User talk:Wikitiki89

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
Taking a bit a of a break for a few months from editing every day. I can still be reached on my talk page or by pinging.




Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to one of the discussion rooms or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!


See its documentation page for its purpose. Normally the cognates are listed in the ===Etymology=== section, e.g. "From Proto-Semitic *blah, cognate with Hebrew x, Aramaic y, Akkadian z...". --Ivan Štambuk 19:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


The English suffix -like does not come from Old English. As the OED puts it: ‘the words containing this suffix are compounds of LIKE a. and adv., in the senses in which these words govern a dative or are followed by an adj. (see LIKE a. 1b, LIKE adv. 1, 3). The compounds so formed not unfrequently resemble in sense the derivatives formed with -lik(e, ME. dial. form of -LY1, -LY2, but the two formations are entirely distinct’. Ƿidsiþ 19:37, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


This might be useful for you. Example in English {{suffix|read|able}} giving read + -able. Mglovesfun (talk)


In Romance languages and their derivatives, most words and suffixes derive from the ablative form, which superceded the nominative in daily use. --EncycloPetey 19:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Quebec pronunciation[edit]

About half of the Quebec pronunciations you're adding are wrong. It is a difficult subject because there is no standard here in Quebec, pronunciation depends on age, location, social class, etc. I don't hear people pronouncing / very often, for example, so I don't think it is wise to say that it is the "Quebec pronunciation" of anniversaire.

Alright, I'll stop for now. --wikitiki89 03:52, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


Is the coin actually being displayed on the left side on your screen? It isn't on mine... --Yair rand (talk) 03:06, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

No, it was a typo. Thanks for pointing it out! --WikiTiki89 (talk) 05:29, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


What're your criteria? DCDuring TALK 16:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I've never heard anyone use dices. Also I did a google book search for "a dice" "two dices" and for "a dice" "two dice". The first returned 38 or something results, the second over 2000. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 16:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
What you've heard is just suggestive and motivating. If those percentages (~2%) are the threshold level, we have a lot of entries and senses to mark. I usually limit the rare tag to the barely attestable. We lack a tag to indicate lower frequency. Sometimes I insert frequency data from COCA and BNC, conveniently available to use through the BYU website. I recommend it as one of the most useful resources for checking on contemporary usage. DCDuring TALK 17:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

genderfuck from clusterfuck?[edit]

Do you have any evidence for this? [1] It just doesn't seem likely to me. Equinox 12:05, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I will admit that it is just speculation, but to me it seems like the only explanation that makes sense. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 12:09, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
A clusterfuck is a big mess or chaos — that doesn't relate to genderfuck. To fuck with is to tweak, or subvert expectations — that's exactly what genderfuck is. Equinox 12:10, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
I never said a genderfuck is a clusterfuck, only that the structure of the word genderfuck is based on clusterfuck. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 12:14, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


English auscultate derives as a back-formation from English auscultation, and not from the Latin verb auscultō. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

In that case, couldn't the same be true of the Romance languages? For example, couldn't French ausculter also just be a backformation from auscultation? Note: I am not disputing natural descendants like écouter. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 06:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
It could be true, except that's not what the etymology of the word gives on the French Wiktionary. They state it comes from the Latin verb, and I trust their information. In some cases, the etymology is known, and that information should be used to guide the addition of descendant terms. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
According to CNRTL, auscultation is attested before ausculter in French, just like in English. According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, English auscultate comes from Latin auscultātus, past participle of auscultō. I'm sure the other languages probably took the term from either French or English and molded it to fit their verb paradigms. Either way, auscultation comes from auscultātiō, which comes from the same past participle auscultātus of auscultō, so essentially they are all descendants of auscultō. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 15:07, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
But that makes assumptions at odds with published sources. The RAE (for Spanish) gives the Latin verb in the etymology of the Spanish one, and they're pretty picky about etymologies. There's probably a publishable research project in this. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:08, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Do you dispute that they all ultimately come from auscultō? --WikiTiki89 07:38, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Ultimately? No. But our etymology and descendants listing don't go by ultimate origin; the more proximate origin is desirable. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:47, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Wiktionary:About Yiddish[edit]

Hi! I've just created this page, which is meant to have a centrally located repository of information about the standardized treatment of Yiddish on Wiktionary. I'm giving you this message because you have shown interest in Yiddish, and we need your help! The page especially needs better coverage of the many undocumented headword-line and conjugation templates, but any assistance is welcomed. Please feel free to edit the page, and to raise any issues for discussion at Wiktionary talk:About Yiddish. Thanks so much! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for letting me know! --WikiTiki89 (talk) 06:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)


When you move an entry, please be sure to add {{delete}} to the redirect you leave behind, so that an admin can notice and delete it.

Thanks in advance,
RuakhTALK 14:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, from now on I will. But what's wrong with a redirect? --WikiTiki89 (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
We generally don't want them; see Wiktionary:Redirections. —RuakhTALK 21:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


Ha, whoops, thanks. {{he-onym}}'s support for dwv= is actually the only reason I used it there, so I don't know how I managed not to actually use the dwv=. :-P   —RuakhTALK 20:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I figured I'd remind you. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 10:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)


The mass deployment of {{t}} seems to be dramatically slowing down the loading of entries. Could you please stop mass-adding them until our technological adepts can come up with some less resource-intensive template? It might be quite a while, but there is hope from the prospect of the use of 'lua' to accomplish some things. Apparently each instance to {{t}} causes a template-existence test, which is the source of most of our template-related performance problems. The same seems to arise from mass-deployment of {{l}} and any of the templates that use our language-and-script system. Actually, adding {{t}} to entries with few translations doesn't cause as noticeable a problem, so perhaps your efforts could be directed there. DCDuring TALK 17:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

See User_talk:Liliana-60#dog. DCDuring TALK 17:53, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Alright, I didn't realize that. I'll stop until it's fixed. --WikiTiki89 18:18, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
It's really good in the long run and the problem is only bad with entries with lots of instances of {{t}}, {{l}} and {{term}}. Adding an explicit 'sc=XXXX' (eg 'Latn') helps too, apparently. DCDuring TALK 18:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Well the xte script automatically adds the sc= for non-Latin scripts. It's only the {{t}}s that are already there and dont have "sc="s that end up still without one. Unless you think we should also start adding sc=Latn? --WikiTiki89 18:40, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Fête's pronunciation questions[edit]

Discussion moved to User talk:Wikitiki89/Fête's pronunciation questions.


If you want to use the nikúd הֶחְמִיץ instead of הֶחֱמִיץ (which I'm O.K. with: he.wikt also uses a sh'va), then I think you need to update the transliteration to match. —RuakhTALK 18:28, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Done. Don't know how I missed that. --WikiTiki89 18:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


Is this really a good idea? It seems like it just makes things more complex. (And it also reduces the usefulness of the search interface.) —RuakhTALK 21:17, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

How does it make things more complex? I agree that it reduces the usefulness of the search interface, but given how thoroughly we are templatizing everything, we need to find another way to fix that problem anyway. And theoretically we should be creating entries for the inflected forms. --WikiTiki89 07:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
I think it makes things more complex in three ways. Firstly, it depends on an abstract notion of a "stem", which I don't think is an established concept, and is therefore not a way that people are used to thinking about adjective inflections. (For example, I can't imagine anyone ever thinking of an adjective as having a "stem" that consists of the masculine singular indefinite form plus a dagésh, with the dagésh being dropped in all singular forms and retained in all plural forms.) Secondly, it reduces the similarity between input and output. For example, from your edit to [[מצוין]]:
  • {{he-adj|dwv=מְצֻיָּן|tr=m'tsuyán|f=מצוינת|fdwv=מְצֻיֶּנֶת|mp=מצוינים|mpdwv=מְצֻיָּנִים|fp=מצוינות|fpdwv=מְצֻיָּנוֹת}}
  • {{he-adj-auto|tr=m'tsuyán|dwv=מְצֻיָּן|stem=מצוינ|stemdwv=מְצֻיָּנ|f=מצוינת|fdwv=מְצֻיֶּנֶת}}
In the first version, it's obvious at a glance what the four forms are. The second version is much more opaque. And thirdly, the template itself is confusingly complicated. I think you did an admirable job making it as simple as possible, but "as simple as possible" is still pretty darn complicated. If all that complexity added up to something really useful, that would be one thing — for example, verb-conjugation templates tend to have this much complexity because the alternative is making the editor type several dozen forms — but the adjective headword-template has only four forms (six, if you count mp2= and pausal=, which {{he-adj-auto}} doesn't support), and this template doesn't seem to really spare the editor the effort of constructing those forms.
RuakhTALK 03:05, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Yeah I don't know if "stem" is the best word for it should be something like "suffixable form". Also don't forget that most other languages have automatic headword templates for adjectives, a lot of which are much more complicated. If it makes any difference, I was gonna also use the same concept when I redo the conjugation templates. Also, you would be right that typing in four forms isn't so bad, but typing in four forms with vowels is extremely annoying. Maybe it's much more useful when you don't have to specify the feminine form (see יָפֶה and מֵת). --WikiTiki89 07:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Removed comments[edit]

Sorry, I realised my original message was incorrect and I needed to rephrase the question. So your "support" didn't make any sense anymore with how I rewrote it. I hope that doesn't bother you, I'm sorry if it does. —CodeCat 18:48, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

My edit summary was mostly a joke since you removed my comment for good reason and I removed yours for good reason. --WikiTiki89 18:50, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


Regarding the citation you just added to char: I'm not sure what to do about it, but I think it's a distinct sense (an abbreviation for character in general) rather than the noun ("char" with no dot/period). The latter specifically refers to a data type, e.g. "chars can be cast to and from ints"; the former only abbreviates "character" in general. Equinox 13:08, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Did I add a citation? I thought I just rearranged them. Anyway I fixed the problem of accidentally deleting a sense that I meant to reword. --WikiTiki89 13:23, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Re: "But I'm not even an admin..."[edit]

Would you like to be? I'd be happy to nominate you. —RuakhTALK 16:17, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

What, are you trying to outdo Wonderfool in how many admins you've nominated?
Oh wait. I get it. Vahag was right all along. There's something fishy going on ;)
So, of course, I think you'd be a great admin. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:29, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
What mandatory responsibilities come with being an admin? --WikiTiki89 21:08, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
The only mandatory responsibility is not to abuse the position. Deleting the main page, for example, is forbidden. ;-)   But there are various sorts of tasks that either can't be done by non-admins, or at least that tend work better when admins do them, and I think admins should participate in some such tasks every so often. Such tasks include patrolling (see Help:Patrolled edits, though actually a lot of the details have changed since that was written . . .), closing RFV and RFD and RFDO discussions, closing votes, archiving discussion-pages, maintaining WOTD and FWOTD, and so on. But to be honest, we have plenty of admins who never do anything like that, and it's just fine. —RuakhTALK 22:03, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Ok, then I would accept a potential nomination. --WikiTiki89 22:11, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
O.K.: Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2012-12/User:Wikitiki89 for adminRuakhTALK 01:46, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit summary at {{he-adv}}[edit]

Template:he-adv?diff=19016340 is hard to decipher. An edit-summary like “support wv= even when dwv= is specified” would have been very helpful. —RuakhTALK 17:09, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, a lot of times I forget to put an edit summary and since you can't put one in retroactively, there isn't much I can do. --WikiTiki89 21:10, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Understood. —RuakhTALK 22:03, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Ladino orthography[edit]

A long time ago, you asked about Ladino orthography at the tea room and I forgot to answer you. The best online source for that is this, which will hopefully answer all your questions. I think you'll soon see why Yiddish is so blessed to have YIVO making things logical for us... —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! If only every Ladino writer had a chart like that... --WikiTiki89 06:33, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Implied prepositions[edit]

In idiomatic or colloquial speech prepositions are often implied:

  • "I see (that) you are tired"
  • "John wrote (to) Mary a letter"

Same way "The chair is metal" does not derive from "The chair is metallic" but "The chair is made of metal". Regards--Pierpao (talk) 21:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually that is not true:
  • "I see (that) you are tired" – the "that" is optional even in formal speech (and it's not even a preposition).
  • "John wrote (to) Mary a letter" – putting "to" in there actually makes the sentence incorrect. You are right that there are two choices: "John wrote Mary a letter." and "John wrote a letter to Mary." The first one uses "Mary" as an indirect object of the verb, while the second uses Mary as the object of a prepositional phrase.
"The chair is metal" uses "metal" as an adjective as evidenced by the parallel structure in sentences like "The chair is tall, metal, and heavy." where "metal" is used as part of a series of adjectives. You cannot say "The piece is lively, D Major, and long." because it would be mixing nouns with adjectives.
--WikiTiki89 21:41, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
mmh...Of course that is not a proposition, and you are too right about "Mary". I wanted only to be concise...anyway you have some point but regard metal I'm still in doubt; not convinced as before indeed. Piece D Major is simply incorrect. Bye--Pierpao (talk) 22:06, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
There is no implied preposition in "John wrote Mary a letter". That's the syntax of the old dative case which never fell out of use. —CodeCat 22:25, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Conjugation of נשאר[edit]

You gave this a regular nif'ál conjugation, which is not quite right. Specifically, the ה never takes a sh'vá (*‎הְ‎) anywhere in this conjugation; instead, it takes a khatáf-patákh (‎הֲ‎) wherever a sh'vá might be expected. (And maybe other differences, too, but that's the only one that jumps out at me.) —RuakhTALK 20:36, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

You must mean א. And yes, you are right, I must have missed that. --WikiTiki89 17:28, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, sorry, I mean א. (The ה got in there because I consulted Tarmon and Uval just to make sure, and they list נשאר as being conjugated like their table for נבהל. Apparently I failed to translate that back.) —RuakhTALK 19:32, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Wikitiki89/Fête's pronunciation questions[edit]

Don't answer to Fête's questions if you don't want. You just encourage him his behavior and to earn a ban on the French wiktionary. Ĉiuĵaŭde (talk) 17:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, he is a pest. Not a vandal, just a pest. He seems well-meaning, but lacking in social graces. Urhixidur (talk) 02:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


Are you sure about the [‌ən] in there? I always thought it was [n̩], although phonology (especially in Yiddish) has never been my strong suit. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:30, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I think in most languages that have these sounds, including Yiddish and English, [‌ən] and [n̩] are used interchangeably. --WikiTiki89 18:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, since we're only using narrow(er) transcriptions, it doesn't really matter. I'm sure you could find a bunch of Yiddish speakers who say that. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
I think [‌ən] is a little easier to read because the little line under the "n" in [n̩] is very small. --WikiTiki89 18:39, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
In Dutch, it is normally [‌ən], and [n̩] is markedly dialectal (Low Saxon). However, the more usual pronunciation drops the -n, so it is only [‌ə]. —CodeCat 19:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
How well can you hear the difference? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:21, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
After another nasal, it is clearly [ən] (which is reflected in the orthography). Before a plosive, it is usually clearly [m̩]/[n̩]/[ŋ̩] (which is also reflected in the orthography). After everything else it, it is much harder to differentiate them (and the orthography does not write the ע). I don't think it is very useful to differentiate these different cases of the same phoneme. --WikiTiki89 20:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Off topic: how do you type Cyrillic vowels with acutes over them? I can't find them in the edittools or on my Russian keyboard. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:17, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I added the combining acute accent to my custom Russian (actually pan-Slavic Cyrillic) keyboard layout (made using the Microsoft Keyboard Layout Creator). I had to make my own phonetic layout because the real Russian keyboard layout is impossible to remember. They are also on the old special character entry bar under the "Save page", "Show preview", etc. buttons. --WikiTiki89 20:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Ah. One of the only things I really dislike about my Mac... well, there must be a way w/o virtualization. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:30, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Maybe this can help (I've personally never tried it)? --WikiTiki89 02:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Big Mac[edit]

For a demonstration on global commercial English, I am adding and citing as many translations of Big Mac as possible (currently, on that page alone there are French, German, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish). Could you please check the entries биг-мак (big-mak) and ביג מק (which have both been tagged with {{attention}}) and clean them up a bit? Thanks! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 08:05, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Fixed, but according to this ngram, биг-мэк (big-mek) is more common in Russian. --WikiTiki89 14:45, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Aha, I'll move it. I assumed that /æ/ would generally be changed to /a/ in languages that lack that phoneme, except for examples like Korean where they already have something closer. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Certainly not in most Germanic languages, which replace it with /ɛ/ usually. —CodeCat 18:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Come to think of it, Pacific creoles do that too, although /æ/ is less noticeable in Australian English, so it doesn't come up quite as much. So how come Big Mek is still a redlink? On BGC, I only see one valid Serbo-Croatian hit for it, even though by your logic it should be the Germanic default. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:52, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Because not all languages tend to respell loanwords, and the Germanic languages often don't to a greater or lesser degree (*cough* English). Especially not when it comes to proper names. German has Big Mäc at least, though. I've also found a few Google hits for Finnish bigmäkki. —CodeCat 19:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately, like Catalan Big Mec (which is funny to anyone who knows French and English), that seems to fall outside the zone of citeability. I suspect that Big Macs are a somewhat rarer topic of conversation in Fennoscandia, where people actually care about their health (remember the Danish fat tax?). I'll try some more Asian languages, because biggumakku had a lot of hits. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Russian usually transcribes English /æ/ as "э" and Hebrew usually transcribes it as a segol, while "а" and patach are usually reserved for English /ʌ/. But I agree that if it were my choice, I would borrow them as /a/-like sounds. I even once tried to order a בִּיג מַק in Israel, only to find out that it's called a בִּיג מֶק. McDonald's itself, on the other hand, is transcribed as Макдональдс (Makdonalʹds) (capitalization varies) and מַקדּוֹנַלְדְס. --WikiTiki89 20:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Presumably the Russian name is because it is unstressed in English then, and an unstressed e in Russian would resemble "MicDonalds". I wonder why they added the soft sign though? —CodeCat 20:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
In Russian, as well as other Slavic languages, foreign /l/s are usually, but not always (see алкоголь (alkogolʹ)), transcribed with a soft /lʲ/ as opposed to a hard /l/ (which is realized as a heavily velarized [ɫ̪ˠ] and I guess seen as too different). In Polish, in fact, the soft L is the orthographic default. --WikiTiki89 20:35, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Also, ironically, McDonald's is pronounced as "MicDonalds" in English. --WikiTiki89 20:38, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
My two cents. Макдональдс is colloquial, Макдоналдс is official. Polish "soft l" is close to German and French, not as soft (palatalised) Russian "ль" /lʲ/ and Polish ł used to be pronounced as Russian /ɫ̪/ "ł sceniczne" (Poles in Lithuania, Belarus still pronounce so) but now it has become /w/. Russian use "ль" or "л" + iotised vowels traditionally, "imitating" French and German, borrowings from English increasingly avoid palatalistion of "l". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:48, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


What the hell happened with {{yi-noun}} here??? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Fixed it. You used tr= instead of pl=. --WikiTiki89 19:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, I'm an idiot. (BTW, would you mind fixing the Hebrew section on that page while you're at it?) —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


I'd like to create an entry for фишка, could you give me a list of English definitions (translations), please? I don't like dictionary definitions I have found. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The only thing I can think of in the general case is piece or playing piece. Yandex lists counter, chip, token, marker, and peg, all of which I think are fine but only apply in specific types of games (it also lists fish and dib, but I think those are too rare in English to be worth including, although fish is related etymologically to фишка, coming into English from French fiche). --WikiTiki89 05:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Спасибо. Сделаю позже. Присоединяйся к усилиям по увеличению и улучшению объёма русских статей в Викисловаре! Это не сложно, но интересно. Проблемы бывают с выбором шаблонов, но я ищу для этого слово того же типа склонения. Для глаголов у нас нет хороших и удобных шаблонов, поэтому это самая кропотливая и неприятная часть, где нужно вставлять формы вручную, поэтому у нас мало русских глаголов. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Да, я по-этому и не люблю добавлять русские слова. Но буду стараться! --WikiTiki89 06:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Если добавлять склонение и спряжение слишком скучно, можешь работать без них, но оставляй {{attention|ru}}. Главное, чтоб была правильная семантика и другая инфомация! --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 10:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

русские статьи[edit]


Не хочешь ли попробовать силы в Category:Russian_terms_needing_attention? Наречия довольно просты, имена существительные и прилагательные сложнее. Мой приём - использовать подобные слова и заменять параметры в шаблоне. Например, платок, шнурок и курок одинаково склоняются. То же самое с экономический и политический. Этот словарь поможет в выборе переводов с русского или английского. Глаголы - самые сложные, можно оставить "на потом". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:07, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Я счас занят учебой, но когда будет время, буду помогать. --WikiTiki89 02:51, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Удачи в учёбе! Да, хотя мы часто говорим "счас" (то есть "щас" или "сича́с"), писать надо "сейчас" :) --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Я всегда забываю что так редко пишут. --WikiTiki89 03:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
В зависимости от браузера, ты можешь установить программку проверки орфографии для русского языка, я пользуюсь Файрфоксом, для него есть очень удобные плагины, которые выделяют подозрительно написанные слова. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


I've never been near to Boston, so I was wondering if got and gut are genuine homophones there. More generally, is it beneficial to Wiktionary to include every regional variation? We could end up with thousands! Perhaps we should have a separate regional pronunciation page? Dbfirs 13:38, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, they can be genuine homophones. By most "more traditional" speakers, got is usually, but not always, pronounced gut, even when stressed. I have no clue what the frequency of either variation is. This is not the only case where /ɒ/ becomes /ʌ/, but I do not know what the pattern is. For example, popcorn and hotdog are usually pronounced pupcorn and hutdog, while pop and hot are usually not pronounced pup and hut. As far as I can tell, it seems to only occur before voiceless stops (and their allophones, thus gotta can be pronounced [ˈɡʌɾə]): most often before a /t/ and sometimes before a /p/.
Disclaimer: I have never read this anywhere, this information is purely from my own experience.
As for whether we should indicate all regional variation, I don't know. Perhaps the Beer Parlour can decide that.
--WikiTiki89 20:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

English palindromes?[edit]


For some reason your user page appears in Category:English_palindromes, and I don't think it should... Can you help prevent that?

לאף טוף (talk) 19:29, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

In fact, User:Wikitiki89/a and User:Wikitiki89/subst:a have a lot of inappropriate categories due to template calls that need to be removed. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:53, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
I can delete those pages. They were kindof a failed attempt to see what would happen if you subst every template at [[a]]. --WikiTiki89 16:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hebrew script and Jewish Babylonian Aramaic[edit]

Hi Wikitiki89, I am collecting a lot of translations of the word "water" on the French Wiktionary. I found the one in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic within that book. Yet I do not know the Hebrew script and I do not knwo any person who knows it on the french Wiktionary. So I am requiring your help :). I found that the word looks like מיא but I am not completely sure. So could you confirm that water is מיא and if not could you give me the correct spelling? Thanks in advance. Pamputt (talk) 00:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes that is the correct spelling. If you want to include the vocalization, it would be מַיָּא. I also checked and your Hebrew and Yiddish translations are also correct. --WikiTiki89 01:05, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
You can get many translations from water#Translations. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:13, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks you for the confirmations. Concerning water#Translations, I started my "project" by taking the translation that you point out and I created the corresponding articles. The main problem of the translations indicated in water#Translations is that they are not sourced. On french Wiktionary, I indicate systematically the source especially for the "exotic" languages. Pamputt (talk) 03:27, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Yiddish and Lua[edit]

Good to see you're back. I was wondering if you're interested in switching over the Yiddish templates to Lua. The main attractions would be:

  • Automatic transliteration (in Module:yi-translit) could do non-Hebraic words
  • Conjugation and declension could be automatic (no parameters)
  • I think we already have a function somewhere (probably Module:he-utilities) that converts finals forms to medials
  • I think we can't currently handle separable verbs, but there's a neat way to do it. I like how CodeCat did {{af-verb}}/Module:af-headword, you could probably copy that.

I probably would be of little use, but glad to help if I can, maybe by bot-converting the entries to the new templates. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:28, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

For the prefixes and separable parts you can also look at the Dutch verb inflection tables, which the Afrikaans templates were based on. Module:nl-verb first conjugates the base verb, then adds any prefixes or separable parts later. This ensures that all verbs derived from the base verb are automatically conjugated the same way, even if it's irregular. It also keeps the two stages separate which matches how it's done in the grammar itself. —CodeCat 02:43, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I can certainly do all that. However, I am currently working on the Hebrew verb conjugator, which as anyone who knows anything about Hebrew knows is pretty complicated. I would like to at least finish the regular Hebrew verbs before getting started on Yiddish. --WikiTiki89 03:49, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Any headway on this? (Sorry to sound pushy, but I was singing Hanukkah songs in Yiddish today and now I'm all excited again.) —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:28, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
    I'll get back to it soon. It's one of those things that I can't work on for too long in one sitting. --WikiTiki89 01:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


Hi, I think this your edit is an error, because Venetian and Italian are different tongues (and anyway in signora there is no etymology). --Tn4196 (talk) 17:29, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

That's why it says "compare". If you want to add a more detailed etymology then do so, but delete what's already there just to point to a different word. --WikiTiki89 17:31, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Here, now there's everything and more. --Tn4196 (talk) 17:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


I just want to encourage you to keep producing Judæo‐Arabic entries. It sounds like a very interesting language to me, and I wish that there existed more information available for it. --Æ&Œ (talk) 15:43, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I want to add more, but it requires time (plus my Arabic is not so great yet). My main source currently is File:Saadia-Tafsir.pdf, which is 1893 printing of a 10th century Judeo-Arabic translation of the Torah (Five Books of Moses). Just a warning if you decide to take a look: this book has a French translation that starts at the beginning of the PDF and goes towards the middle, while the Judeo-Arabic starts at the end of the PDF and goes towards the middle (as is common when a LTR language and a RTL language are included separately in one book). Also, some pages are unfortunately missing. --WikiTiki89 15:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for populating my "user page" (lol). Well, can you please elaborate on "sherutim"? There is a Yod after the shesh, so why she---? I think the separate entry of the word is right about it being shi---. P.S. Yes we do have a common foe, and that's the individual putting all these Y's. Frankly, this kind of transliteration will make transl. Hebrew look like Polish (bystra, bym, byt... ;)) -andy 20:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, there is a yud after the shin, but what matters is the vowel under the shin (which happens to not be written on that page). The vowel there is a tsere, which is pronounced "e". --WikiTiki89 21:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Yea, shin, not shesh. Shesh was the number 6, e.g. in clock time, LOL. I'm a grand-master in confusing things in languages. --- Well I've usually heard it spoken - mahér (quickly) :) - and hence it was not easy to distinguish in that talking speed. So I'd just say you're obviously right here. :) Thanks for the good eyes. -andy 21:50, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
By the way, if you are ever unsure about the vowels, the dictionary at usually has the vowels pretty accurately. --WikiTiki89 23:37, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Categorisation bug (wrong language in Module:ru-headword)[edit]

The bug - Category:Ukrainian verbs needing aspect vs Category:Russian verbs needing aspect is fixed (see diff but it takes time for verbs to change categories. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:41, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

There were two bugs. It's good that you fixed that one, but it was also categorized as missing gender even though it's not a noun. --WikiTiki89 02:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
It's not a bug, it's expected. There was some discussion about treating imperfective/perfective forms as gender for technical reasons in translations and some headword modules, so impf or pf are now identical to m, f, n, p, etc. The category name is a bit misleading, so bring it up to CodeCat when she's back. I don't know if she's on a break or has been bullied out. I hope she'll be back. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I understand. --WikiTiki89 02:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

"Tabs are evil"[edit]

First of all, I am a mathematician. You bastard. Second, do you know what is evil? Genocide and slavery. Not indentation.

And on a less serious note. Tabs take less storage space (ha!), and the fancy syntax-highlighting editor here (Ace) has recently switched to using tabs by default. I use tabs exclusively myself, I noticed that User:CodeCat and User:Ruakh switched recently, and the rest do not seem to care. So I assume we are going to adopt them here. Keφr 15:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say you were a professional computer programmer. Yes tabs take up more storage, and that is why they were originally adopted by programmers rather than spaces back in the Middle Ages. Nowadays, storage is too cheap to worry about saving three bytes per tab. Anyway, I use an external editor (I can't edit large amounts of code without a decent regex-based search-and-replace feature), which converts everything to spaces as soon as I paste it in anyway. --WikiTiki89 16:04, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
As a computer programmer, you should know that "evil" has a slang meaning (our sense #6). (Also, even for the ordinary sense of evil, "genocide and slavery" are kind of extreme examples. Garden-variety evil is less spectacular.)
I only switched to tabs because the editor makes it very hard to consistently use spaces. I hate it.
By the way, I don't think you should just mindlessly convert spaces to tabs, as you did at Module:he-utilities?diff=23787346. Some of the space-based indentation was there so that table-elements were properly lined up, and they're now no longer properly lined up when you're viewing the module. To get it working with tabs, you have to split everything line-up-able onto its own line.
RuakhTALK 16:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Re Template:la-decl-1&2 bgc[edit]

Hi WikiTiki. I've recently added a "SEARCH ALL FORMS" function to {{la-decl-1&2 bgc}}, which you suggested ("Maybe it could create a single link to all the quoted forms separated by ' OR '?") in WT:RFV#auroleus, q.v. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:58, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hobbites Ille[edit]

WikiTiki, yesterday you posted over at Metaknowledge's about Hobbitus Ille. As you saw, I am translating LOTR into Latin; however, you should check out the four (three relevant) one-star reviews on Amazon. | Scio (talk) 21:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing it up, though- I'll have to look out for more Latin translations of Tolkien's Legendarium.

Yes, I never expected it to be good. I only knew it existed because I saw a facebook post about it when it first came out. Nevertheless, I thought it was worth bringing it up. --WikiTiki89 19:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
It was, and I'm glad you did. If you find anything else of that sort, could you contact me? I would much appreciate it. | Scio (talk) 21:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Pronunciation of “Japan[edit]

I still don’t understand what the issue with the pronunciation is, the pronunciation of a /p/ on a stressed syllable in English is [pʰ]. I mean, for the page cat, the pronunciation is shown as:

  • (UK) IPA(key): /kæt/, [kʰæt]
  • (US) IPA(key): /kæt/, [kʰæʔ(t̚)], [kʰeə̯t]

Is the UK pronunciation wrong? I think it’s completely important that the precise pronunciation be shown. 〜britannic124 (talk) 17:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

The problem with precise pronunciations is that they only apply to small regions. For example, where I live (in New England), /kæt/ is realized as [kʲʰæʔ(t̚)] (or [kʲʰæɾ] before a vowel, also note the palatalization of /k/) and /dʒəˈpæn/ as [d͡ʒəˈpʰẽː(ə̯)n]. If you want to go into that kind of detail, then you need to specify which region the transcription applies to. Otherwise the information is not very useful. What you gave for Japan ([d͡ʒəˈpʰæn]) does not actually exist anywhere in the US that I know of (it sounds British to me, actually) and even if it did exist in the US, you would have to say where. The only thing you did to get that transcription is apply the simple rule that /p/ is aspirated before a stressed syllable, while ignoring all other rules. --WikiTiki89 18:14, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Etymology language[edit]

What went wrong? Your revert didn't give any information I can use to find the problem, so I can only diagnose it by putting it back again and seeing what the error message was. —CodeCat 19:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Or by using the Preview feature. --WikiTiki89 19:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
You can't preview modules because they don't have anything to display. —CodeCat 19:28, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Which is why there's a special feature on Modules and Templates that allows you to preview any page using that Module or Template. --WikiTiki89 19:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: your edit summary американский язык жестов[edit]


Thanks for fixing.

Re: how is anyone supposed to know that? it should say {{attention|needs declension|lang=ru}}. These are general issues with entries attention for ru. I specifically asked Stephen and Ivan to add {{attention}}, so that people could add declension and other things. If you edit a lot of entries, it's hard to make everything perfect or add a text. Also, if everything is OK with entries, just take the tag away after checking, IMHO. Sometimes users just tag suspicious entries. Please double-check your edits, if it's okey, if you have accidentally removed {{attention}} when there were no declension tables. There are not too many outstanding requests, anyway.--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:38, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Well if it said {{attention|needs declension|lang=ru}}, people would be more likely to realize what's wrong and fix it, instead of only a few people (just you and Stephen?), who know what it means. --WikiTiki89 01:42, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Sorry but no one cared for a while and Stephen was mass creating entries using Ruakh (talkcontribs)'s fast entry creation tool and I have explained the situation to Wanjuscha (talkcontribs) who did massive work there as well adding declension/conjugation table. You're in the picture now, so can the request stay for Stephen and Ivan? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:50, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
My point is that they could have and should have easily copied and pasted "needs declension" along with the attention template, without doing any extra work. I'll fix the ones I removed and any that I find, but in the future, that's how they should be requested. Better yet, use our dedicated template {{rfinfl|lang=ru}}. --WikiTiki89 01:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Да, ты прав, но привычка — вторая натура, мне требовалось как-то убедить Стива добавлять эти запросы, и чем короче, тем легче. Совершенно случайно начал писать по-английски, без всякой задней мысли :) --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:00, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Не страшно, я английский тоже понимаю. --WikiTiki89 02:02, 11 December 2013 (UTC)


I also found words danac, danca (Antun Kadčić), dancati, dančati (Marin Držić). For reference Etimologijski rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika Petar Skok, you can found book online [2], [3]. Here he states that etymology is probably from Old German Tanz, tanzen, but the picture isn't clear. Wish you luck ! Duh


Hi, the transliteration you provided (bētā) contradicts with the IPA transcription in ביתא#Pronunciation and ܒܝܬܐ#Pronunciation. Which one is the correct form? this source says it's baytā. --Z 16:03, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Most of our Aramaic transliterations and pronunciations are complete crap at the moment, whoever added them was too true to the consonantal letters even when they are matres lectionis. In all of Judeo-Aramaic, Biblical Aramaic, and Classical Syriac (the only ancient dialects that have vowel markings), what was presumably originally "ay" had already become "ē". The -ā suffix (definite article) is written with the letter א/ܐ as a mater lectionis (the letter is normally a glottal stop). This suffix, however, never actually contained a glottal stop. --WikiTiki89 16:15, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Actually Biblical Aramaic still had "ay" in ביתא. --WikiTiki89 16:18, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Ok. Shouldn't we write that as bēṯā instead?. --Z 16:26, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Possibly, the only problem is that the different dialects of Aramaic differ in the rules of spirantization. In this case, I believe they all spirantize the "t" to "ṯ", so it would not be wrong to indicate it. --WikiTiki89 16:30, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


Hi WT. I reverted you at apple, apologies…UK /a/ and US /æ/ are distinguished by many editors, since the difference in pronunciation is one of the key differences between US and UK English. The OED also takes this approach, and it's what we have listed at Appendix:English_pronunciation. Ƿidsiþ 20:31, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Appendix:English pronunciation didn't say that until you changed it recently. My electronic copy of the OED gives /æp(ə)l/ for apple. The GenAm and RP pronunciation of the short "a" is exactly the same. I watch British TV shows on a regular basis and I have never heard /a/ as the realization this sound, except by Scots. In fact some British speakers pronounce it even higher up closer to /ɛ/. The only place I've seen that transcribes this sound as /a/ is, which in case you didn't know is not affiliated with the OED. --WikiTiki89 23:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Wow. OK…first of all the reason I changed it is because the page links to IPA_chart_for_English where, as you'll see, the UK pronunciation is given as /a/. As it in in the OED. I can only assume you are looking at the old 2nd Edition. The current (2008) version reads: ‘Brit. /ˈapl/ , U.S. /ˈæp(ə)l/’, more or less exactly as ours used to say before you changed it. This is normal in phonetic reference works and has been for several years: it's the normal form given in English Accents and Dialects, for instance. You can also check some of the references on that Wikipedia page. /æ/ is a very very old-fashioned pronunciation in the UK, it's the sort of thing people say in black-and-white films from the 1960s. "The GenAm and RP pronunciation of the short "a" is exactly the same." I'm sorry WT but this is just wrong, as you will see if you consult any good work on comparative phonetics. The difference between a Londoner and a New Yorker saying man is instantly clear, and that difference consists mainly in the value of the vowel. So pretty please with sugar on top, can you change it back. Ƿidsiþ 07:30, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Since the decision to transcribe this vowel as either /a/ or /æ/ affects a large number of words, I've raised the issue for a broader audience: Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January#using_.2Fa.2F_vs_.2F.C3.A6.2F_for_the_.27trap.27_vowel_in_RP. Cheers, - -sche (discuss) 08:21, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Side note: I find it hilarious that IPA chart for English transcribes the vowel differently than English phonology#Vowels. Then again, it's not surprising: until I merged them, our own Appendix:IPA chart for English and Appendix:English pronunciation contradicted each other. - -sche (discuss) 08:24, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Cheers. Yes, we definitely need more consistency. Ƿidsiþ 08:35, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Actually, the "a" of words like "man" and "ham" can sometimes be pronounced differently than in words like "mad" and "had" amongst some American speakers. The "a" of "man" might be pronounced /eə/ instead of /æ/ in some American dialects, whilst the "a" of "mad" and "had" would still have the vowel /æ/, as in non-American dialects. In addition, Ƿidsiþ, the dialect of New York does not represent the dialect of Massachusetts (for instance) nor does either of the prior two represent the dialect of Florida. That would be like someone in America believing the speech of the Cockneys to be identical to the speech of the Geordies! Such presumptuous thinking is completely ignorant and naïve, and I see it present in the thinking of far too many people from England. It's this type of thing that has led me to no longer refer to myself as being from "the United States" when I'm asked where I hail from, and instead refer to the region I'm from (New England) instead. Geez... Tharthan (talk) 19:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
This discussion was actually continued at the WT:Beer parlour. But /æ/-tensing is not phonemic, which is why we don't use it in phonemic transcriptions. We do indicate it in phonetic transcriptions occasionally. --WikiTiki89 19:32, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Excuse me, but...[edit]

Hello. When I checked my watchlist this morning, I saw that you had changed my audio file's descriptor from "New England" to "New York."

I am extremely insulted by this, as I am a proud and patriotic New Englander. My mother was born in Pawtucket, Rhode Island and my father was born in Fall River, Massachusetts. Due to a business opportunity, I was born in Alexandria, Virginia, but I lived there for only the first year of my life due to my mother becoming extremely homesick. I've lived in Warwick, Rhode Island since I was two years old.

My point is, that I am a New Englander, and that both /bɒstɨn/ and /bɔstɨn/ are used in New England.

Please refrain from making such changes in the future. Tharthan (talk) 12:21, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for telling me. That explains everything, because Rhode Island doesn't have the cot-caught merger. I will mark the audio as Rhode Island. --WikiTiki89 14:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good. And, actually, the phonetic realisation of /ɒ/ varies depending on the word and (in some cases) the person (though I've never run into anyone who has actually realised /ɒ/ as /ɒ/). For example:
"Dog" /dɒg/ is realised as /dɔ:g/, but "hog" /hɒg/ is realised as /hɑg/.
"Pop" /pɒp/ is realised as /pɑp/, but "Popeye" /pɒpaɪ/ is realised as /pʌpaɪ/.
"Florida" /ˈflɒɹɪdə/ is realised in one of three sundering ways (it has no consistent pronunciation). The first is /ˈflʌɹɪdə/, which is heard quite often from the elderly, and (oddly) many adolescents. The second is /ˈflɔɹɪdə/, which is heard in the speech of some adolescents. The final one is /flɑrɪdə/, which is heard in the speech of those born c. 1960-1980.
...It's the same deal with the "horse, hoarse" distinction. Some keep it, others do not. In many instances, one might hear one pair of words pronounced distinctly, but another not. It is irritatingly inconsistent. Tharthan (talk) 17:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
That all is typical New England stuff. Rhode Island is the only place that still has /ɔ:/. --WikiTiki89 17:50, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Kephir vote[edit]

I would like to encourage you to reinstate your support for Kephir in Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2013-12/User:Kephir for admin in spite of your coming late to the vote. Ideally, you would indent your post like "#: {{support}}" so that it is not counting, and add "posting after vote closure" or the like to your vote. The vote closing date is a necessary evil, IMHO; the purpose of a vote should include finding out about support and oppose positions of as many editors as possible. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

See e.g. late votes at Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2013-09/CFI and Wiktionary is not an encyclopedia. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Ok done. --WikiTiki89 21:14, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Ladino orthography[edit]

Hi Wikitiki,

I saw your question about Ladino orthography in a tea room from Nov. 2012. I am a native speaker of Judaeo-Spanish and I am competent in both speaking and writing the language. Unfortunately there aren't many online sources that are proper. However, I am more than willing to help with any question or any problem what-so-ever.

About the spelling of Judeo-Español or Djudeo-Espanyol in Merubbá (Hebrew square letters), the correct spelling is: גֿודֿיאו-איספאנייול. However, sometimes, the rafe (line) over daleth is omitted for convenience or easier spelling, even though it's fricative.

Friendly --Universal Life (talk) 23:09, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

It's nice to know that we have a native Ladino speaker among our editors. I don't know much Ladino, but I do know that whoever added most of our Ladino entries spelled a lot of things wrong.
It would be very helpful if you edited some of the Ladino entries and fixed spelling errors.
From what you say, I understand that the rafe is used on the letter gimel rather than a geresh (for the "dj" sound). Is that correct?
Thanks. --WikiTiki89 08:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Yeap, that's correct. Rafe has always been used traditionally on gimel, daleth, zayin, pe etc.
Btw, I am also an admin in the Ladino Wikipedia. And I have started a Ladino Wiktionary project. For it to be realised, all MediaWiki messages of the interface should be translated... So, I'm doing those translations mostly in my free time.
About spelling in Ladino...Basically till 1850s, it was written in Rashi (printed) and Soletreo (cursive hand-writing) and usually Merubbá (square Hebrew letters) was used for titles in printed books. From 1860 and on, the Latin letters were introduced to most native speakers, through the French schools of Alliance Israélite Universelle. So French orthography became very common, let's say till the 1930s. However due to nationalism in most countries, different types of orthographies developed.
Today, there are at least 12 styles of orthography using Latin letters + 5 different non-Latin orthographies in use. Though out of these 17, 6 are the most common and most suitable to use in the Wiktionary: French orthography (Vidas Largas), Turkish orthography, Aki Yerushalayim orthography (simplest Hebrew transcription system), Multidialectal orthography, Old Spanish orthography and Hebrew orthography. Most speakers are over 70 years of age and it is very difficult to find proper sources online. Thankfully, I have books dedicated to this subject at home. I am also in contact with speakers from different parts of the world. For example, I've recently learned that (old) Spanish-based orthography (with some French and Italian influences) is quite common among the ex-Rhodes, ex-Congo Sephardic communities. Turkish orthography is quite common in Turkey, where I am from. Aki Yerushalayim (AY) is gaining popularity in some academic circles, it's a 30 years old orthography. Multidialectal one however is the youngest, it's around 6 years old. It's also called the United Orthography and in my opinion is much more developed than AY because of it's partially a deeper system (it makes use of some morphographic and multidialectal conventions, though it's a phonographic system at its base).
In no other orthography, you could differentiate between qué (what) and (dock), between carar (amount) and karar (decision), between vida (life) and vidda (screw) etc. Often times, the same word is bound to be written in many different ways in the same orthography but most often not in the multidialectal one. For example sueño is spelled suenyo, suenyu, s.huenyo, s.huenyu, es.huenyo, es.huenyu, esfuenyo and esfuenyu according to the pronunciation (dialect) of the speaker, and when spelled in the Aki Yerushalayim orthography. Fuerte is spelled similarly as fuerte, huerte, fuerti and huerti. Kereste is spelled as kereste, kyereste, kyeresti, chereste and chiresti. Hijo is spelled as ijo, fijo, isho, fiju and hijo. Muchacha is spelled as muchacha, muchache and mushasha. That's why I prefer the multidialectal spelling in the interface translation, because you can write a word one way and it could be read different ways (own ways), according to the origin of the reader. Writing muchacha and mushasha is like writing tomahto and tomeito for the same word.
It would be very nice if we could fix, different orthographies or spelling standards for the wiktionary, may be use only one of them in the translations, and give the most other common spelling as alternative spellings. May be I'll go ahead and do some corrections, however I'm not so good with templates.
Friendly, --Universal Life (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Here at the English Wiktionary, we require words to be citable. Since Ladino is a fairly small language, Ladino words only require one citation to be deemed "verified". This means that we should choose the orthography that has the most durably archived texts available so that we can verify whether the word exists. If we use this "Multidialectal orthography", which as you say is 6 years old, I am worried that there wouldn't be enough published books to get citations from. I found a description of the multidialectal orthography here and it seems interesting, but if we can't find citations in it, then we can't use it. See WT:CFI#Attestation and WT:LDL#Citations for more information. --WikiTiki89 18:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Ah! I though citation rule was for Wikipedia..and usually I like to cite everything I add to the Wikipedia. However citing every Ladino word one adds, would be quite difficult, if not impossible, especially for each orthography. I have two Ladino dictionaries at home. One of them is a small Ladino-Turkish / Turkish-Ladino dictionary, where the Turkish system is used with small modification. The other one is the biggest Ladino dictionary present, but written especially for the Salonika dialect; from Ladino to French. However it uses a very unconventional system of spelling. So if I add a word from there but use a more common orthography (passing from one style/spelling to the other is quite simple actually), then how could I cite it? Would I need to cite, every word I add, in every spelling style (Hebrew, French, Turkish spellings etc.)?
Btw, I checked again and it seems I was wrong about the age of the multidialectal spelling. I think it's around 12 years old...But it wouldn't matter which orthography I use, it would be practically impossible to cite every word I add in its every form, let alone to cite each word itself. We should not forget that Judeo-Spanish is a highly endangered language, with most of its native speakers over 70 and not using the internet. There has been orthography change, at least twice or even thrice in the last 150 years. There used to be tens of daily newspapers and thousands of books published a hundred years ago. However it's not the case today. So, my grandparents' knowledge and some older publications and books are the best resources available. --Universal Life (talk) 19:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
You don't actually need to cite every word. It just needs to be possible to cite the words. If someone asks for the word to be verified, then you will need to cite it. With languages like Ladino, people usually aren't very picky about verifying words. But I still think it is important that we use an orthography that would allow us to cite as many words as possible. Also note that citations are not the same as Wikipedia. Citations here need to be uses of the words rather than other dictionaries or articles talking about the words. Wikipedia is a tertiary source because it only cites secondary sources, but Wiktionary is a secondary source because we only cite primary sources. --WikiTiki89 19:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you WikiTiki, now I'm relieved! I imagined that I would need to find secondary sources and proof that such word exists every time I made an entry...I was discouraged for a moment there, but now I understand what you meant by citation. I have misunderstood. Thanks for explaining :) --Universal Life (talk) 20:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
If there is anything I can do or any question or problem that I can be helpful with, about Judaeo-Spanish, please let me know. Thanks --Universal Life (talk) 21:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Well there are a lot of things that you could do, depending on how much time you have to work on things:
  • You could check the spelling of Ladino entries. A lot of them are wrong.
  • You could add words that we are missing.
  • You could add pronunciations, etymologies, conjugation tables.
  • You could add citations. For an example of how to add citations, see the Hebrew word סופגנייה.
  • You could add usage examples if you can't find a citation. For an example, see the Hebrew word נפגש.
Those are just some things I could think of off the top of my head. I myself don't work with Ladino a lot because I don't know enough about it. But if I had a text to work with, then I would be able to add citations. The only Hebrew-script text I can find in Google Books is a Ladino translation of the New Testament, which I think is probably the worst subject for quoting Ladino. I'm not even sure why the New Testament was ever translated into Ladino. I don't know if you happen to have any Ladino books at home, but if you do, that would be one of the best sources. --WikiTiki89 21:54, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, I will see what I can do. --Universal Life (talk) 22:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Module:ru-translit errors[edit]

Pages are now showing module errors when a word begins with e-. —CodeCat 02:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

You're right, I should have tested it more. But it's fixed now. --WikiTiki89 02:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)


I think the changes are done now. Could you have a look to see if everything is ok? —CodeCat 20:53, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. --WikiTiki89 06:51, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


Are you sure that wasn't spelled with yat? It had one historically. —CodeCat 03:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

You're right, my mistake. --WikiTiki89 03:18, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

"This makes more sense"[edit]

It does, but it's not as practical. People could still edit the first section to put messages in the second, and that would make recent edits harder to follow. —CodeCat 20:29, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

But people generally won't do that. And the people interested in the second section are probably also interested in the first one. --WikiTiki89 20:32, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Valles, plural or not ?[edit]


Are you sure that “valles” is both singular and plural ? On most latin dictionary valles is only a plural… In any cases, for the valleys of Valles Marineris most of the source say « Valles » is a plural ;)

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 15:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

According to our entries valles and vallis can both be the nominative singular form, while the nominative plural is vallēs. This might be a mistake, but I don't know. I will ask someone who knows more Latin than me. --WikiTiki89 18:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
According to fr:valles, it's only a plural Face-smile.svg. I'll wait for a answer…
For the pronunciation of Valles Marineris, TAKASUGI Shinji (talkcontribs) change ˈvælɪs ˌmɛəɹɪˈnɛɹɪs to ˌvæl.ɪs ˌmæɹ.ə.ˈnɛɹ.ɪs. I don't know well enough API to tell if this change matters or not, if it's right or not… Meanwhile, I've found some references for the pronunciation : VAL-less mar-uh-NAIR-iss, VAHL-lace mah-rin-EHR-iss, and this audio file.
Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
I disagree with his change to the stress, but /mæɹ/ seems more correct than /mɛəɹ/. Metaknowledge (talkcontribs) has confirmed that the vallēs is an alternative nominative singular form of vallis. --WikiTiki89 18:15, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


  • I understand what you mean, but several American online dictionaries disagree with your syllabication (see or Merriam-Webster, for example). The actual most common GA pronunciation of the word is [ˈvʌɪ.ɾə.mᵻn]. The phenomenon ("Canadian raising") can cross syllable and even word boundaries. Wolfdog (talk) 15:51, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


I just saw the note that you had reverted my edits on "bear", and while I was looking to see what you'd done and why you reverted more of them. I'm perfectly willing to discuss my edits, but would you please not revert edits while they're still being made? Say, wait an hour to see if the person is done? (Is there any instant messaging or instant alert functionality?)

I want to do this right - I have just retired from a full career as a linguistic researcher, most recently with the University of Pennsylvania - so I was working on the fixes and saving every so often. I saw the red "1" at the top of my page while I was in the middle of posting to the Tearoom, asking for a more experienced Wiktionarian to check my work and advise me on it. (I am, however, a fairly experienced Wikipedian.)

I need my supper. Afterward I will see your reply, I hope. --Thnidu (talk) 01:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I apologize if I interfered with your editing, but there is no way for me to know whether you were done or not. --WikiTiki89 01:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
I see the revisions that you and User:-sche have made to my edits, and I'm content with them. --Thnidu (talk) 04:07, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

definite vs definite form[edit]

Please look at these two categories: Category:form of/definite form Category:form of/definite. Perhaps you might want to change all of those in the second one, to be consistent. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:07, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. In that case I'm ok with "definite of" for now. But I will bring this up for wider discussion. --WikiTiki89 06:11, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


Svann? svann? Could you give an entry please? --Back on the list (talk) 11:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

svunno mentions it. --WikiTiki89 13:22, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Entry created. Why? LA2 (talk) 23:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
I used it in this game. --WikiTiki89 23:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Ударение в русинском[edit]

Поначалу я ставил ударение в русинском, особенно в тех словах, где ударение совпадает во всех восточно-славянских языках, но потом перестал. Ведь ударение может и не совпадать под влиянием словацкого и других языков. У тебя есть какой-нибудь источник с ударениями? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 14:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Нет, но я почти уверен, что ударение бы не менялось, особенно в таких словах, которые очень часто используются. --WikiTiki89 19:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Думаю, что это довольно рискованно. С уверенностью можно говорить только о правописании. В украинском ударения могут быть очень непредсказуемые для русского, который мало знаком с украинским: мали́й, стари́й, ко́лесо, дочка́, ідете́, и так далее. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Только что исправил собственную ошибку в переводе на украинский: дрова́ -> дро́ва (@firewood. Раньше ошибок было больше, но с украинским и белорусским легче проверить. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Да, но когда ударение в том же месте во всех языках, очень вероятно, что будет там же и в русинском. Когда в русском и в украинском ударение не совпадет, это обычно из-за изменения которое случилось именно в русском языке. На пример:
рус. ста́рый (stáryj), ук. стари́й (starýj), бел. стары́ (starý), русин. стары́й (starŷ́j)
рус. идёте (idjóte), ук. ідете́ (ideté), бел. ідзяце́/ідзяцё (idzjacjé/idzjacjó), и в русинском наверно тоже ідете́.
--WikiTiki89 01:52, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Your multiple reversions of Silent Sam's edits to angle[edit]

Hello Wikitiki89 -- I'm sure your intentions are the best, but there are a couple of points you are missing:

1. The purpose of Silent Sam's original edit was to add a new term to the list of derived terms and rebalance the columns. Your reversions keep removing these improvements.

2. Inclusion of the POS in the "Derived terms" header has been good, accepted practice for many years by seasoned editors. DCDuring, for one, also routinely does it.

Please restore Silent Sam's last version. Respectfully -- · (talk) 00:49, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realize that he added more terms to the list as well, I should have been more careful. Can you show me some examples of this "good, accepted practice" by "seasoned editors"? --WikiTiki89 00:56, 2 March 2014 (UTC)


Why did you revert my edit on the pronunciation of -ing? 06:55, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Because you made it look like that was the only pronunciation in the US. --WikiTiki89 16:12, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Статьи на арабских диалектах[edit]

На арабские диалекты мало обращают внимание в викисловаре. Я думаю, не будет больших проблем в создание диалектных статей используя заголовок "Arabic". Проверь, пожалуйста ايش, добавь или измени регионы и удали "Arabic terms needing attention", если всё в порядке. Думаю, что перед тем как начать обсуждение в "Пивной" нужно создать несколько примеров. (Я практически не знаю диалекты, кроме некоторых распространенных слов, но имею только информацию о них и у меня есть разговорники и словари, при необходимости могу кое-что добавить из словарей). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:17, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Я сам не эксперт в диалектах, но у меня просто глубокий интерес к Левантскому диалекту (особенно к Палестинскому/Израильскому) и его учу на Ютюбе. О других диалектах я в основном знаю только то, что читаю в лингвистических статьях, но это никак не помогает их понимать. Я согласен, что надо создать несколько примеров, я сейчас создал وين (wen), مين (mīn), عم (ʿam), رح (raḥ). --WikiTiki89 05:38, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Я добавил شنو, ايه и то, что ты видел, плюс примеры использования. Я думаю, что структура для работы с диалектами практически готова, тем более для левантийского, которого до сих пор не было, под заголовком "Arabic". Нужно добавить региональные категории и постепенно перебросить туда существующие диалектные. Не думаю, что будет сопротивление. Арабские шаблоны (фусха) немного получше диалектных. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:51, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Писать МФА (IPA) очень хлопотно и я не силён в арабской фонетике на этом уровне. Что ты думаешь по поводу слияния حصان под "арабским языком". Разница только в произношении. Нужно ли добавлять транслитерацию (ḥuṣān) для египетского произношения или только МФА? Статей на египетском не так уж много, хотя займет какое-то время. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:57, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Я не очень хорошо знаю египетскую фонетику. Лучше чтоб User:Mahmudmasri это делал. --WikiTiki89 06:02, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Хорошо. Надо убедить его в необходимости и в новых возможностях слияния.
Мне нравится такой формат:
  • (MSA) IPA(key): /ħisˤaːn/ (transliteration: ḥiṣān)
  • (file)
  • (Egyptian) IPA(key): /TO DO/ (transliteration: ḥuṣān)
--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Да, мне тоже нравится. Проблема в таких буквах как ق, у которых даже в одном Леванте много разных произношений (/q/, /ʔ/, /k/, /ɡ/, и т.д.). --WikiTiki89 06:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Это не страшно. Можно добавлять известное произношение по регионам, например, IPA(key): /первое/, /второе/, /третье/. Это всё равно проще, чем писать целые статьи. При вертикальном расположение раздела произношения можно добавлять сколько угодно и свернуть (collapse), если получится слишком много. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:43, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I guess I was requested to comment here since I was tagged and notified, but I don't speak Russian. The audio file sounded like [ħɪˈsˤɑːn], but with a weird rising tone. This pronunciation is also accepted in the Egyptian accent of Literary Arabic, in addition to [ħeˈsˤɑːn]. However, in Egyptian Arabic dialect, it is [ħoˈsˤɑːn, ħʊˈsˤɑːn]. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 18:08, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

@Mahmudmasri: Actually, I didn't actually mean to ping you, but since you're here, what we wanted was to know how the word is pronounced in Egyptian Arabic (i.e. an IPA transcription). I basically said that I don't know enough about Egyptian and that you should be the one to transcribe it. --WikiTiki89 18:24, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
It is often difficult for non-Egyptian Arabic speakers to speculate the exact vowel, additionally because it is a non-standardized language. To simplify things for you, use the a, i, u letters for the short vowels when transliterating/transcribing exclusively Egyptian Arabic words (in non-IPA transcriptions), however the shortened ē, ō should be transcribed as e, o.
Egyptian Arabic vowels summary:
  • The short vowels in IPA: [æ, ɑ, e, o] and [i] word finally. However, the [e, o] can be [ɪ, ʊ] and some linguists prefer them as the main values over [e, o].
  • The long vowels in IPA: [æː, ɑː, eː, iː, oː, uː]. Notice that long vowels are usually in stressed syllables. Many words which end with a vowel are spelled with Arabic letters for long vowels, however when the last syllable is unstressed (which is very common), the vowel is pronounced shortly and should be transcribed as a short vowel.

--Mahmudmasri (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

@Mahmudmasri: Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all unstressed vowels shortened in Egyptian, not only the final ones? Also, as a separate question, does مافيش have a short /ɪ/ or long /iː/? --WikiTiki89 16:02, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
مافيش is pronounced [mæ.ˈfiːʃ]. Vowels in unstressed syllables are shortened if they were originally long, but there are exceptions especially in careful pronunciation of loanwords. The word itself is also spelled in Arabic letters as مفيش (without alef). --Mahmudmasri (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
@Mahmudmasri:. I also have a question for you. What do you think of a unified approach for all Arabic varieties? The question was about a word that is spelled identically in MSA and Egyptian but pronounced differently, such as حصان, I think those just need a separate pronunciation section for dialects. We are aware that dialects can be very different from MSA but the actual number of words, which are spelled differently in the dictionary form is not so large. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 08:50, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
If the spelling is the same in Arabic text, then we shouldn't provide duplicates of the Arabic spelling, just the pronunciation, but we shouldn't merge the dialectal variation with the Literary Arabic pronunciation. حصان is pronounced the same by Egyptians in Literary Arabic, but differently in Egyptian Arabic (their daily spoken language). --Mahmudmasri (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Good point. Can we then use (Egyptian colloquial) for ḥiṣān and (Egyptian standard) and for ḥuṣān or something similar? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 09:31, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
The situation is similar with Quebec French, where words are pronounced differently in formal contexts due to influence from French French. For example centimètre is pronounced /sɑ̃.tsi.maɛ̯t(ʁ)/ in the colloquial dialect, but /sɑ̃.tsi.mɛːt(ʁ)/ formally; compare this to /sɑ̃.ti.mɛt(ʁ)/ in France. --WikiTiki89 13:12, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
No! We can't use the labels colloquial vs standard (that would be extremely controversial) because Egyptian Arabic is not a standardized/literary language yet and the Literary Arabic cognate /ħɪˈsˤɑːn/ is not used colloquially. Wasn't my previous comment clear? Egyptians can use Egyptian Arabic in formal situations, not just informally. Literary Arabic is almost always used in formal situations and can't be used informally, unless you are extremely faking it. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 11:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Why not just use the tags, Egyptian and Egyptian MSA? --WikiTiki89 16:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Indeed. @Mahmudmasri:, what do you think? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Egyptian MSA? When would we need that label? Egyptian is an implicit label. Egyptian Arabic is more specific. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, we are discussing this in the context of merging Egyptian Arabic with Arabic. --WikiTiki89 19:50, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Egyptian Arabic is not the same as Arabic. The word Arabic mostly means Literary Arabic. The use of spoken Arabic dialects is different and not merely a stylistic variation for Literary Arabic, as your merging suggestion implies. See that edit to understand what I'm trying to say. We don't merely switch to Literary Arabic contextually. When we speak in Literary Arabic, it's more like consciously speaking another language, more like when you consciously choose to speak English and not Russian. Each spoken Arabic dialect, including Egyptian Arabic, have their formal and their informal styles. You are misunderstanding that situation, thinking that Literary Arabic is the formal while all other Arabics are informal, which is false. When we want to show respect and when we speak to our boss, we do so in a formal style of Egyptian Arabic, which is very different from Literary Arabic, it differs from how we speak to very familiar people. Egyptian Arabic has slang, which is not used in formal Egyptian Arabic. Literary Arabic has no slang vocabulary because it is mainly a written language. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 18:17, 28 March 2014 (UTC)


The gadget should work now. You can w:WP:BYPASS and try again.

Though I will note that I was hesitant to archive this particular discussion myself, because I am not sure whether Wonderfool's "Kept" closure had been correct. Keφr 20:46, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I realized that too, which is why I did not try again. It seemed that the consensus was to delete, but the deletion hadn't been fully carried out. --WikiTiki89 21:02, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
It worries me a bit that so many things on this project turn out like that. A problem appears, people start discussing how to solve it, disagreements arise, some are dealt with, in the meantime we get distracted by other problems, discussions are left without a clear resolution, ideas are not implemented and ultimately nothing gets done. Or worse, people do not even bother to participate in discussions. I think the WT:RFD/WT:RFV backlog is where you can see it most clearly, but there are many other examples. Keφr 21:36, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes indeed. Beer parlour discussions die out as soon as the next big discussion comes up. At least with RFV/RFD, each discussion needs to be eventually closed. --WikiTiki89 21:40, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
FWIW, my understanding is that the three Hungarian templates are all redundant to general-purpose templates, but aren't actually harmful. One user plans to eventually add Hungarian-specific features to them, but as I commented on RFDO, it's been 4.5 years and that hasn't happened yet. So, they could be orphaned and deleted, but apathetic archiving of them wouldn't be a harmful outcome (just a neutral outcome). - -sche (discuss) 19:29, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Well I was just trying out (or trying to try out) Kephir's new archiving tool. There's no rush to archive that particular discussion. --WikiTiki89 22:22, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Wiktionary:About Hebrew[edit]

Я добавил шаблоны, для того чтобы лучше видеть символы. Посмотри, пожалуйста, не сделал ли я ошибки. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 08:41, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Спасибо! Ошибок нет. --WikiTiki89 12:59, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Спасибо тебе! Как человеку не знающему иврит, мне кажется таблица очень непонятная, в том числе большинство комментариев, например что такое "a when gadol, o when katan", что такое "dagesh". Нет названий диакритических знаков или они упоминаются, но их названий нет в таблице (и букв) и, в отличие от арабского, разные знаки дают один и тот же результат результат. Нет примеров с שׁ (sh) и שׂ (s), как в Module:he-translit. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
@Atitarev: Теперь лучше? --WikiTiki89 00:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Намного лучше, спасибо! Еще хотелось бы знать, почему есть варианты согласных, напр. כ‎ и ך и другие. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:56, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
כ, מ, נ, פ, צ пишутся в начале и внутри слова. ך, ם, ן, ף, ץ пишутся в конце слова. Не очень уж отличается от арабского. --WikiTiki89 01:09, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Я так и подумал (только не знал, какая в начале и внутри слова, а какая в конце). Дело в том, что арабский алфавит просто показывает отдельно стоящие буквы, они сами изменяются в зависимости от положения в слове, хотя ب можно представить в виде: / / / . А в иврите не так? Нужно выбирать буквы в зависимости от положения или они сами изменяют форму? Для полноты картины, в Wiktionary:About Hebrew не хватает того, что ты мне сейчас рассказал. И еще я упомянул бы буквы для записи звуков /p/ и /f/, как ты сделал с "шин" и "син". Кажется всё. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:41, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
В иврите только пять таких букв и у каждой из них только одна конечная форма. В арабском, почти у каждый буквы есть две или четыре формы, столько клавиш бы не поместилось на клавиатуре. И еще некоторые исключения: буква פ пушется в конце когда имеет звук "п", из-за того, что исторически в иврите не могло быть звука "п" в конце слова: טיפ (тип, чаевые). И еще в аббревиатурах, которые не произносятся одним словом не пишут конечные буквы: ח״כ (х"к, член Кнессета). Поэтому их нельзя выбирать автоматически как в арабском. (/p/ и /f/ объяснены в строчке о "дагеш") --WikiTiki89 02:10, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Всё-таки "шин" и "син" представлены лучше, на мой взгляд, с примерами (שׂ и שׁ). Pey dagesh (פ и ף) отсутствует в примерах. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:29, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
ש — единственная двойная буква (с библейских времен, вероятно что ח и ע тоже были двойными также как и в арабском ḥ/ḫ и ʿ/ģ, но потом слились как и в арамейским и в мальтийским). В отличие от них, буквы ב, ג, ד, כ/ך, פ, ת всегда считаются одной буквой несмотря на то, что их произношение меняется по контексту (немного как русская буква е/ё), например: פָּתַח (patách/pāṯaḥ, [он] открыл) и יִפְתַּח (yiftách/yip̄taḥ, [он] откроет) (сравни с арабским فَتَحَ и يَفْتَحُ). Я не думаю, что стоит перечислять все варианты этих букв когда все объяснено в строчке "дагеш". --WikiTiki89 08:05, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Ладно, спасибо еще раз. Я добавлю в строчку дагеш примеры פ и ף. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:05, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

A couple of bits of Hebrew[edit]

Hello Wikitiki89. I'm trying to cite the titles of two books, both of which begin with a bit of Hebrew (1–2 words each). My Hebrew is non-existent, so I'm not even confident that I have the right characters. Could you help me, please? The titles are:

  1. [Hebrew] Harmonia Michææ V,1. & Matth. II,6.גה…? I can't even guess what the rightmost character is.
  2. [Hebrew] Porta Mosis […]באב מוסי?

Feel free to tell me how far off the mark I am. :-) Thanks. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 12:17, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

The first one is a bit hard to read, but I'm fairly sure it says בגה which makes no sense to me at all anyway. The second one is clear, you got the letters right באב מוסי, but it is actually not Hebrew, but Judeo-Arabic for "the door of Moses". --WikiTiki89 20:04, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
A Google Books search for "Harmonia Michaeae" also finds one mention of "Haskamath ha-nevi' we-ha-mebashsher: sive Harmonia Michaeae". Does that give any clues as to what the mysterious word is? Could it be something related to נגה (and perhaps the typesetters of the book used the wrong diacritics / put them in the wrong place)? - -sche (discuss) 20:28, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I think if you look closely, you'll see that the Hebrew letters aren't actually pointed: what looks like diacritics is actually bleed-through from the other side combined with the dots at the bottom of each letter that are apparently used to mark the location of each letter before it's drawn in. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Chuck is right that the letters are probably not actually pointed, but I still don't know what it means. The first letter (from the right) is definitely too wide to be a נ, so the word can't be נגה. --WikiTiki89 04:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Does it help any to assume a prepositional prefix followed by a yod? Chuck Entz (talk) 05:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I considered that the ב could be a preposition, but גה is not a word. And I don't know what you mean by "followed by a yod", since there is no yod (nor could one have been dropped). --WikiTiki89 05:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I meant ב + יגה. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I've never heard of a yod being dropped in writing when a preposition is added, but either way, יגה could only be the 3rd person masculine singular future tense of נגה, a tense that I've never heard of taking a preposition. It might be an acronym, but I have no idea how to figure out what it would stand for. --WikiTiki89 16:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, that was a bit of idle brainstorming on my part. It's been a long time since I've really studied Hebrew grammar, so I thought I'd see if there was anything useful hiding in some of the gaps in my memory. The other wild guess seems actually grammatical: בג + , but it doesn't really offer much of anything semantically. The only other thing I can think of is some kind of abbreviation.
As for the subject matter: I'm not going to spend the time to translate the Latin, but it might help you to know that the verse in Matthew quotes the verse in Micah in order to establish that the Messiah would be expected to come from Bethlehem, so I'm sure it's a discussion of how well the Micah passage fits what the Matthew passage claims about it. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:53, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
I can't seem to find any clues in Micah 5:1. --WikiTiki89 18:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

@Wikitiki89, -sche, Chuck Entz: Thank you all for your efforts to make sense of these two bits of Hebrew-script text.
First, regarding באב מוסי (the door of Moses), does באב (bābun) — which, Wikitiki89, I greatly appreciate you creating — only have the narrow sense of “door”, or can it be used in as broad a range of senses as its Arabic etymon, باب (bāb)?
And second, regarding that cryptic little trigraph, בגה, Chuck Entz is right about the purpose of the text, whose Latin title translates to "[The] Harmony of Micah 5:1 and Matthew 2:6", and I too checked the Hebrew text for Micah 5:1, but found nothing that helped (granted, all I was looking for was that series of three letters; I'm sure Wikitiki could glean more (!)). Upon following -sche's lead, I found what appears to be the text's full title page, which begins with three words, which I make out as הסכמח הככיא והמכשר; are those (as I very much doubt) spelt correctly? Do they mean anything to any of you? And can you see any relation between them and בגה?
Again, thank you all very much. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 17:03, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm sure that באב has the full range of meanings of باب considering that Judeo-Arabic is really just an ethnolect of Arabic. As for the full title, the letters here are much clearer: הסכמת הנביא והמשר, which I interpret as הַסְכָּמַת הַנָּבִיא וְהַמְבַשֵּׂר (haskamát hanaví v'ham'vasér, agreement of the prophet and the messenger) and the transliteration given as the Google Books title confirms this. However, this sheds absolutely no light on the "cryptic little trigraph". --WikiTiki89 17:22, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks very much, Wikitiki89; and that's OK — I'll just cite the long Hebrew title. Just to confirm, it's הסכמת הנביא והמבשר, yeah? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 18:53, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Yep, that's it. --WikiTiki89 18:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Another bit of Hebrew[edit]

Hello Wikitiki89. I wonder if you'd mind helping me again: Is סגלה a Hebrew word? Many thanks for any help you can give. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 00:10, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

@I'm so meta even this acronym: More context would help, since there are several things it could be. --WikiTiki89 12:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
It seems to be glossed either by pānis or pecūlium. Does that help at all? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 16:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
The first definition in Even-Shoshan of סְגֻלָּה (s'gulá, səḡullā) is דְּבַר חֶמְדָּה, קִנְיָן יָקָר, אוֹצָר נִבְחָר., or roughly "desired thing, valuable property, select treasure", which may correspond to peculium. --WikiTiki89 19:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: Thank you very much; you're a great help. And I see you've added the vowel points to רוּחָנִי, as well; you are fantastic. :-)  — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
@I'm so meta even this acronym: No problem. Hebrew vowel points are one of my favorite things! --WikiTiki89 21:08, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Use of the term па-беларуску[edit]

Hello, Although па-беларуску is an adverb in Belarusian, it can be translated as a noun in English. That's why I thought it best to add it in the translations for the English noun.

Here is an example of common use: Я размаўляю па-беларуску — I speak Belarusian.Vedac13 (talk)

There is a similar situation with Russian по-русски (po-russki), yet we don't list it as a translation of Russian. That information can be given on the entry for беларуская мова (bjelaruskaja mova) or беларуская (bjelaruskaja). We don't need to account for every possible situation in the translation tables; they just needs to point in the right direction. There is a similar situation with Russian по-русски (po-russki), yet we don't list it as a translation of Russian. --WikiTiki89 03:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
What Wikitiki89 said. "я размаўляю па-беларуску" literally means "I speak Belarusianly" or in Belarisan way. It's not just East Slavic way but it's a paradigm with a number of languages. E.g. Lithuanian translations of language names often have these weird translations with suffix -ai, since "lietuviškai" is the same as Russian по-ру́сски (po-rússki) or Belarusian па-белару́ску (pa-bjelarúsku). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps the following information could be put under the heading Usage Notes -

When using verbs expressing language skills, the adverbial form па-беларуску is used; e.g. я размаўляю па-беларуску ‘I speak Belarusian'.

A similar form could be used for languages using a similar system. What are your thoughts on this? Vedac13 (talk)

Usage examples are sufficient, IMO. As with по-ру́сски (po-rússki), lietuviškai or Czech česky. (Please note my changes, as I said before, you can fully use automatic transliteration for Belarusian, just need to add those accents. I noticed, you keep using "tr=" on Belarusian entries). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:10, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I have just added Ukrainian украї́нською (ukrajínsʹkoju) and Polish po polsku, just for the heck of it. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:29, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Having only the link - as in по-ру́сски (po-rússki) might cause some confusion for an English speaker new to the grammar - who would look at the the article русский язык (russkij jazyk) first and not see the function that по-ру́сски (po-rússki) has. I've tried the usage note thing with беларуская мова (bjelaruskaja mova) to give you an idea of what it could look like.Vedac13 (talk)
slovenščina might also be useful for a comparison. —CodeCat 23:07, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm sure you meant slovensko. I've listed some on User_talk:Vedac13#.28to_speak.29_.2B_in_a_language. I find them useful. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:15, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
I didn't. I was referring to the usage note. —CodeCat 23:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Ah, OK, sorry. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


I've never heard the pronunciation /ˈviːˌlɒɡ/. Do you think you could point me to a video online where someone says it that way? —Mr. Granger (talkcontribs) 15:57, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

google:veelog. --WikiTiki89 16:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. After trying the first four videos that popped up, though, I'm still not convinced. In two of them, the speakers said /ˈvlɒɡ/, and in the other two, oddly, the speakers said both pronunciations in a row. In all four, the video descriptions used the spellings Vee-Log or veelog, not vlog. So I don't think they support the pronunciation of "vlog" as /ˈviːˌlɒɡ/. —Mr. Granger (talkcontribs) 16:08, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
People spell it that way to indicate an alternate pronunciation. This spelling could not have existed unless vlog were pronounced that way first. The spelling itself is not very common, but it shows that the pronunciation exists. --WikiTiki89 16:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Okay, makes sense. —Mr. Granger (talkcontribs) 21:30, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Samizdat and Samsebyaizdat[edit]

Hey Wikitiki,

I was wondering whether you could help me clarify something. I assume you know about samizdat, but apparantly in the 1940s there was a poet who called the work he 'published' at home samsebyaizdat. This, along with the later samizdat, could be seen as a play on official publishing. I wondered whether you could tell me about the 'hilarity' so to speak of the word samsebyaizdat, because to me, it sounds as if the word is tautological. Is it tautological according to you and do you think some Russian speakers could find the word funny? A kind of strange question, but thanks anyway. 15:23, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

"Самиздат" means roughly "self-published", and "Самсебяиздат" means roughly "self-published-himself". It's basically a simple pun (or not even really a "pun", but I don't know what else to call it), and it's not tautological, it's just not 100% grammatical. I wouldn't say it's "hilarious", but it's the kind of joke my grandfather likes to make; it gives a chuckle at the right time and place, but that's about it. --WikiTiki89 16:01, 28 April 2014 (UTC)


Please check my recent edit. Thanks!​—msh210 (talk) 05:54, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh, and, by the way, doesn't פֿאַר also mean "before" (in some sense(s) of the latter)?​—msh210 (talk) 05:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for catching the typo! As for "before", you're probably right. Since I'm going to be in the library today anyway, I'll double check it in a Yiddish dictionary. --WikiTiki89 15:01, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Wanted entries[edit]

Hi, please note what's on the top of the page: Don't remove links for entries you define. But since someone else (= me) checked it now, it's fine ;) Longtrend (talk) 10:42, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

@Longtrend: Ok sorry, that's just the way I've always done it. --WikiTiki89 21:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

I did what you requested yesterday.[edit]

I have actually physically updated the chart to have what you requested marked on it. For more details, read my latest response on -sche's talk page under the "I'm confused." header. Tharthan (talk) 14:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Glottal stop in the Aramaic -א/ܐ[edit]

pinging User:334a

Hi, you told me that the suffix -א/ܐ (-ā) never contained a glottal stop in Aramaic, unlike what we have in the pronunciation sections of most of our entries (I wanted to do more research and discuss it again, but I forgot), is your claim backed by any source or was it your personal judgment? I doubt that a bit because AFAIK, based on the words that I've encountered, unlike waw and yodh, aleph was not used as mater lectionis in Aramaic except in later stages of the language and in late borrowings, moreover the suffix -ē for emphatic plurals is written with aleph instead of yodh, which suggests it wasn't used as mater lectionis there (this may have been used to be distinguished from the constructive plural suffix, though). --Z 22:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

@ZxxZxxZ: I don't think I've seen a source really mention this at all, but I have read papers on the history of the definite article in Semitic that say that the Aramaic originated as the suffixed demonstrative (with the h elided). Incidentally, is also spelled with an aleph הא/ܗܐ (although it is spelled without one when used as a prefix: הָ־), so that in itself is not conclusive. But those theories also say that likely originated as an elided from of han or hal. I will try to find those sources again if you want to see them. As for the emphatic plural : firstly, it was in fact also written as just a yodh, which is the usual form in Jewish texts, but then again, ריש (rēš) (from Proto-Semitic *raʾš-) is also written with a yodh even though it did originally have a glottal stop. Also, this suffix is from an earlier -ayyā(ʾ), written -יא, so the spelling with an aleph does not surprise me either way. Anyway, I think it is safe to say that the glottal stop, if it was there to begin with, was dropped at the same as the one in words like ריש (rēš), if not earlier, and so it makes sense to not transcribe it. It might also be useful to compare other words that end in aleph: Aramaic לָא () is cognate with Hebrew לֹא (), and since Hebrew rarely has final alephs, I have always assumed that there was originally a glottal stop (although our Proto-Semitic entry *lā says otherwise); while Aramaic אֲנָא (ʾănā) is a clipping of Proto-Semitic *ʾanāku, and so could not have had a glottal stop at the end. --WikiTiki89 01:28, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
@ZxxZxxZ: One of the sources I read was “The Development of the Definite Article in Semitic: A Syntactic Approach” by Na'ama Pat-El (2009). --WikiTiki89 15:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the answer. I found this source which says: (OA = Old Aramaic)
"[...] whereas in OA ʾ is still a genuine consonant and -ʾ in the emphatic state ending represents /-aʾ/, this is certainly not the case in IA, where the sub-standard spellings -h and -yh (masc.emph.), -th (fem.emph.), and -ʾ ( demonstrate that -ʾ had lost its consonantal value and represents /-ā/."
So it's certain that in Imperial Aramaic (and therefore probably in later forms of Aramaic) it didn't contain a glottal stop (regardless the fact that whether it did contain in early form of Aramaic or not).
lā in PS possibly contained a glottal stop per STARLING (#3055), which has reconstructed it as *la(ʔ). אֲנָא (ʾănā) remains unexplained, although the word was normally written with a final he instead of aleph, at least in Biblical Aramaic. --Z 19:27, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Some Hebrew category loose ends[edit]

I've been working lately with Special:WantedCategories, and there's one batch of redlinked categories that you may be able to help me with. They seem to be generated by a template in Hebrew entries, and categorize for verb root type and binyan. I know enough Hebrew to recognize what they are, but I'm not sure what content should go in the categories, and how they should be categorized. If you don't have any ideas, or don't have time, that's ok: these have been around as redlinks for a while, and none of them has more than two entries- so it's not a big deal. Ideally, it would be nice to have a template to use in future ones, but any help would be apprecieated. Here are all the ones in the current Wanted categories run:
[[Category:Hebrew פ״ה pi'el verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew פ״ה pu'al verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ע״ה pi'el verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ע״ו pi'el verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ע״י pa'al verbs]],[[Category:Hebrew ע״ר pi'el verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ע״ר pu'al verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ע״ע hif'il verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ע״ע huf'al verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ל״ח nif'al verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ל״ח pi'el verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew ל״נ pa'al verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew פ״ל pa'al verbs]], [[Category:Hebrew פ״ח nif'al verbs]]
Thanks ! Chuck Entz (talk) 04:03, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: The existing categories, such as Category:Hebrew ל״ה pa'al verbs, use the template {{he-weakrootcat|ל|ה|bin=pa}}. I have just created the categories you listed with this template. --WikiTiki89 04:29, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Perfect! that's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 05:08, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


The Bear Flag sense is a proper noun, not a common noun, for the same reasons Democrat is a proper noun. Please do not revert again, and please discuss at Talk:Oso. Neither you nor Ungoliant have provided a cogent reason as to why it isn't a proper noun. Purplebackpack89 16:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Mass changing of proper nouns to common nouns[edit]

Please stop. You do not have a consensus for what you are doing. You have yet to point me to the discussion that says you do, and you have yet to participate in the BP discussion I have started about this issue and your edits. Purplebackpack89 17:40, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

@Purplebackpack89: I actually do have a consensus. This issue has been discussed multiple times throughout Wiktionary's history. My memory is not so detailed that I can point you to all of them, but the most recent one was this month, on the same page as the new one you just created. --WikiTiki89 17:42, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Yiddish transliterations[edit]

I started going through the Yiddish request category trying to find words of Hebrew origin with varying pronunciation but got sidetracked and started adding transliterations to words that had been done automatically, just to get rid of the category. With the exception of words I found with incorrect transliterations, in hindsight it was rather pointless, more precisely it was אַ ביסל טױג אױף קלאָגן. In the future i'll only be amending transliterations that truly need it. !אַ געזונטער דאַנק Sgold84 (talk) 19:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok, that makes sense. It doesn't matter that much, I just didn't know you were doing that. --WikiTiki89 19:53, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Jean-Louis user page[edit]

Thanks. So, what must I do to get back the use of my user page ? --Jean-Louis (talk) 07:29, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Create it again. And make it more useful to us that it was before. Keφr 08:14, 26 July 2014 (UTC)