User talk:Gamren

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



IPA Issues[edit]

Hej Gamren,

Can you solve some IPA issues (mainly hyphenation) for danish?

  1. With mandelolie (almond oil), do you hyphenate it as [ˈmanˀ.l̩ˌol.jə], [ˈmanˀ.l̩ˌo.ljə] or something else?
  2. kvæde (quince) as [ˈkʰvɛː.ðə] or [ˈkʰvɛːð.ə]?
  3. When can consonant clusters with the 'j' sound (English y) start syllables other than the first one; could it be the case with californium (californium), being [kʰa.liˈfɒː.njɔm] or [kʰa.liˈfɒːn.jɔm]

Sorry for the load of stuff here, but I want to learn how to speak Danish, and if you provide me answers, I will say tusind takAWESOME meeos * (「欺负」我) 06:25, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

I deeply apologize, but I know very little of IPA and phonetics, and you may wish to consult someone more knowledgeable. I do not personally see this hyphenation as showing meaningful phonetic distinctions; the difference between ol-ie and o-lie is only audible (to me, at least) when spoken in an artificially slow and careful manner. Your transcription of mandelolie implies that you are aware of/concerned with schwa assimilation, which would cause kvæde to be pronounced [ˈkʰvɛːð̩]. As for j-clusters; I presume you don't include compounds like ørnefjer, vaskebjørn, befjedring or obsolete forms like igjen, forskjellig?
I'm sorry I can't be more helpful.__Gamren (talk) 11:44, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Actually, Tusind Tak! Genuinely, you were very helpful. Is there an online dictionary that show the hyphenations of words, e.g. god‧dag? Other than that, I now get it – AWESOME meeos * (「欺负」我) 12:14, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
@Awesomemeeos I'm sorry for the slow reply. Retskrivningsordbogen shows orthographic hyphenation.__Gamren (talk) 15:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Fixing da-noun[edit]

Can you explain what you are doing with Template:da-noun? Thank you. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Sure. I wanted to make all parameters optional, because I'm tired of having to give inflections two places. I also made the parameter for the combining form named rather than positional. To find the cases that needed correcting, I categorized them in Category:User kl-1. The showing of the parantheses should be contingent on either {{{1}}} or {{{com}}} being passed.__Gamren (talk) 15:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)


Could you please provide IPA here? Thank you! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:54, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge It is /katedər/, [kʰaˈtˢeˀ.d̥ʌ]AWESOME meeos * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 20:39, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Awesomemeeos: Given your comments above on this page, I don't think you know enough about Danish for me to use your IPA, sorry. I'll wait for Gamren or someone similarly qualified. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:11, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge I agree with Awesomemeeos' phonetic, except that (a) it's silly to mark only one syllable break and not the other, (b) the second syllable is long, and (c) my idiolect does not distinguish between [ʌ] and [ɐ], unlike w:Help:IPA for Danish but like DDO. w:Phonology of Danish says that one pronunciation of [ɐ] is the same as [ʌ], which is "probably the usual pronunciation". If this is true, then perhaps the help page was written by people who do maintain a distinction, in which case the rest of us will need some sort of regularity for when to use one, and when the other symbol.__Gamren (talk) 17:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:35, 12 February 2017 (UTC)


I just noticed the edit summary where you mentioned this word. If it's any help, steenrijk exists in Dutch as well, and German steinreich. So it may be a loanword originally. —CodeCat 15:15, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

@CodeCat Thank you, I was not aware of that. ODS says it's after German steinreich. DDO and Nudansk Ordbog are silent. DWDS says that stein- is a colloquial intensifier, and we say the same about Icelandic stein-, so maybe you have that in Dutch, too? A thing to consider is that it can be hard to tell the difference between a true prefix and an ordinary simile in cases like stenhård (rock-hard) and stenrolig (stone-calm).__Gamren (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
There is steengoed (very good) in Dutch so there is a case to be made for that. However, the synonymous prefix kei- seems to be more productive. —CodeCat 16:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


If you could supply a translation for this quote, that would be much appreciated. It will be featured as FWOTD on H. C. Andersen's birthday. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:56, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Sure thing. I also corrected what I presume to be a scanno and added some more stuff.__Gamren (talk) 09:45, 30 March 2017 (UTC)


Hello, I notice that at शब्द (śabda) you removed the acute over the first a in transliteration. That denotes stress, not any weird Wiktionary-specific transliteration. It's useful for reconstructing PIE and PII entries, as well as knowing how to pronounce a word. Just thought I'd explain my revert. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 03:48, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I apologize greatly.__Gamren (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
No problem! Be sure to read Wiktionary:About Sanskrit if you feel like editing in Sanskrit more. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 15:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Indefinite Blocks of IPs[edit]

It's never a good idea to indefinitely block an IP: there's no guarantee it will be assigned to the same person a year from now, let alone for ever. has been using the same IP for almost 9 months, so I changed your indefinite block to 1 year- that's about as long as I'm comfortable with. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. It says so on WT:Blocking policy, too.__Gamren (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


Thank you very much for all of your work on the Danish language, and thank you for cleaning up my mess with the verb forms I did not understand. The amount of work you did to help readers understand Danish inflections, etc., is massive and I really can't thank you enough. I have once again became interested in improving the Danish lexicon here. I just want to let you know, if you ever feel my edits are out of place again, just let me know and please correct me, as I do not know Danish natively, but I instead only am largely interested in Danish. And congratulations on your adminship! PseudoSkull (talk) 01:55, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

I have made a sub userpage containing a list of Danish words I need definition help for. I hope you don't mind it. If you don't like it there, please move it to User:PseudoSkull/rfdefs. PseudoSkull (talk) 02:42, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
No, that's fine. A lot of the errors you made are in the past; presumably, you have learnt since then. Let us see how it goes.
By the way, I have been using Declension rather than Inflection for new nouns; the choice is largely arbitrary, but we should at least be consistent.__Gamren (talk) 08:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Danish Trisagion[edit]

I have a question: how would the Trisagion be written and therefore sung in Danish? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Lo Ximiendo I am not sure I understand. I looked up "tersanctus", which lead me to some website, which referred to a part of the bible: Old Testament, Esajas' book, chapter 6, verse 3, which reads "De råbte til hinanden: / »Hellig, hellig, hellig er Hærskarers Herre, / hele jorden er fuld af hans herlighed!«"
Is that what you mean? If not, "Hellige Gud, hellige Stærke, hellige Udødelige, forbarm dig over os" gives a bunch of Google hits.__Gamren (talk) 10:22, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I meant the phrase "Holy God, Holy Strong, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us" so thanks for providing the latter. (Now, for Tibetan, Thai and Lao...) --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 21:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


Hi Gamren, I just saw this edit from a few weeks ago adding an "attention needed" label to the page. I just wondered what makes you say that lofa + orð is more plausible? lof + orð looks fine to me. Thanks, BigDom 12:58, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Actually, after thinking about it you're probably right. lof + orð would be more likely to give lofsorð (which is a real word) rather than loforð. I'll change the etymology now. Cheers, BigDom 13:25, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Cool.__Gamren (talk) 14:02, 22 June 2017 (UTC)


The English entry doesn't have a noun sense. Is this an adjective? Ultimateria (talk) 10:37, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

No, Greenlandic does not have adjectives, or rather, any distinction between nouns and adjectives. Nouns may modify other nouns, and thus serve a function similar to the one adjectives serve in Germanic languages.__Gamren (talk) 10:40, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Greenlandic entries[edit]

Lemmas should always be translated with lemmas. So the definitions of verbs should use the English infinitive, since that's the lemma form of English verbs.

The "References" header should only be used for the <references/>, when there are actual references elsewhere in the entry. If you want to put links to external sites in the entry, use the header "Further reading". —CodeCat 17:05, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

@CodeCat 1) Says who? Latin verbs (and some Ancient Greek ones) are translated as first-person singular present (which happens to be identical to the infinitive in English). See also Navajo verbs like diltłʼééh or akʼeʼełchí.
2) As WT:ELE says, the distinction between References and Further reading is that the first refers to sources verifying the claims in the entry, whereas the latter is for "simple recommendations of further places to look". That all references should be entered with <ref> tags is your own opinion. I agree with the pragmatic approach described in WT:REF that a simple listing of the source(s) is preferable when it/they support(s) the entry as a whole.__Gamren (talk) 17:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
See Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April#Should definitions and glosses reflect the lemma form of a lemma?. And the current interpretation is that "References" is to be used as I said. I can bring this to BP if you want. —CodeCat 17:44, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
@CodeCat 1) I have no strong opinion on the matter, but I am not sure it is possible to consistently translate verbs with English infinitives. Sure, most are easy: kukkuvoq (is wrong -> (to) be wrong). Others are translated in sources as present perfect, which is still doable: uppippoq (has shot an owl -> to have shot an owl) or aqilluppoq (has become soft -> to have become soft).
However, how would you like to change these glosses: uunarsivoq (his sight is blackened (as if before fainting)) (where "he" is the subject), or naammagaa (it is fitting for her) (again, "she" being the subject)?
Or how about impersonal verbs like nittarpoq (it has stopped raining/snowing), kuisiinnarpoq (it rains strongly and persistently), kingusippoq (it is too late)? Again, probably possible, but what is gained thereby? The discussion you link to contains convincing arguments that some languages should be treated "lemma-to-lemma"-wise, but I am not sure it applies to this specific language. We should continue this on BP. Feel free to copy or refer to this discussion.
2) If you want to change policy, then yes, a BP discussion would be in order.__Gamren (talk) 08:58, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
@Rua Actually, on reflection, I think I've warmed on using infinitives.__Gamren (talk) 13:26, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


I got the Danish term ladon from an entry on Danish-style Tarok; specifically, and I quote: "Each suit also has the usual 10 spot cards (ladon, pl. ladoner) marked with numbers 1 through 10." I hope this answers your question, because I apologize for the delays. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:37, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

No need to apologize. I see some use on the Interwebs (e.g. [1]), but I don't know if they're durably archived.__Gamren (talk) 17:46, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Did I pique in you any curiosity about Danish-style tarok? Also, don't forget the term honnør. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 20:29, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Not really? I'm not really into card games.__Gamren (talk) 08:28, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Closing RFVs[edit]

To help with archiving, when you close RFVs, please strike out the title and bold the result (like RFV passed). Thanks! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:13, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge Sure thing. I used to do that, but then got the impression that it wasn't necessary.__Gamren (talk) 11:54, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


Why did you delete this? You left nothing in the deletion log. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:04, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

@Koavf Does it exist?__Gamren (talk) 05:59, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
It has citations. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:00, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
See (koavf)TCM 06:01, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Hm, [2] might be durably archived. Most of those are either Norwegian or scannos.__Gamren (talk) 06:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
And Citations:blåost? —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:13, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf What about them?__Gamren (talk) 06:17, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Don't those show that this term exists? You never answered my original question: why did you delete this? —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:22, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Because I presumed you created it based purely on the citations I gave, which are insufficient. Send it to RFV, if you want it investigated but cannot find citations on your own.__Gamren (talk) 13:15, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  • It's certainly used in Norwegian, even though it doesn't appear in Norwegian dictionaries - I believe the correct term is blåmuggost. But I found a couple of hits for Google Books in Norwegian in that lot, so that's good enough, I think, even if it's unofficial. DonnanZ (talk) 14:46, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Pet peeve: when people refer to language use as "official" or "unofficial", as if anyone has any authority to regulate language.

Accidental rollback[edit]

Apologies for the accidental rollback at RFV, one-click revert button + touch screen sometimes isn't the best combination! — Kleio (t · c) 13:33, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

@KIeio No problem, I assumed it was something like that.__Gamren (talk) 14:29, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Danish entries with "Needs cleanup"[edit]

Have you any idea why quite a few Danish entries have this? See for example skalle, in the categories at the bottom of the page "Needs cleanup" appears in red. DonnanZ (talk) 15:31, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

@Donnanz Yeah, that's me. I made {{da-verb}} do that when {{{5}}}=er/har, then forgot/didn't bother actually doing the clean up. The point of that parameter is to let the reader know what the auxiliary verb is, which is done more explicitly in {{da-conj}}; I am not sure why anyone added er/har in the first place, except Sarrus, who said that, since er + past participle is still a valid construction for words with have as auxiliary (passive), it should be given, which seemed and seems a completely nonsensical reason to me.__Gamren (talk) 17:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Ah, I couldn't figure out how "Needs cleanup" was generated, nor what was wrong with those entries, that's all. I'll leave you to deal with them. DonnanZ (talk) 18:26, 17 November 2017 (UTC)