User talk:CodeCat

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

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Your edit on Stoppel214:07, 30 July 2015
*kh₂eyd-1012:58, 30 July 2015
Bad old edit112:19, 28 July 2015
Finnish allative is NOT llex013:06, 24 July 2015
Template:catfix1217:02, 22 July 2015
Template:verbal noun of114:08, 21 July 2015
Profile page215:06, 17 July 2015
Wikidata item113:25, 16 July 2015
Template:instrumental_singular_of114:30, 14 July 2015
Language Codes111:52, 11 July 2015
PGmc *barō220:47, 9 July 2015
Transliteration questions316:29, 8 July 2015
Italian templates312:48, 8 July 2015
nl-conj-irr010:06, 8 July 2015
Request for categories for "Terms with manual transliterations"015:03, 7 July 2015
Linking from PIE entries to their root derivation categories712:06, 7 July 2015
Any experience with race conditions when running multiple bots simultaneously?211:58, 7 July 2015
PIE template123:16, 5 July 2015
A few Finnish conjugations labeled declensions in en-wikt615:17, 5 July 2015
Eigenwert008:55, 5 July 2015
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page

I've sort of reverted your edit on "Stoppel", except that I put the Latin more towards the front as you had done.

Firstly, it was not correct to say "the High German form was Middle High German stupfel", because Central German is also High German, and it uses "Stoppel".

Secondly, in modern German -- which is not a standardized dialect, but an artificial amalgam of dialects -- we very often have the case that a word comes out with a certain consonantal "irregularity" in comparison to the Upper German-based MHG. But while this is so, it's still essentially the same word and thus a native one. Because the forms Stupfel, Stopfel, Stuppel, Stoppel were all around for some while, written, read, and reproduced, and eventually Stoppel happened to become standardized.

I've been working on these "irregular" consonantisms more or less systematically for some while, and thus far I have chosen to give the MHG-OHG lineage, and then explain the specific form according to its dialectal background (usually that is Central and/or Low German). This is also what the etymological dictionaries do in many or most cases. Thereby, I treat the word as being derived both from Middle High German and Middle Low German, not as a borrowing from the latter.

I only do this in cases where the identity of different dialectal forms was obvious to writers in the formative period of modern German, who were generally quite aware of the dialectal differences. I wouldn't do it if two stems happened to be cognates, but the identity wasn't obvious (because maybe the word had become archaic in Upper German, or the Low German form was just too different). All of this, of course, based on the standard literature.

You don't need to answer, unless you disagree with this practice.

Kolmiel (talk)17:05, 8 June 2015

What I don't agree with is saying that the word comes from MHG "stupfel". That's just clearly wrong.

CodeCat17:06, 8 June 2015

Sorry. This was ages ago, but I somehow hadn't seen your answer. I see your point. But I don't quite agree. Saying that modern "Stoppel" is from MHG "stupfel" doesn't mean that it directly developed out of this particular form. And this miscomprehension is ruled out by the following explanation, namely that the consonantism is northern.

What is meant is that "stupfel" was the MHG standard form -- MHG being very much a standardized language, by the scale of the time -- and that "Stoppel" is the continuation of this MHG word, even if its form has been influenced by northern dialects. Take Hafer. The word is a continuation of MHG haber even if its form has been influenced by Low German haver. A minor formal change in a word doesn't make it a completely different word that loses all connections with the MHG antecessor.

That's my point of view. But I think a compromise would be to say: from MHG stupfel, *stuppel, from OHG stuphila, *stuppila. So that's what I'll write.

Kolmiel (talk)14:07, 30 July 2015
 
 

Is that a better? I wish you would at least warn me before deleting these entries. I've gotten a lot better at PIE reconstruction, and some of my early entries are not as accurate as they should be, but you could at least ask me whether I could find more descendants now. No offense meant, and also realize I may be being a little touchy about this for no good reason.

PS: I fixed up *wéh₁itis.

JohnC503:10, 29 July 2015

I'm not sure what deleted entry you're actually referring to. In any case I didn't really look at who created it, and it's nothing personal. There's just a lot of bad etymological stuff around and it's hard to tell between usable stuff and junk. So I would rather err on the side of caution. I won't mind at all if you restore stuff I delete, as long as it's improved of course.

CodeCat14:35, 29 July 2015

Cool, cool. Could I also ask, as you move inflected stems into the main root articles (e.g. *gʷʰer-), that you add the conjugation tables in with them? I think that they are useful and am sorry to see them disappear.

JohnC518:11, 29 July 2015

I'm wondering about that myself. The difficulty is that a root by itself doesn't have any kind of conjugation. But where else can we put it?

CodeCat18:42, 29 July 2015

Yeah, I was wondering that myself. You could put it under each stem's bullet point; though, that would going against normal practices and divisions. You could also have an Inflection header with subsections for each stem. It's an interesting dilemma, but as I say, I'd still love to have the tables.

JohnC519:30, 29 July 2015

I guess this would be material for BP or ID.

CodeCat19:40, 29 July 2015
 
 
 
 
 

Bad old edit

Hi,

I found this old but bad edit of yours in diff, which I have fixed just now. Pls let me know if you still think it was correct then. :)

Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад)10:01, 28 July 2015

I don't really know why I did that, so I'll trust your judgement.

CodeCat12:19, 28 July 2015
 

Finnish allative is NOT llex

Finnish allative ending is lle and not llex.

Please remove the x

I see from discussion on this page that the x is intended to signify a gemination.... but the gemination effect applies to ALL instances when a Finnish word ends in a single e- and rules do not allow for the e to be elongated to ee. For instance, the polite request "tulepa tänne" (come here) is pronounced as if it were written "tuleppa tänne". Your inclusion of a marker for this effect is inappropriate and confusing to the average reader. Even a Finn would not understand this llex terminology unless he or she is also an expert in phonetics. Or else a fan of Daniel Abondalo ;) ~~

87.92.144.10313:06, 24 July 2015

Why isn't it working at Category:Hebrew terms belonging to the root כ־ת־ב (see {{HE root cat}})?

WikiTiki8923:20, 21 July 2015

Or rather why doesn't it work in any Hebrew category?

WikiTiki8923:21, 21 July 2015

Actually, I think I get why. But can it be fixed in the general case, since Hebrew is 99% of the time in the "Hebr" script?

WikiTiki8923:25, 21 July 2015
 

What's not working about it?

CodeCat23:25, 21 July 2015

Essentially, my new question is, how can I make "Hebr" the default script for Hebrew categories?

WikiTiki8915:23, 22 July 2015

The problem is that {{catfix}} tries to do script detection on some nonsense text inside the template, and the result is always Latn. There is no way to change that because the actual category fix is done by JavaScript, and Lua is no longer in the picture. JavaScript would need its own form of script detection.

CodeCat15:37, 22 July 2015

Then what's the point of {{catfix}} without an explicit sc= parameter?

WikiTiki8915:39, 22 July 2015
 
 
 
 
 

Is there are reason you removed parameters such as "dot" that were in the original template code, in the documentation and in use?

Chuck Entz (talk)12:50, 21 July 2015

They were obsolete and not actually being applied by the template anyway. Also, until there is a consensus about the format of entries (capital and dot) I'm hesitant to reinstate them.

CodeCat14:08, 21 July 2015
 

Profile page

Hi, I have been blocked by Vahagni as user Nemzag, but someone else Kephir deleted my user profile page, can you help me and reput it back please ? Since this case should be discussed and judge by the Evropean tribunal of human right, the info and profile should be there ; you know my case since you wrote in JohnC5 talk page. Can you at least as an administration to be able to edit my user profile, talk page, and to be able to pm to other users & admins ? Please thank, good day. 46.217.70.166 15:46, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

46.217.70.16615:46, 16 July 2015

Editing a wiki isn't a human right. As for your user page: see WT:USER- user pages are only for dictionary business, and you won't be doing any dictionary business as long as you're blocked. Also, the monstrosity you were creating on your user page isn't something we would ever want added to entries- the problem with being an autodidact is that there's no one to tell you when you get things wrong- which seems to be a common occurrence on your part.

On several occasions, you ranted about how a non-Albanian couldn't possibly contribute anything worthwhile to Albanian etymology, but you won't apply that same standard to your own disastrous incursions into the study of other languages. You've also harassed at least one other editor over religious differences, which has no place on any Wikimedia website.

Chuck Entz (talk)02:22, 17 July 2015

If only every troll were disposed of so swiftly.

Keφr15:06, 17 July 2015
 
 

Wikidata item

Hi, CodeCat, I was wondering if this also is applicable here. (example: aanwijzing, where the language links are still at the bottom of the page). Thank you for your time.

Lotje (talk)04:54, 16 July 2015

The people at Wikidata have so far not shown much interest in handling interwiki links. They seem to want to come up with much more complicated solutions, which then always get refused by the Wiktionary people themselves.

CodeCat13:25, 16 July 2015
 

Hey. There are Pages that link to recently deleted "Template:instrumental singular of".

Also, why did you replace form names with their shortcut forms? Like, the bot did not have time to type in a more human-readable way?

Also, why would you not add support for other declensional forms in {{inflection of}}? Now, some of the noun forms of Georgian should use Template:* of (e.g. {{adverbial of}}), while others inflection of.

Dixtosa (talk)14:20, 14 July 2015

Thank you for letting me know. I must have missed that.

CodeCat14:30, 14 July 2015
 

Language Codes

I know elfdalian already has a code, but I would like some codes for the following "swedish dialects": Pitemål (Pijtmåle), Lulemål (bonnmål), Kalixmål (ÖverkölismaLe), Jamtlandic (Jamska). All the entries I would have to make under "swedish" would just clutter the swedish section with things that aren't standard (which would be confusing since it clearly says "swedish").

All these dialects/Languages I listed have their own grammar and pronounciation and I would prefer to list them as their own languages so I can add pronounciation information along with other stuff.

Now, I'm not quite sure how to do this, so that's why i'm posting here. I'm probably at the wrong place, but I figured since you edit most pages you should know how to set this up (language codes, the rest I can do ofc) :)

Br0shaan (talk)08:51, 11 July 2015

Codes for languages need to be approved by consensus. You should bring this up at Beer parlour.

CodeCat11:52, 11 July 2015
 

PGmc *barō

Hi ! I would like to bring the entry back, sans the VL barra (and it's descendats, including the possible German descendant), as this is a sure reconstruction for Old Frisian, OHG bara, and Old Norse Leasnam (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Leasnam (talk)20:32, 9 July 2015

Ok. I'm finding that a lot of our Proto-Germanic entries have dubious etymologies. I'll have to tag them sometime.

CodeCat20:43, 9 July 2015

Thanks!

Leasnam (talk)20:47, 9 July 2015
 
 

Transliteration questions

Howdy! I have been on a bit of a transliteration binge recently, and I had a few questions I thought you might be able to answer (In part because you worked on this some).

I was looking at Module:uga-translit and wondering:

  1. Do we have a decision about the correct transliteration of 𐎀 (ʾa/ả), 𐎃 (ẖ/ḫ), 𐎛 (ʾi/ỉ/i), 𐎜 (ʾu/ủ), 𐎝 (s₂/ś)?
  2. Why was this never fully implemented?

In the same vein of deciding on specific tranliterations, I wrote module:Ital-translit based on Appendix:Old Italic script and was wondering:

  1. Do I need a vote to decide on particular encoding/transliteration principles for certain languages? For instance, the South Picene lemma mefiín (which I want to move to Ital) could be lemmatized:
    1. 𐌌𐌄⁚𐌉𐌑𐌍 (mefiín) with and 𐌑 (which looks like the form used in South Picene)
    2. 𐌌𐌄:𐌉𐌑𐌍 (me:iín) with a colon
    3. 𐌌𐌄⁚𐌉𐌝𐌍 (mefiín) with 𐌝 (the Unicode character encoded for í, but that doesn't look like the form in South Picene)
    4. 𐌌𐌄:𐌉𐌝𐌍 (me:iín)
  2. What do I need to change to get both ⁚ & : to be transliterated as f?
  3. Ital-translit currently has a standard behavior for all Ital characters and then exceptions by language. This means that if character, which is not in a particular language's sub-alphabet. is added, it will be transliterated regardless using the standard correspondence. Should I disallow this behavior and only permit transliteration of characters within a language's sub-alphabet?

Sorry for all the questions, but I thought you might have useful answers/opinions.

JohnC516:11, 8 July 2015
Edited by author.
Last edit: 16:28, 8 July 2015

I can't help you at all on the first part, sorry.

For the Italic alphabets, the common set was chosen so that it could apply for all languages. If it doesn't apply to all languages equally, then it shouldn't be in the common set. Alternatively, you could transliterate the language-specific features first, and let the common set handle whatever remains after that.

Something you need to be careful with is using gsub with '.' to replace multiple-character combinations. That's not going to work. Sadly, extending it to '..' will not work either in case you were thinking of that. The way I handle these situations is a bit more elaborate but it works much better at least.

  • "rest" contains characters yet to be processed, "parts" is a table containing characters or sequences that were recognised.
  • Look at the "rest" string for the longest match with each one of the character search sequences.
  • Once the longest match is determined, insert that into the list of parts. If no match was found at all, just insert the first character.
  • Remove the processed characters from "rest".
  • Repeat until "rest" is empty.
CodeCat16:20, 8 July 2015

I currently have it transliterating the language-specific features first then the common set second.

Any idea about getting ⁚ & : to both transliterate to f?

And do you think I need to have a vote or something about these correspondences, or should I just enact them de facto?

JohnC516:26, 8 July 2015

Would you not just add them to the table?

CodeCat16:29, 8 July 2015
 
 
 

Italian templates

Hi there. If you ever have some spare time, could you modify the Italian noun, adjective and verb templates so that they produce the "The parameter whatever is not used by this template." error message if an unused parameter is used. Cheers.

SemperBlotto (talk)06:02, 6 July 2015

I've done it for {{it-noun}} and {{it-adj}}, but it will be much more difficult to do it for the conjugation templates because there are so many override parameters.

CodeCat12:39, 6 July 2015

You might consider adding the ability to specify regexes to match sets of params. That should make things like {{it-conj}} much easier, as well as Module:ar-headword. Actually, it already looks like you generate regexes (or Lua patterns, rather) from the specified named parameters ...

Benwing (talk)12:51, 7 July 2015
 

Semper, will you be fixing the errors soon? They've been there for a few days now.

CodeCat12:48, 8 July 2015
 

nl-conj-irr

Hi, Please see my comments on Template talk:nl-conj-irr, I think you might be able to fix this.

H. (talk)10:06, 8 July 2015

Request for categories for "Terms with manual transliterations"

We currently have Category:Terms with manual transliterations different from the automated ones/hy and Category:Terms with redundant transliterations/hy and such. I'd like a category Category:Terms with manual transliterations/ar (and possibly similar categories for other languages not in override_translit, but for the moment mostly I care about Arabic). This would be useful because most manual translits for Arabic can be removed by using the manual translit to vocalize the Arabic properly and then removing the manual translit. I have a script to do this but it doesn't currently have a category to operate over. Thanks ...

Benwing (talk)15:03, 7 July 2015

Linking from PIE entries to their root derivation categories

Don't you think it would be a good idea to create some sort of link from PIE entries (such as *mer-) to their respective root derivation categories (Category:Terms derived from the PIE root *mer-)? One way to do this would be simply to categorize the former into the latter.

WikiTiki8920:56, 6 July 2015

I was thinking of something like {{suffixsee}}.

CodeCat21:08, 6 July 2015

I tried {{#categorytree:Terms derived from the PIE root *sed-|depth=0|class="derivedterms Latinx"}}, but it does not let me expand the subcategories (the ► is grayed out). And on this thread no ► appears at all even for the top category, so I can't expand anything:

WikiTiki8911:11, 7 July 2015

That's strange, the arrow expands just fine for me in this thread.

CodeCat11:36, 7 July 2015

It does for me now too, maybe it only apples to text added to the page by JavaScript features (such as when you preview and save a thread, but not after you refresh). Still, the subcategory arrows are grayed out.

WikiTiki8911:42, 7 July 2015

Maybe the extension only supports expanding one level? I don't know.

CodeCat11:58, 7 July 2015
 
 
 
 
 

Any experience with race conditions when running multiple bots simultaneously?

Hello. I am getting tired of the one-second delay between saves, esp. since I have a job coming up that involves 100,000 pages or so. I am thinking of running multiple bots at once but I'm concerned about the possibility of race conditions when two bots try to work on the same page at the same time. Do you have any idea what happens in such a case? There's clearly code so that if you press Edit and then save and someone else saves in the meantime, you get an edit conflict, but I can't easily see how that could be implemented in pywikibot. Have you ever run multiple bots at once? If so, do you simply hope no clashes occur?

Benwing (talk)11:16, 7 July 2015

I haven't had problems with race conditions when running the same bot multiple times. But you have to be careful that there are no problems when running the bot twice on the same page in sequence either. That is, the second run should be a no-op, rather than accumulating more changes.

CodeCat11:41, 7 July 2015

Yeah, I know about that issue. I'm usually careful to first do a run without changing anything, and then examine the output, which usually (but not always ...) helps, although I've still run into it occasionally ...

Benwing (talk)11:58, 7 July 2015
 
 

PIE template

Are you planning on adding a similar template for entries derived from other language families, such as Sino-Tibetan, Koreanic, and Japonic?

WikiWinters (talk)23:13, 5 July 2015

I wouldn't know what the requirements of those families would be. For starters, these languages probably don't have modifiable or affixable roots in the sense of PIE. In the Uralic family, for example, there is such a thing as a "root" but it's always also a noun, adjective or verb. Someone who is more familiar with them should probably do it instead.

CodeCat23:14, 5 July 2015
 

A few Finnish conjugations labeled declensions in en-wikt

I'm referring this to you because I haven't done anything in Wiktionary for about 4 years and I'm not sure whether this needs fixing on the level of individual pages or elsewhere.

Examining some 800-900 of the verbs I consider to be of most pedagogical relevance, I came across 6 (not all in one kotus group) where the Conjugation section of the page is labeled Declension instead, which has some bearing on automated parsing.

Those are kaivata, karata, piristää, pitkästyttää, virnistää, and vääristää.

None of the category pages or verb pages I looked at have discussion pages. At some point in the past, I must have participated on some central discussion page for Finnish entries, but I can't recall or find where that would be. Where would I look to see all discussion about Finnish pages in en.wiktionary?

Onyx~enwiktionary (talk)16:15, 2 July 2015

If we label them all "Inflection" then we won't have this problem anymore. I've already been using "Inflection" for a while now.

CodeCat16:20, 2 July 2015

Ah, now I see additional variability. I was referring to the section heading from the source line with equal signs, but I think you may be referring to the generated first line of the inflection table. Only now I notice that some of those tables ( e.g. olla) say "Conjugation" and others (e.g. sanoa) say "Inflection", which I had taken to be universal.

FWIW, I was liking Conjugation as the section name and Inflection as the start of the table. It's hard to shake establishment terminology (conujugation/declension) for the big picture, but "inflection" in the nuts-and-bolts table does make sense, plus it's a great marker in the text. Conversationally, I mostly stick to "inflection" because I'm mostly referring to the detailed process.

Onyx~enwiktionary (talk)16:50, 2 July 2015

No I was talking about the actual section heading. For some languages such as Latin, we've been using this heading for a long time. So I've decided to use it exclusively now, for all languages.

I was actually thinking of removing "inflection of" from the table header. After all, it doesn't really add anything useful if the heading is already labelled inflection/conjugation/declension. It would also leave more room for the inflection type.

CodeCat17:12, 2 July 2015

Also, what do all of the ˣ characters after entries in these conjugation tables mean? (For instance suunnitella.) I'm not seeing them in any kind of legend.

Onyx~enwiktionary (talk)17:53, 2 July 2015

They indicate that the form ends with final gemination for most speakers.

CodeCat17:54, 2 July 2015
 
 
 
 

I re-labeled these sections as "Conjugation". If you encounter more of these, you may edit them yourself.

Hekaheka (talk)15:17, 5 July 2015
 

Eigenwert: Why the removal of content? The content you edited out doesn't strike me as "wertlos," so it is strange to see it be deleted and replaced with nothing. Wondering what prompted this edit. Thanks!

Aperiarcam (talk)08:55, 5 July 2015
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page