User talk:ObsequiousNewt

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


I am also on IRC! If I am there it is a faster way to contact me!

/1

Things that still don't work with module:grc-pronunciation[edit]

Pre-velar nasals:

φᾰ́ρῠγξ
 

Something or other with capitals and accent marks:

ᾍδης
 

Could we possibly fix it so that it accepts the diacritic order length mark + (breathing mark) + accent mark like the rest of the entries instead of (breathing mark) + accent mark + length mark? Sorry to pester so much, but we are soooo close, and I dislike the old template sooo much. —JohnC5 05:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Also, the dative plural here seems to be freaking out:

You're the best! :)JohnC5 06:20, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

φάρυγξ and ψίξ are fixed. ᾍδης is an upstream bug with PHP ([1]). I'll look at changing the input format later; I may want to just rewrite the module (it's kind of spaghetti.) —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 19:19, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for these. I had tried in the past to comprehend the module, and I kept getting bored every time I tried. I certainly agree that it could be far more parsimonious and easier to edit. —JohnC5 19:25, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

πρεσβύτερος[edit]

Hi ObsequiousNewt. As I'm sure you know, πρεσβῠ́τερος is the comparative form of πρέσβῠς and, therefore, doesn't have its own comparative form (AFAIK). My use of {{grc-adecl|πρεσβῠ́τερος|πρεσβῠτέρᾱ}} in its entry autogenerates the comparative *πρεσβῠτερώτερος, the superlative *πρεσβῠτερώτᾰτος, and the adverb *πρεσβῠτέρως, none of which should be there (again, AFAIK). Is there any way to tell {{grc-adecl}} that it's declining a comparative or superlative form and, therefore, shouldn't be generating those other degrees? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 19:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I just wanted to let you know I'm aware of this problem; I've been working to fix it but my cache dropped, so it'll be a while. I can probably hack something together in the interim. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 16:32, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. I'll leave this with you. Take as long as you need; you won't get any pressure from me. :-)  — I.S.M.E.T.A. 23:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
I have hacked a solution together. I'll be trying to rewrite the module (synchronically with the rewriting of grc-conj.) —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 19:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Cool. The best of luck to you in that endeavour. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 00:00, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
@I'm so meta even this acronym: Incidentally; what is your opinion on the appearance of the bottom row? I don't know if it would make more sense for it to look different. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 00:24, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Do you mean the "Derived forms" row (which lists the adverb and comparative and superlative degrees)? Or something else? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 01:53, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 04:13, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
I suppose that the labels "Adverb", "Comparative", and "Superlative" could be emboldened for consistency with the other labels in the table; other than that, it looks fine to me. Then again, I may just be being unimaginative. What kind of change did you have in mind? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 13:22, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
I mean the part where I put the comparative and superlative degrees in parentheses. I'm not sure if there's a better way to do it. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 18:21, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
I think the ideal solution would be to omit the "derived forms" section entirely in the declension tables of comparative and superlative degrees, but is that possible? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 13:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Omitting the entire section does seem optimal to me too. —JohnC5 15:34, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
The adverb at least needs to stay. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 00:08, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
@JohnC5, ObsequiousNewt: Yes, you're probably right. The relationship there looks similar to the one that exists between Latin comparative adjectives (usually -ior) and comparative adverbs (usually -ius, homographic with the neuter of -ior). — I.S.M.E.T.A. 02:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

μηλοπεπων[edit]

Hi. I'm investigating the etymology of Hebrew מְלָפְפוֹן ‎(m'laf'fón, cucumber) and the he.wikt, without any diacritics, says it comes from Greek μηλοπεπων ‎(mēlopepōn), from μῆλον ‎(mêlon) +‎ πέπων ‎(pépōn). As you can see've been able to identify, verify, and diacriticize the parts of the compound, but I have not been able to verify or diacriticize the compound itself. Could you help? --WikiTiki89 21:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

@Wikitiki89: I've made μηλοπέπων ‎(mēlopépōn). We need to add more descendants, but I'm too lazy to do it now. Hope this helps! —JohnC5 22:23, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
@JohnC5: Thanks! And I just realized that cucumbers are melons... --WikiTiki89 22:29, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Not only that, but w:Armenian cucumbers are actually a type of muskmelon, like cantaloupes and honeydews. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:19, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Evil search engine[edit]

I had a crazy idea. What if the inflection tables generated an undisplayed table of un-macroned and -breved forms so that readers can find forms in searches? — since it seems the search engine is unlikely ever to be fixed. For instance, an undisplayed table with ἱερέα ἱερέας instead of ἱερέᾱ ἱερέᾱς, so people can find the entry ἱερεύς ‎(hiereús) when searching for the "wrong" form. Perhaps also a table without accent marks, so that people can find the entry when searching for ιερεα ιερεας.

Perhaps a crazy idea, and it would greatly add to the byte count of entries, especially for verbs. But it would be a temporary solution. — Eru·tuon 05:25, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't know much of anything about programming, but perhaps the byte count could be lowered by only including in the undisplayed no-breve-and-macron table the forms that actually have macrons in the ordinary table. — Eru·tuon 05:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

A better solution would be to simply implement a bot to create pages for such forms. I can look into this when I am finished working on grc-conj. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 15:33, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Bots FTW, BTW. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:58, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Bad idea. The only good solution is for the devs to fix the search functionality. --WikiTiki89 21:37, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: That is probably the optimal solution (at least in the short term), but why are bot-created entries a bad idea? —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 23:07, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Well I guess it isn't, but it it doesn't completely solve the problem of finding forms without knowing the accent. --WikiTiki89 23:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Agreed, and I would like to get the search engine fixed if at all possible. Do you know what extension is responsible for it? —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 15:02, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm 90% sure it's mw:Extension:CirrusSearch. --WikiTiki89 15:24, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
I have filed a bug report. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 22:04, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Excellent! I hope they respond and do something. — Eru·tuon 00:11, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

ἐπί[edit]

Is it possible for the entry to provide more details on the differences between using ἐπί ‎(epí) with different cases? Also, what would be the correctly accented lemma form of ἐπι- ‎(epi-) +‎ κῶμος ‎(kômos) +‎ -ιος ‎(-ios)? --WikiTiki89 14:54, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Sure, I can give that entry a once-over. The correct form should be ἐπικώμιος (ppx.), as evidenced by the form ἐπικώμιᾰ (n. pl.) in Pi.N.6.32. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 15:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
I took a look at the entry for ἐπί in Perseus and it seems pretty complicated. I also notice that the "in addition to" sense is given under the dative case, while I was hoping for accusative. What I'm really wondering is how to gloss ἐπὶ κῶμον ‎(epì kômon) and ἐπικώμιον ‎(epikṓmion) in the etymology for אפיקומן, which is a piece of matzah that is saved for the end of the Passover meal and eaten as a "dessert", after which nothing more may be eaten or drunk. I originally thought it meant something like "in addition to the meal". --WikiTiki89 15:42, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: ἐπὶ κῶμον, without any other context, probably means either "during the festival" or "for the festival", although it could mean "until the festival"—that is probably the closest in meaning to what you describe. ἐπικώμιος is listed in LSJ as meaning "of, at, or for a κῶμος", but the English preposition "of" there is really just a translation of -ιος, not ἐπι-, which seems rather to simply have intensifying force. That said, ἐπι- as a prefix can mean "after"—compare ἐπιβιόω "live after, outlast"; ἐπιγίγνομαι "be born after". It's not evident that it did in the case of ἐπικώμιος, though. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 17:53, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
That doesn't make much sense, though. Wikipedia says:
The Babylonian Talmud explains that the word "afikoman" derives from the Greek word for "dessert", the last thing eaten at a meal. The Jerusalem Talmud, however, derives the word afikoman from epikomion, meaning "after-dinner revelry" or "entertainment".
Maybe that will help. I'll try to find those quotations in the two Talmuds to see what words they use. --WikiTiki89 18:02, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: ἐπι-κωμιον would certainly mean "after the meal", but the only attested word is επι-κωμιος—which, while it could mean "after the meal", doesn't. Although that statement is limited to two attestations of the word. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 18:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
This might be more information than you need, so I'll collapse it:
But the gist of it seems to be that either it directly refers to dessert, or it is a phrase that alludes to desert. But note that the Talmuds are just trying to understand what the Mishnah meant, and not necessarily what the word itself actually means. It might be worth noting that the Soncino translation of the Babylonian Talmud translates the Mishnah as “One may not conclude after the paschal meal [by saying], ‘now to the entertainment! [Apikoman].’ ” --WikiTiki89 20:42, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: I filled out ἐπί ‎(epí) with the meanings given in the LSJ. Wish it could be simplified. — Eru·tuon 18:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! --WikiTiki89 18:02, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
@Erutuon: I appreciate the thought, but I had stated that I was working on improving the entry. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 18:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
My apologies for presuming you had given up on it. As far as I'm concerned, you can still do anything you like to it, even if it includes deleting most of what I've added, since I'm not especially attached to the LSJ's highly confusing description. — Eru·tuon 18:24, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Use of Template:grc-decl in μονοειδές[edit]

Hi ObsequiousNewt. Any idea why {{grc-decl|form=N-full|μονοειδές|μονοειδέος}} and {{grc-decl|form=N-full|μονοειδές|μονοειδοῦς}} in μονοειδές ‎(monoeidés, uniformity) are throwing up module errors? This would also affect νευροειδές ‎(neuroeidés), which (I assume) is declined alike. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:43, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

@I'm so meta even this acronym: Fixed. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 21:55, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for that, which also worked for νευροειδές. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 13:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC)