User talk:Jeraphine Gryphon

Welcome

Please don't copy definitions word-for-word from other dictionaries. (e.g. Merriam-Webster) SemperBlotto 15:53, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't you guys have welcome templates here? Jeraphine Gryphon 19:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes but we are curmudgeons. Hello!

Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki-editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

• Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy on Wiktionary's page formatting; all entries must conform to it. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing same-language entry, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
• Check out Language considerations to find out more about how to edit for a particular language.
• Our Criteria for Inclusion (CFI) defines exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary; the most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
• If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
• If you have any questions, bring them to Wiktionary:Information desk or ask me on my talk page.
• Whenever commenting on any discussion page, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) which automatically produces your username and timestamp.
• You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage to indicate your self-assessed knowledge of languages.

Enjoy your stay at Wiktionary! Equinox ◑ 20:14, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you! — Jeraphine Gryphon 20:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome!

We needed more Estonian editors, so thank you for wanting to help out! :) I've tried to improve some things for Estonian, mostly by creating templates that display inflection tables with the different forms of verbs, nouns and adjectives. But I haven't been able to look at the nouns and adjectives yet because I don't speak Estonian and I've had to rely on other sources. But you can use the verb tables when you create new entries, they're listed at Appendix:Estonian conjugation. —CodeCat 18:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh TY for the welcome. I was actually just looking at the Appendix:Estonian_declension table, it lists 38 types but my copy of the ÕS (which may be a little old/outdated) lists 115 of them -- does that mean that some are missing from the table or that some in the book are redundant? — Jeraphine Gryphon 18:40, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Maybe both, I don't really know. The lists on Wiktionary are based on ÕS 2006, which is on the EKI website. You can try to use the templates there already are, until you find a verb that none of the templates can handle. —CodeCat 18:50, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I just created Template:et-decl-külm (and used it on surm), but I'm not 100% sure I know what I'm doing. Is this okay? Can I create the other ones when I get the hang of this? — Jeraphine Gryphon 18:53, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

If you like you can, but when you make templates it helps to think about how they will be used. Will all nouns in the külm-group be able to use the template you created, by using just one parameter (do they all lack gradation and do they all have a genitive in -a)? If you look at Template:et-conj-õppima you can see how gradation works. Another issue is how alternative forms are displayed in the table. The Finnish tables show all forms in the table, even alternative or archaic forms that are not often used. But you can choose not to do that if it makes the tables too messy. —CodeCat 19:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm having difficulty understanding what's going on here. :x The whole idea about declension types is that the words change in the same way, isn't it? One thing I was actually wondering about is if it should be noted somehow that the genitive and partitive singulars sound different, though they look the same. (I don't know what the English term for it is, why the pronunciation is different.) — Jeraphine Gryphon 19:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

They can change the same way yes, but sometimes it's not possible to tell whether the genitive ends in -a like in külm, or -e or -u and so on. I don't know if the declension types are divided in that way, so that all words in the külm-group end in -a. You would have to check on their site to make sure. I don't think it's necessary to note that the genitive and partitive have a different pronunciation, but if you want to indicate this, the best place to do it would be on the page külma. On Wiktionary we allow entries for forms of a word as well, they are called form-of entries, and those entries can also have pronunciations (although most of them don't). Usually they are created by bots or other automated scripts, and use special templates that show a standard explanation which form the word is, and a link back to the base word. For a Finnish example you can look at kylmää. —CodeCat 19:36, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I tried to think of a third example besides külm and surm, and thought of film, but realized it changes in a different way. My ÕS says it changes in the same way as the word hall, but hall-type nominals aren't given in the list or the ÕS website. Wat do? — Jeraphine Gryphon 19:48, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I think the website also has a dictionary that shows which type the word belongs to. It shows a number that you can then use to look up the word. I've created a form-of template for verbs now: Template:et-verb form of —CodeCat 19:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

kindel

Could this word belong to type 37, küünal? —CodeCat 02:08, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Nope. — Jeraphine Gryphon 02:12, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I've changed {{et-decl-õpik}} slightly so that it uses the name of the page to create the nominative. That way it doesn't need the third parameter. —CodeCat 02:23, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

TY. :3 — Jeraphine Gryphon 02:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm now seriously wondering if I'll ever find another word that changes like küünal does... — Jeraphine Gryphon 02:39, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

... peenar does! — Jeraphine Gryphon 20:09, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Translations for Estonian terms on your user page

I tried to find the terms...

• astmevaheldus = consonant gradation
• vältevaheldus = quantitative gradation, length gradation
• laadivaheldus = qualitative gradation
• välde = grade, gradation (not sure)
• arvsõna = numeral, number
• asesõna = pronoun
• hüüdsõna = interjection
• sidesõna = conjunction
• kaassõna = adposition
  • eessõna = preposition
  • tagasõna = postposition
• kohamäärsõna = locative adverb, adverb of place
• ajamäärsõna = temporal adverb, adverb of time
• viisimäärsõna = adverb of manner
• tegumood = voice
  • isikuline = active voice
  • umbisikuline = passive voice
• kõneviis = mood
  • kindel = indicative mood
  • tingiv = conditional mood
  • käskiv = imperative mood
  • kaudne = quotative mood
• aeg = tense
  • olevik = present tense
  • minevik = past tense
    • lihtminevik = imperfect tense
• pööre = number
  • ainsus = singular
  • mitmus = plural
• kõne = polarity
  • jaatav = affirmative
  • eitav = negative

I hope that helps! —CodeCat 18:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh thank you! — Jeraphine Gryphon 20:09, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I think I earlier mixed up adverbs with adpositions; I'll have to go back and fix my mess-ups. I swear I'm not dumb, I'm just not used to dealing with these things in English. — Jeraphine Gryphon 20:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

umb-

Is this a prefix or is it a separate word that can stand alone? And what does it mean? —CodeCat 21:08, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

It's a prefix, similar to the adjective umbne (stuffy, closed; vague). — Jeraphine Gryphon 21:11, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

kõik

The word kõik confuses me. Is it a noun, pronoun, "determiner", or all three of them? — Jeraphine Gryphon 21:16, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The meaning 'everyone' is a pronoun, because it can replace a noun: I see the people -> I see everyone.

The meaning 'every' is a determiner, because it stands with a noun but it does not replace it: I see every person.

I don't really understand the meaning 'all'. If it means 'all' it is not a noun but a pronoun or determiner, just like the two meanings above. In English 'all' is not normally a noun, you can't say 'the all'.

So I think it is a pronoun and a determiner. But what are the meanings? I am looking at the Finnish word kaikki, and I wonder if the same thing works for Estonian. Does kõik tuleb mean 'everyone comes' or 'everything comes'? And what about kõik tulevad? And what do kõik koer and kõik koerad mean, does it mean every dog and all dogs? —CodeCat 21:41, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

"Everyone comes" would be "kõik tulevad". "Kõik on siin" can mean either "everyone is here" or "everything is here". "All dogs" would be "kõik koerad". I'm tad confused myself here, at first I thought there'll have to be two declension tables on the page because the word seems to change differently depending on whether it means "everything" or "everyone".

ÕS says it changes the same way that külm does, but I don't know how to make sense of that. Let me just try to bend it in all ways possible and you tell me what it means:

• nominative
  • everyone is here -- kõik on siin
  • everything is here -- kõik on siin

• genitive -- kõikide
  • everyone's possessions -- kõigi omandid
  • the point of it all -- selle kõige mõte

• partitive
  • I'm looking at everyone -- ma vaatan kõiki
  • I'm looking at everything -- ma vaatan kõike

• illative
  • both everyone and everything can be either kõigisse or kõikidesse. ("These publications will reach all homes" -- "Need publikatsioonid jõuavad kõigisse kodudesse.")
  • kõigesse can be used for "everything" ("He had a very distrusting attitude towards all of this" -- "Ta suhtus sellesse kõigesse väga umbusklikult.")

• inessive
  • kõigis (more often used for "everyone"), kõikides (more often used for "everything"), kõiges (also used for "everything")

• elative
  • (everyone) kõigist or kõikidest
  • (everything) kõigest or kõikidest
    • I'm sick of everything -- mul on kõigest kõrini
    • I'm free of all responsibilities -- ma olen kõikidest kohustustest vaba

• allative -- kõikidele
  • (to everyone) kõigile
  • (to everything) kõigele

• adessive -- kõikidel
  • (everyone) kõigil
  • (everything) kõigel

• ablative -- kõikidelt
  • (from everyone) kõigilt
  • (from everything) kõigelt

• translative -- kõikideks
  • (everyone) kõigiks
  • (everything) kõigeks (A common saying: "Ma olen tema nimel kõigeks valmis." -- "I'd do anything for her", literally: "In her name [for her sake], I'm ready for everything.")

• terminative -- kõikideni
  • (to everyone) kõigini
  • (to everything) kõigeni

• essive -- kõikidena
  • (as everyone) kõigina
  • (as everything) kõigena

• abessive -- kõikideta
  • (without everyone) kõigita
  • (without everything) kõigeta

• comitative -- kõikidega
  • (with everyone) kõigiga
  • (with everything) kõigega

It sounds like in the meaning "everything" it's singular and in "everyone" it's plural (not in what it means but how the word changes). I guess that makes sense, kõik/everything is "the bulk of all this stuff" (singular) while kõik/everyone is "these several people" (plural).

(Words like kõikede, kõikedes, kõikedel, etc, don't exist at all.) — Jeraphine Gryphon 23:36, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

It's the same as in Finnish then. In Finnish, the singular means everything and the plural means everyone. If we mention that in the definitions, using a context tag, it should be ok. —CodeCat 23:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

töööööök

Are you sure it can't be a word? I think töö means work, and öö means night... so then töööö means work night? I don't know what öök is though. (I still giggle when I see jäääär) —CodeCat 14:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

töööö (work night) and öötöö (night work) are quite possibly legit words, but tööök or töööööök or whatever it was is not. (I find these words giggle-worthy as well, though ÕS is a buzzkill and recommends they be written with a hyphen, like jää-äär, plekk-katus, maa-ala, pakk-kast. kokkki is a real word, also (kokk + -ki).) — Jeraphine Gryphon 15:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The forms of the inessive, genitive and partitive cases

The inessive case has two forms, but which is more common? Is it the form with -sse or the shorter form without -sse? And in the plural, is the -desse form or the -isse form more common? Can you look at Appendix:Estonian declension please and check if the first of the two forms is always more common than the second? —CodeCat 20:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Did you mean illative? Yes, it does seem that the first form as currently listed is more common (though I'm not 100% sure, especially with the singulars of words like sai and hein). For example, in illative singular, "suurde" is way more common than "suuresse"; but in illative plural people always say "suurtesse", never "suurisse".

In the plural, for some certain words, the shorter form (I think that's what's called the "i-plural" (i-mitmus)?) may be more common, but for most words the shorter form nearly doesn't exist at all or is used very rarely. I really wouldn't recommend trying to invent those for each word here, if no one in the history of ever has actually used them and never will. I was really surprised ÕS actually lists words like "suurisse" or "kaasisse", but it might be just for that list -- like if there's a word that bends the same way "suur" does and also uses the shorter illative plural form. But "suur" itself doesn't.

People may sometimes purposefully use the ultra-rare short illative plural forms -- to sound pretentious (because it technically isn't grammatically incorrect to say "käsisse" but the average person won't even know that). — Jeraphine Gryphon 01:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

au

ÕS says that this word belongs to the group of koi, but the partitive is au, not aud? This doesn't really make sense to me... if the partitive is different, it's not really like koi anymore?? @.@ —CodeCat 21:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes. That's exactly what it says. The partitive is an exception but the other ones change according to the rule. — Jeraphine Gryphon 22:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Eesti

Thank you for your contributions to Estonian, and keep up the good work! ~ heyzeuss 16:55, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

:D! — Jeraphine Gryphon 20:20, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I've been living in Finland for the last three years, and have completed some formal coursework in Finnish. Some of my classmates were from Hungary and Estonia, and the Estonians were especially bored with the slow pace of the class. One of my instructors was from Estonia, and she brought a unique perspective to the curriculum as a near-native. I am no genius, so it has been hard for me to gain fluency, but I still enjoy studying Finnish. These are indeed exotic languages! ~ heyzeuss 11:15, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

{{vro-noun}} update if desired

Hi, Jera. Since I made this template out of the Indonesian noun one (which is {{id-noun}}), an update for the Võro one is my potential cup of tea. --Lo Ximiendo 04:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're saying. XD — Jeraphine Gryphon 04:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Keep in mind that I'm high-functioning autistic, but have a look at Dick Laurent, who gave the upgrade to {{et-noun}} from {{et-noun (old)}}. --Lo Ximiendo 04:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Does vro-noun need an upgrade? — Jeraphine Gryphon 04:29, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Given how {{id-noun}} works (I wonder if there's such a thing as Indonesian declension or not), I guess so. --Lo Ximiendo 04:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I know enough about templates here nor Võro declensions, so I really have nothing to say about that. — Jeraphine Gryphon 04:36, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The "old" Estonian declension template

So earlier this year, I made {{et-basic-decl}}, which was intended to be a sort of skeleton template that other templates could use without repeating too much useless code. I never learned the more intricate parts of Estonian declension so I could never really implement it. As you know, CodeCat (talk • contribs) recently decided to work more on Estonian. It's still in use on such entries as varras, sülearvuti and surnud. (CodeCat had been removing the entire template without replacing it, which of course bothered me because removing content tends to be frowned upon here.) I'd like to know what you think of "the old" template or if you have any questions about it, or how I intended to use it as a sort of background template. — [Ric Laurent] — 21:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

For some more diverse examples, it's also on poeg, higi, and... well all of this :D — [Ric Laurent] — 21:29, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm relatively savvy about how templates generally work on wikis, but not savvy enough to understand what's really going on here, or what would make more sense/be less complicated. By the looks of it it's a good idea to have the 38 templates for the 38 distinct types of declension, don't you think so? (Don't those have a skeleton under them?)

There's a lot of redundancy in a line like

{{et-basic-decl|sülearvuti|sülearvutit|sülearvutite|sülearvuteid|sülearvutei}}

that sort of thing can be reduced. What exactly would you propose? — Jeraphine Gryphon 21:41, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the extra parameters at the end just add more forms to the template. I didn't want {{et-basic-decl}} to be used directly on entries, but it can be. I wanted it to be used in other templates in a manner more like this, for the more specific templates themselves

{{et-basic-decl|{{{1}}}uti|{{{1}}}utit|{{{1}}}utite|{{{1}}}uteid|{{{1}}}utei}}

or wherever the actual cutoffs should be. — [Ric Laurent] — 22:15, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I think both of you should discuss the declension templates on Wiktionary talk:About Estonian, you guys know better about the templates than I do. — Jeraphine Gryphon 22:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I think if she wanted to really discuss it, she would've done so when she noticed that I'd already started working on Estonian templates this year. I've brought up issues on her talk page a few times, which has never really gone anywhere. I know I can be abrasive and unpleasant, but my concerns are valid. — [Ric Laurent] — 16:53, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you...

Thank you for helping out by adding the genitive and partitive and replacing the old template with the new one. But could you also try to add a declension section to every word? When you add {{rfinfl|lang=et}} to an entry, it makes it easier to keep track of which entries still need declensions. Without that, it's very hard if not impossible because there is no easy way to make a list of which entries still don't transclude a template. Right now, the only 'way' we have of knowing that there is no inflection is that they still use the (old) template (that template was created before there were any declension tables), but if that's changed then there is no way at all, unless you add a request to the entry. Thank you! —CodeCat 21:57, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I will. — Jeraphine Gryphon 22:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)