User talk:CodeCat

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives: 2009-2010 · 2011 · 2012
Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Template:lb-conj-regular201:44, 25 July 2016
Finnish nominative plurals321:57, 21 July 2016
Translation request019:56, 20 July 2016
Edit at niveau400:52, 17 July 2016
Your rollback was in error.218:25, 16 July 2016
etyl -> cog exceptions013:07, 15 July 2016
Template:es-conj-eer102:04, 14 July 2016
Why did you revert another one of my edits?009:36, 11 July 2016
*klengan - to sound217:49, 8 July 2016
Several errors017:41, 7 July 2016
Problem in the category.914:27, 7 July 2016
...503:41, 6 July 2016
se templates with module errors220:00, 29 June 2016
Etymology languages' parents120:14, 28 June 2016
Irish verb forms114:56, 28 June 2016
Template fur-noun021:11, 26 June 2016
Proto-Finnic *rr220:31, 26 June 2016
Emmer revert216:17, 24 June 2016
Why did you revert my edit on Dehnu's article?709:14, 23 June 2016
miegen222:44, 22 June 2016
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page

This template has been showing a module error for almost two weeks now, due to your completely reworking it, but not updating the documentation (though I suppose the unused parameter might predate that).

Consider yourself nagged...

Chuck Entz (talk)22:07, 24 July 2016

Yes, the documentation was wrong, but it's only showing up now. I was hoping one of the Luxembourgish editors would notice.

CodeCat23:44, 24 July 2016

Is that better?

JohnC501:44, 25 July 2016

Finnish nominative plurals

Hello. Please pardon me if I use this advanced discussion widget incorrectly, I've never seen it before.

You left a note on my user talk page a few weeks ago about Finnish nominative plurals, saying that I should specify nominative plural instead of just formatting it as plural of ___. I'd just like to point out that not only does the whole rest of English Wiktionary already have the convention of just "plural of..." instead of "nominative plural form of...", but the actual Finnish Wiktionary also has the same convention. (see and for a couple of examples)

This might be because Finnish Wiktionary doesn't really have separate dictionary entries for fancier conjugations like genitive plural, etc. and in turn this is surely where the convention on English Wiktionary came from. If you feel the convention from "plural" to "nominative plural" is worth changing, that would be a job for a bot, because it would be basically every noun and adjective in the books that needs updated. Otherwise I don't see any point in going against the flow manually. Even very basic and age-old entries like vedet and luut are just "plural of...".

Sylvanmoon (talk)14:41, 21 July 2016

Yes, I do think it should be changed, but if you are unsure you can bring it up at the Beer Parlour.

CodeCat14:52, 21 July 2016

I think "nominative plural" is far better than "plural" because every Finnish noun has fourteen different plurals. Don't worry about the old entries. Just make sure that the new ones are good.

Hekaheka (talk)21:36, 21 July 2016

Sounds good. Will do.

Sylvanmoon (talk)21:57, 21 July 2016

Translation request

Hi. Could you please translate this passage for me from en->nl?

"Hi. I am an 18-year-old bisexual girl looking for a sweet, older girl to talk to. I do not speak Dutch, but I'd like to learn the language. I am from the United States."

(I wouldn't ask what this is for though lol)

Philmonte101 (talk)19:55, 20 July 2016

I'm not going to do an undo on an admin. First, I must ask, why did you delete n from the derived terms? I feel it can help users understand the noun's gender before they even get there.

Philmonte101 (talk)21:10, 16 July 2016

We don't include grammatical information about terms in links to those terms. We don't include plurals or other inflected forms, noun cases, etc. So we shouldn't include gender either.

CodeCat21:12, 16 July 2016

Even if you were going to include gender, the term linked to is the type of compound that would get its gender from niveau, so the addition is more clutter than anything else.

On general priciples, the more information you add about an entry in other entries, the greater the likelihood that some of that information will be changed in the main entry and the other entries will be out of sync. Maintaining that kind of distributed information in a wiki is a nightmare that should be avoided whenever possible.

Chuck Entz (talk)22:18, 16 July 2016

I do wonder why {{l}} has a gender parameter though, if there really is a wider consensus to not add it.

CodeCat22:19, 16 July 2016

In some cases where there are homographs with different genders, it might be useful. My remarks were more general advice than expression of consensus (combined with a bit of grumpiness, I have to admit).

Chuck Entz (talk)00:52, 17 July 2016

Your rollback was in error.

User:NativeCat (was) my account. I suppose you did that because I did this from another account instead of that one, so I'll go ahead and log into that account and do the same thing with that one.

Philmonte101 (talk)17:55, 16 July 2016

Yes, I did, editors editing other people's user pages is frowned upon. Why the new account, though? Could you not have renamed the old one?

CodeCat18:06, 16 July 2016

I create new accounts a lot. Sometimes you feel like you just want to start over, right, especially after not being here for a while? Idk

Philmonte101 (talk)18:25, 16 July 2016

etyl -> cog exceptions

Hi CodeCat, thanks for your changes on etyl/cog. I didn't realise I had been a pretty regular abuser of that template. Is there a way you can revert or leave alone those involving etymologies where one word derives from two? For example, heraus derives from a two word phrase in MHG, and it is incorrect to treat MHG her as the cognate, as here: heraus-diff. I'm not sure how widespread this problem is. Thanks,

Isomorphyc (talk)13:07, 15 July 2016

Hi Cat. Please can you look at Template:es-conj-eer and make it show the past participle forms correctly - on proveer the past participle forms should be provista, provistas, provistos. I can't figure out the template. Cheers, mate

Turnedlessef (talk)19:36, 12 July 2016

Those templates are junky and should be rewritten in Lua probably. The support for pp= is quite broken; it puts the same pp form in all numbers and genders.

Benwing2 (talk)02:04, 14 July 2016

Why did you revert another one of my edits?

What is your objection against me adding a relevant picture to a Proto-Germanic article of a mother and a baby with Germanic used as a caption?, 10 July 2016

*klengan - to sound

Edited by 2 users.
Last edit: 17:49, 8 July 2016

Hi CodeCat! I wanted to start an entry for the Proto-Germanic root *klengan and as I see are the most derivative verbs in strong verb class 3, but the reconstructed root *klengan does not end with -aną like all the other Proto-Germanic verbs in strong verb class 3. What do you think?

Here is a table of derivatives:

lang term(s)
Proto-Germanic *klengan, *klennjan, *klennan? (< *glengʰ- < *kel-)
Old Frisian klinga, klinna (3a)
frs klinga (3a)
North Frisian klinke (3a)
Old Saxon klinke (strong and weak)
Middle Dutch clingen, klingen, clinghen, clinken
Dutch klinken
English clink, clinker
Old English clynnan (weak)
Old High German klingan (3a)
Middle High German klingen (strong)
Middle Low German klingen
German klingen (3a)
Old Norse klingja (weak)
Icelandic klingja
Danish klinge (< klingen?)
Bigbossfarin (talk)15:12, 22 December 2014

e becomes i when followed by a nasal and another consonant, so *kleng- is not a possible root syllable in Proto-Germanic, it would be *kling-.

I can't say much about the verb type. According to the Etymologisch Woordenboek van het Nederlands, this is in origin an onomatopoeic word, so it's not surprising that there are many kinds of derivation. What's more, the verb looks like it should be strong class 3, based purely on its shape/sound. So this could have actually caused it to become strong if it wasn't already. This means that the fact that many descendants are strong class 3 does not necessarily mean that the original verb was too.

There are also several verbs in your list which cannot be descendants of this. Those are the forms with -k- instead of -g-, which must come from a separate related verb with -k-. Furthermore, Old English clynnan, and probably also Old Frisian klinna (if it's the same verb) must derive from a different verb too, something like *klunjaną or *klunnijaną. Old Saxon klinke is not even a verb, as Old Saxon verbs always end in -an or -on.

CodeCat15:23, 22 December 2014

Thank you for your help, I think it is not possible in this case to determine if the words were originated by onomatopoeia or derived from Proto-Germanic. Further Ancient Greek klángē, Latin clangere and French clinquer seem to be similar too. ([1]) But I dispute a derivation of the PIE-Root *kel- (as in [2][3]). The special case that -k- appears instead of -g- is also mentioned here as "mit abweichender, wohl expressiver Konsonanz im Inlaut", but I do not know how plausible this is. Old English clynnan and Old Frisian klinna were designed to derive from *klennjan ([4]) and an Old Saxon klinke does not exist.

So as I see it seems to be really difficult to say here what derives from where so I would oppose to create an entry on the Proto-Germanic term at all.

Bigbossfarin (talk)22:17, 22 December 2014

Several errors

Hey, ik weet niet hoe, maar deze edit heeft voor meerdere foutmeldingen gezorgd op de pagina eat. Ik kan zo snel het exacte probleem niet echt zien.

Prinsgezinde (talk)17:41, 7 July 2016

Problem in the category.

Category:Cities in The Bahamas I don't know what happened.

KoreanQuoter (talk)14:06, 7 July 2016

The category hasn't been defined yet in the data modules.

CodeCat14:07, 7 July 2016

The Module:category_tree/topic_cat/data/Place_names_old has "cities in the Bahamas".

KoreanQuoter (talk)14:11, 7 July 2016

With a lowercase T yes.

CodeCat14:12, 7 July 2016

I don't think I can fix this. I'm sort of confused right now.

KoreanQuoter (talk)14:16, 7 July 2016

You have to get the casing of the category right too. You spelled your category as "The Bahamas" but the category is defined in the module as "the Bahamas".

CodeCat14:16, 7 July 2016

Wtf bro? Are you saying we shouldn't call those terms inherited from PIE? They weren't borrowed, and "derived" doesn't distinguish enough between different paths of transmission. Clearly, when one wants to search for a list of words in a modern language inherited from PIE, these kinds of words should be on there. Sure we might not know the entire or exact route it took from Indo-European to Latin, but come on. Should we only use inh when we have an actual reconstructed term as opposed to just a root? I use inh when it comes from the same kind of word/part of speech in PIE, with a more or less continuous meaning over time.

Word dewd544 (talk)01:57, 5 July 2016

I'm not a bro, for starters.

They may have been inherited from PIE, maybe not. The documentation of {{inh}} states that derivation from a root should never be considered inheritance, but rather just derivation. The reason is that roots aren't words; they are the basis for many words, rather than just one. You can think of them as similar to prefixes and suffixes. For a word to be considered inherited from another, it must have existed as the same word in the parent language. For this reason, hound is not considered inherited from *ḱwṓ. The reason is that the English word, like its Germanic ancestor *hundaz, contains an extra -d- that was not present in the PIE word, and thus reflects a different word.

That said, in this particular case, De Vaan reconstructs an actual PIE word for this Latin verb, namely a verb *bʰérweti which is derived (not inherited!) from the root given in the entries. That verb would have led to a 3rd conjugation verb fervō, which is actually attested in Old Latin. At some point, the 3rd conjugation inflection was replaced by 2nd conjugation inflection. De Vaan says that the older verb fell out of use around the time of Vergilius, but the newer one introduced already in the time of Plautus (and inferveō is already found in Cato). So the replacement was gradual, taking a few centuries. I don't know if these should be considered separate verbs or not, and therefore whether ferveō is derived or inherited from fervō.

CodeCat12:36, 5 July 2016

Fair enough, sir. You make a good point.

Word dewd544 (talk)02:00, 6 July 2016

Word dew544, you said "bro" and then "sir", but CodeCat is a woman.

--Daniel Carrero (talk)02:03, 6 July 2016

CodeCat is female, as you seem to have missed from her response.

JohnC502:03, 6 July 2016

Oh, wow. My apologies. I didn't know that. I thought she just meant she's not like a college-aged dude and prefers being addressed in a more serious way. For some reason I always pictured Code Cat as male. Never actually read deep into her profile. My bad.

Word dewd544 (talk)03:40, 6 July 2016

se templates with module errors

Since you seem to have nothing else to do ;-), you might want to fix these- they've been in CAT:E for almost a week now. And while you're at it, could you take a look at Template:pl-decl-noun-irreg? The last person who worked on it has no clue about allowing for the template page in the module. Thanks!

Chuck Entz (talk)14:02, 28 June 2016

I haven't forgotten about them, they'll be fixed eventually.

CodeCat14:56, 28 June 2016


CodeCat20:00, 29 June 2016

Etymology languages' parents

CodeCat, you edited Module:etymology and said: "Etymology languages' parents are always languages (or another etymology language! See the data module!) but never families"

This edit broke a few entries that were just fine before:

  • Pérgamo -> contains the code "pregrc" (parent: "qfa-sub" = substrate)
  • balsa -> contains the code "und-ibe" (parent: "qfa-sub" as above)
  • zarza -> contains the code "und-ibe"
  • zurrapa -> contains the code "und-ibe"
  • ܚܡܘܪܬܐ -> contains the code "MIr." (parent: "ira" = Iranian family)
  • पुस्तक -> contains the code "MIr."
--Daniel Carrero (talk)19:39, 28 June 2016

Hmm that's quite strange. So apparently these aren't really languages, but they also don't form a subset of another language like etymology languages normally do. They're like half-languages in limbo.

CodeCat20:14, 28 June 2016

Irish verb forms

Would MewBot be interested in creating entries for Irish verb forms generated by the Irish verb inflection-table templates?

Aɴɢʀ (talk)14:17, 28 June 2016

Not at the moment.

CodeCat14:56, 28 June 2016

Template fur-noun

Hi, I was watching this template "fur-noun" concerning the writing form of Friulian nouns and their plural. There is surely a mistake when this plural form takes the final -s, first because in Italian no final -s is required in the plural, then also because often the plural form in dialectal nouns remains unchanged, or in the feminine gender, takes different endings. Best regards,

Better, see this link: , where we can see (I'm Emilian and therefore not expert in Friulian language, sorry...) that plural forms can end both in -s, or in -j or in -i. Thank you,
Glo (talk)07:23, 26 June 2016

Proto-Finnic *rr

Your inflection module seems to produce past participles like *surrut for verbs like *sure-, similarly essives like *noorra for nominals like *noori. This is incorrect — *rn > rr was a post-PF analogical generalization (probably mainly based on roots showing the sound changes *ln > *ll and *sn > *ss). Retained forms include e.g. Estonian surnud, older Finnish nuorna, and all cases with *-rn- as a part of the root (such as *kaarna > Fi. kaarna).

Tropylium (talk)18:36, 26 June 2016


CodeCat18:47, 26 June 2016

Thank you!

Tropylium (talk)20:31, 26 June 2016

Emmer revert

Edited by author.
Last edit: 16:12, 24 June 2016

I think it is obvious, even to an untrained eye, that German Eimer and Dutch emmer are related. There is also Low German Ammel which is also probably related to the afore-mentioned two. And then there is also West Frisian amer.

According to, Eimer is derived from Middle High German eim(b)er, einber; from Old High German eimber, eimbar.

I mean, it would be an almost impossible coincidence if all of the above words were not related.

Mountebank1 (talk)16:08, 24 June 2016

They are related, but your use of templates implied that the Dutch term was from German, even if the text in the entry itself didn't say so. You should probably be more careful with the categorisation.

CodeCat16:09, 24 June 2016

Yep, I totally overlooked that. But anyway, I was just taking a break before adding the rest of the Germanic cognates.

Mountebank1 (talk)16:17, 24 June 2016

Why did you revert my edit on Dehnu's article?

Sanksrit clearly attests that the original word was amphikinetic via preserving its neuter u-declension, so what reason do you have for this?, 20 June 2016

Amphikinetic nouns normally have o-grade of the suffix in the nominative, so you'd expect *déh₂now ~ dh₂n̥wés instead.

CodeCat16:41, 20 June 2016

Fair enough, but Dehnu clearly was a noun, so it has to have some form of declension. I'll investigate the Celtic form and see what comes up., 21 June 2016

And can you explain why *peku doesn't have an o-grade despite being amphikinetic?, 21 June 2016

I can't.

CodeCat17:45, 21 June 2016

Well, there you go! Now if you don't mind, I'll be putting the inflection table back up, based on both the Celtic and Sanskrit forms., 22 June 2016

Is miegen via Low Saxon (per the gem-pro etymon) or just via Middle Dutch? How would one tell the difference? Etymologiebank doesn't really indicate it, but then again, it's not a perfect resource.

Kleio (t · c)19:38, 20 June 2016

Dutch has ī > ij, so if a form retains ī it's from some other language. Saxon would be a likely candidate.

CodeCat20:45, 20 June 2016

Alright, I edited the entry. Thanks!

Kleio (t · c)22:44, 22 June 2016
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page