User talk:Mnemosientje

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive – 2016, 2017

Golja þuk![edit]

Golja þuk Mnemo! Ik im fraujinonds Gutiskaizos Wikipaidjos jah wulþrais ist mis hwa meljis her bi þuk silban/silbon (is þu qinakunda þau gumakunds?)

I 'm a native Dutch speaker too, so if you prefer to speak Dutch we can switch to Dutch too, I know some Hebrew too and I can read Latin basic texts. I was referred to you by someone else and the Gothic community has many projects. At the moment I 'm working on a book with modern poetry in Gothic to be published as a paperback, I also helped with several modern book publications in Gothic, see Omniglot > Gothic > books. I wondered if you'd like to contribute to the book? Do you write poetry in Gothic?

We are also looking for people which want to help us with writing good articles at got.wikipedia.org

Bokareis (talk) 00:00, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Hails! Gumakunds im. Nih *liuþa nih ƕanhun aljōs *mēleinōs gamēlida. Mis leikaiþ sō razda, iþ dauþa ist jah swa fawaim waurdam kunþaim mēljan nei þugkeiþ mis raþ.
I hope that's grammatically correct; feel free to point out any errors so I can learn. (Speaking of which -- you wrote mēljis - isn't it mēleis, given that the 3p. sg. is mēleiþ?) Anyway, I don't usually do the conlang/revival thing, which is also why I don't edit got.wikipedia -- I mostly enjoy Gothic for its history, the history of its speakers and its relevance for historical linguistics. I did have the idea to translate the Internationale (or parts of it) to Gothic at some point for shits and giggles and I'd be willing to try my hand at that (with invented words based on Germanic precedent where there are lacunae in the surviving vocabulary), but I'm not sure you want that in your publication - Altgermanistik tends to be rather reactionary, so the inclusion of that particular *liuþ may not be too well-received...! Also, a proper, metrical translation would probably take a while.
If you're into Gothic, though, and want to help with its documentation and preservation, by all means I gotta say feel free to help me add any missing words here that are attested in the ancient corpus. We're actually over halfway through adding every attested word or word-form; compare the entry counts in Category:Gothic romanizations and Category:Gothic romanizations without a main entry (all romanizations had been imported automatically from a transliteration of Wulfila's Bible fragments years ago; most have a proper Gothic-script entry now). — Mnemosientje (t · c) 01:44, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
The liuþ of Massmann is one of the few rare pieces of Gothic literature written before 1900, and as we want to include Tolkien too I don't really see why we would waste about 3 of the 4 pieces written before 1900 just because it is published in a "reactionary" paper (and there wasn't nazism when Massmann lived, if he was a nazi we wouldn't include them but that is not the case), I could also say that it's better to reject the Internationale because it's a communist song and millions of people died because of communism. We are a-political in this and we aren't going to reject works based on this, we will have both communist poems and nationalistic poems like those of Massmann, because we aren't going to reject works if they don't incite hate or violence.
But if you'd like your translation of the Internationale to be included that could be possible.
I 'm more kind of looking for revivalists, revivalists automatically help with the preservation of Gothic with the production of dictionaries etc.
Bokareis (talk) 01:38, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Gave it some more consideration, think I'll pass, soz. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 23:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Etymology of kech[edit]

Do you happen to know from what word kech derives? There's an Arabic word قَحْبَة (qaḥba), but I don't know whether the outcome in Moroccan Arabic would be similar. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 09:57, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

It appears that the Moroccans say /'gaħba/, more or less, which isn't a stunning match with the Dutch. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 10:05, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Drawing a blank, sorry - think you'll have more luck with a native speaker of Moroccan Arabic, my knowledge of Arabic is very limited in general (although I do intend to fix that sooner rather than later). — Mnemosientje (t · c) 03:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Perhaps @Lucyin can help next he turns up. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
It does look like it might come from that word after all, forms like kechba, ke7ba and ke7 ("7" is a non-standard way of transliterating haa) can also be found, so that leaves only the first radical uncertain. @Metaknowledge ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 14:55, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
It's extremely frustrating that the usual sources don't include colourful language. Anyway, I decided to look specifically for attestation of a non-Bedouin form and did so in this paper, which records qeħba. If you found kechba in running Dutch text, then I'd say case closed. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:35, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Free[edit]

I saw 'free' used in context in a news article on the website of the Galician state broadcaster over the weekend, which is why I added that definition. The Portuguese equivalent (from the nearest related language) would be 'freie', whilst the Spanish is 'frene', but Galician appears to omit the letter between the two Es. 2A02:C7D:8434:200:6153:A08B:C99:BF41 02:19, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I reverted it because of the formatting and because it seemed incorrect after a brief google, but I just looked into it a bit more and apparently free (alternatively freei) is indeed a correct form, so sorry about the revert! I've undone the rollback & formatted it correctly. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 18:01, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I could've linked to the source I suppose (Galician has only had institutional standardised spelling – the so-called 'normativa' – for around 40 years, so there is often more than one accepted spelling for a lot of words). Thank you for reverting it and for correcting the formatting. — 2A02:C7D:8434:200:7521:D8E3:1427:4B9E 22:46, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Pherenice[edit]

Hello, you reverted edit of Βερενίκη (Bereníkē) and it is referenced in http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=fere/nikos&highlight=.

Please put them back... Thank you. 94.109.115.121 14:25, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I reverted it because Βερενίκη (Bereníkē) is the form that's from Macedonian (as is in fact claimed in the source you yourself provided just now), not Φερενῑ́κη (Pherenī́kē), which is Greek (and not Macedonian as your edit suggested). — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:56, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

The "Le Grand Bailly" state the Βερενῑ́κη (Berenī́kē) is the Macedonian variant, sorry I inverted the two terms... 94.109.115.121 15:20, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

May be you should ask to the wiktionary devs to add XMK iso code to be automatically recognized as Ancient Macedonian, like ATT, or DOR...

Now the code is not working. He should be added. Thank you for correcting my mistake. 94.109.115.121 15:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Autisme[edit]

Hallo, ik zie dat je Nederlands ben. Dus zal ik in mijn natieve taal praten [als dat geen probleem is] Waarom was mijn bewerking van de definitie van het woord autisme verwijderd? ‘Autisme’ word vaak gebruikt als een pejoratieve term om stommiteit te signaleren. Het is misschien informeel, maar ik snap niet waarom het dan nodig is om het ongeldig te verklaren. AltHypeFan (talk) 00:07, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Zie Chuck Entz' antwoord op zijn talk page. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:57, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

𐌲𐌸𐍃[edit]

Hello,

I see that "𐌲𐌸𐍃" has been added to the category "Gothic lemmas". However, it is an abbreviation of "𐌲𐌿𐌳𐌹𐍃", which is a non-lemma form.

Thank you for your contributions to this Wiktionary. It's a very helpful resource. (209.188.78.40 23:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC))

Thanks for the heads up! I forgot to use the right template there. Fixed it now. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 13:06, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Gothic protologisms[edit]

Thanks for telling me. I handed the IP a block and nuked the pages. In the future, it's probably more effective to leave a message on my talkpage, because then you get to leave fewer messages (since I deleted all the contribs in a single go) and other admins will see it and deal with it if I'm not around. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:45, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, those forms they added are actually quite likely to be correct (like, almost certainly) but just aren't attested. Possibly the anon thought Gothic is handled like Latin in that form-of entries, when predictable, are created pretty much indiscriminately without regard for attestation. A block's a bit harsh, perhaps; the pattern doesn't match any repeat offender for Germanic languages I know of. (Regarding the talk page thing: I only noticed there were more after posting the first ping, so I just did that twice more.) — Mnemosientje (t · c) 18:00, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure this is the same anon who was editing in lots of languages they didn't know and got blocked already, so it was evasion. But Chuck would know more on that front. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:27, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Hmm, perhaps. Just that I've not really seen vandals create unattested form-of entries in Gothic before, so I didn't recognize this anon. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 18:33, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

wir haben es nicht gewußt[edit]

Phrase: this only applies in German, and this is a Dutch entry

Citations:wir haben es nicht gewußt

"Of kardinaal Simonis, aan tafel over het seksueel misbruik binnen de katholieke kerk, met zijn uitspraak: 'Wir haben es nicht gewusst.'" Alexis Jazz (talk) 09:04, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

That's an interesting quote, I see your point. A weird way of using it IMO (given the context and what the saying alludes to), but that is indeed an example of that usage. I do wonder if it's intended to be an entirely neutral way of saying "we didn't know" (why is he referring to the Nuremberg defense here?), or if it's supposed to imply some sort of complicity (through passivity/lack of investigation) on the part of the church the cardinal is representing here. Anyway, I've had another go at the entry, what do you think? — Mnemosientje (t · c) 11:25, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Good. Face-smile.svg Alexis Jazz (talk) 12:17, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Sorry for the necro, but I think it was intended to be neutral and misfired because of unawareness. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 14:19, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

First entry[edit]

Hello Mnemoseientje,

I just created my account, and I made my first entry, for 𐌿𐍃𐍆𐌿𐌻𐌻𐌾𐌰𐌽. I wonder if the format is appropriate? In particular, I felt that the number of definitions I added got to be rather high, but then I was also unsure if combining "to fill" with "to supply" was suitable. Other than that, just using the templates from "fulljan" and adding the prefix should work, in this case? I'm quite new to this, and it's more work than I anticipated.

I've been using the category "Gothic lemmas" extensively, because I've been building a flashcard deck in Anki with these entries. I plan on making that available under the same license as this site when I either bring it to a state of some sort of completion, or lose interest in working on it, whichever comes first. At first I just planned on making this as a tool for learning Gothic vocabulary, but after a while it occurred to me that it could be a good tool for editors of this Wiktionary.

Once again, thanks for all the great work on this project! Similitudo nomini authentici (talk) 04:33, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Can I upload the Anki package? How can I do this? Similitudo nomini authentici (talk) 05:01, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@Similitudo nomini authentici Hey, that entry looks pretty good, certainly if it's your first! Thanks for taking the time to add it :) It may seem like a lot of work, but once you understand the basic format, Wiktionary entries aren't that difficult to create. Modeling your entries on existing ones is definitely a good way to start out.
The format was indeed correct, and the etymology and conjugation templates were both added correctly as well I see. The definitions seem pretty much fine from a cursory glance at wulfila.be, they could maybe use some fine-tuning but I have to admit so do many other Gothic entries (usually the problem is the opposite: too summary or inexact a definition) and I don't really have much time at the moment (nearing an important deadline, which is also why I'm only seeing this more than a day after you posted!), so I can't check any further right now.
As for the Anki thing, I'm not sure it's even possible or permissible on Wiktionary to upload the deck itself to the site. However, you can host it elsewhere and put a link to it on your user page if you think people might benefit from it (personally I have no need for it, since I'm satisfied with my current level of Gothic proficiency, but others might). — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:43, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Just noticed the ji parameter in the conjugation table should have been ei instead, a minor point. I've changed it (on the fulljan entry as well). — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:46, 28 May 2018 (UTC)