Module talk:it-headword
Was it intentional to remove the boldface for plural forms? I preferred it for consistency's sake (compare with other languages at e.g. vandalismo). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
- No, accidental. Fixed. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:10, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Automatically generated forms?
[edit]Lua can remove endings from words and decide which new ones to add depending on other factors. So, for example, it is possible to make it so that all nouns ending in -o automatically get -i in the plural, but allow for this to be overridden if there are any exceptions. That way, no extra parameters are needed other than the gender, at least not for most nouns and adjectives. Would it be ok for me to make this? You can look at {{ca-noun}} and {{ca-adj}} as an example for how this might work in practice. —CodeCat 20:17, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
- I came with the same question; on azzurro I tried just
{{it-adj}}, expecting it to work out the inflection and it doesn't. I'd've thought it was perhaps the best feature of Lua for inflection-line template such as it-adj, it-noun and so on. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:20, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Bug
[edit]How can I fix the display of "~", which shouldn't be seen? [ˌiˑvã̠n̪ˑˈs̪kr̺ud͡ʒʔˌn̺ovã̠n̪ˑˈt̪ɔ̟t̪ːo] (parla con me) 10:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Gender of surnames
[edit]@Benwing2 can there be the possibility to input - as the gender to {{it-proper noun}} for things like surnames? Gender requests are currently full of them. Catonif (talk) 15:16, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Catonif IMO surnames should use
mfbysensesince they can be either masculine or feminine. If you agree, I will fix those by bot. Remaining terms should all be given a gender since they do have one. Is there a rule for things like cities and states (e.g. are cities always feminine)? If so, I can fix them by bot. Benwing2 (talk) 22:22, 26 December 2022 (UTC)- @Benwing2: I think that treating surnames as
mfbysensewould be theoretically incorrect, since Rossi m means "a man whose surname is Rossi", Rossi f means "a woman whose surname is Rossi", so the m or f by sense definition should be "a person whose surname is Rossi", where as the actual definition that we have, which is a surname, is genderless by its very nature. Actually, if we were to refer to the surname directly it would actually be always masculine, eg: "Rossi (m) sounds better than Bianchi (m)" even if such conversation is held by two girls about their surnames. I also wonder if readers seeing the m or f will come to the conclusion that it is a characteristic of that particular surname, and that other surnames might be limited to only one gender. I hope I don't sound like I'm nitpicking... - Cities should all be feminine: I don't have any reliable source claiming that, but I can't think of any masculine one, except for the Cairo. Countries can definitely take both genders, just like regions, rivers, volcanoes, etc. Catonif (talk) 23:11, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Catonif What you're proposing does feel a bit nitpicky and semiotics-y to me. When you say, for example, "Rossi (m) sounds better than Bianchi (m)" this is not specific to surnames but applies to every word used as a word rather than for its meanings, and is the sort of edge case we shouldn't be catering to. When Wiktionary defines Rossi as a "surname" rather than "a person whose name is Rossi" and similarly for given names like Maria and Luigi, this is not intended to be interpreted literally but simply as a shortcut to writing out a longer definition. BTW I just changed the handling of
mfbysenseto display "by sense" next to the genders with a gloss "according to the gender of the referent" which might help in cases like this. Also I don't get your point about readers seeing m or f and thinking that other surnames are gender-limited, and in any case my plan is to usemfbysenseby all surnames. Benwing2 (talk) 23:47, 26 December 2022 (UTC)- @Catonif See biatleta for an example. Benwing2 (talk) 23:48, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Benwing2 Thank you for making mfbysense finally display differently from mf, I was wondering since a while ago why that wasn't already the case. If you feel confident about your claim, I encourage you to make the bot work, as I, on the other hand, am not particularly confident about mine. Also now that by sense is visible and has a gloss I feel like the confusion would be less. Catonif (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Catonif See biatleta for an example. Benwing2 (talk) 23:48, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Catonif What you're proposing does feel a bit nitpicky and semiotics-y to me. When you say, for example, "Rossi (m) sounds better than Bianchi (m)" this is not specific to surnames but applies to every word used as a word rather than for its meanings, and is the sort of edge case we shouldn't be catering to. When Wiktionary defines Rossi as a "surname" rather than "a person whose name is Rossi" and similarly for given names like Maria and Luigi, this is not intended to be interpreted literally but simply as a shortcut to writing out a longer definition. BTW I just changed the handling of
- @Benwing2: I think that treating surnames as
Past participles for reflexive verbs
[edit]Can we add the full past participle form for reflexive verbs? Take for example, rivelarsi, currently we generate "rivelato", whereas, the full form would be "rivelatosi". Ideally the f. & p. forms would be there too, i.e. "rivelatosi/asi/isi/esi". This is how it's done by Olivetti, see rivelarsi in Dizionario Italiano Olivetti, Olivetti Media Communication. Cpetty-wiki (talk) 04:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)