Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/September

accessing existing templates[edit]

How does one access existing templates to copy and modify for new articles? For example, I would like to model a conjugation table for the Czech verb "nosit" after the existing template for the Czech verb "nest". Likewise, I would like to model new conjugation tables for Slovenian verbs that lack them after existing templates.

Templates are just pages on the wiki. You can see them by adding "Template:" to the name of a template and going to that page. —CodeCa t 20:29, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copying Bulgarian information and using it for Macedonian.[edit]

A number of Bulgarian word definitions I find are similar to Macedonian with some slight differences in usage and these aspects are missing in some Macedonian entries, can I take the information from the Bulgarian posts and only if I have to modify it or is there something else I have to do?

Copying information isn't a problem if you know the languages well enough- if it's correct, it doesn't matter where you got it from (copyright and plagiarism issues aside). Where you could get into trouble is with the formatting: some templates may be different in some of the details (or even have no counterpart), and language codes would need to be changed. For instance {{etyl|sla-pro|bg}} might look like just a way to output "Proto-Slavic" in etymologies, but it would put your Macedonian entry in Category:Bulgarian terms derived from Proto-Slavic- you would want {{etyl|sla-pro|mk}} instead. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Word that can be both a preposition and a postposition?[edit]

According to Wikipedia, this would be called an ambiposition, although this term also has other meanings. Should we use this as a POS header and category? If not, what alternative is there? —CodeCa t 20:28, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can just call it a preposition. The important thing is that it is word that takes a noun as an argument and creates an adverbial or adjectival (or possibly other) phrase. --Wiki Tiki 89 21:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A preposition goes before its phrase, so it wouldn't be correct for a postposition. I'm asking this for the case of Northern Sami, which has prepositions, postpositions and ambipositions. They're all part of the same general word class, yes, but they're still distinct. Surely we need to indicate which is which? —CodeCa t 21:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Etymologically, you're right, but this is a useless distinction. For example, adverbs don't have to modify verbs and French has adjectives that come after the noun and some that come before the noun, but that doesn't mean we need to have two separate parts of speech for them. We can just mention in our glossary that our definition of preposition also includes postpositions and ambipositions. --Wiki Tiki 89 21:42, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could use "adposition" instead. I oppose using "preposition" for anything other than a preposition. —CodeCa t 21:46, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That would be nice, except that none of our readers would have any clue what "adposition" would mean. According to Oxford Dictionaries, a preposition is "A word governing, and usually preceding, a noun or pronoun […] " (emphasis mine), so I don't see the problem with classifying postpositions as prepostions. --Wiki Tiki 89 22:11, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we use "Postposition" and "Circumposition" as headers and categories, "Preposition" must refer to preposed words by default. So if we are to use "preposition" in this odd generic sense, then at the very least you should make a proposal to merge headers and categories for all other adpositions to "preposition". —CodeCa t 23:20, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That is basically what I was saying. You want me to make a formal proposition? (Also, by your definition, is from not a preposition in Where is that from?) --Wiki Tiki 89 20:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That would definitely be a "dangling" preposition. from still precedes its NP before the syntactic move stage. If it had been pied-piped, that relationship would have been clearer. At this phase, since many speakers would find *From where is that? ungrammatical, we normally analyze that use of from as the particle compliment of a particle verb. —John C5 21:34, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But nevertheless, from is not preceding a noun, so I'm sarcastically asking CodeCat: how can we call it a "preposition"? --Wiki Tiki 89 15:11, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Roger that! Sarcasm noted. :) —John C5 13:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I request the creation of new Macedonian conjugation charts or where can I get help with this?[edit]

Macedonian needs a new conjugation chart for verbs that use a noun or who require short pronoun clitics to show person. Where can I go to request this or who can I work with to make this?

Mention of Late Latin word[edit]

In trying to create an Ethymology section, I see Wiktionary often uses {{etyl}} and {{m}}. The former supports "LL." as parameter, but {{m}} produces an error, "The language code is not valid". E.g. {etyl|LL.|ang}} {{m|LL.|bisaccium}}. (I tried some variations but no luck.) What should be used here? –Krinkle 13:11, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Late Latin is what we call an "etymology-only language". We consider it a form of Latin, but we categorize it separately from Classical Latin for purposes of etymologies. That means you can use LL. inside {{etyl}}, but inside {{m}} (and {{l}} and {{t}} for that matter}}, you have to use la: {{etyl|LL.|ang}} {{m|la|bisaccium}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:49, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"invariable" vs "indeclinable"[edit]

Currently, Swahili adjectives that do not inflect have the former on the headword-line but the latter is used for the category. Which is preferable/clearer, or is the current bipolar situation actually a good thing? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adding pronunciations[edit]

Hi, I'm thinking about adding audio files for the Portuguese entries in the dictionary. I downloaded the list of members of the Category "Portuguese lemmas" (~45k), randomized it, and started recording. Uploading the files to commons also seems simple enough to automate. My only concern is: is there any recommended automated way of batch editing the Wiktionary in order to link to the commons files?

By the way, I'd be grateful for feedback on these samples: --Artefacto (talk) 01:25, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Be sure to tag the accent of the pronunciations (Lisbon, right?). If you prefer, I have a list of Portuguese words sorted by frequency here. The advantage over Portuguese lemmas is that it includes common inflected forms (surely words like está needs pronunciation more urgently than the likes of agronomicamente), but it doesn’t include phrases. Feel free to contact me if you have any question regarding our Portuguese content.

As for automation, you can use WT:AWB or a bot. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 01:35, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's my undertanding that User:DerbethBot, run by User:Derbeth, automatically finds audio files that exist on Commons but aren't in entries, and adds them to entries. - -sche (discuss) 02:43, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please make sure files are properly named (correct: File:Pt-país.ogg incorrect: File:Bloco de Esquerda.ogg) and placed in commons:Category:Portuguese pronunciation. My bot will then add them automatically. --Derbeth ^talk 05:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

mahlen[edit]

It's a German verb with a 'weak past' which qualifies it for the category 'German weak verbs', but it's class 7 strong. Should there be some kind of note stating its irregularities in the entry? ~Eloquio (talk) 18:25, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seax; worth adding this additional use?[edit]

Hi all,

I've noticed that in the UK, Seax also relates to the Essex County Council Records Office archive searching tool / application; http://seax.essexcc.gov.uk/.

Initially, I thought this was an acronym for "Search Essex Archives... something" or "Storehouse of Essex Archives...something", and queried the acronym with the office via email, out of curiosity more than anything. They came back to say that Seax in their usage for the search application isn't an acronym at all, but is the name given to a sword or dagger (as the Wiktionary entry correctly states), and that which appears on the Essex Coat of Arms, viewable here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex.

Not being able to find the abbreviation details on-line, I just wondered if it was worth me adding something to the seax article to cover this use by Essex County Council?

Regards

Jams Watton (talk) 08:35, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Well, the search system (that I have actually used in my family history research) is called Seax though, of course, its name is derived from seax. Can you find, in say Google book search or similar, three independent uses of the term? If so, we could have an entry for it. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:27, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to make an edit[edit]

I'm sure I'm making some stupid mistake here, but I'm trying to update this page: https://ru.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B0

As you can see from the word at the start of the page and in the table on the right, the word should be прокуратура. However, in the Морфологические и синтаксические свойства section, it is just "прокурату́р". I'm just trying to add the 'a' onto the end. It tells me to talk to an administrator, but I can't figure out how. I'm sorry for bothering you with this, but I can't seem to figure out what to do.

Whether it's a mistake or not, it's there (Russian Wiktionary), not here (English Wiktionary). Maybe one of our editors who also edits over there (@Atitarev, Stephen G. Brown, Wikitiki89, Cinemantique) can help you. Chuck Entz (talk) Chuck Entz (talk) 00:59, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made the change with no problem (and I'm not even an admin there or anything). --Wiki Tiki 89 14:50, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why it let you and not me, but thanks for the help! — This unsigned comment was added by Feliciaspb (talk • contribs) at 10:45, 12 September 2015.

It seems to be happening with other pages too. Like when I tried to add a stress mark to the word on this page: https://ru.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8C Is there anything I can do, or should I just not be trying to edit these pages? — This unsigned comment was added by Feliciaspb (talk • contribs) at 11:37, 12 September 2015.

Well what exactly happens when you try to edit the page? --Wiki Tiki 89 15:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This sort of sounds like some kind of abuse filter that looks at edit counts. Maybe if they do a few minor edits like fixing typos it will give them enough edits to clear the threshold. Another possibility is a block, perhaps of their IP or even range of IPs. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a Wikitionary for a language - a comprehensive guide[edit]

Hi Team mates,

My mother tongue is Tulu which is spoken in the Dakshina Kannada region in the State of Karnataka, India. Because the population of speakers is small, it is not recognized to the degree that it needs to be. I have a Facebook group, where we have created a document with a containing both English and Tulu words (written in English alphabet). Was hoping for guidance in starting one for Tulu. I have been hunting for a comprehensive set of steps (to serve as my checklist of sorts). Hope to hear back from my team-mates here. — This unsigned comment was added by Ravikallianpur (talk • contribs) at 15:06, 16 September 2015.

Note that it may be more useful to just help out with Tulu here on the English Wiktionary. We already have a number of entries in Tulu (see Category:Tulu lemmas). You can use those as a guide to create more entries. If you really want to create a Tulu-language Wiktionary, you can follow the instructions at incubator:Wt/tcy. --Wiki Tiki 89 15:25, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

latin verbs[edit]

In the etymology section, when latin verbs are mentioned, only three forms are given : active present singular first person (ex : timeo, I fear), the active present infinitive form (timere, to fear), the active perfect singular first person (timui, I feared) and that's all. However in latin, when you have to cite a verb, you normally have to cite 5 forms. In addition to the three that was used above, one normally have to use the active present singular second person ( times, you fear ; between timeo and timere) and the last form that has to be given is "supine" (in latin supinus but there is no corresponding form in English so it is difficult to explain. In fact, this form is only used when the verb has to complete a verb that gives a movement like "to go") that doesn't exist for all verbs but if it exists, this form has to be given. (Here for timere, it is timitum). So, in this example, the correct way to name the verb to fear in latin is : "timeo, times, timere, timui, timitum" because without that it is impossible to determine all the conjugation of this verb.

That's not true; the standard forms given, known as the principal parts, are essentially what we give on Latin headword-lines as it is. Etymologies need only give the lemma. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:00, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adya Ceramic[edit]

An item called "Adya Ceramic" Filter system, a trade name or a item?

Is hound inherited/descended from *ḱwṓ?[edit]

From a purely phonological point of view, this is clearly false, as the modern word has a dental consonant in it that the Proto-Indo-European word lacks, which cannot be explained through regular sound changes. Yet it's obvious that it's still derived from it. So I am wondering, can hound be considered a direct descendant of *ḱwṓ? Or is it a descendant of a derived form of it? Would we consider hound to be inherited from PIE, even though it is not a phonological descendant of a PIE form? —CodeCa t 21:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would not call it a direct descendant of *ḱwṓ. PG *hundaz is presumed to come from *ḱuntós, which is comes from the same root as *ḱwṓ does, but there is (AFAIK) no extra-Germanic evidence for *ḱuntós, so we can't be sure that the form with the dental extension is even IE in provenance. It's a descendant of the root *ḱun- for sure, but not of the noun *ḱwṓ. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't this in the WT:ES? --Wiki Tiki 89 14:43, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was intended as a more general question to assess what we might consider "inheritance". If you think it should be moved, feel free to. —CodeCa t 14:45, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You gave me a legitimate answer, so no need to move. Anyway, I don't understand the purpose of your question. Do you want to know whether hound should be listed at in the list of descendants at *ḱwṓ and whether *ḱwṓ can be listed in the etymology of hound? Then the answer is yes, but with an explanation that there was some form in between. --Wiki Tiki 89 15:07, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

She probably wants to know whether she can use {{inherited}} all the way back to PIE or whether it needs to stop at PGmc. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:26, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, so the question is really about the category Category:English terms inherited from Proto-Indo-European. I'm not sure why we need to make a distinction between "derived" and "inherited", but since we are, I would say that hound is not "inherited" from *ḱwṓ (but is "derived"). --Wiki Tiki 89 15:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why do Romanians use bad spelling?[edit]

Almost all of the Romanians that I’ve met use bad spelling that’s difficult to comprehend, like typing ‘cat’ for cât. My best guess is that the ‘Romanian (Programmers)’ keyboard layout is used frequently and they can’t figure out how to type Romanian letters on it. Other Romanian keyboards don’t have that problem (as far as I know). I want to continue learning Romanian, but the informal writing is very annoying. --Romanophile (talk) 01:40, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Count Dracula feeds on diacritics. They are deleeceeous. —CodeCa t 01:51, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At least Romanian is not tonal. Imagine trying to decipher text messages in Vietnamese when they're written using the standard Latin letters only... Pfftallofthemaretaken (talk) 20:56, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]