User talk:Atitarev/2011-2012

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


I have a song by this title, but the ending looks strange. Is the -ья an alternative way to say -ия for those neuter nouns or something like that? — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 20:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you're 100% right. It's not only for plurals, many (if not all?) words ending in -ние can have -нье as well but they have a more colloquial ring, obviously used more when rhyming is necessary. --Anatoli 21:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
One important exception I can remember: воскресение and воскресенье have the same etymology but the current meanings are very different. --Anatoli 21:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
I like making correct guesses. Thanks :D — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 21:45, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


So my crazy friend asked me to translate this into Chinese Japanese for her new tattoo but I told her my Chinese Japanese isn't good enough, so I wonder if you could have a look at it?

"You're exactly right. My blade is full of hate. I didn't come here to fight you. I came here to violently hack you to pieces."

I have marvelously insane friends :D — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 21:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

My mistake, it's a quote from something Japanese, so that would probably be better D: It's called Bleach, I guess it's an anime or somethin. So I'll try to find the original quote, but I dunno how successful I'll be, having never heard of it... — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 04:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
It's spoken by Hitsugaya Toushirō to Sōsuke Aizen. I found the Japanese version:
Here it is:
「その通りだぜ藍染 (Aizen)
--Anatoli 10:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks man, I really appreciate it :) — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 14:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome. :) --Anatoli 01:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh yes! I was wondering, if she doesn't want Mr.藍染's name on her, should we just remove 藍染 or replace it with てめえ or お前 or something? I've never seen a construction like その通りだぜ before, so I'm not sure :D — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 19:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, you can just remove 藍染 from the phrase and leave everything else as is, no need to add anything. その通りだぜ (sono tōri da ze) just means "you're right". だ (da) is the informal copula, equivalent to です (desu) and ぜ (ze) is a masculine phrase end particle (haughty). A polite form would be その通りです sono tōri desu. てめえ is rude, much worse than お前. --Anatoli 21:39, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Hehe I only suggested てめえ because he says it later, in the last line: 暴力でてめえを叩ッ斬りに来たんだ. But less is more, so I'll tell her the final version. Спасибо за всю твою помощь :) — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 22:04, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Всегда пожалуйста :) If you have the recording/anime, I wonder how 叩ッ斬り part is pronounced. It must be kōkkiri but I'm not sure. I can romanise the rest with no problem if you need. Don't worry if it's a hassle to get the recording. --Anatoli 22:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
I've never seen Bleach, I'm not actually sure at all what it's about... I'd probably have to watch every episode from the beginning to find it :D I dunno, though, it could be on youtube or something. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:52, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Hindi searches[edit]

If you have a complete list of characters in groups which you want added we can put in a bug. It is not something which we can change within the wiki as far as I know. I will ask Hippietrail if it can be fixed via javascript but I don't think so. - [The]DaveRoss 01:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll make a complete list. I have a similar request for Arabic. --Anatoli 02:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
I tried to leave a comment on TheDaveRoss page, but it was too difficult and my comment vanished. Anyway, don’t forget about Arabic kashida (or tatweel). It should be ignored wherever found, so that الكـــــــســـــــــر = الكسر.
I think that you are talking about the search box specifically. I never use the search box, I only type what I am looking for in the URL address line. I don’t know anything about how the search box acts. The only fix that I know of that works in the URL address line is redirects, but if other editors who know nothing of the language keep deleting them, that won’t work either. —Stephen (Talk) 16:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Some work has been done. You can type امس and see أمس. Still need to add مصري / مصرى pair and kashida. It is useful because an existing entry (or a redirect) may have a spelling different from the one user enters. It's already working for Roman and Slavic languages. Not so sucessful with Hindi. You can just use reply button at User_talk:TheDaveRoss#Hindi_searches_486 --Anatoli 21:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


I added this example sentence, not sure about the naturalness of it though:

  • Она украдкой улыбнулась, когда он упал.
  • She smiled furtively, when he fell down.

How's it look to you? — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 02:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks good, if furtively has the same meaning as stealthily or secretively. --Anatoli 03:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, in fact I just added украдкой. The one thing I'm not really certain of in that one is the devoicing of the д before the к. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 03:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
The pronunciation and transliteration both look okey to me. Voiced consonants are devoiced in front of the voiceless ones, which is not reflected in the romanisation. The reverse is also true (voiceless consonants become voiced in front of the voiced ones) - this part is different from Polish where tw-, trz- where the 2nd part is devoiced. --Anatoli 03:10, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Would you like to have a go at the classical examples of украдкой at the Russian wiki (from Turgenev and Dostoyevsky? I find them interesting but they could be a little hard. --Anatoli 03:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
You could add some, but it might take me a while to get my head around them :D Even reading Dostojevsky in English gives me a headache sometimes. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 03:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Stative verbs (Asian languages)[edit]

So, I've always felt kinda weird listing these as both verbs and adjectives... How do you think the suggestion of treating these under ===Stative verb=== with definitions like "(to be) obscene" would go over? — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 00:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey ex-Opio, I liked your older nick :). I'd prefer to continue to treat them as adjectives, not as verbs but definitions might need the part ("to be") added to them. Japanese differentiates between "true" (also -i-adjectives) (e.g. 美しい) - 形容詞 and -na/-no adjectives (e.g. きれいな) - 形容動詞, also there are many adjectives derived from verbs: 疲れる -> 疲れた (tsukareru "get tired" - tsukareta "tired"). Korean adjectives usually have attributive and predicative forms. With Chinese many words can simply belong to verb, noun, adjective, etc. categories simultaneously - - "I'm afraid to be/get fat". Most adjectives automatically become verbs - "(to be) something" and nouns - "(being) something", "-ness". Most grammarians seem to have agreed on that (at least according to books I'm using) but the discussions keep poping up. I have no strong opinion about this. --Anatoli 01:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
If you wish to raise it in BP or something, these would be good examples, all meaning "beautiful":
  • Korean: 예쁘다 / 예쁜 (yeppeuda/yeppeun) - predicative/attributive. The latter must be a true adjective?
  • Japanese: きれいな (kirei-na) (-na adjective), 美しい (utsukushii) (-i adjective). Note: -na adjectives drop -na and use the optional copula when in predicative mode.
  • Chinese: 漂亮 (piàoliang)
  • Vietnamese: đẹp
  • Thai: สวย (sŭay)
etc. --Anatoli 01:21, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I avoid the BP like the plague :D I don't really have a strong opinion on it, it was just an idea lol. I liked 'opiaterein', but I've been that for 6 years and it's not 100% me now. — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 01:50, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Anyway, IMHO, not worth reinventing the wheel and another place for discussing language specific policies could be used instead, I'm sure there is some merit in it. Someone raised a similar point about Japanese/Korean and Chinese adjectives but I don't remember where this was. --Anatoli 02:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


So, I was wondering about loan-type words in Russian. Would порнография follow normal pronunciation rules and be [pərnɐˈgrafʲɪjə]? — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 02:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Loanwords written in Cyrillic are pronounced in Russian as native words. The two things to watch for: 1) lack of palatalisation on some words containing е, e.g.темп - no rule exists and some words have dual pronunciation, 2) lack of vowel reduction on the final unstressed о, if there is another vowel in front of it: радио. With words ending in -ия, there are many words where "и" is stressed. --Anatoli 02:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Strange, I haven't seen any loanwords at all that end in ия...the native ones I see usually put the stress on the syllable before the и, though... I love Russian :) — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 03:01, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh, crap. I'm hoping my assumption that the adjectival suffix -ческий is pronounced [tɕɪskʲɪj] and not [tɕɛskʲɪj] is correct? — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 03:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Stressed on и: истерия, педерастия (your favourite topic, LOL), анестезия, etc but stressed otehrwise are more common.
I see no problem there with -ческий. --Anatoli 03:12, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Isn't there a subtle difference between педерастия and жопная ебля? D: — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 15:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Not too subtle. Ебля в жопу (not жопная ебля) is ass fucking, педерастия is pederasty. --Anatoli 19:51, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
But pederasty is a pretty unique form of it. I dunno how many cultures still do it — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 20:19, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Poll on formatting of etymologies[edit]

I would like to know your preference as regards the use of "<" vs "from" in the formatting of etymologies in Wiktionary, whatever that preference is. Even explicit statement of indifference would be nice. You can state your preference in the currently running poll: WT:BP#Poll: Etymology and the use of less-than symbol. I am sending you this notification, as you took part on some of the recent votes, so chances are you could be interested in the poll. The poll benefits from having as many participants as possible, to be as representative as possible. Feel free to ignore this notification. --Dan Polansky 10:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Trinidad and Tobago reverted[edit]

¿Why you have reverted my contributions about Trinidad and Tobago? Please, see the Spanish an Catalan Wiktionarys.--Maltrobat 17:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, changed back. --Anatoli 19:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


Just wanted to say thanks for helping me recently. I probably wouldn't have become aware of shinjita-kyujitai for a long time if ever, but recently I've made a few shinjita-kyujitai related entries and I'll be aware of it from here on. I hope I didn't sound dismissive before. Sometimes it feels like I'm working alone and it's nice to get feedback and help from other editors. Haplology 17:09, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome :) --Anatoli 22:54, 18 April 2011 (UTC)


Note that I broke your Mandarin translation up into the sum of its parts because 煽动仇恨者 is not a set phrase. ---> Tooironic 22:57, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I added {{Hant}} and {{Hans}} for the display. Sometimes the broken up translations may look ugly or dislayed as squares on some computers without explicit script settings. --Anatoli 23:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
煽动仇恨者 is a word, because is a suffix. 01:17, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


Hi, There is no Burmese language in the Tai-Kadai Swadesh lists page (Burmese is a Tibeto-Burman language, not Tai-Kadai). The one in there that's written with the Burmese script is from a Shan dictionary available for free online at — Stevey7788 22:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I have change my translation of count from ဢၢၼ်ႇ (ʔaan2) to {{trreq|Burmese}}. --Anatoli 11:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

User:123abc back[edit]

What should we do about User:123abc's return? He has been creating a significant number of unattestable pinyin entries and changing the standardised translations of English terms, e.g. at sincerity. I've blocked all his accounts that he's created so far but maybe a range block is in order. ---> Tooironic 00:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure, really. I am annoyed at his pinyin entries as well but technically toned pinyin entries are allowed, aren't they? Are you testing for attestability in Google books only or Google web? Not sure about the CFI here. Perhaps it should be discussed in BP or put to the vote. Feel free to block, IMHO and if you raise it in BP or in the vote, I'll second you. --Anatoli 01:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Well can you help me apply a range block? Everyday he changes his ISP - the last one I blocked was Special:Contributions/ Thanks. ---> Tooironic 01:13, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I don't know how. Do you mean listing all possible combinations of 91.104.27.XXX? --Anatoli 01:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Probably should be all combinations of 91.101-9.XXX.XXX, seeing as the last account I blocked was Special:Contributions/ If you can't do this who do you think can? There was someone who helped me last time but I can't remember their user name. ---> Tooironic 03:14, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
This page might help, I haven't used or tried it, obviously. I would seek some broader approval before applying. --Anatoli 03:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
You beat me to it. I agree that some sort of approval from the greater crowd should be sought first. JamesjiaoTC 03:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Another one I just blocked: Special:Contributions/ I also had to clean up all the mess he made, yet again. Will someone please range block him already? ---> Tooironic 12:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Yet another one! Special:Contributions/ ---> Tooironic 12:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
And another one - Special:Contributions/ ---> Tooironic 22:36, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
He's obviously been following the conversation here and has taken preemptive actions. He uses either proxy sites or VPN connections because the 91.106.62.* range is located in the UK where as his new range 2.25.214 is located in the US. This is becoming a serious concern as instead of trying to conform to the standards/resolve the issues, he's now tunnelvisioned into getting things done his way with any means necessary. He's got a bit of 牛脾气. JamesjiaoTC 02:02, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
It's a dangerous precedent. A more vicious person could be doing much more damage. We should copy/move this discussion into BP. English Wiktionary allows anonymous edits, I don't want this to go because of some weirdos. --Anatoli 02:10, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Indeed. I just blocked another one - Special:Contributions/ Something needs to be done very soon. I've left a message at User:msh210's talk page, so hopefully we'll get a reply soon. ---> Tooironic 13:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
91.101.*.*–91.109.*.* is a huge range, and should IMO be discussed at the BP or at [[WT:VIP]] first. (Perhaps it is being discussed there already: I haven't checked yet.) 2.25.214.* is less so, of course, and I don't see any other not-logged-in editors from that range. (I'm using [[User:TheDaveRoss/CIDR.js]] to check.) I'd just block the latter (smaller) range (not-logged-in people only), except that I don't know that his edits are wrong. So instead I'll just post how to do so, and someone else can if it's appropriate. You use [[special:block]], and instead of blocking the individual IP number, you use as the to-be-blocked IP number, making sure the "Block anonymous users only" box is checked.​—msh210 (talk) 14:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm gonna second msh210, and save my breath for a BP debate. --Mglovesfun (talk) 14:39, 10 June 2011 (UTC) IFYPFY.​—msh210 (talk) 16:01, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Actually his latest incarnation is Special:Contributions/ - how would I create a range block which takes into account this new number as well as the past ones? ---> Tooironic 23:26, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
I made a 16-bit range block (roughly 65536 IP addresses) from to He's extremely persistent. Whatever hope and sympathy I had left for him is now completely gone. I did, however, clear the 'Prevent account creation' checkbox in case someone else from that IP range wishes to contribute under a named account. JamesjiaoTC 02:13, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean he is "back"? He has been here editing uninterruptedly in the past year. 03:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Engirst[edit]

Could you unblock this 123abc sock-puppet. The reason is the following. I'm currently trying to get him (or her, I suppose) to participate in the Beer Parlour discussion on unattested pinyin entries; blocking him gives him a get out of jail card not to participate. I have no sympathy for him, it's merely so he can't later turn round and say "aha, I didn't join in because I was blocked". Mglovesfun (talk) 21:58, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I see your point. Done, as requested. --Anatoli 23:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you help me find a source?[edit]

Hey Atitarev,

I'm doing some work on the Taiwan article, trying to develop where the name came from and list some of its previous names. I've found one source which wrties "Abe wrote that the name "Taiwan" came from the words "taian" and "tayoan" which natives in the present Tainan area used in refer­ring to early Chinese settlers." I've also noticed the following entry on Taiwan's wiktionary page where you seem to have been active. "From Tayuan, Tayoan, or other variants, referring to “I/us”, in the Siraya Formosan language. Similar to tayo in Tagalog." Any ide where I can find the original source that lead to that entry? TIA Long island bob 17:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind I saw it on the talk page. Long island bob 18:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


How would you feel about classifying this as a noun? I would if it were English or French. Also, isn't the transliteration AO in capital letters, with no hyphen? --Mglovesfun (talk) 11:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

On initialisms, I'm just following the status quo, the English JSC is also an initialism. Changing would require some work (not too keen to change all of them, to be honest). Perhaps, need some discussion at BP, so that we have consistency with other languages.
Same for the case, technically you're right, I will change for this one but we have many others. --Anatoli 12:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


So a bunch of the ligatures from Sanskrit are pronounced way differently in Bengali... So while I understand the argument that transliteration should reflect spelling... I dunno. Thoughts? — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 23:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Oops, I thought it was pronounced dôkshin, my mistake. Will change back. --Anatoli 23:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Lol it's fine, I figured you'd changed it because most here think transliteration should reflect spelling. I think that makes sense for some languages, but Bengali would just be too confusing if we did it like that... I got in a pretty ugly argument with someone who wanted a pan-indo-aryan transliteration scheme. Wanted to castrate him. — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 00:01, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
I think it's good to have Bengali transliteration to show the pronunciation, especially if the pronunciation and the spelling differ so much, as with দক্ষিণ. Thanks for letting me know. --Anatoli 00:10, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
No prob, man. WT:BN TR :) — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 00:17, 7 July 2011 (UTC)


Hiya, just to say that English topical categories now use en:, such as Category:en:Fruits. Cheers, Mglovesfun (talk) 09:48, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

please note the correct order of symbols for Chinese translations[edit]

Thanks. --Dingar 07:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


Are you aware that the Mandarin translations given here are adjectives not nouns? :S Currently there is no adjective sense at good-for-nothing. ---> Tooironic 04:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

No need to tell me if you see a definitely wrong edit, this is wiki. I've been trying to add a lot of translations and the more you work the more chances you can make a mistake. The Russian translation is also an adjective. Perhaps a qualifier would do or a new adjective section? --Anatoli 11:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)


Could you take a second look at some of my translations at I have a question (particularly the Belarusian and Ukrainian ones) and maybe add some others you can think of? :) — [Ric Laurent] — 17:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ric. Real life gets in the way. I started a new job today, quite busy as you can imagine. I will take a look as soon as I have a moment. :) --Anatoli 13:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Of course, man, whenever you have time :) Good luck with your new job! — [Ric Laurent] — 13:14, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit to гипотенуза using definition editing tool[edit]

In this edit, did you specifically add the extra "#" sign or is there a bug in the script? If it was a bug, what browser are you using? --Yair rand 07:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not a bug, I accidentally inserted a #. --Anatoli 09:25, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


Hi. Could you please explain this edit? Thanks! An editor since 8.28.2011. 02:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree with people who are very upset with you. You just spend more time on talk pages trying to prove your point. Wiktionary is not about this. No more explanations. --Anatoli 03:07, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Please don't revert my edits on my talk page. An editor since 8.28.2011. 03:13, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Could you explain why I can't delete your comment on my talk page? An editor since 8.28.2011. 03:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Russian help[edit]


I asked Stephen a question about a Russian word. Could you help out? Thanks 14:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)


Do you know wtf the masculine form of "крайняя" is? :D I wanna know what I should link to in the head= of крайняя плоць.— [Ric Laurent] — 12:27, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I do, it's крайні (krájni). The Ukrainian would be крайній (krájnij). --Anatoli 12:47, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Epic, thanks man :) — [Ric Laurent] — 12:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
No worries, mate. :) --Anatoli 13:02, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

excluding mixed-script entries vs making them redirects[edit]

I think you might be trying to do too much in/with/to one vote with this change. What I meant in the Beer Parlour is: if you'd prefer to ban the entries, you should go ahead with the vote, as written, to ban mixed-script proper nouns entirely. If you and the other Chinese editors wouldn't mind allowing the entries as "soft redirects", I don't think we need a vote; at least, I think we don't need to try to repurpose a vote titled "banning entries not in Chinese characters" by adding "or keeping them as soft redirects would be OK, too". Mockba isn't a soft redirect, it's a hard redirect. Soft redirects are entries like archaelogical (almost full entries: a language header, usually a part of speech, an explanation that the form is nonstandard, proscribed, rare, or whatever, and a link to the correct form). - -sche (discuss) 01:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

It's worth thinking about. The soft redirect should be created only if a standard version exists, like with pinyin romanisation. --Anatoli 02:30, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Please take a look at Talk:Planck常数. --Anatoli 02:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind, but I feel like we should start a new page for what is fundamentally a different idea (having soft redirect entries for mixed-script terms) than the old vote (which is, after all, titled "Wiktionary:Votes/2011-10/CFI for Mandarin proper nouns - banning entries not in Chinese characters". If you don't mind, I'll copy the sections you just added to a new vote, so we can figure out how we want to word it. (We'll probably take some inspiration from how the Pinyin vote was worded.) - -sche (discuss) 00:13, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
OK, no worries. Thanks for your help. --Anatoli 00:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


Hi. I've already started to add some, but I gotta ask a question. In the article I'm gay, the last two Turkish translations (which were added by an IP user) kinda means "I'm faggot". Since those are vulgar and derogatory, I think we don't need those, do we? --OG 13:47, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Not if Turkish gays don't actually call themselves faggots lol. Feel free to remove them, dude. — [Ric Laurent] — 15:02, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't know any Turkish and I'll leave it to you to decide. Usually the translations are adequate, if they are not, then (temp) could be used. --Anatoli 21:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


Hi Atitarev,

Can I ask you to visit Special:NewPages?hidepatrolled=1 every so often and either delete CJKV entries, or mark them as patrolled, as appropriate? A number of editors, such as (talk), are very prolific, and I have no idea if their entries are O.K., because I have no idea what these entries are supposed to look like. [[𣛧]], for example, looks crazy to me, but for all I know it may be valid. (Or for all I know it may be Engirst.) We have several admins with knowledge of CJKV languages, but none ever seems to do any patrolling.

Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help.

RuakhTALK 15:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the suggestion. I usually check recent changes page. No, it's a different person. The entry may need some attention but it's valid - it's a Sino-Vietnamese character, like 𡨸. Do you have other entries in mind? --Anatoli 21:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Re: other entries: I don't know. Just, whenever I look through Special:NewPages?hidepatrolled=1, I see lots of CJKV contributions, presumably because the admins who patrol it don't know what to do with them. The CJKV entries there look so bizarre, and I have no idea if that's how they're supposed to look. —RuakhTALK 21:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps we need to discuss what Chinese character entries (or CJKV characters) should look like, they may have no parts of speech (which can be also be normal), they are not categorised and not very consistent. Many were created by bots, then also edited by various people but there are many thousands of them, not an easy job and many our Sinophone editors (including myself) have stayed away from single character entries in the last few years. --Anatoli 21:49, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

没事儿, 好玩儿, 这早晚儿, 上班儿, et al[edit]

Would you know how to create an erhua category for these entries and turn them into soft redirects? I think that would be the best course of action, instead of having to maintain two different entries with much the same content (in addition to the tra and sim forms). ---> Tooironic 23:36, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Soft redirects is actually a good idea for words only different regionally or something. 哪儿/哪里 那儿/那里 would perhaps fall into the same category. We could also use " {{alternative form of|沒事|lang=cmn}} ". We'll still have the part of speech section.

How about:



# {{alternative form of|沒事|lang=cmn}}


# {{alternative form of|沒事|lang=cmn}}

--Anatoli 23:59, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

+ Category Category:Mandarin erhua terms or something. --Anatoli 00:01, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Great. Have a look at my changes to 没事儿 and 沒事兒. How do you think we will be able to differentiate between tra and sim forms in the category? ---> Tooironic 00:54, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Looks good. I changed to Category:Mandarin erhua terms in traditional script and Category:Mandarin erhua terms in simplified script but not sure what categories should contain. --Anatoli 01:01, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Joint phrasebook and translation-target inclusion criteria ?[edit]

Does it make sense to you that the criteria for translation target multi-word entries and phrasebook entries be combined? I think there is significant overlap and have long thought of them as lexicographically similar. Obviously, though, there are differences. I'd love to try to combine the two sets of criteria and see whether the combination helped or hurt in the course of voting and applying the criteria. But I wouldn't want to start down that path if it didn't make sense to at least a few folks. You are one of the steady advocates of translation targets as entries, so I thought I'd solicit your opinion at an early stage. DCDuring TALK 16:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I can see some overlaps and CFI could possibly be combined but taking into account the differences as well. Words like fur coat, last night, plastic bag (in case they are not accepted simply as words) seem to fall into translation-target more than phrasebook. Keep me in the loop in case I miss some discussion about it or if you're planning to write up a proposal. --Anatoli 04:22, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

жёсткая парнуха[edit]

^ Белорусский? (I mean I understand what it says. But. Can not identify source.) — [Ric Laurent] — 13:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

No, that's "Russian" but in падонки (deliberate misspelling of "подонки" - "bastards") or олбанский (deliberate misspelling of "албанский" - "Albanian") style (deliberate misspeling for some effect) - "жёсткая порнуха" is the proper spelling. This spelling could be hard to understand by foreigners, like "ржунимагу́" (ржу не могу "LOL") or "пацтало́м" (под столом "under the table"). "Padonki" or "olbanski" used to be quite common on the Russian internet, it's somewhat subsided now. --Anatoli 21:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Hah, glad I've learned this. :) Mulțumesc mult, prieten. — [Ric Laurent] — 00:52, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Калі ласка, сябар :) You were not far off. The Belarusian equivalent of "жёсткая порнуха" is "жорсткая парнуха" --Anatoli 03:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC).

Czech šulař[edit]

Привет, I have just removed "šulař" from the request page for Czech entries, because it is currently not attestable by Google books search; Google web search gives less than 200 hits. The word could mean something, judging from the only hit in Google books. I do not know the word. Where do you have the word from? Do you have a Czech quotation that uses the word? --Dan Polansky 07:55, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Ahoj. I don't have a Czech source. I was looking for the etymology of the Russian "шулер" (šúler) - cardsharp or fraud. It resembles German Schüler but has nothing to do with it. It's allegedly derived from Middle High German "scholderer" / "schollerer" (gambling organiser?) via Polish "szuler" and/or Czech "šulař" as it says here. --Anatoli 08:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
By "šulař" I am reminded of the Czech "ošulit", which means something like "deceive", but I do not know the exact meaning of "ošulit". "Schüler" has clearly nothing to do with шулер, that is for sure indeed. Polish "szuler" is an attested word, which, judging from, means something like a cardsharp AKA cheater in card games; there is even a 1991 film W:pl:Szuler_(film). --Dan Polansky 09:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation. Really helpful. I will address "шулер" later on.--Anatoli 10:29, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: Etymology of szuler

This is the etymology from Słownik wyrazów obcych, 1980, PWN, Warszawa, →ISBN. I added the source to the entry. Maro 19:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I still doubt the origin is Czech. It's more likely earlier German. The Czech may have the same origin as the Polish word, though. See Dan Polansky's talk page, he has give a source. --Anatoli (обсудить) 00:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

how do you spell this word[edit]

Hey, long time no see. Just thought I'd let you know that I changed the Mandarin translation you gave for this sentence as the translation you gave was a little unnatural. Hope to catch up soon. Cheers. ---> Tooironic 22:12, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, no probs. Yeah, I might go to Chinese meet-ups again soon. --Anatoli 20:59, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


Why the change in pinyin? Just curious. My impression was that an apostraphe is only added if the combination of syllables without it would cause confusion, e.g. xian and Xi'an. ---> Tooironic 22:33, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

It's to separate syllables where the second syllable starts with a vowel. This convention is also followed in Wenlin software. This page describes it well: Apostrophes in Pinyin. See also 悲哀 in Nciku. --Anatoli 22:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


Здравствуйте(^^). Я - Russ и часто - в Корейским Викисловаре(^^). Теперь я писал(^^). Мой русский - плохо, но говорю немного(^^). И учусь по-японски, по-китайски и по-испански(^^). -- 04:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Привет! Спасибо за сообщение. Нам нужны корейцы. Hello. Thanks for your message. We need Korean people. I will answer on your Korean talk page. --Anatoli 04:53, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Я добавил ваш перевод, спасибо! I have added your translations, thank you! 감사합니다! --Anatoli 05:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Не за что(^^). Я тоже хорошо(^^). Большое спасибо(^^). -- 07:17, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


I have just removed your unsourced etymology from Czechoslovakia (diff). I find it implausible. The etymology that I find plausible is the one by Online Etymology Dictionary. --Dan Polansky 13:46, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

OK. --Anatoli (обсуждение) 22:47, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Arabic xlit[edit]

I saw that comment you'd made somewhere (I think an edit summary) about overhauling our Arabic translit (again), I was wondering what you'd like to see happen. I pretty much hate all systems I've ever seen lol — [Ric Laurent] — 13:58, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I hate all the systems too. The chat version doesn't look scientific, the other one is harder to enter. In any case, it's very inconsistent. I use semi-chat translit as I promised to User:Beru7 after long discussions. He was more active with Arabic than I was and he is more knowledgable. Stephen B. uses the same method. So if we change anything, we need to discuss and come to some agreement at WT:AAR. I usually follow WT:AAR, except when I wikify an existing translation. --Anatoli (обсуждение) 21:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
BTW. I seem to have trouble with my new signature: Anatoli (обсуждение). The preview looks alright but superscript is not linked. Could you help? --Anatoli (обсуждение) 21:37, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Test signature. --Anatoli (talk) 21:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Haha your signature's working fine, it just looks like it's not cuz you're already on your page :D Try it on my talk page lol — [Ric Laurent] — 23:24, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Beruh's entire argument is that the chat xlit is common. I never got along with that person haha... A lot of our transliteration systems are hard to enter, just look at Hindi... — [Ric Laurent] — 23:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
He-he, silly me with the signature thing. Happy to discuss and change but let's invite Steve and update the About Arabic page. I'm not too concerned about the system we use. Arabic seems to be very unstandardised in terms of pronunciation, including MSA - too many variants, too many exceptions. More important is having good templates for verb conjugations. It would be great to have a template that shows both romanised and Arabic conjugation. If I remember correctly, you, Dijan or Steve did some great work on Hindi and Persian. Maybe you could repeat that magic? I think ideally, one wouldn't need to type Arabic diacritics like with {{ar-verb-conj-top}} - only Roman vowels and then Arabic vowels appear. The state of Arabic contents leaves much to be desired. --Anatoli (обсудить) 23:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
I do make some pretty boss conjugation templates :3 Sinek is working on a new one for Turkish that will be loads better than the one I made, which still functions in a super sexy way, but is missing a lot of important tenses and stuff... So once he's got the frame done, I'll stick my awesome vowel-harmony templates in there and it'll be like freakin' magic. I'd really love to do some of the same magic for Arabic, but my knowledge of formal Arabic is really really bad lol... I started doing Hebrew a long while back, but I don't really get along so well with some of the other Hebrew editors so I decided to quit lol... But the requirements would be similar. If I based one on what we have at كتب (kataba) I could maybe do one....
If it were up to me, we'd have a wiktionary-specific transliteration scheme based on logic and written MSA... but logic doesn't win all that many friends :D — [Ric Laurent] — 00:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
I was gonna suggest كتب (kataba) as a good example. It would work for trilateral roots. The quadrilaterals, hollow (with waw or yaa' as a middle root letter) and double verbs would need some modification. Perhaps hamza'ed verbs as well - you won't be able to simply use root consonants to display all verb forms correctly. I'm sure Stephen would be happy to help. I will help you testing will create a few samples - I've got full conjugations in my grammar books. If this could modified to show the whole section with one template and vowels, it would be great. Verbal noun parameter definitely needs multiples. On translit, we use a simplified version of MSA - pausal forms, ignoring case endings (including iDafa cases) (but adding the pronounced /t/ with taa' marbuuTa). I think we won't have any big trouble deciding, which method to use.--Anatoli (обсудить) 00:45, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm worried if I start doing Arabic templates I'll lose my focus on learning Turkish T_T lol — [Ric Laurent] — 01:02, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
That's always a problem with me, adding translations is at some expense of language studies. --Anatoli (обсудить) 01:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
At least now it's on the table, so I can do it in the future :) In all fairness it probably won't be too long before I get frustrated and give up Turkish for a year :( I guess it'll come down to whether or not I can find someone who can tolerate conversing with me regularly lol — [Ric Laurent] — 01:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


So I started taking notes from kataba to start working on a new template... that thing is weird. For example, there's two sections labeled "imperfect subjunctive active". So... I'm not sure exactly what should and shouldn't be there, so I'll draw up what I would have assume before I got confused by the template and you can tell me what shouldn't be there :D — [Ric Laurent] — 22:56, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The template {{ar-conj-ccc-isp}} should say Imperfect Subjunctive Passive, not Imperfect Subjunctive Active, that's what it is.

Template:ar-verb-conj-top Template:ar-conj-ccc-isp Template:ar-verb-conj-bottom --Anatoli (обсудить) 23:25, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

That's what I figured :D Anyway, here's the frame I've got, let me know if there's anything superfluous User:Dick Laurent/Template:ar-conj[Ric Laurent] — 23:31, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Wow! Massive! Looks great and correct. Imagine filling all these forms manually. --Anatoli (обсудить) 23:48, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
It'd be a nightmare lol. Now comes the really fun part... Ugh :) I'm not yet sure what the best route to take would be. I'll have to take more notes and look at various conjugation patterns. I'm hoping this will be easier than the Latvian templates, those were wretched :D — [Ric Laurent] — 00:00, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm not good with templates but would be great if you allow manual parameters for some exceptions (some regular verbs have exceptions) or perhaps a different template would be required for doubled, hamzated, hollow, assimilated, weak, doubly weak, quadrilateral, doubled and defective verbs. Well, there may be 10 verb forms too! I'm listing all this just to highlight the scope. Not an easy task at all. Won't blame you if you give up. :) --Anatoli (обсудить) 00:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
I like to think I'm pretty good with templates, and yeah I'm pretty sure there will be several conj templates... I've written down transliterations of kataba for just imperfect and perfect and I already wanna die a little bit :D This could take a long time lol. Still, I really want it to be done. I want Wiktionary to be a kickass resource for MSA. Still, it's really easy to see why nobody speaks it in everyday life D: — [Ric Laurent] — 00:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Interesting that I see much more predictability and patterns in Arabic than in my native language - Russian. I don't think Arabic grammar is more complicated than Russian, really. The difference is that the Russian literary grammar is the same as spoken and what we say, we also write. You can learn the grammar by both reading and listening. With Arabic, you read without the vocalisation marks (unless the only thing you read is Quran), which don't show the endings and you listen to the simplified version as in dialects or in pauses. I'm now more enthusiastic about improving my Arabic and improving the Arabic contents in Wiktionary. Good luck to you! --Anatoli (обсудить) 00:31, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
The patterns are there, yes, but they make a lot less sense to me than the patterns in most other languages. Even Hebrew is more logical. I dunno what it is about Arabic, but it just seems so random. I'll have to be really slow with these templates, make sure I'm not slipping up anywhere D: I'll start with the pattern at kataba, but I think that's the only basic pattern we have here on Wiktionary. — [Ric Laurent] — 00:47, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Kataba will cover all trilateral (triconsonantal) verbs where the consonants are not waw, yaa' or hamza. All you need to know is the lemma, present tense vowel, imperative (usually predictable) and مصدر's. Let's do one thing at a time. When you finish with kataba, I'll add some verbs with different middle vowels. If I can recommend form 1, triconsonantal root verbs first, then we'll decide, which pattern next. What do you think? --Anatoli (обсудить) 01:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
I hadn't really thought beyond kataba. (I'm usually quite detail-oriented and getting too specific overwhelms me, so I like to start small before I get too into what I'm doing - unless it's an awesome idea that makes sense on a grand scale or something lol). I think actually what I'd really like to do is start with verb form 1 and then go through. Probably starting with the k-t-b root, but being that the project is in its infancy, I'm hesitant to make big plans for small things yet.
However, I did have once concern. Do the verb forms that are passive in meaning have actual passive forms, or should I make a separate skeleton template for those? (Like how Esperanto has intransitive verbs that are less conjugated than transitives) — [Ric Laurent] — 02:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure of an example but make params optional - blank or "-" if something is missing. --Anatoli (обсудить) 02:12, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Well yeah... but having half the table with - - - - - - - - would be a little on the silly side, right? :D — [Ric Laurent] — 02:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
What about two templates (active and passive) or a parameter marking that passive is absent, so it doesn't show blanks? --Anatoli (обсудить) 02:18, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
That's what I meant :D We've got two templates for Esperanto, for transitive and intransitive, so if, for example, Form V verbs don't have passives, they might need a template that only has one voice. But my formal Arabic is pretty limited, so I don't know that for sure. — [Ric Laurent] — 02:23, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Quick su'al[edit]

So I know the vowels in form-I verbs are somewhat volatile, but I can't remember seeing any of that in most other verb forms. For conjugation templates for other verb forms, will it be necessary to specify those vowels? — [Ric Laurent] — 13:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

No, you don't need to specify vowels for derived forms. It'll make things a bit easier. :) Don't forget to allow the imperative to be overwritten for exceptions (máSdar's for sure). --Anatoli (обсудить) 13:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Everything in the table can be overridden. The parameters are a little weird, but they follow a basic logic :) It goes person-number-gender-mood, and -wv for vowels, -tr for transliterations. so, 2pm-juss is 2nd person plural masculine jussive, 2pm-juss-wv is the voweled form, 2pm-juss-tr is the transliteration. I'll have to write a little guide to these for the documentation. — [Ric Laurent] — 13:17, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


Hey man. I have no idea what the participles and imperatives for form-4 verbs are. :D But you can check out what I've got so far at User:Dick Laurent/Sandbox. I made it kinda quickly, and my eyes are starting to hurt. I could use some extra ones to take a look lol — [Ric Laurent] — 15:15, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I seem to have found the participles :D — [Ric Laurent] — 15:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
أَسْلِمْ (ʾáslim).
أَصْبِحْ (ʾáṣbiħ).
أَظْهِرْ (ʾáđ̣hir).
Like I said on Stephen's talk page with أَرْسِلْ (ʾársil) - send!, alif is not elidable on form VI. Could you change the romanisation symbol from ' to ʾ? You're going quite well with these templates. Have a break :) --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:56, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I've been using ` for ء and ʿ for ع. I refuse to use ʕ for ع and haven't been able to find something logical that I prefer D: — [Ric Laurent] — 00:41, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
ʿ for ع is fine with me, the reason I chose ʕ is because symbols ʿ, ʾ, ` and ' all look similar. ` is actually used more often for ع as well. ʾ is standard for ء, the alternative is just ' (apostrophe), also, if you double click on ʾáslim it will select the whole word, not so with `áslim or 'áslim and is visually more appealing. Will you agree for ʾ to represent ء?
What's the best approach for hollow verbs قام (q-y-m) and سار (s-w-r)? Can I reuse the existing paradigm and overwrite deviated forms? Logically, they are the first thing to do after regular verbs (next level of complexity). They are conjugated as sound verbs, only a short vowel i for قام and u for سار is inserted when R3 is followed by a consonant - قمت (qumtu, qumta, etc.), سرت (sirtu, sirta, etc.). Verbs نام, مات, خاف and جاء (R3 - ء) aremore complex. --Anatoli (обсудить) 01:21, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I just didn't want to use ʾ for both of them. Hm. Anyway, I have very little experience with hollow verbs, so I'm not sure how easily templates can be made for them. I didn't think I'd be able to do other verbs, but so far I guess I'm doing alright.
Anyway, I'll need the patterns for the imperatives for each verb form, they're the only one I can't really find anywhere :D — [Ric Laurent] — 01:26, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
(In addition to that stuff) It's also bothering the piss out of me that I didn't include passive forms in {{ar-conj-I}}, how predictable are those? Do the variable vowels affect them? (Oh also, check out the form-7 stuff at User:Dick Laurent/Sandbox[Ric Laurent] — 01:32, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Actually, hamzated verbs are way simpler than hollow, hamzated verbs are conjugated as sound verbs, only the spelling is affected - position of hamza.
Imperatives for قال (q-w-l) - قل (qul) m sg, قولي (qul) f sg, etc. Only masculine singular has the short vowel because the word ends in a consonant and a sukun, all other form have the long ROOT vowel (not alif). If R2 is "y", then it's the same paradigm, only it's long and and short "i", not w and uu. Let me know if you have any issues with hollow verbs. I'll answer your other questions later, I've got a few things with a family. --Anatoli (обсудить) 07:00, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Good news on passive, it's predictive! The invariable perfect pattern for form I sound verbs is "fuʿila". So, صنع is "ṣanaʿa"/"ṣuniʿa" - make/was made. The rule is even more generic for all forms. The middle vowel is always a kasra, all others are Damma (endings are the same as in active). The long ā is replaced with a long ū. قابل (qābala) "meet" -> قوبل (qūbila) "was met". Let me know if it makes sense. I will check your form 7 now. --Anatoli (обсудить) 10:23, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Alright, updates... added passives to {{ar-conj-I}}, double checked IV and VII (though triple and quadruple checks would probably not hurt lol). Anyway, I'm going to get those moved to Template namespace and put them in action on a couple of pages... But first I'm going to turn my brain off and eat lol. After all that, I'll get started on another verbform. I'm really apprehensive about hollow and hamza verbs yet, I might put those off til last. Irregularity of any kind unnerves me. :D — [Ric Laurent] — 13:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, you deserve a rest. Sounds like a good plan to have only regulars first. There's regularity in irregulars as well :) I'm sure you can do hollow, hamzated, etc. when you understand how they work and won't lose motivation :). My Arabic skills are not so great but I think I'm now equipped with enough tools and some prior knowledge helps. Ask Stephen to check as well. I may be on and off. Real life gets in the way. I can only check from home. All good Arabic grammar references are in books. There's too little comprehensive stuff on the web. That really adds the value to the project. Time to go to bed for me, 00:40 am here. --Anatoli (обсудить) 13:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Damn time zones :) Sleep well man, we'll do more later lol — [Ric Laurent] — 13:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Form-3 imperatives?[edit]

How they do? :D — [Ric Laurent] — 23:27, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

The simple jussive base (plus endings), e.g. قاتل (qātala) -> قاتل (qātil) - fight! --Anatoli (обсудить) 23:34, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Here's a summary of imperatives for derived forms (I used translit) where f-ʿ-l are the three radicals:
II - faʿʿil
III - fāʿil
IV - afʿil
V - tafaʿʿal
VI - tafāʿal
VII - infaʿil
VIII - iftaʿil
IX - ? (one book I used shows very little info on 9, it's a rare form)
X - istafʿil
No changes for sound verbs with feminine, plural, etc. --Anatoli (обсудить) 23:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I probably won't make a template for form 9, I'm not sure really. Anyway, check out the sandbox :D — [Ric Laurent] — 00:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
You mean User:Dick Laurent/Template:ar-conj-III? Not sure I can follow it, the one with a full example was easier to follow. :) Anyway, I'm going away for a few hours, will check when I can. --Anatoli (обсудить) 00:06, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
No no, User:Dick Laurent/Sandbox :D
Good luck, man. — [Ric Laurent] — 00:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

✓. Good job. --Anatoli (обсудить) 03:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


8 and 10 are left. lol, probably just going to skip 9. — [Ric Laurent] — 22:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Great! Please have a look at قبل, I added some conjugations yesterday and just now. I have a question. The old templates linked to derived forms. I have created some derived verb forms (duplicates - قابل - III, أقبل - IV, تقبل - V, تقابل - VI, تقابل - IV, اقتبل - VIII, استقبل - X). Do I need and can I link to the derived verb forms using the new templates? Obviously it was meant to have all forms under one root like Hans Wehr. Not sure if this is right. Do you think they should separate entries with links to the common root or all put into one? Let me know if you want me to check anything. Some complicated stuff I will be able to check only when I get home. --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Adding short vowels is pain in the butt, so in the header I might just stick to unponted spelling. --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Lol yeah, I usually don't indicate vowels in headword lines, there's enough major shit to do without that.
I definitely think root-derivations should be listed all in one place, but I link them in root entries like ح ف ظ (ḥ f ẓ). I made the template {{ar-verb forms}} for that (though it's not perfect, it doesn't do hollow or hamzat verbs, or the odd Form 7 and 8 ones), and I link back to the root entry from the etymology like on أحفظ. But I never link to the other verb forms from the pages like حفظ, I only put forms 1 and 2 on those pages. — [Ric Laurent]
OK, I'll follow your example. Have a brief look at the main and derived entry again. Will add conjugations when you finish with the remaining templates. If you're planning to do the exceptions, do you need any assistance with weak or hamzated verbs? Hamzated may be harder than it seems, the spelling will depend on the order of the vowel. Weak verbs seem to be more straightforward but some hollow verbs are weird like مات (māt) or نام (nām). --Anatoli (обсудить) 23:09, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Hamzat and hollow roots are intimidating, but I would like to be as complete as possible... There are lots of those roots, and they're just as important as strong-root words. But because I'm such an unabashed pervert, at the very least, I want to have a template that can handle the conjugation of استمنى :D — [Ric Laurent] — 23:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Alright, unabashed pervert :) Do you have your own source or do you want the complete conjugation paradigm for استمنى? You won't need jussive and subjunctive, I think but I can give you perfect, imperfect, imperative and the verbal noun, if you need. For me all words are important, I don't focus on sex but sex-related words are popular, so sex words are important for me as well. I can't say I like some of your sample sentences, though, in terms of contents and style. :). I will be able to type it in without vowel points but romanisation for clarity in the evening (I want to be accurate, so I will have to check it). --Anatoli (обсудить) 00:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I've been using [ إكون] for the basic patterns (unfortunately no participles, masadir or imperatives). Dunno what the actual root of istamna is, though, so... eh. Lol.
I really only use vulgar examples on entries for vulgar words. It's not like someone is going to say "I woke up on this lovely morning and realized that my asshole smelled like it had been bathed in a field of wild flowers" or something. I keep it clean on normal words. — [Ric Laurent] — 00:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
If you have budget for Arabic books, I'll make a list of material I use later but let's see if I can make it from memory: "A student grammar of modern standard Arabic", "An Introduction to Koranic and Classical Arabic" (with the answer brochure separately! - "Key to Exercises"), "Teach Yourself Arabic" (arguably explains verbs in a more understandable way), "501 Arabic Verbs" (not all have VN and imperatives) are all good to have. Besides, I used "Ultimate Arabic" and "Mastering Arabic" as an introduction, completed "Teach Yourself Arabic". Hans Wehr dictionary always gives the verbal nouns, at least for form I. --Anatoli (обсудить) 00:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
On استمنى, I think the root letter are (m-n-y), need to check this (!), it's a defective (weak, R3 = ي) form X verb. It may be related to مني. --Anatoli (обсудить) 00:51, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't even have a budget for pencil lead. I'm fantastically poor :)
I have a feeling it probably is related to مني.... I'd be surprised if it wasn't. — [Ric Laurent] — 00:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Alright, I think form 10 is done. Easiest one yet... easy switches from form 7 lol. So, the example in use is up at muh sandboks. If I get bored, I might start on 8 later, but if not, I'll probably do that tomorrow. Then maybe I'll start thinking about knocking out some of the easier paradigms of weak verbs... I really want those to be done, so I hope I can do it. — [Ric Laurent] — 01:44, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
If you still need my checking, I will check all three when you're done. --Anatoli (обсудить) 01:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I checked 2, 5 and 6 several times, and the simplicity of form 10 makes me pretty confident that my quick check is sufficient, but naturally as many knowledgeable people can take looks at it the better. There's stuff I've double and triple checked that still had little stuff that I'd missed, which naturally bothers the piss out of me. I'm pretty confident they're good, but still.... :) — [Ric Laurent] — 01:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Haha {{ar-verb forms}} :)[edit]

I'm glad you like it. I'd love for it to work better for the transliteration of hollow and hamzat verbs (like the {{ar-verb-fa3ala}} templates can), and I want to add participles and verbal nouns to it, so it'll look like...

  • Form I blabla
    • Verbal noun blablabla
    • Active participle blablabla
    • Passive participle blablablabla

Except, you know, not silly. :D — [Ric Laurent] — 04:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Would be good, yeah :). I haven't spent much time on participles and passive voice, so relying on books. It's my weak point, if there is any strong point with my Arabic. --Anatoli (обсудить) 04:57, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I like participles, now that I understand the use of the active participle in Egyptian Arabic. I never understood why they said stuff like انا عارف instead of انا بعرف until very recently... lol — [Ric Laurent] — 05:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I know that far as well :) A phrase in Egyptian I remember: عايز أكون معك دائما instead of أريد...‎. --Anatoli (обсудить) 05:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I forgot about عايز... good one :)
I'm kinda itching to start working on form 8 conjugation... I'll probably get that done within the next few hours. Whoo. BEEFCAAAAKE. — [Ric Laurent] — 12:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Alright, I think 8 is done. I guess I might as well do 9, I've got time now. Hm... At least I won't have to worry about passives for it. I can find the verbal noun and active participle. Do you know if the imperative is used at all? — [Ric Laurent] — 15:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I couldn't find much on form IX when I was looking in "A student grammar of modern standard Arabic" but I will try "501 Arabic Verbs" and others. Sorry, not being very productive now as I can't really use textbooks at work even if I have a break and not always convenient to edit at home, like last night, I only did Talk:استمنى partially. Will try again later. --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Haha don't worry about it dude, not everybody can be a hermetic hypergeek editing all day like me. But you should definitely take a minute to look at User:Dick Laurent/Sandbox#Verb forms :) — [Ric Laurent] — 22:22, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
It's really cool, man. I will check (promise) but won't rely on my memory, will use references! --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:26, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Haha don't worry man, I'm not gonna start using it yet. I wasn't actually expecting to get as much done as I did. There's still some little stuff to do, like the alternative form-3 verbal noun, and the form-1 verbal noun cuz it's unpredictable anyway. I also didn't do anything form form 9, which I intended to, but decided against lol... — [Ric Laurent] — 22:43, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I may be a hypergeek like you, would quit work and just learn languages (with different activities), and edit Wiktionary but the real life keeps getting in the way :) Let me collect more info on IX, at least we can inform users about it. The irregular verbs will take some time too. The defective verbs have variants! There are exception in imperatives for أخذ - take, أعطى - give, جاء - come, etc. --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I hate irregular verbs lol... I guess that's why I like Turkish and Lithuanian so much. Almost none lol — [Ric Laurent] — 23:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


Hi. You recreated this page, but it had failed a previous RFV/RFD: Talk:Linux. Has something changed? Equinox 22:07, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I didn't notice the talk page. Go ahead and delete it, if you're keen, not sure the absence of this word this will improve Wiktionary, though. --Anatoli (обсудить) 00:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Appeal to Hindi Wiktionarians[edit]

Hi Anatoli, I've tried to create an article (भूत). Would you please review it so that I may know about the proper way of writing on Wiktionary, thanks and regards.--Bill william compton 02:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Looks perfect, and welcome to Wiktionary! You may want to look at WT:HI TR, Hindi requests: Category:Requests_(Hindi), update your Template:Babel table, so that people what languages you speak. Note that wiktionary has WT:CFI, the criteria are stricter than in Wikipedia, so some entries may get deleted, not sure about if Asian Games will pass. --Anatoli (обсудить) 02:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I made some changes. — [Ric Laurent] — 03:07, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, Ric! Yes, Bill william compton, please learn from this guy, a language and template Guru! --Anatoli (обсудить) 03:25, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
*bows* — [Ric Laurent] — 04:08, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Nouns and proper nouns[edit]

Hey, I've started a discussion in the Beer Parlor. I'd really like to know the community views on this. Any additional input would be great. Thanks. – Krun 13:54, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Теперь я писал(^^).[edit]

Теперь я писал в ko:사용자토론:Russ(^^). Я говорю по-японски немного, поэтому смотрел и писал по-корейски(^^). -- 11:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

정말 감사합니다! --Anatoli (обсудить) 12:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

ف ء ل[edit]

Hey dude, for 1st form verbs with 2nd root hamza, are there فئل فأل فؤل? — [Ric Laurent] — 18:54, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey dude, I could find example of the first two, not فئل.
سأل (sáʾala) - to ask
رأس (ráʾasa) - to make/appoint as a head (e.g. of a department)
بؤس (báʾusa) - to be brave. --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually, سئل (súʾila) would be the passive (perfect, 3rd pers, sg) of سأل (sáʾala). I'll try to check my books later, mate. --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:42, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Also سئر (sa’ira), to remain, to be left. These are called "verbs middle hamza". Others include: رأى (ra’aa), تساءل (tasaa’ala, verb form VI), بئس (ba’isa), لأم (la’’ama, verb form II), لاءم (laa’ama, verb form III), and تلأم (tala’’ama, verb form V), التأم (ilta’ama, verb form VIII). —Stephen (Talk) 02:53, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
I just wanted to start making more conjugation templates... Arabic verbs are easily the most intricate I have ever encountered. The Turkish templates were a cakewalk compared to these. — [Ric Laurent] — 12:37, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
I know. All the best :) --Anatoli (обсудить) 12:55, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


Ok so now you can categorize weak roots. Check out أراد, هنأ, كافأ, تآلف.

Basically you take the weak radical and use the roman numeral I, II or III= and specify what that root letter is. I used roman numerals because 1, 2 and 3 would be weird in terms of wikicoding, and ف ع ل could be messy. I'm gonna go drop dead from brain exhaustion now ^_^

Almost none of the categories exist. So far I've only set up {{ar-weakrootcat}} to do the most specific ones. Oddly backwards for me. — [Ric Laurent] — 17:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

ḥ vs ħ, ŧ vs th and other xlitssss[edit]

So, I know we have different preferences for transliterations but I'd love to give you the reasoning for my preferences if you'd like to listen receptively, openmindedly etc, which I know is something of which you are capable :D

I'd also like Stephen's input (I think he watches this page - and I know he likes the basic-Latin transliterations, but I think he knows that more complex systems tend to be preferred here) — [Ric Laurent] — 23:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm all ears. We need to be consistent. We can't have too many systems. I'm on a party today, though. Merry Christmas! --Anatoli (обсудить) 07:37, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Haha alright :) So, I use dots below for a letter that changes æ to ɑ which I don't think ح does so I use ħ. I use đ̣ for ظ to be strictly standard as the emphatic version of đ. I use ŧ for ث because there's the parallel to đ. I wanted the parallel because of their phonetic correspondence. (Also I think đ̣ and ŧ just look cool lol) I don't really have a strong opinion on غ, though I'd hesitate to use the dot because I only use dots for emphatics. Anyway, that's the major stuff :D — [Ric Laurent] — 17:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Ric, could you also run it past Stephen? I don't want to change the way we romanise all the time. I'm not too happy to change again but most of your templates are best on your romanisation, so I prefer consistency. I have been using the first symbols as in WT:AAR. Could you also make a full list of symbols you're suggesting (apart from the obvious - k, p, t, etc)? --Anatoli (обсудить) 20:42, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
I couldn't find, which system you're using. Mine was based on w:DIN 31635, except for ج for which I used "j", not "ǧ". --Anatoli (обсудить) 06:21, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
The ar-conj templates use a subtemplate that switches the Arabic letters for transliterations, so if the system I used is so despised, it can easily be changed and affect numerous pages at once lol :) — [Ric Laurent] — 13:11, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
No-no, despised is not the right word. I'd prefer to use the standard one I described on WT:AAR first option, before commas) and your talk page today but I don't want you to think I'm forcing it and hate me for this, so we can still discuss it. I'll check your talk page now. Not sure I got your meaning 100% there. --Anatoli (обсудить) 13:18, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

New conj template[edit]

{{ar-conj-I/و-II}} should be good to go. One thing I'm not entirely sure of is the ones like نام (nām) who conjugate partly like hollow ي verbs. In particular, I'm concerned about the jussives who lose their long vowels, and the imperatives.

Anyway, that aside, I'm thinking maybe I can do {{ar-conj-I/ي-II}} next. Stuff like طار (ṭār). — [Ric Laurent] — 18:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh, in case my naming system isn't obvious... the weak-root templates will follow the system:

Also, I got around to making most of those categories for weak roots. I made a list at User:Dick Laurent/ar weak roots. Most of them are empty and a number of them haven't been made yet because I either haven't gotten around to adding them or I'm still looking for examples of their existence... lol. — [Ric Laurent] — 18:34, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

You're doing a great job, Ric. I can say that many times. Your efforts should not be wasted. Perhaps you could document the templates? Specifically how to override settings and how to give more than one masdar? There are unfortunately combined exceptions, like أتى. How do you handle defective verbs? They don't seem to have a set pattern or they have more than one pattern. --Anatoli (обсудить) 11:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Haha I probably am wasting my time :)
I haven't yet added multiple masadir...I'll have to do that.
If you're talking about defective verbs in the non-Arabic-3rd-weak-radical sense, there's no way to do that yet. If you're talking about the weird ones with unpredictable endings, I'll probably do {{ar-conj-I/ي-III/ā}} and {{ar-conj-I/ي-III/ī}}
I think for verbs like أتى we'll do {{ar-conj-I/ء-I/ي-III}}, {{ar-conj-I/ي-II/ء-III}} for جاء (jāʾ). — [Ric Laurent] — 12:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
No-no, definitely not wasting. I won't promise constant commitment, as I have too many other commitments and interests but I will create new entries using the templates over time. It's great that you created all these templates. What's already there, covers quite a lot of verb patterns. So "kick-ass resource for MSA" is achievable with some efforts, although we don't have native speakers on this. --Anatoli (обсудить) 12:19, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
As a self-documenting thing, I'm thinking of adding an example or two of a perfect entry (with conjugations) for each form, exception type into Appendix:Arabic verbs. --Anatoli (обсудить) 12:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I've thought about doing something like that.... There's always so much work to do around here.... — [Ric Laurent] — 12:56, 27 December 2011 (UTC)