Talk:батько
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Cinemantique
@Benwing2 Hi. Could you help adding declension tables for both ба́тько and батько́ for a Russian section as in ru:wikt, please? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:35, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Atitarev: They would be:
Declension of ба́тько (inan neut-form velar-stem accent-a reduc irreg)
Declension of батько́ (inan neut-form velar-stem accent-b reduc irreg)
- --WikiTiki89 03:47, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Wikitiki89 Thank you! I'll make the entry later, if nobody does.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:05, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- I think they should rather be as follows, at least if we believe the genders of ruwikt:
- @Wikitiki89 Thank you! I'll make the entry later, if nobody does.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:05, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Declension of ба́тько (anim neut-form velar-stem accent-a reduc irreg)
Declension of батько́ (anim neut-form velar-stem accent-b irreg)
- Note that the first one disagrees in the accusatives vis-a-vis ruwikt, but Zaliznyak is clear (p. 54) that masculine animates in -о take acc sg. -а (= gen sg); furthermore, all animates (including neuter animates) take acc pl = gen pl. The ruwikt accent-pattern-a declension would be correct if ба́тько were neuter inanimate.
- When combined (which is what we'd normally do), the declension would be as follows:
singular | plural | |
---|---|---|
nominative | ба́тько, батько́ bátʹko, batʹkó |
ба́тьки△, батьки́△ bátʹki△, batʹkí△ |
genitive | ба́тька, батька́ bátʹka, batʹká |
ба́тек, батько́в△ bátek, batʹkóv△ |
dative | ба́тьку, батьку́ bátʹku, batʹkú |
ба́тькам, батька́м bátʹkam, batʹkám |
accusative | ба́тька, батька́ bátʹka, batʹká |
ба́тек, батько́в△ bátek, batʹkóv△ |
instrumental | ба́тьком, батько́м bátʹkom, batʹkóm |
ба́тьками, батька́ми bátʹkami, batʹkámi |
prepositional | ба́тьке, батьке́ bátʹke, batʹké |
ба́тьках, батька́х bátʹkax, batʹkáx |
△ Irregular.
Benwing2 (talk) 04:10, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Atitarev, Cinemantique, Wikitiki89, Wanjuscha, KoreanQuoter Pinging various people. Cinemantique, if you agree with my analysis above, you should fix the relevant templates. Benwing2 (talk) 04:11, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, very thorough. Yes, I agree, ru:wiki entry needs to be fixed as well.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:13, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Atitarev, Cinemantique, Wikitiki89, Wanjuscha, KoreanQuoter Pinging various people. Cinemantique, if you agree with my analysis above, you should fix the relevant templates. Benwing2 (talk) 04:11, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- (e/c) Yes, you're right. I was concetrating on getting the correct plurals and totally forgot about the animacy and did not check the accusatives. Also, I prefer including the asterisk even in the second form, just for consistency even though it makes no difference. --WikiTiki89 04:15, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- I've fixed it. Thanks!--Cinemantique (talk) 04:39, 28 August 2016 (UTC)