless", please feel free to. --Panda10 11:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Árpád-sáv[edit]

The Hungarian Wikipedia spells it as one words Árpádsáv. Which one is correct? --Panda10 23:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

According to AkH 140.b, it is Árpád-sáv
http://hu.wikisource.org/wiki/A_magyar_helyes%C3%ADr%C3%A1s_szab%C3%A1lyai/A_k%C3%BCl%C3%B6n%C3%ADr%C3%A1s_%C3%A9s_az_egybe%C3%ADr%C3%A1s Qorilla 23:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok. According to the talk page there, the hu Wikipedia follows the Osiris spelling. This will make it harder to connect entries here to Wikipedia. Not sure how to resolve this. Maybe we should mention the alternative spelling. --Panda10 00:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Etymology[edit]

Hi Qorilla, I appreciate your contributions and good work, but please be a little more careful with etymologies, I had to correct several of them. If you are not sure and don't have a reliable resource, it's ok not to add that section to entries. Thanks. --Panda10 01:17, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

űr <- üres was in Magyar Értelmező Kéziszótár (2003); vény <-rendelvény (I heard it sometime, i guess it was wrong); fogadtatás <- I think here it is not -tat like the causative suffix, but -tatik, the reflexive one.
Ok, thanks. --Panda10 11:56, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

{{hu-conj}}[edit]

I am all for updating this template and make it more versatile, but if you add new parameters, please document their usage on the talk page of each: {{hu-conj-ok}}, {{hu-conj-ek}}, {{hu-conj-ök}}, {{hu-conj-ok-ít}}, {{hu-conj-ek-ít}}. --Panda10 14:26, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm just working on making all conjugations possible at the moment and experimenting with subtemplates, so I needed to modify this one to try how it will work. When I finish I will document it of course. Qorilla 14:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Great! Thank you for doing this. --Panda10 14:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Hungairan templates[edit]

Your templates will need thorough revision by someone familiar with template mecahnics and Hungarian (which is rare here). Your version uses many nested "if"s, and this creates enormous server strain. When an "if" is used, each and every possibility is worked out by the system, so the progression is geometric. Two ifs = 4 possibilities, 3 ifs = 8 possibilities, 10 ifs = 1024 possibilities. Such server strain must be reduced.

I may be able to help later today, but am just about ot sign off for a while. As long as you can get the template to do what it needs to do, then I may be able to strealine it. --EncycloPetey 19:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

-- Okay, i will rework them, reorganize, and maybe split to more separate templates. I will do it in a few days but thanks for the offer. Qorilla 19:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not about the number of templates. If the same number of "if"s appear when the template is split up, then the same problem exists. I can see some simple ways that might simplify the template, but if the current version is trying to handle all cases with a single template, then yes, splitting some of the forms into separate templates would be good. It isn't necessary for table templates to put everything into one template. --EncycloPetey 20:08, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
That is exactly what I meant. Splitting cases as separate templates will make more templates but the templates will be easier. Now I'm designing it to have the least redundancy required when calling the template from entries... It will take a bit of time because Hungarian conjugation is not straightforward. Qorilla 20:15, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

-aszt[edit]

I usually don't add derived terms to suffixes, only the category that contains all the words with that suffix. I think that's sufficient information. What do you think? --Panda10 00:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I think sometimes it is good to see such derived terms that do not have entries yet, especially for these rare suffixes. (red links) But of course the best would be to have all entries written. Qorilla 08:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

van and megy[edit]

It would be cleaner to create specific templates for irregular verbs (hu-conj-van, hu-conj-megy) and enter the verb forms there. People who run bots say tables are not a good idea in entries. It also makes editing harder. Would you mind changing it? Thanks. --Panda10 11:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense. Qorilla 11:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Two things. Please add the new templates to the appropriate category. Could you use hu-conj for the format just like hu-conj-ek and all other templates do? If we ever decide to change colors or any other formatting, we will have to make the change multiple times. --Panda10 11:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
For van, the template is not good, because the normal past form cannot be copied to the volna part. To change the template to test for an option just for one entry is not efficient I guess. Qorilla 11:58, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I just want to note that I will document all changes I make, but it needs time. I think some transition time is normal. Qorilla 12:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
There is another technique implemented in {{hu-decl-ak}} and its siblings - the "form" parameter which is useful when only singular or only plural forms are needed in the declension table. There is a separate hu-decl-sing and hu-decl-pl where the singular/plural columns contain dashes. Please take a look at it. The colors were not refreshed in these two templates yet. --Panda10 22:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I do not understand. Are you talking about van? With van, the problem is that it is one exceptional case (no other such verb exists) that it has different past forms than what are used before volna: voltam - lettem volna Qorilla 22:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

No, I just mentioned it. But now I get confused, maybe you meant that the "van" template cannot use the pre-coded future indefinite "fogok", "fogsz", etc. Because the past indefinite is "lettem volna" and it is used. Well, it's ok, I know what you mean and thank you for taking care of these irregular verbs. Your contributions are much appreciated. --Panda10 22:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
It can, in fact, use the pre-coded future indefinite because the infinitive is always the same, even before "fog". The problem is that the template automatically copies the indicative past forms to the place before "volna", so there is no way to have different ones in the indicative past and in the conditional past. But seeing that this is the only verb that is problematic, I think it would be overkill to have an option in the template to handle this one case. Qorilla 23:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

például[edit]

This is an adverb, please change it back. Just like később :) --Panda10 22:58, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

There is some confusion about the essive-modal -ul and the adverbal -ul.
  • The -ul in például is an essive-modal case ending, meaning "meaning it as a ...", "with the aim of ...", it shows an intention, thus it is similar to -ként, céljából, végett.
  • The -ul in angolul is an adverbal suffix that creates adverbs from adjectives meaning "in the ... way". The two are not the same.

I guess you are right about például because it is no longer a suffixed form but a one-block word meaning. So that can have a separate definition, but it can still be a noun if it is not used idionatically as a one-block word: ...-ot hozta például

  • meaning in the one-block style: for example he brought the ... this can be replaced with "pl."
  • meaning in the analytic, put-together-at-the-time-of-speaking style: he provided ... as an example. this can not

Qorilla 23:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I mean sometimes it is really példa+ul, just like ház+ban, but at other times it can be a single unit of speech, and that is when it becomes an adverb. Qorilla 23:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

More: if the például can be replaced by "pl." and retain the meaning then it is the adverb, if not, then it is just a case-declined noun I think. Qorilla 23:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I already wrote that I don't like calling suffixes "cases", but if we insist (I don't really mind), then what on earth can be a noun with an essive-modal ending, if not például, ajándékul and végül. We could remove it from the case-list, and requalify it as a "képző" that changes the part of speech to adverb, but it will still be distinct from the adjective-suffix. Qorilla 23:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I've been thinking about moving -ul/-ül out of the inflection table, too, but I haven't decided yet. I looked up the suffix in Zaicz's etymology dictionary, he has two entries. One is the adverbial suffix (angolul, vadul, hihetetlenül), the other is the verbal suffix (tanul, vonul, szépül). No third one. Eventually, we need to separate the entries in the current category to appropriately show the difference. A few more examples where the suffix is used with nouns:
  • érdekes tanulmányul szolgál; kutatási területül szolgál
  • azt kapta feladatul
  • vitézül állja a próbát
  • kutyául érzi magát
  • a szigetországot választotta színhelyül
  • tudomásul vesz
  • kézenfekvő dolgokat ad tanácsul
Instead of randomly changing things, it would be so much better to discuss your ideas first - there is a great value in cooperation. --Panda10 01:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

You are right. But the other model (change -> discuss if problematic -> consensus) can also be efficient. I looked up -ul/ül in Magyar értelmező kéziszótár and it also shows the two senses:

  • Vmilyen módon, vmilyen állapotban
  • Olyan szándékkal, eredménnyel, hogy vki/vmi vmivé váljon, vmilyen minőségben szerepeljen. <- this would be the case-ending
  • (and of course the adjevtive->verb suffix (csorbul))

Vitézül and kutyául are first sense, it's not the intension or the aim of the doing, but the way. The others are in the second, thank you, I've been trying hard to find more words to that sense. Are there any widespread categorisations that do not use these weird cases? I mean it's okay with me to say -t is a case because it works very similarly to other languages' accusative, but the cases that were invented for Hungarian are different. Some suffixes are promoted to case-level some are not. Maybe it was'nt a native speaker who made up these categories... And speaking of the case-table, the "temporal case" -kor is not there. It's similar to -ul, in a sense that it is also restricted, only 'temporal' nouns take it. Qorilla 08:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

What I meant above was to cleanup Category:Hungarian words suffixed with -ul - currently it contains all three types and that should be separated. We could use {hu-verb} to categorize verbs or hu-suffix with a part of speech parameter. The essive-modal could be in noun form categories, and the adverbs could stay in the current -ul category. Generally speaking, if a suffix does not create a new part of speech or a new dictionary entry (e.g. -ban/-ben, -ra/-ra, all case endings), than it should be in a form-of category such as Category:Hungarian verb forms, Category:Hungarian noun forms, etc. --Panda10 23:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Yep. But there are border-line cases and Hungarian can sometimes resist categorisation quite hard. Talk about it later. I go sleep now. Qorilla 23:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Entry layout[edit]

Clearly we have usability issues. I think that there is more acceptance that the problem exists for long entries than for others. I don't think that we have anyone among our regular contributors with any credibility on usability issues to address the problems. Do you have any thoughts about how to get someone involved at Wiktionary who is credible on the subject? DCDuring TALK 22:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I don't really understand what you mean by "regular contributors with any credibility on usability issues". Can you describe this better? We (wiktionary :) say that: credibility means "reputation impacting one's ability to be believed". People don't believe the regular contributors? Qorilla 22:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
The regular contributors don't have much confidence in each others' abilities to deal with the complexities of it. Some of the proposed solutions involve technical changes or fairly radical changes in presentation. We don't seem to have the ability to collect facts from users that would help us agree on the problem. My thought is that someone with a substantial amount of relevant experience in usability might help. I'm pestering you with this because you still have some freshness of point of view on the problem - and haven't developed habits to cope with (and ignore!) the problem as the veterans have. DCDuring TALK 22:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

"With personal pronouns" -ra[edit]

This is a non-standard header and AutoFormat tagged all the entries where you used them. Please go back and correct them. Maybe put the template under Usage notes? --Panda10 01:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I saw. I think level4 headers could be a bit more language specific, and not so overall-standard. I'll ask if:

Applied to personal pronouns[edit]

could be indluded in the allowed headers. With personal pronouns was something I just made up but it doesnt sound too good. Qorilla 07:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I was also thinking about the phrase "personal pronoun" in this context. Actually, this is "case endings applied to personal suffixes" and not to personal pronouns. I know that the personal suffixes -m, -d, etc. do represent the persons, but they are not pronouns, they are suffixes and they can be used with case endings, postpositions, nouns, verbs. Your thoughts? --Panda10 11:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I want to say with it that if you have a personal pronoun and want to add the suffix or postposition waht forms will you get (as opposed to attaching them to nouns) It is applied to a pronoun but then it changes. I think it's clearer for learners than saying that the suffixes get the ending since suffixes don't stand alone. Qorilla 12:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edit to ditch[edit]

Hello Qorilla -- Thank you for your contributions. Concerning this edit, please note that we do not put links in example sentences. Respectfully -- WikiPedant 04:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay then I change it to a more understandable adjective. Example sentences shouldn't contain more words to look up anyway. Qorilla 11:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, Qorilla, agreed. Good change. -- WikiPedant 18:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

egybeír[edit]

The etymology is incorrect. The element "egybe-" is not being added as a prefix to another word, rather it is the root word. --EncycloPetey 21:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

egybe- is a Hungarian verb prefix that modifies the meaning of verbs. Egybe- means "together" or literally "into one". Egybeír is ír prefixed with egybe-. Qorilla 21:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I always understood egybe to be a separate preposition/adverb. --EncycloPetey 21:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
It is called "igekötő" (verb prefix) in Magyar Értelmező Kéziszótár. The distinction is not that sharp, many prefixed verbs are also similar to compounds. By the way, if you speak Hungarian, how come that it's not in your Babel list on your user page? :o Qorilla 22:03, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Hungarian is not a language I feel comfortable communicating in. I simply know some phonetics and grammar as a result of teaching English in Hungary for a few months, followed by continued interest and book study.
These verb compounds are very much like those in Latin, where a preposition is attached to the front of the verb. In Latin entries, we've decided not to call it "prefixed" if the added portion is itself a word in its own right. This matches what we do with the prefix as a part of speech. We usually call an element a "prefix" only if it isn't a word itself. --EncycloPetey 22:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Many things are arbitrary in this, but this is the usual way to treat Hungarian verb prefixes. Basically all of them evolved from distinct words just like the suffixes. Qorilla 22:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
The case is similar with English over- which is also a word alone as over. Qorilla 22:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
And you can see the problems that creates. Having a separate page for over- means that senses are duplicated on two pages. For Latin, this would have meant two copies of every page, with no discernible benefit. English, on the other hand, does have some prefixes like endo- and ab- that are not words in their own right. --EncycloPetey 22:40, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes. The problem is that prefixes need a hyphen at the end so another entry must be created. The best solution would be to include them in the non-hyphenated entry with another POS header "Prefix". Qorilla 22:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
That wouldn't be a reasonable solution in many languages. Then, we would simply have duplicate definitions sections on the same page instead of separate pages. My preferred solution is to avoid the "prefix" templates unless the component in question functions as a prefix and not as a separate word. --EncycloPetey 22:52, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Any change at this point will require a huge amount of rework and we simply don't have the manpower. Paper dictionaries usually don't have a separate entry for prefixes with a dash (e.g. ki-), they simply have ki 1, ki 2, etc. and indicate the part of speech at each entry. However, they do call it prefix and when this prefix is mentioned in descriptions and explanations, it is spelled ki-, with a dash. --Panda10 23:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, just so I know where we stand on this what ,if anything, is the decision? Are we to recreate Category:Hungarian words prefixed with egybe- or what? On an unrelated related note can any of you tell me what "szerelem egy" means? I'm curious as I saw it as a character name not too long ago in w:Guild Wars and I presume it is Hungarian. 50 Xylophone Players talk 12:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
I recreated the category and added some more words to it.
szerelem means "love", egy means "one" or "a, an". Might be the beginning of a sentence like "love is a ..." Qorilla 12:50, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
So, would it be equivalent to saying "Love is...(possibly blind, as that expression gets thrown around relatively often ;-)" in English? 50 Xylophone Players talk 20:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Nope. 'egy' at that place looks very strange. It can not be "love is adjective" because "egy" wouldn't be used then. Qorilla 20:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
I think you're taking me up too literally the thing about "love is...(blind)" was merely a musing; I was not saying that that structure would definitely be viable in Hungarian using "egy", not that I would have known about that. So, would the best translation assuming nothing else is implied be "A love" ? 50 Xylophone Players talk 15:25, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't have the slightest idea what it could mean, really. It doesn't make sense alone. It's hard to guess without context. Are you sure it was exactly as you wrote? Qorilla 15:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
99-100% sure yes, because I wrote it down when I first saw it despite only having posted it here two days ago. 50 Xylophone Players talk 16:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

{{hu-inflection of}}[edit]

I'd like to ask you to make a small change in this template. Currently, it puts the word into a noun form category, but I'd like to use the same template for adjective forms, see rosszban. So an optional parameter is needed, pos=a which would put the word to a Hungarian adjective forms - <case name> category. If the pos parameter is not provided, the default is noun (this is also needed to preserve the integrity of the current entries using the same tempate). Let me know what you think. I'm not sure if we are overcategorizing the form entries. --Panda10 01:41, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

This is reasonable but I'm starting to feel we worry too much about these "form of" things while some very basic words and suffixes are still missing or have very short entries. Qorilla 07:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Don't we have a joker word for both nouns and adjectives like Hungarian "névszó"? Qorilla 07:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Névszó is translated as substantive in my dictionary. I agree that a lot of words are still missing, but this is the result of the small number of regular Hungarian editors. It's not urgent to update the template, leave it for now. What you do - adding words and examples - is more important. --Panda10 11:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

If I may just give my two cents on the matter then I would like to make two points

@Qorilla: It's not that we're "worrying about them too much" , we're just ensuring that like regular entries they a) have firm standards so they don't become a disorganised mess and b) are categorised in a manner that minimises clutter as much as possible bearing in mind that we are dealing with thing that there are a lot of. Just look at what happened with Category:Finnish noun forms (something I do hope I and/or some other people can tackle in the future) hence why I proposed categorisation by case before Category:Hungarian noun forms was set to get just as bad.
@Panda10: Per my above points IMHO we're not overcategorising them. Also just out of curiosity if Hungarian adjectives do inflect into cases ((really, I thought this was like, a major distinguishing characteristic of Hungarian that distanced it ever so slightly from Finnish :-) ) much like nouns then why didn't you previously add declension tables to adjective entries? Did you forget? Or were you just too busy? 50 Xylophone Players talk 15:44, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
What about "Hungarian essive forms" etc? Then we don't need to worry about the POS.
There are a great many suffixed forms that don't appear currently in many types of entries. Few Hungarian editors, slow progress. Anyway repetitive things should be handled by bots. I prefer to do some more human-needing work for now, as I said some extremely basic vocabulary is still missing. For example I just added the word for "again" (ismét) today. I think that has priority over form-of entries like those expressing things like into our xx.
Speaking of bots: I know some Python programming and I think it would be good to semi-automate these things somehow to reduce the "clicking, waiting to load, copying-pasting then saving" time. This is what I'm thinking of:
  • I collect data from the dump on the local computer (I already wrote some programs to search in it so I can see what to expand): like searching for pages without hyphenation
  • run some trickery to guess the correct hyphenation
  • manually copy-editing the changes proposed by the program
  • feed the concrete changes to a bot
  • the bot makes the desired changes
It could also be used when changing template using practice, like the recent adding of the part of speech to suffix categories. For example all words that are categorised to "Hungarian words suffixed with -ás" should be in "Hungarian nouns suffixed with -ás". Then we could just feed the bot with the words concerned and it would make the changes. This would extremely reduce the time needed for repetitive works. The bot would be used for concrete tasks, I don't talk about a patrolling bot. How would this be possible? Qorilla 16:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Post coding questions in WT:GP. If you create a bot, you have to get approval to run it and the code has to be posted so others can review it. There is another tool, the AWB (AutoWikiBrowser) Wiktionary:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage for category moves/changes. Panda10 21:44, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:Hungarian foreign words[edit]

There is a discussion about foreign words in Hungarian. Do you think we need a category for those words? [[WT:RFDO#Category:Hungarian_foreign_words]] Thanks. --Panda10 21:17, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

múlik[edit]

How can I add the future participle form múlandó? And the past tense form varian múlott? --Panda10 15:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Múlandó can be added with the option future-participle-flag=y (maybe not the best name).
Múlott can not be added in the current stage. I cannot think of any other verb that has two kinds of past, but of the other forms only one kind, so it would not be practical introduce an option for this.
  • it may be written below the conjugation table (I think this would be the best solution)
  • a separate conjugation table can be inserted with the parameter past=ott. Qorilla 15:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
As it is just one difference and it needs a small explanation, I added it below the table. Qorilla 15:54, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Great, thank you. --Panda10 15:57, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Verb complements[edit]

Hi Qorilla, have you seen this discussion on verb complements? I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. Thanks. --Panda10 16:10, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Declension of adjectives[edit]

What are your thoughts about the declension of adjectives? I had used the current hu-decl template on a few adjectives when it was appropriate (see zavaros), but we may have to duplicate the templates just for adjectives because there are differences. Let me know how you see this. Thanks. --Panda10 20:47, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Maybe later I will try to think about it. Actually I don't have much time because of the university. I just happened to see that the conjugation topic is again discussed, so I thought it won't take long to put up the new versions but I would not begin with another project now. Sorry. Qorilla 21:25, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I did not expect you to do it. I totally understand your priorities and really appreciate what you did. Good luck with your studies. --Panda10 21:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

hu-decl-ak[edit]

I'd like to modify {{hu-decl-ak}} to accomodate words ending in i such as további. The only incorrect cell is *továbbion instead of továbbin. In line 23=, I'd like to add this: {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|i|{{{1}}}{{{2}}}n}}, but I'm not sure where to insert it to keep the existing entries intact. There are several if's already in this line. Can you take a look? Thanks. --Panda10 (talk) 17:33, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. I also modified {{hu-decl-ek}} accordingly. If you find any errors with the solution, just let me know. Qorilla (talk) 23:04, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
I made it a bit more compact. {{{param|else}}} is equivalent to {{#if:{{{param|}}}|{{{param}}}|else}} Qorilla (talk) 23:37, 30 September 2014 (UTC)