User talk:Octahedron80/archive 1

Dear Octahedron80

I would like to thank you and ask you about some things. First off: thank you for your edits on the indices of the Chinese radicals. I had planned to add the characters from cjk unified ideographs b-e to all of them, and as you may have noticed, I had started doing that for some radicals. But then I stopped doing Wiktionary for a while. I am happy to be back. Second off: I assume that the characters in the indices are sorted firstly by stroke order (obviously), and then by Unicode order. Am I right? Third off: I see that you undid my revision on one of the indices. As far as my knowledge goes, the plural form of a word, in this case stroke/strokes, is used when there are zero, two, or more strokes. Wikipedia define a plural as: "The plural, in many languages, is one of the values of the grammatical category of number. Plural of nouns typically denote a quantity other than the default quantity represented by a noun, which is generally one (the form that represents this default quantity is said to be of singular number). Most commonly, therefore, plurals are used to denote two or more of something, although they may also denote fractional, zero or negative amounts.". Is it therefore okay if I change "stroke" back to "strokes"? I personally think that it sounds better. - VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

1. I'd appreciated your help. I had thought to implement Unihan database for a long time. And later, I may use bot to create absent character pages on this project. (It is doing well on Thai Wiktionary.)
2. Unihan sorting is based on UAX #38. See kDefaultSortKey. It is nearly to arrange main & A-E blocks in order. (There's newer update proposal but no change.)
3. Sorry for my revert because I didn't know before; I had never used 0 to describe a thing. I studied a bit in case and I already put -s back on every pages.

--Octahedron80 (talk) 16:09, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

于, 扵 and 於

Hi Octahedron80, I don't know why you insist that 扵 ≠ 於. I don't think this is specific to Mandarin. Here are a few sources that say 扵 = 於:

• Dictionary of Chinese Character Variants (教育部異體字字典), A01760-004
• ZDIC
• International Encoded Han Character and Variants Database
• Chinese Text Project

— justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:04, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry if I am misunderstanding. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:05, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

That's fine. I also apologize for continuously reverting your edits without sufficient explanation. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

th module

สวัสดีครับ. เข้าใจว่า คุณแก้ ส, ฟ, ล (เมื่อเป็นตัวสะกด) เป็นเสียง t, p, n, ตามลำดับ.

ช่วยแก้คืนเป็นเสียง s, f, l, ตามลำดับ, ได้ไหมครับ?

เพราะเคยมีการคุยกันแล้ว, และคุณ Wyang เพิ่มเสียง -s, -f, -l เข้าไปสำหรับกรณี phoneme สะกดด้วย ส (ไม่ใช่ ด อย่างแม่กด), ฟ (ไม่ใช่ บ อย่างแม่กบ), ล (ไม่ใช่ น อย่างแม่กน).

เช่น ซอส ว่า "ซ้อส", ซอฟต์แวร์ ว่า "ซ้อฟ-แว", "ออสเตรเลีย" ว่า "อ้อส-เตฺร-เลีย", ฯลฯ.

--iudexvivorum (talk) 00:14, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

เรื่องนั้นผมก็คิดอยู่เหมือนกัน ตอนนั้นผมเข้าใจว่า เอารูปคำต้นฉบับไปแปลง ก็เลยทำใหม่เป็นอย่างที่เห็น และคิดต่อไปว่า จะทำรูปพิเศษให้ด้วยซ้ำ แต่เนื่องจากว่ามอดูลนี้แปลงจากคำอ่าน เดี๋ยวเปลี่ยนให้ครับ แต่บางตัวก็ผิดเช่น ร=r ฬ=l ซึ่งไม่เคยมีเสียงเหล่านี้ --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:39, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

ขอบพระคุณมากครับ. --iudexvivorum (talk) 02:00, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

th adv, adj, etc.

สวัสดีครับ. จำเป็นต้องให้แสดงอาการนาม (abstract noun) โดยอัตโนมัติทุกคำด้วยหรือครับ? บางคำก็ไม่น่ามีอาการนามนะครับ, อย่าง:

• "เชิญ" ก็ไม่น่ามี "ความเชิญ",
• "โดยพลการ" ก็ไม่น่ามี "ความโดยพลการ",
• "ตรัส" ก็ไม่น่ามี "ความตรัส",
• "วัวตายควายล้ม" ก็ไม่น่ามี "ความวัวตายความล้ม",

ฯลฯ.

นอกจากนี้, แม่แบบเดิมได้งดเรียก transliteration, หลังจากเปลี่ยนไปใช้ template:th-pron เมื่อไม่นานมานี้. แต่ปัจจุบันกลับมาเรียก transliteration อีกแล้วครับ.

รบกวนพิจารณาด้วยครับ.

--iudexvivorum (talk) 05:53, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

คำส่วนใหญ่สามารถเติม "การ" หรือ "ความ" เป็นอาการนามได้ทันที ส่วนคำไหนที่ไม่มีรูปอาการนาม ก็แค่ใส่ขีด "-" ต่อท้าย (ให้ลองพิจารณาให้ถี่ถ้วนว่า POS ถูกประเภทหรือไม่) หรือถ้ามีรูปทั้งการและความก็ใส่ "~" เรื่องจำเป็นหรือไม่ คิดว่าจำเป็น เพราะภาษาอื่นก็ทำเช่นกัน มอดูลนี้ได้ใช้ในโครงการภาษาไทยมาระยะหนึ่งแล้ว ส่วนการถอดอักษร ผมได้ใส่ nil เอาไว้ ซึ่งก็ไม่เข้าใจว่าทำไมยังปรากฏอยู่ จะหาวิธีแก้ไขต่อไป --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

ขอบพระคุณที่อธิบายครับ. --iudexvivorum (talk) 06:06, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

สร้าง

Hi,

Re: changes in {{th-verb}} and Module:th-headword

The automatic transliteration in the headword is currently strange - it's "srâang", not "sâang". If it's not using the same as in the pronunciation section, it's better to leave it empty as in Wyang's version, I think. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:02, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Already noticed above. Transliteration is already set to nil in the module but it still appears. So nothing to do with the module. Please support module change (th) at Module_talk:headword#th --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:18, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. There may be other places as well. Let me check this when I get to my desktop tonight.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:21, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I've added it but there's no effect. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:28, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

It's ok now. After I tracked its code and I replaced nil with hyphen (which is not preferable). If you still see on some page, purge it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Diacritical mark "Yamakkan"

สวัสดีค่ะ คุณคิดว่าควรใช้ยามักการกำกับเสียงที่ออกเล็กน้อยไหมคะ อย่าง "เอส๎-โต-เนีย" (เอสโตเนีย Estonia), "อ๊อส๎-เตฺร-เลีย" (ออสเตรเลีย Australia), "ซ้อฟ๎-แว" (ซอฟต์แวร์ software) "อัฟ๎-กัน" (อัฟกัน Afghan)

มีการใช้ยามักการอยู่ในดิกต์บางเล่ม สำนักพิมพ์บางแห่งก็ใช้อยู่ แต่ไม่ค่อยนิยม เราเห็นว่ามีประโยชน์ เลยลองใช้ดูในบางหน้า แต่แม่แบบยังไม่รับ คำอ่านเลยไม่แสดง ถ้าคุณเห็นด้วย เราก็จะใช้ต่อไป (และไปเชิญชวนให้คนอื่นใช้ด้วย) และจะได้ขอให้ฝรั่ง (หรือคุณ 55+) แก้ไขแม่แบบให้รับยามักการด้วย

อ่านเพิ่ม: "การกลับมาของยามักการ" - รศ. ดร.นิตยา กาญจนะวรรณ ภาคีสมาชิก สำนักศิลปกรรม ราชบัณฑิตยสถาน

--หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 15:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

ไม่เห็นด้วย เดิมยามักการเอาไว้ใช้แทนพินทุในภาษาบาลีอักษรไทย ในตำแหน่งที่เป็นอักษรควบกล้ำและตัวสะกด เช่น พ๎รห๎มา (พฺรหฺมา อ่าน พฺรัม-มา) ส๎วากขาโต (สฺวากขาโต อ่าน สะ-หฺวาก-ขา-โต) ชิต๎วา (ชิตฺวา อ่าน ชิด-ตะ-วา) แต่ปัจจุบันใช้พินทุหมด เราจึงรับพินทุมาแสดงคำอ่านไทยด้วย และใช้ในพจนานุกรมที่เป็นทางการ อนึ่งพินทุมีลักษณะคล้าย virama ในอักษรต่าง ๆ ของภาษาในอินเดีย ดังนั้นไม่มีประโยชน์อะไรที่จะเอาสัญลักษณ์อื่นมาแสดงแทน ถ้าหากทำได้ ในอนาคตอาจจะมีคนอื่นอุตริคิดสัญลักษณ์ขึ้นมาใหม่มาแทนอีก --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

ปล. คำที่สะกดด้วย ล (ลิ้นแตะเพดาน) ไม่ได้ออกเสียงอย่างแม่เกอว ว (ห่อปาก) --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:50, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Wyang, Iudexvivorum, Octahedron80, หมวดซาโต้, Alifshinobi Hello. I don't understand Thai but หมวดซาโต้ has introduced changes without a discussion and agreement. Now all these transliterations fail. The code can't handle yamakkan. Any objections if I revert the changes, until this is addressed? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:15, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

↑ For short, I opposed to use Yamakkan, an archaic symbol, in pronunciation because it is even not used by official dictionary. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:30, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. BTW, I get the phonemic Thai from dictionaries - either as transliterations or spelled out with the Thai script. Sometimes, they seem to be wrong - I've seen you correcting my entries. Does it mean that my sources are wrong or phonemic Thai doesn't always match the exact pronunciation? If more than one pronunciation is allowed, you can use "|".--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:50, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Many western loanwords we usually change tones on them for long time when reading even no tone marks. By the way, some words (including Thai originated ones) reads shorter or longer than they are written. Recently, it had some seminar about this in Thailand. เบคอน is a good example. Additionally, Thai orthography doesn't allow putting tone mark above shorten mark, so we'll see either tone mark or shorten mark on a (part of) word. Whether it is short or long become from user experience. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:30, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

ขอบคุณที่แก้ไขค่ะ 55+ แต่ดูเหมือนมีปัญหาที่อิสราเอลค่ะ เพราะแม่แบบถอดเสียงว่า ìs-raa-lee, ìt-sà-raa-lee --หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 14:02, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

+เบลเยียมด้วยค่ะ ถอดเสียงว่า blee-yîiam --หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 14:05, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

เห็นปัญหาแล้วตอนที่แก้นั่นแหละ กำลังคอยดูอยู่ว่าจะมีกรณีไหนอีก จะได้แจ้ง คุณเวียง ทีเดียว--Octahedron80 (talk) 14:09, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for budging in. Is เบลเยียม (blee-yîiam) now correct?! --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:10, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

TL logic still be wrong. I am finding similar cases then I will tell Wyang. (or I may correct the code) --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:28, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

อุซเบกิสถาน and other countries

Hi,

Could you check the phonemic Thai for อุซเบกิสถาน, please?

Is it OK if I give you a small list of countries in this format to check? I'm sure there could be a problem with "s":

• เติร์กเมนิสถาน (dtə̀ək-mee-nít-tǎan, “Turkmenistan”)
• ทาจิกิสถาน (taa-jì-gìt-tǎan, “Tajikistan”)

Please fix the "|p=" part only.

--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

อุซเบกิสถาน fixed. For your request:

• เติ๊ก-เม-นิส-ถาน or เติ๊ก-เม-นิด-สะ-ถาน
• ทา-จิ-กิ๊ส-ถาน or ทา-จิ-กิ๊ด-สะ-ถาน

You should use first one for th-l. About s, not every word is in pattern like these.--Octahedron80 (talk) 01:33, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

th-l

สวัสดีครับ. เดี๋ยวนี้พารามิเตอร์ p= ในแม่แบบ th-l ใช้ไม่ได้แล้วหรือครับ? ตัวอย่าง: {{th-l|เพลา|p=เพ-ลา}} ก็ไม่แสดงเป็น pee-laa, แต่เป็น plao ทุกที. ปัญหาอย่างนี้ยังเกิดในแม่แบบอื่น ๆ อีก, เช่น {{m|th|เพลา|tr=pee-laa}} หรือ {{l|th|เพลา|tr=pee-laa}}. เราจะแก้ไขอย่างไรได้บ้างถ้าต้องการให้แสดงคำอ่านโดยเจาะจง. ขอบพระคุณครับ. --iudexvivorum (talk) 11:37, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

ขอให้แจ้งคนสร้างแม่แบบดังกล่าว คือคุณเวียง ไม่ใช่ผมครับ --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:54, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Programming operators

Hi. I'm not sure we should include these, as they don't occur in human language. For example, the entries for APL symbols were deleted, and we don't include programming language keywords either (unless adopted into English like enum). Equinox ◑ 11:36, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

IMO They should be included because they are symbols and they are under the programming topic. In the other hand, why the mathematical symbols and emojis can be included here if they are not the human language? --Octahedron80 (talk) 11:41, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

• Naturally, I Support including programming language symbols. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 11:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Thai transliteration module

สวัสดีค่ะ ถ้าคุณ Octahedron80 ว่าง ก็โปรดแวะไปแสดงความคิดเห็นใน Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2016/June#Automatic_transliteration_for_Thai_has_been_disabled_for_now หน่อยนะคะ เพราะคุณชำนาญเรื่องทางเทคนิค ในนั้นกำลังทะเลาะกันโขมงโฉงเฉงเลย

เรื่องของเรื่อง คือ CodeCat แก้ Module:links แล้วเกิดปัญหา (ดู User_talk:Wyang#Thai_transliteration_-_old_problems_come_back) Wyang แก้กลับ CodeCat ไม่ยอมก็แก้คืน แก้กันไปมา ทีหลังคนอื่นมาผสมโรง แล้วก็ไปคุยกันที่ User_talk:Wyang#Module:links คุยไปคุยมาก็บานปลาย กลายเป็นแซะกันส่วนตัว CodeCat เลยปิดฟังก์ชันการถอดอักษรไทยทั้งหมด แล้วไปคุยกันต่อที่ Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2016/June#Automatic_transliteration_for_Thai_has_been_disabled_for_now

ถ้าเข้าใจไม่ผิด ประเด็นของ CodeCat คือ ควรแก้ Module:th-translit ให้ถอดอักษรไทยโดยอัตโนมัติให้ถูกต้อง โดยไม่ต้อง respelling แต่ Wyang ก็บอกว่า มันต้อง respelling เหมือนที่ใช้ในภาษาเอเชียหลาย ๆ ภาษา ตอนนี้ยังตกลงกันไม่ได้ แต่ก็มีสงครามการแก้ไขอยู่ในหน้า Module:links

ส่วนดิฉันไม่รู้เรื่องทางเทคนิค ก็ได้แต่นั่งดูเขาทะเลาะกัน (55) แต่ถ้าได้ผู้ใช้ภาษาไทยเป็นภาษาแม่และมีความรู้ทางนี้อย่างคุณ Octahedron80 ไปแสดงความคิดเห็นก็คงดี จึงมาเชื้อเชิญค่ะ

--YURi (talk) 14:54, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

ผมไม่ค่อยจะสนใจ link เท่าไหร่นะครับ ขอแค่ pron อ่านถูกก็พอ ส่วนตัวคิดว่าระบบ paiboon (ซึ่งไม่รู้ว่าเอามาจากไหน) ดีกว่าระบบ royin เพราะมันละเอียดกว่า --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

pi-alt

I <3 your pi-alt template so I included it in my cut-and-paste system for Devanagari syllables. Another user though has alerted me that when I applied it to kau कौ, it came out as ka:u कउ; how can I fix this? Warmest Regards, :)—_thecurran Speak your mind ^{my past} 13:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Because Pali does not have the vowels 'ai' and 'au'. It has only 8 vowels as seen in Module:pi-Latn-translit. When you apply to 'kau', it definitely returns 'ka+u'. So please do not use the template in other place than Pali section. --Octahedron80 (talk) 14:21, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

ק׳

You added the line ['ק׳'] = 'c', to Module:he-translit. I'm just totally baffled by where you found this, and what "c" even means. --WikiTiki89 15:54, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Hebrew_alphabet told me that ק׳ read as [ɕ] but there is not many choices left then I chose 'c' for it. I adopted your code at thwikt and it works quite well. I think I also forgot to add ע׳ but I just can't decide which letter to use. --Octahedron80 (talk) 20:16, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

It's possible it's used in another Hebrew-script language (even though I've never heard of this), but certainly not in Hebrew. I have asked Nemzag about it; he was the one who added it to the Wikipedia page. Don't worry about ע׳, it's only used in transliterations of Arabic, so not really Hebrew. --WikiTiki89 20:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I also just realized that if ק׳ is actually used in any Hebrew-script language or transliteration system, then [ɕ] must have been a misreading of [ɢ], which would make a thousand times more sense; but still I have never heard of ק׳ being used this way. --WikiTiki89 21:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Formatting moved Lao pages

Hi, please note the changes I've made to ຫນາວ and others. Rather than treat it as an alternative spelling that is also dated, it makes more sense to use the template for dated spellings. Ultimateria (talk) 10:58, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me that the template exists. :) --Octahedron80 (talk) 11:01, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

• I fear you may be rushing into this. There's no discernable current preference for the ligature spellings in modern Laos. Anyway I wrote some thoughts about it over on Module_talk:lo-headword - should we move it to the Beer Parlour? — hippietrail (talk) 00:17, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Template:lo-noun

Your edits to this template seem to have broken all the Lao entries using it (some don't show translit now, others have more serious issues). Firstly, you need to be much more careful when you make a change. Secondly, you need to fix all the entries or undo your edits to the template. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:35, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

This will be fixed at the Module:lo-headword and removing deprecated parameters. (th.wikt does not have such the problem 😅) --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:45, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

I think I finished the work. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 08:06, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

OctraBot

In Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August#Unicode 9.0, you requested for User:OctraBot to be unblocked. Apparently, this is an unauthorized and undiscussed bot. What were you intending to do with it? A bot requires a vote before it can be used. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Probably not for updating Unicode 9.0. I found some script written by module's author (after that). I am just going to run it in my subsystem and paste the result.

With the bot, I tend to use with interwiki and some little cleanup. I already created vote topic then. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:52, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I unblocked the bot. Per WT:BOT, feel free to use the bot and do a test run in a very small number of entries, to make sure your code goes well, if you want. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:01, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Okay thanks for that :) --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:03, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:09, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

You have created 60+ entries with the unauthorized bot today. Another admin blocked the bot. I encouraged you to do a very small test run, so I agree with the blocking admin: "Making way more than enough edits for a vote". If the vote passes, the bot will be able to do the proposed task freely in all entries. WT:BOT says: "Then, do a test run (under the bot account) on some 10-50 entries until you’re certain everything goes well (bots with a single function, like interwiki, should not run more than 25 edits)." For the record, the edits seem to be okay. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 06:13, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

That's all right. I just recalled a steward said that bot must edit 100 times and I thought this would also apply to en.wikt. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

der, inh, bor

• {{der}} = generic derivation template, use it when in doubt
• {{inh}} = "inheritance": the word came from an earlier stage of the same language, like an English word that came from Middle English
• {{bor}} = a word "borrowed" directly from other language, like how "pizza" came from Italian and "sushi" came from Japanese

--Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:48, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Okey-dokey. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

To be clear: I delivered that short explanation because you said: "But I am still confused when to use bor, der or inh because they are similar." I don't know if you actually needed it; one plausible hypothesis is that you already knew and was just confused at the time about remembering it. :) Ignore if you want. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:00, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

ขีด

แพทย น่าจะมีขีด เป็น แพทย- หรือเปล่าคะ เพราะในพจนฯ ราชบัณฑิตฯ ก็ลงไว้แบบมีขีด น่าจะสร้างหน้าได้ เหมือน anti-, pseudo-, re- อะไรประมาณนี้ค่ะ --YURi (talk) 10:25, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

ไม่เหมือนกันครับ prefix suffix ของฝรั่งหมายถึง มีรากศัพท์อยู่ตรงกลาง แล้วพวกนี้มาเติมทำให้ความหมายแปรเปลี่ยนไป แต่ยังคงวนอยู่กับความหมายเดิม หรือมีไว้ผันรูป ส่วนไทยนี้ ลอกวิธีมาจากภาษาของอินเดีย คือคำหน้าขยายคำหลัง เหมือน compound word คำไทยแท้ที่ คำหลังขยายคำหน้า ความหมายอาจจะไปคนละเรื่อง คำเหล่านี้ล้วนไม่ใช่ prefix suffix เรื่องขีดนั้นไม่เห็นว่าต้องเติม เพราะคำไทยที่ประกอบอาจจะอยู่หน้าหรือหลังก็ได้ เติมขีดเพิ่มเท่ากับเราต้องไปสร้างหน้าเหล่านั้นเพิ่ม ทำให้เปลืองแรงงาน หากดูภาษาของอินเดีย ไม่มีใครทำเช่นนั้น นอกจากนี้การเติมขีด ทำให้แม่แบบเข้าใจผิดได้ว่า นี่เป็น prefix suffix เพราะเขาเขียนไว้แบบนั้น --Octahedron80 (talk) 11:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

กราบขอบพระคุณที่อธิบายจนกระจ่างแจ้งดังแสงตะวันค่ะ _/\_ ลืมเรื่องการสร้างคำในภาษาไทยไปสนิท หลงคิดว่ามันคือ prefix suffix 55 --YURi (talk) 13:39, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Misspellings

Misspellings are not lemmas. Please just use {{head|en|misspelling}}. DTLHS (talk) 00:50, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I looked some missy entries use that so I just copied from it. I will do your suggestion from now on. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:53, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

@DTLHS Let's see CodeCat's comment here [1] --Octahedron80 (talk) 14:18, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Misspellings are actually lemmas, unless they are only misspelling of one particular form of the word. --WikiTiki89 15:29, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Avestan lemmas

Hi, where do you get your Avestan terms from? Thanks! AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 03:04, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

@Awesomemeeos

By copying, I got from [2]. Look for ave-003 Avestan-script Avestan. But it has very few words. For example, search "dog". Some of them are from PDF. I even saw Avestan vocabulary on some Wikipedia but I forgot which project. I also heard that there are many forms of a term so be careful adding entry. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:11, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

BabelMap will help you input far-Unicode letters. But you must have a font first. I use Noto Sans Avestan. Additionally, Avestan script is right-to-left system. Don't believe what you see in IE and Edge. Use Firefox or Chrome instead. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:54, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 10:13, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Tone numbers

It should probably be "alternative spelling", because it's a different written representation of the same thing. —CodeCat 00:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:37, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's fine by me. I see you have already done some. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:41, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

It's too much work to convert them manually. Someone might do it with a bot. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:18, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Not worry. I am used to it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 12:23, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

It's just very inefficient. For a bot-writer, it's a rather trivial task. Your energy is better spent elsewhere, for example in Category:Thai terms without th-pron template, which requires the knowledge of Thai, especially when the readings are not easily available in dictionaries. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:35, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Great job with OctraBot's recent edits

Not sure whether the respellings were manually entered prior or extracted from another place (I'd be very interested if such resource is available), but regardless, it was fantastic work. Wyang (talk) 06:53, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, great job, would be great to see the source you used. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:09, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

I write new program that imports pronunciation data from Thai Wiktionary. And that's that; many entries still remain. Let me cleanup there for some time and I will run it again. And sorry for forgetting to set bot flag. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:05, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

"dummy"

Is there a reason you're adding this to numbered pinyin entries? DTLHS (talk) 03:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I let bot do task after my edit. Whatever content will be dropped so I just put something like dummy. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:44, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I see, thanks. DTLHS (talk) 03:51, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

崖 (yái)

https://www.moedict.tw/%E5%B4%96 —suzukaze (t・c) 08:30, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

K. I also check 睚 too. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:33, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Superscript sense at 2

In my opinion, we don't need to add the sense "(superscript) The square of a number or an unit." in the entry 2. This can be understood from the context: any superscript number or letter can be a power in math, but I believe we don't need senses for all of those:

0 = "(superscript) The power of 0."

1 = "(superscript) The power of 1."

a = "(superscript) The power of a."

b = "(superscript) The power of b."

c = "(superscript) The power of c."

We do have Appendix:Superscript to explain that. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:30, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

All right. I just put what I think that it is missing. The super-2 and super-3 are very common. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Mistakes native speakers make when speaking Thai

Hi Octahedron80, I wonder if native speakers themselves make grammatical mistakes when speaking Thai? Can you tell me some examples? Thanks! – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 06:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

IMO, there is not much grammatical mistake in speaking because Thai language doesn't have inflection, conjugation, and declension‎. Instead, Thai people have more significant problem about spelling correct words. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:59, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Tell me some misspellings. Also, when I went to Thailand years ago, I noticed with Thai writing that some had little loops at corners of letters and some didn't, resulting them looking like lowercase Latin letters. Why is that the case? – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 13:25, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

PS are you also an admin? – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 13:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

• Look at w:th:รายชื่อคำในภาษาไทยที่มักเขียนผิด. The first column is for correct words. The next column is for frequent misspellings.
• According to standard, the little loop called "head" is where to start writing a letter. But you already know that some letters don't have head. Google for "แบบคัดลายมือไทย" pictures and you'll see how to write a letter properly for grade 1 students. Lastly, Thai alphabets have no case. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

คำ

สวัสดีครับ จำพวก "พระ-", "พระราช-", "พระบรมราช-", "พระบรมมหา-", "ราช-", "อัคร-", "อัครมหา-", "อัครราช-" ฯลฯ (อย่าง พระโองการ, พระราชโองการ, พระบรมราชโองการ, พระราชวัง, พระบรมมหาราชวัง, ราชวัง, อัครมเหสี, พระอัครมเหสี ฯลฯ) นี่ส่วนใหญ่ต้องรีไดเหร็กใช่ไหมครับ --iudexvivorum (talk) 06:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

ผมรีไดเหร็ก พระราชโองการ และ พระบรมราชโองการ ไปยัง โองการ แล้วใส่วงเล็บลูกน้ำไว้หน้านิยามใน โองการ แบบนี้โอเคไหมครับ --iudexvivorum (talk) 06:24, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

กรณีคำว่า ราชโองการ, ราชโยงการ = คำสั่งราชการของพระมหากษัตริย์ เป็น lemma ครับ และ โองการก็เป็นอีก lemma หนึ่ง ลองเปิดดูในพจน. นอกนั้นก็ทำเปลี่ยนทางอย่างที่ว่าตามสะดวก ผมกะจะทำอยู่เหมือนกัน หากค้นบางคำไม่เจอ ลองดูว่าอะไร "แค่เติม" หรือว่า "ผสาน" ไปกับความหมาย --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

• พระราชโองการ > ราชโองการ
• พระบรมราชโองการ > ราชโองการ
• พระราชโยงการ > ราชโยงการ
• พระบรมราชโยงการ > ราชโยงการ

--Octahedron80 (talk) 07:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thai writing

Hi octahedron, just wanting to know about "Modern Thai" fonts, e.g. พ (pɔɔ) looks in that style like a Latin 'w'. Is it hard to read? Who invented this font style? – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 00:12, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Personally I like it better than the traditional 'looped' version – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 00:12, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

It's not modern style at all. Don't study or teach Thai with that font. It's is just font style that imitates Latin alphabet. Like serif and sans-serif, no one especially invented it.--Octahedron80 (talk) 01:42, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

But it was everywhere when I went to Thailand! – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 02:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Just used in media and advertisement for eye-catching. Nobody writes like that. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:33, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Module Errors

There are a couple of Malaysian entries that showed up in CAT:E after you edited Module:ms-headword. Please fix them. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 01:36, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:45, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

~ in definitions

Hi,

As a learner of Thai, I don't find it very user-friendly when usage examples with transliterations are replaced with WORD + ~. Anyway, why are you removing valid examples like this one:

โบสถ์คริสต์

bòot krít

(Christian) church

? -Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:41, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Tilde is very known in dictionaries to substitute headword because they can't be lemma (i.e. SOP) or they must/often use with other word(s). They are not usage examples. And I didn't remove the example; I moved it to adjective. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

About transliteration, there will be solution in the future, that should discuss with Wyang too. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:54, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. It's still more useful to show transliterations. First of all, I find it a bit silly splitting proper nouns into adjective and other PoS, like making {{th-l|ไทย} - a proper noun (Thailand), noun (Thai person), adjective (related to Thai), etc. For a language like Thai, which has no inflection, it's sufficient to make one PoS and nest everything under it.

I suggest this format under ===Proper noun=== and remove the adjective section:

===Proper noun===
{{th-proper noun}}

# [[Christ]], [[Christian]]
#: {{th-x|โบสถ์ คริสต์|(Christian) church}}
#: {{th-x|ศาสนา คริสต์|Christianity (religion)}}

What do you think? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:02, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Your method does not apply every situation. For example, have you seen แก้ว ดาว and อาทิตย์ yet? I think tilde notation already fits all. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:08, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I understand the intention and I agree that ~ can be used and cannot be applied everywhere. My request is NOT to remove examples with transliterations if they already exist. I noticed you and other Thai editors have adopted your method but started removing useful usexes. The Thai script is not easy to read for foreigners, pls don't neglect the need for transliterations where possible and when it's already been added in entries. :) Calling @Wyang re transliterations. --03:18, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

PS. I am not the first person here to use the symbol. ;-) --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:22, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I like the ~ notation, though I think it should be templated, like {{zh-div}}. If the meaning is not very obvious, we can add a ? to the top right corner. Wyang (talk) 04:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

เครื่องหมายยึกยือ

สวัสดีค่ะ ควรใส่ไว้อันหลังสุดอันเดียวก็พอแล้วหรือเปล่าคะ อย่าง "(ก, ข, ค, ง~)" มากกว่าจะเป็น "(ก~, ข~, ค~, ง~)" --หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 08:05, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

ตัวหนอนเป็นสัญลักษณ์แทนคำหลัก ใช้ประกอบอยู่กับคำ จึงควรมีตัวหนอนทุกคำ จะได้รู้ตำแหน่งประกอบ ดูตัวอย่างที่ พุทธ --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:07, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

เข้าใจแล้วค่ะ ขอบพระคุณค่ะ --หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 08:10, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Paiboon

Hi Octahedron, can Thai people read Paiboon (or other romanization systems)? Can you read it well? – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 11:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Thai people really do not use Paiboon's system (they do not even know it). Instead, they use the Royal Institute's system as in official documents and traffic signs. But there is one problem: the RI's system does not express actual pronunciation, making farangs confused. The Paiboon's system is better for foreign learners IMO. If they can read, I can read too. --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:59, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@Octahedron80 What does Royal Institute's system looks like? For example what would ประเทศไทย (bprà-têet tai) look like – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 00:44, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

[3] --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Farang

@Octahedron80 With the term 'farang', why that term? Do you often have issues with them? Do they make you look inferior to them? – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 08:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

What is the problem? These days, they also call themselves farang. I used to live in Hua Hin; I know that. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

@Octahedron80 Do you of any Farangs who were born in Thailand and speak fluent Thai? BTW 'farang' somewhat reminds me of 'France' – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 08:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

The ฝรั่ง (farang) means westerner or foreigner in speaking, so no farang born in Thailand. They may or may not speak Thai. If they have family and later have children born in Thailand, their children are also not called farang, instead, ลูกครึ่ง (luuk krueng ≈ hybrid) we said. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:44, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

@Octahedron80 So do you know any ลูกครึ่ง who can speak Thai – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 08:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Thailand have lots of ลูกครึ่ง, and some are celebrities. See some. Because they can come & go between their parent's countries, definitely they can speak Thai. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:49, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Character images in appendices

In case you are interested, the images of each character now appear in the Unicode appendices too. See Appendix:Unicode/Geometric Shapes. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:07, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Good job. That will help someone to overview a block without having special font. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I was thinking about that too. It would be nice if all characters in the appendices got images eventually, including all Chinese characters. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 03:18, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thai vs Lao

Hi Octahedron, I know of two languages that sound similar but are also different in ways, Thai (ไทย (tai)) and Lao (ລາວ (lāo)). As you are a native Thai speaker, do you understand Lao most of the time? Please confirm this, but what I've also heard is that Lao is easier to learn in Thai, in the sense of pronunciation and spelling – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 22:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I can understand Lao speak, as I heard in Lao's TV. But they also have different vocabulary to call things. As my view, Lao text look weird in Thai eyes and take some time to comprehend. Lao people might think in vice versa. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

When I examined on Wiktionary, I discovered that Thai can have irregularities in spelling, such as ข้าพเจ้า (kâa-pá-jâao) phonetically pronounced as ข้า-พะ-จ้าว (kâa-pá-jâao). But in Lao, the exact cognate, ຂ້າພະເຈົ້າ (khā pha chao) is spelled phonetically, which means that Lao is more phonetically spelt than Thai – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 01:24, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Thai usually keep spellings corresponding to their etymology, especially words that come from Pali & Sanskrit. While Lao cannot do that because they have not enough consonants. But they are happy to spell out everything. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:32, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Gothic alphabet etymologies

What's the source for this diff? — Kleio (t · c) 18:24, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about that. Please edit or put 'unknown' sir. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:27, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

I added some qualifications and a source. — Kleio (t · c) 18:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Module:shn-pron question

Hi Octahedron, in this module mentioned above, there is a 'vowel' listed as ူ*. I just wanted to know what does the star mean and how to use it? – AWESOME meeos ！ * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 06:50, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

It is the special mark for internal condition at line 55. Don't directly use it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

OctraBot is making a mess

It's adding templates with parameters missing or empty and causing module errors. Please check your code. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:27, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Could you point some? NVM I gonna see your revert instead. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:09, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I guess you already revert all of them? I don't see any more in Category:Pages with module errors. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:36, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

End --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:59, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

etyl → der

Is Octrabot simply changing all {{etyl}}'s to {{der}}'s? This is really a job a human should be doing, because the decision whether to use {{der}}, {{bor}}, or {{inh}} needs to be made on a case by case basis. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:45, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

The etyl is already basically der. To change from der to others take less effort than to change from etyl. This is the first step to get rid of etyl. I also think about to change der to inh in case of proto languages. Leave them for later. --Octahedron80 (talk) 14:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

The thing is, they're much harder to find once {{etyl}} has been changed to {{der}} because then they're no longer in CAT:etyl cleanup. There's no knowing what's been robotically changed from {{etyl}} to {{der}} and what's been done so deliberately. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

There will be some way to collect those. Let me think a bit. --Octahedron80 (talk) 14:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

End --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Etyl -> der bot edits

Why are you changing the etyl template to der? Was there a concensus for this? The reason we have Category:etyl cleanup is so we can sort these entries into the proper type of etymology (borrowing, inherited, etc) on a case-by-case basis. It's not to replace one template with another. Ultimateria (talk) 12:48, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh. What he said. ^^ Ultimateria (talk) 12:48, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

See above lol. --Octahedron80 (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

End --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Please revert all your etyl -> der changes

There is no consensus for them. I disagree with the changes, as do several other editors above. By rule, a bot cannot make controversial changes, and any such change made by a bot must be reverted upon request. Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 14:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Better revert. Sorry. However pywikibot has no self revert script, so I must create a new program. It will take more time than pywikibot. --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:58, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

The best way to do this is to keep a careful log when running a bot, where you output "Page XXX: changed {{foo}} to {{bar}}" and such. I always do that in my bot runs. That way, it's pretty easy to revert if needed by just using regexp substitutions and checking to make sure that exactly one substitution happened; otherwise you need to fix it manually. Benwing2 (talk) 07:02, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Does tone follow Thai songs?

Hi Octahedron80, do Thai tones follow the melody of songs? — AWESOME meeos ！ * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 06:34, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

IDK. Have you ever heard Chinese songs? It may be like that. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:58, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

ลักษณนาม

หวัดดีค่ะ ทำแม่แบบต่างหาก เพื่อลงลักษณนามแยกเป็นความหมาย ๆ ดีไหมคะ (คล้าย ๆ first attested ในหน้า abbot#Noun เป็นต้น) เพราะอย่างหน้า หนังสือ บางความหมายก็ไม่ได้ใช้ลักษณนาม เล่ม/ฉบับ (ความหมายแรกเป็นต้น) --หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 08:26, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

ของภาษาจีนดูเหมือนจะมีเหมือนกัน ก็คิดอยู่ว่าจะทำครับ แต่อันไหนใช้รวมกันได้ ขอให้ใส่ไว้กับ th-noun ครับ --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:31, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

mul-letter module

Hi! Seeing that you are the author of Module:mul-letter, I’ve got a question. Is there a way for the saltillo pages (Ꞌ and ꞌ) to display upper- and lowercase variants as before, given that the parameters upper=Ꞌ and lower=ꞌ are no longer accepted in {{mul-letter}}? I would’ve tweaked the Lua code myself if I knew how to code. Thanks! ―Born2bgratis (talk) 01:39, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

The cases are generally mapped by Unicode. In case of failure, that means internal engine (Lua, I think) is not support on the character in question. You can input more data in Module:mul-letter/data under common set to override default behavior. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Telugu plural forms

Hello. I am working about common Telugu plural rules in Module:te-headword. Could you tell me if there are more common rules to apply to noun, for new usage of Template:te-noun? For special cases, they will not be put there. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the help in creating the plural forms of Telugu nouns. Basically I am not a linguist and not familiar with the Telugu grammatical rules. Few straight forward things we can begin with. The nouns ending with Rhymes:Telugu/ప్ప, we can add లు (lu) to covert them to plurals.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 15:07, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

That rule is already the last line of the code when a word does not meet other conditions. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:50, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I do not know why you are not responsive. The said example is created by the program you are developing. It is o.k. The one more example, I am familiar is when there is గుడి (guḍi) (the vowel ఇ (i)), we have to change it to కొమ్ము (kommu) (the vowel ఉ (u)) and add లు (lu) as suffix. Ex: పులి (puli) to పులులు (pululu).Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 05:44, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Adding some rule is easy. But I wonder if changing -i to -ulu would be appliable in most case? --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:43, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

[4] page 50 of this may be helpful. —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 16:25, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

อุตพิด

ดิกต์ราชบัณฑิตบอกว่า มาจาก "อาจม์" อะครับ: "[อุดตะ-] น. ชื่อไม้ล้มลุกมีหัวชนิด Typhonium trilobatum (L.) Schott ในวงศ์ Araceae ดอกบานเวลาเย็น กลิ่นเหม็นเหมือนอุจจาระ. (ข. อาจม์ + พิษ)." --iudexvivorum (talk) 03:08, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

ผมว่าไม่ใช่ครับ อาจม์ มันห่างไกลจาก อุต มาก อ่านยังไงก็ไม่ได้อุด เรื่องตัวสะกดก็เหมือนกัน ถ้ามาจาก อาจม์ + พิษ ก็ควรจะเขียนเป็นบาลีหรือสันสกฤตด้วยซ้ำ --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:14, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

"Bangkok" or "Standard" Thai in {{th-pron}}

Hi Octahedron80, do you think we should change the label (Bangkok) to (standard)? I think "Bangkok Thai" can be misleading, as it can also refer to the colloquial dialect in which there are many features not recognised by our pronunciation, e.g. cluster dropping. Wyang (talk) 22:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree to change Bangkok to Standard because it is spoken through Thailand. There are also some significant varieties like "Suphan Buri" and "Korat". (I do not mention about northern, northeastern or southern dialects; they have their own varieties too). --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:57, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! I will change it. Wyang (talk) 02:47, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Tangut transliterations

1. Where did these come from?
2. Could we note the sources on the entry or at Wiktionary:About Tangut, Wiktionary:Tangut transliteration, or a similar page? (for future editors, or people like me who want to know more)

—suzukaze (t・c) 01:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

[5] and then look for txg. (also synonyms are found there) But it does not mention how a character pronounces, so I gotta check more ref at [6] and [7] and double-check on Google. I also use Babelmap to convert a character back to codepoint because ref number is there. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:54, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I am not familiar with about pages. I will leave them for someone to write. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:03, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Pattern matching

About this edit: I don't see how those patterns will cause problems with the basic string functions. They have sequences of single bytes and sequences of "not these bytes". These should behave the same whether the basic string or the ustring function is used. Bytes in ASCII (<=0x7F) are different from bytes in non-ASCII sequences (>=0x80). But I could be missing something. — Eru·tuon 04:51, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

@Erutuon In English, you even do not worry about the code because it is already English; you may use basic function and it works everywhere. But the world outside is not ideal. I copy this module to Thai Wiktionary and many words have to be translated (localized) and they do not work with your code. (Unicode is the main cause.) I look forward that more Wiktionaries would also implement the same module. Generic supporting should be done before they meet the problem. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

@Octahedron80: Ahh, I see what you mean by localization; I also saw th:มอดูล:links, which is what you are referring to. It is best if the modules work when English names are replaced with names using non-ASCII characters. I'm puzzled, because I can't see a way in which, for example, string.gsub(str, "%[%[หมวดหมู่:[^|%]]-|?[^|%]]-%]%]", "") would fail. = ("[[หมวดหมู่:ภาษาทั้งหมด|หมวดหมู่:ภาษาทั้งหมด]]"):match("%[%[หมวดหมู่:[^|%]]-|?[^|%]]-%]%]") gives a match in the debug console. What happened? — Eru·tuon 05:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

@Erutuon The basic function matches on (1) ASCII byte while the ustring function matches on Unicode multibyte (or each true character). There are many chances that ASCII byte may match some Unicode multibyte, for example,

= string.char(0xE0):match("[ก]")
= string.char(0xB8):match("[ก]")
= string.char(0x81):match("[ก]")

return positive because ก consists of 0xE0 0xB8 0x81. Another example,

= ("ǰ"):match("[ะ]")
= ("ก"):match("[ข]")
= ("ʣ"):match("[ԣ]")

return positive either because ǰ consists of 0xC7 0xB0 and ะ consists of 0xE0 0xB8 0xB0. They both have 0xB0. (and etc) Instead, you can try

= mw.ustring.match("ǰ", "[ะ]")
= mw.ustring.match("ก", "[ข]")
= mw.ustring.match("ʣ", "[ԣ]")

they will return negative. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:48, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

But those are not ASCII characters. ASCII is the bytes 0x00 - 0x7F (0xxxxxxx); multi-byte sequences use 10xxxxxx, 110xxxxx, 1110xxxx, 11110xxx. So ASCII can only match ASCII.

I do work with 2- and 3-byte characters in Ancient Greek, and I know that sets containing multi-byte characters (for instance, "[αάἀἁᾶ]" = "[\206\177\206\172\225\188\128\225\188\129\225\190\182]") will give strange results with string.match. For instance, ("ἀἐἰὀὐ"):match("[αάἀἁᾶ]") returns "က". Same with quantifiers (for instance, "α+" = "\206\177+").

But sets containing ASCII ("[^|%]]") will match correctly, even if the text contains multi-byte sequences like "ะ" above. None of the Thai or Greek characters, or any other multi-byte sequence "[\194-\244][\128-\191]+", can be matched by an ASCII character "[\0-127]". Similarly, the sequence "αάἀἁᾶ" can only match an instance of itself. So in those situations string.match is equivalent to mw.ustring.match, and faster. — Eru·tuon 08:05, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Nevertheless, if you think it works better, I won't force you. When I work with Unicode, like my language, I will always use ustring for safety (usually when the brackets are needed). --Octahedron80 (talk) 10:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

It's definitely safer to use the ustring functions, but page processing might be faster if modules use the basic string functions whenever possible. They look at bytes, but the ustring functions have to parse the whole string into codepoints before doing anything. So using the basic string functions skips a step. When the function is called many times, it adds up. I previewed some large pages with and without the changes and noticed a significant difference in Lua time usage and CPU time usage. It might be worthwhile because English Wiktionary uses Lua so much. — Eru·tuon 08:40, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Persian

Hey. As a recent editor of Persian terms, can you help me with the entries in Category:Tbot entries (Persian)? There's just 19 entries there that need checking. Thanks! --P5Nd2 (talk) 09:05, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

I am not quite familiar with Persian. My recent edits were the side product of deeply-checking many references for another loanword's etymology, since it has so different definitions (the homograph). I may dig up a bit if I have time. --Octahedron80 (talk) 10:48, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Thai Morse

About -.-. and other entries. I'm thinking maybe we should keep the Morse for Thai letters in a Thai section, not the Translingual section. I would suggest doing the same for all Braille letters eventually, in all languages except those written in Latin script. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:18, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I think so. But how about templates? --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:19, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I created {{th-morse letter}}. It still categorizes in the Translingual category, but that can be fixed, naturally. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:47, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your work. With the current formatting, the Morse entries look good in my opinion. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 03:47, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

วอลเลย์บอล

หวัดดีค่ะ รบกวนดู วอลเลย์บอล หน่อย ไม่แน่ใจว่ามีคนอ่าน ว็อล-เล่-บ็อล / ว็อน-เล่-บ็อล อะไรประมาณนี้ (หรืออย่างอื่น) ไหม ขอบคุณค่ะ --หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 04:46, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

แม่กนตามด้วย ล ลิง อาจจะกลายเป็น ลล ได้ ส่วนบอลยังไม่เคยเห็นใครออกเสียง ล ไม่ว่าจะอยู่ในคำไหน --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:50, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Han Characters of Vietnamese and Zhuang

Hi, please see my question here. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 03:21, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

I also have Babel's font but it is still missing glyph at the codepoint. However, we can guess what looks like from composition. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:26, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

The problem for me is, I can't download fonts from either the Babel website or the Chinese website, because whenever I click on the download button, nothing happens. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 03:34, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@Lo Ximiendo I can download easily; perhaps your ISP or admin blocks downloading big files. By the way, I think TH-Feon-B should work for CJK Block E&F [8] (your browser needs to restart) --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:40, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

PS, For CJK Block B, better use system font. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:46, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@Lo Ximiendo, I would recommend 花園明朝. It has full coverage of CJK Ext. E and F. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:18, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@Justinrleung Do I have to create an account in order to download the Hanazono font? Also, I may want to tell my father about this issue. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 18:11, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@Lo Ximiendo: No, you don't need any account. Just click on the zip file and download it. Then extract it and install the fonts. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:26, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

"Manoan"

The spelling is Minoan btw, your recent entries have "Manoan". —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:50, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding. I already know and am going to fix it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:54, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Pali

Pali is an early Middle-Indo-Aryan language, along with Ashokan Prakrit. Ardhamagadhi Prakrit is a middle Middle-Indo-Aryan language, it is younger than Pali. Magadhi Prakrit is a later form of Ardhamagadhi that is not that close to Pali. Yes, Pali is an Eastern Indo-Aryan language, so it is from the same sub-family as Ardhamagadhi, but since it is older that that it should be put under Sanskrit. You can look at Cardona & Jain (2003) and Masica (1991) for references; Wikipedia's articles are very confusing IMO. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 01:29, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

I am confused about the names they call and also ISO code. Do you have a look at taxobox in w:Magadhi Prakrit and w:Pali yet? --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure, let me break it down.

Pali: early MIA (Middle Indo Aryan) language used in Buddhist canon; related to both Central (Sauraseni) and Eastern (Ardhamagadhi) Prakrits

Asokan Prakrit inc-ash: early MIA language used by Ashoka on his edicts, not on the Buddhist stories about him!

Ardhamagadhi Prakrit pka: eastern mid-stage MIA language related to Pali but younger; used in some early Buddhist and Jain stories

Magadhi Prakrit inc-mgd: a mix of central and eastern mid-stage MIA languages related to Ardhamagadhi; official vernacular of Mauryan Empire

—Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 01:37, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

@Aryamanarora Also I just wonder why it must be "Sanskrit" in case we can just put Prakrit (pra). Some said that Pali came before Sanskrit either. Did you mean Vedic Sanskrit? In the world, we already have such Neo-Sanskrit and Neo-Pali which borrow each other though. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:40, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Sanskrit includes Vedic (which is the natural ancestor of Pali and Prakrits) and Classical (which was used as a literary language and borrowed from Prakrit/Pali sometimes). Pali coexisted with Classical Sanskrit, but Vedic Sanskrit was much older. I think Neo-Sanskrit and Neo-Pali refer to the recent revival of those languages; Sanskrit even has some native speakers now (such as in Mattur, Karnataka). Prakrit isn't treated as one language here, each dialect has a separate code. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 03:07, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Khmer transliteration

Hi,

Thanks for recent Khmer translations. I know it's pain in the a*se but perhaps we should use a manual translit (which is not easy to get by). You may have missed some discussions.

I don't want to discourage you from editing Khmer either, since it's not easy.

@Stephen G. Brown, Wyang: Do you think we should transliterate Khmer manually, disable translit or allow the current automatic translit? There are pros and cons. Perhaps Khmer entries should display both phonetic and orthographic transliterations like Thai or Burmese entries?

I personally don't have a good suggestion at the moment. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:47, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I support to display both. And when after a link, it should display phonetic one. You could put them back (and correct them). Nevertheless, thwikt prefers to display transliteration by letters because Thai and Khmer are more related than Latin alphabet. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:51, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

@Atitarev Khmer transcription is quite complex, but I think I can try to design something to handle Khmer similarly to Thai, without resorting to manual transcription on every occasion. I may travel to Cambodia (and maybe Thailand) briefly in the next two months, and I will look for Cambodian references on Khmer phonetics and pronunciation if I get a chance. Wyang (talk) 06:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Be lucky in your trip. I suggest you must not talk to natives about their history or you may get harmed. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:28, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, I will be cautious. Wyang (talk) 10:14, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

So far, I much prefer manual transcription. I can't make any sense of the automatic transliteration. I don't understand the diacritics used in the automatic transcrip, spaces are not added between different parts, and the automatic either overlooks some sounds and syllables, or adds sounds that should not be added. The automatic transliteration is better than nothing, but not much better. I think it's okay to start with automatic transliteration, but that it should be changed to manual as soon as someone gets around to it. —Stephen ^(Talk) 01:18, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Etymologies of Pattani Malay Terms

Could you at least change the etymologies of the Pattani Malay terms to the following formula "Cognate with Standard Malay ..."? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 09:25, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Done for your suggestion. I believe Pattani Malay derives from old Malay but not sure how to write (and it changes very much), or if it should join with Proto-Malayic. It had been spoken only until standardized in 2010 both Thai & Jawi scripts. It surely relates with the same word of present Malay. --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:41, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Are the documents for the standard orthography online? The spellings look like they could be transliterated automatically, and Malay has a relatively straightforward phonology... Wyang (talk) 09:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I have 4 right now:

• To write in Jawi
• To write in Thai, similar to this book.
• Some vocab 1 (some words may not follow standard)
• Some vocab 2 (some words may not follow standard)

--Octahedron80 (talk) 09:54, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

If you are lazy to look. I just made easier tables recently. th:ผู้ใช้:Octahedron80/กระบะทราย6. However, you cannot convert standard Malay to Pattani Malay or vice versa because they are not the same on every cases. --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:56, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

You know me... :) thanks for these resources. It seems the transliteration into the Latin script is possible for both Jawi and Thai scripts, but not necessarily vice versa (which is good for the English Wiktionary, and maybe slightly more complicated for the Thai Wiktionary). Wyang (talk) 10:05, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Synonyms of เรา

Are there any pronouns, that are similar to เรา (that is, first person plural), but addressed to someone of an equal or higher status? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:58, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I think there is no word more than เรา or พวกเรา in everyday life. There is only text like ปวงข้าพระพุทธเจ้า when talking to the king but it is actually SOP. --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:52, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Dating

Moved to Talk:ห่าน --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:56, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Zhuang menqbauh

I'm wondering where you got this. It's not in Sawloih Cuengh-Gun or the Translation Bureau's dictionary. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

I've just checked 壮文基础读本, and it says that -q is not written in new loanwords (i.e. loans from Southwestern Mandarin), so the correct spelling should be menbauh. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 20:50, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

I got it from Glosbe which may not accurate. Please rename it. No problem. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Alright, I've moved it. Thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:26, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Redirects for lwghaemz, lwggwz, etc.

I don't think these should be redirects. I understand that Thai entries do this, but in Zhuang, these are clear words separated by spaces. They also don't seem to have that meaning unless they are prefixed with lwg. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Also ga for roegga. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:12, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Could you make the entries like roaegga please? --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:40, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:35, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

S'gaw Karen for black

I wonder if you could add the etymology for the S'gaw Karen term သူ (thoo). --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 04:54, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't know where it comes from. IMO, သူ (thoo) has no PK word because Pa'o Karen ဖြေင်း (preng), Western Kayah ꤜꤟꤢꤪ (lo̤a) are very different. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:54, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I discovered Western Pwo ၥၧၫ့ to compare. Still have little different. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Proto-Tibeto-Burman

Hi, I see that you've been adding Proto-Tibeto-Burman to etymologies. We seem to treat Proto-Tibeto-Burman and Proto-Sino-Tibetan as the same here. @Wyang, please confirm. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 08:40, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, please see the lead of Wiktionary:About Proto-Sino-Tibetan. Wyang (talk) 08:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I get PTB from STEDT. I don't know if this is same as PST; at least they spell different. Also please see the chart at page 20 [9]. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:46, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

About 彐

彐 have different variants: ⿴コ一(GV) or ⿴⿱𠃍一一(HTJK). Maybe it can be replaced with ⺕ or ヨ. --Tang891228 (talk) 04:44, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it might. But since the 彐 already has explanation itself, you just should not to double them everywhere. Moreover, do not rely on your font; use CJK common character first. IDS is also useful for searching; breaking them into 1-strokes will not make better searching. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:54, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

lajmbwn

The order of 天下 (tiānxià) is different from lajmbwn because Zhuang has a different head directionality from Chinese (so that adjectives go after nouns in Zhuang but before nouns in Chinese). The structure refers to the compound of the two parts, not referring to the order. I don't see why it'd be wrong to mention 天下 (tiānxià) at lajmbwn. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:09, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

IDK. This may or may not include Chinese. Since there are still same idiom across languages around the regions. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, could you give some examples of similar structures in other languages in the region? It'd probably be nice to include other languages for comparison. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:16, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

I am familiar with ใต้หล้า means the world. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

cf. Tianxia on Wikipedia. I think the Zhuang word is quite likely a Chinese calque. Wyang (talk) 03:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

チック

Hello, Octahedron80. We seem to be editing チック at the same moment, so I'll drop out for now rather than risk edit conflicts. I did want to mention, though, that I don't think the 'pomade' sense is borrowed from French; I think it's merely derived. The reason I say that is that, as far as I know, コスメチック or the like is not used to mean 'pomade' in Japanese, as I would expect if it were a straight-up borrowing. Rather, チック seems to have been formed in Japanese from コスメチック, which was borrowed from French. Best, Cnilep (talk) 00:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

@Cnilep You are confused between etymology and meaning; the etymology decribes how the word comes from whereas the meaning can be anything (even not related to etymology). The fact that a Japanese word is borrowed is always correct because Japanese language does not belong to any language taxonomy of the world. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:26, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

I think you're confused, too: Japanese has inherited words just like any other language. The difference is that Japanese inherited words are from a source or sources we know nothing about. Of course, it's also true that there are the Ryukyuan languages, but that just pushes the truly isolated stage back to the common ancestor somewhere in the millennium-and-a-half to two-millennia before present times. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for replying. I understand the difference between etymology and meaning. What I have in mind, though, is the difference between direct borrowing and less-direct etymological derivation. Japanese borrowed cosmétique from French, with some changes in pronunciation, meaning, etc. to コスメチック. Thereafter, the word チック was formed within Japanese from by clipping the loanword コスメチック, not the original French cosmétique. I see, though, that Template:derived/documentation urges editors to "use {{inherited}} or {{borrowing}}" whenever possible, so perhaps the difference is not vital for Wiktionary's purposes. (By the way, to Chuck Entz's point rather than mine, see Category:Japanese terms derived from Old Japanese.) Best, Cnilep (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

@Cnilep: The distinction between {{bor}} and {{der}} is quite important, and it is as you have understood it. Since it's a clipping of コスメチック, we would use {{der}} for the French word since it's not directly borrowed from cosmétique. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:06, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Electrical terms in Lao

Hi,

Would you know how to translate (electric) plug and socket into Lao? No dictionary seems to have them. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:10, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I guess there is no explicit words for those.

They describe 'socket' as ຮູສຽບໄຟຟ້າ lit. inserting hole for electricity, or generic ບ່ອນສຽບ lit. inserting place.

They also describe 'plug' as ຫົວສຽບໄຟຟ້າ lit. inserting head for electricity.

Got from [10].--Octahedron80 (talk) 04:23, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

PS. You cannot rely on POS listed there because of lots of errors.

Thanks. Is the SoP break-up correct like this: ຮູສຽບໄຟຟ້າ (hūsīapfai fā) for "socket" and ຫົວສຽບໄຟຟ້າ (hūasīapfai fā) for "plug"? I can't find the components either and the search for these terms doesn't give any results in Google. I have seen some Lao sites using English words instead. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:39, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I correct above links. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:48, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I've added the translations. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:55, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Deleting redirects

Hey, I noticed that there are some categories and pages in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion that you marked for deletion, but they are also redirects to other pages. In the future, could you remove the redirection when marking them for deletion? Deleting them with the redirect is harder because it redirects me whenever I click on them, and I have to click again to go back to the redirect page. —Rua (mew) 12:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for advice. Sorry that make you trouble. --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Codes

Hi, I wonder if you could help me to add codes for Hmongic and Mienic at Module:families/data? PhanAnh123 (talk) 00:30, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Zhuang "new" borrowings (from Mandarin)

Please use |new_bor=1 in {{za-pron}} when a word is borrowed from (Southwestern) Mandarin, especially if the word has a 5th tone (written as 1st tone). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:10, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea to determine old or new ones. I just got words from Zhuang Wikipedia and a dictionary app. What does this parameter do in the template? --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:14, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Whenever you say something is borrowed from Mandarin, it would be considered a new borrowing. One thing I usually look for to determine if it's from SW Mandarin is the tone: 陰平 = h, 陽平/入聲 = z, 上聲 = j, 去聲 = q (not written). Since the -q tone isn't written in these new borrowings, we need that parameter to tell the module to change all 1st tones (unmarked) to 5th tones (-q). Also, I would advise you against importing words from Zhuang Wikipedia without checking a more reliable source, like this dictionary. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Mongolian pronunciation module

Hi,

Are you interested in making an experimental version for Mongolian - Module:mn-IPA? It should be based on the Cyrillic script, since the data is available on a word by word basis for modern Mongolian in Mongolia proper with phonetic respellings (actual pronunciations), stress marks and some additional symbols, such as shwa symbols, etc? I'm building my knowledge on the topic and will take part in making the module work and adding test cases. User:Crom daba will give more pointers as the main Mongolian editor. Bolor toli is a dictionary with many audio recordings for specific words. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:28, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

I think Bolor toli does not help about pronunciation; many words lack of Mongolian audio files, also no IPA or respelling at all. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:33, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Well, with Mongolian there are less resources. Considering it's a small nation (population-wise), then the resources are not too bad. Unfortunately, you have to listen to the recordings, there's no IPA - there are quite many with audio, actually. Once you get used to the pronunciation, it makes more sense - IPA, the writing and the sound. All the recordings must be done by outer Mongolian people, so the pronunciation must be that of Ulaanbaator (we should mark it as such, in Inner Mongolia, the pronunciation must be very different.)

I have downloaded the course by Gaunt and Bayarmandakh + the audio, which I find very good. It's in pdf but all Cyrillic words are not searchable, unfortunately, only English. I have no trouble with Cyrillic texts, though. Let me know if you want it, I can email it to you. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:42, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I have just made the pronunciations of болор (bolor) and шоколад (šokolad) based on what I heard (voice recordings) at Bolor toli ("crystal dictionary"). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:18, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Newari / Newar translations that should be fixed

See User:DTLHS/cleanup/unrecognized translation languages for a list. DTLHS (talk) 04:44, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

OctraBot already fixed them two days ago? Refresh the list please. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:12, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, thank you I didn't notice. Never mind. DTLHS (talk) 05:14, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Proto-Dravidian

You need to stop what you're doing to the Proto-Dravidian entries. We don't break their lemmas down by elements with dashes. We also don't create reconstructions with slashes in them; alternative reconstructions are to be found on the page itself under ===Alternative forms===. That was not cool that you went ahead and did that without consulting anyone. --{{victar|talk}} 11:32, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

If you check my source [11] (Look Appendix A), dashes (and slashes) are almost every terms. They are not just random; it must have meaning to have dashes at their positions. (The source said a dash marks etymological or morphological break.) PIE also has dashes either. If you adhere to 1984, let's update to 2003 already. --Octahedron80 (talk) 14:01, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

That doesn't matter, nor do we use dashes for Proto-Indo-European lemmas. PIE *píph₃eti could be fashioned as *píph₃/b-e-ti, but that isn't how reconstruct entries here on en.Wikt. The date of sources has nothing to do with it. --{{victar|talk}} 14:33, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I guess this is only for Wiktionary naming policy. I will see what I can do to comply that. --Octahedron80 (talk) 14:38, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

@AryamanA, as our resident Dravidian admin, is going to take care of the rest of the moves back. --{{victar|talk}} 15:01, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Not that I have any great knowledge of Dravidian languages, but I think Victar is right on this one. By our conventions, the uncertainties in reconstruction can be in the page as alternate forms or in the headword, but not in the page title. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:02, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Also, please add at least some descendants to your Proto-Dravidian entries. They have a reference and thus won't be shot on sight, but the descendants are the actual evidence for the existence of any proto-form. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 15:49, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I will fill it later. Thanks for reminding. --Octahedron80 (talk) 15:51, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Please add them with the creation of the entry going forward. If you need more time to draft the entry first, you can do so in your sandbox. --{{victar|talk}} 15:54, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I recommend you have a look at the formatting of other reconstructed entries on en.Wikt. If you were more familiar, you wouldn't have reverted me here. Please don't do so again. --{{victar|talk}} 15:54, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I am familiar with proto-format for some. See Reconstruction:Proto-Tai/ʰmaːᴬ, there are two etyma that very different but is constructed as the same word (this is kind of homonym). --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Etymology headers are only meant for etymologies, i.e. From {{der|.., not as entry headers. That IP created entry is wrong as well. --{{victar|talk}} 16:25, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

@Justinrleung informed me that the nesting ====PoS==== under ====Etymology N==== is the preferred method, so my humble apologies on that. --{{victar|talk}} 18:15, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Northern Thai Terminology

Calling the two Thai script forms of Northern Thai 'transliteration' and 'transcription' is a good way to get them banned from Wiktionary. The argument for keeping them is that they are more than that. Native use may also help. What we should be thinking about (*NOT IMPLEMENTING YET*) is how to make one the main lemma and the others almost soft redirects, as with Pali. It may not be as simple, because we may have severe problems with attesting all three forms. I can only think of two three Pali words where I have doubts about the existence of a Latin form.

Incidentally, your Pali transliteration changes seem only to have corrupted two entries - one of them was ᩅᩥᩈᩩᨴ᩠ᨵ. Your change resulted in the nominative singular contradicting the quotation! I have fixed the declension tables - I already had an option in place for that job, but these entries predated the creation of that option. --RichardW57 (talk) 09:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea about terminology. Transcription (การถ่ายเสียง) means sound transferring whereas transliteration (การถอดอักษร=ปริวรรต) means letter transferring, that is straightforward. If they are called something else, it will not help to reserve them either. Unless we must describe why to keep both Thai-script form in about page. For example, Tai Tham script is the original form to write Northern Thai. In the modern days, it is also written with Thai script influenced by Central Thai (aka Siamese). Although, Tai Tham and Thai alphabets do not match in pronunciation, so we have two forms when a word is written in Thai script. etc, etc. --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I was sure I'd seen a rule that transliterations and transcriptions were not allowed as lemmas in the English Wiktionary. That's why I'm nervous about the use of the terms. I wish there were different terms available. To some extent, the various Brahmi alphabets can be seen as different font styles. To that extent, rup pariwat uses the inherited correspondence of letter and sound, but has replaced the letter shapes with Thai shapes. while thap sap uses Bangkok shapes and sounds. The principle of 'just different fonts' is quite visible in the compound vowel symbols of Lao in the Lao and Tai Tham scripts. --RichardW57 (talk) 20:47, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

The history of the writing in Northern Thailand is a bit more complicated, as I presume you know. The very Thai-like elements of the Lanna script were apparently borrowed from the Fak Kham script, which Tai Tham only replaced later. --RichardW57 (talk) 20:47, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

And sorry to make trouble in Pali. --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Apology accepted. --RichardW57 (talk) 20:47, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Zhuang dialects in za-pron

Hi, MOD:za-pron doesn't support other dialects yet (especially in terms of the tones), so I don't think it's wise to have that dialect parameter in {{za-pron}}. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

We can have better tentative measures, such as hiding the tone or something like that. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:46, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

As I said, every Zhuang dialects has different phoneme/orthography (not only tones). I am thinking about how it make to full support like zh-pron. For example, at least Nong Zhuang as you can see in ซื่อ and เนื้อ I discovered from [12]. By the way, I use 'zhn' code represent Nong Zhuang (in the same way 'yue' represents Cantonese). May some one make pronunciation module for it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:47, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Of course, I understand that they all have different phonemic inventories, but as of now, the thing that would the most wrong is the tone. The consonants and vowels are roughly the same in terms of the correspondence between orthography and pronunciation, but tones vary a lot. The Nong Zhuang word is actually pronounced /nɯ˦˥˧/ and not /nɯ˦˨/ as we have it. The dictionary you found is pretty good, but we would need some info on how their orthography works in terms of how the pronunciation corresponds with it. I have some resources on how we can represent other dialects of Zhuang, such as 《壮语方言土语音系》. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:01, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I would like to see Longzhou Zhuang supported some day as it is a major Zhuang dialect. However, different sources describe its phonology differently, and whether tone 10 actually exists is not clear. RcAlex36 (talk) 05:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Module Error at Module:languages/templates/documentation

I'm not sure what's causing the error, but this is the only recent change to anything accessed by the module. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:39, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

All right. I just realized that aliases cannot be grouped like varieties. So I removed extra brackets. --Octahedron80 (talk) 08:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for some Karen words

Hello, I am trying to retype and to find the pronunciation for a few Pwo and S'gaw words in an article about comparative Karen by Gordon Luce published in the Journal of the Burma Research Society in 1959. They all start with d- or b- and have the meanings `frog', `thin', `skin' and `plump'. I can send you the article if you want. Anyhow, you seem to have some facility for S'gaw, so I thought it was wroth asking. my email is nh36 at soas dot ac dot uk, but please delete if here whether or not you write me, thank you!! --Tibetologist (talk) 20:18, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tibetologist: Why don't you just you to WT:PREFS and add your email so you can send and receive it without having to leave your email address out in public? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:55, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I have a phobia about having browsers remember things about me, and anyhow, my email is public information. I just want to keep a bit of distance between my Wiki and professional lives, although the two are quite intertwined.

I have some lexicons in modern Burmese script but I cannot fully interpret into lemmas. Perhaps you can help. Please ensure you input correct Unicode letters. (I recommend BabelMap.)

• S'gaw Karen
• Western Pwo
• Western Kayah (Kayah Li script)

--Octahedron80 (talk) 00:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

PS You also have to use Unicode-supported font like Padauk or Myanmar Text. Do not use Zawgyi.

Sanskrit nasal plus stop

Do you have a quotation for Sanskrit संघ (saṃgha)? It's been deleted as an alternative form of सङ्घ (saṅgha). Textbooks in English on Sanskit all say that it will be an alternative spelling, but I haven't managed to find examples. I intend to restore it if you don't, and am creating an entry for Sanskrit संघ (saṃgha) so that it can only be taken down by formal challenge. A quotation to defend it would be helpful. --RichardW57 (talk) 09:30, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

While I was talking and hunting for evidence, Chuck Entz restored Sanskrit संघ (saṃgha) (by AryamanA, no less). I didn't know it had existed. I've restored the 'alternative forms' section in सङ्घ (saṅgha). --RichardW57 (talk) 09:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I've found potential quotations in WikiSource - I don't need your help to fight the case, if it arises. --RichardW57 (talk) 10:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Adding empty sections

Hi, I don't think it's necessary to save these edits with "...". Everything goes live once you save, so anyone who happens to stumble upon the page while you're editing would see it and wonder what's going on. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I will be more careful. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:33, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

บาน

Hi, I don't know if it's from Old Chinese or Middle Chinese. Could you please change what I've put if I've made a mistake? Thanks! RcAlex36 (talk) 07:10, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I think I have made a mistake and this isn't a the correct word. Is there a word in Thai that sounds like pɛn in tone C1 with a meaning of "plank; panel" and is derived from 板? Is it แป้น? RcAlex36 (talk) 07:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I also don't know if แป้น and 板 are related. Perhaps we can put it as comparison. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I got it from 漢台語比較手冊 and Schuessler (2007). RcAlex36 (talk) 07:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

薑 as the source for Proto-Tai ginger

Hi, I'm wondering if you have a source for your recent edits to the etymologies of words for "ginger" in the Tai languages. I don't think it's sure that it's from 薑. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

IDK either. 薑 is the most possible on both sound and meaning. I will put as comparison instead. --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! It's a very common word in the area, and the Proto-ST entry lists many of them. I don't think it's easy to determine the direction of borrowing. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Khitan

Hello, do you happen to know what you need to download to be able to see the Khitan script?--Karaeng Matoaya (talk) 23:04, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Just download proper font at [13]. Look for Khitan Small Script (Unicode mapped). I recommend Khitan Small Linear. {{Khitan-block}} template I made is also ready to use in Wiktionary. --Octahedron80 (talk) 23:33, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

some concerns about Mon etc. (cont. of Talk:ၜဵု)

Anyway, I feel quite nervous when many people including you change a sourced content with new one without any replacement of the given source. At least in ja.wikipedia.org, my home-wiki, such an act is harshly condemned as deceit for readers and I regard this culture as a right thing. In the time of edit, we should replace the 'deprecated' source with new one that guarantees what you and they think is true. Or did you find discrepancy when I represented ဗြဴ as /pre̤a/, not just like /prèa/ as actually appearing in the source? OK, I will explain. I consider register system important in Mon phonology. I know many sources conventionally represent one of the two Mon registers with grave accent, but its core may be breathiness rather than low pitch. Thus the symbol for breathiness) would be more appropriate.

• Bauer (1982:66)
  • "First register words may be described as normal, if somewhat 'tight' or tense, voice whereas the second register is marked by a breathy voice-quality and the lowering of the glottis."
• Jenny (2015:558)
  • "Mon has two clearly distinct registers (phonation types), called sa 'light' and sɒ̀ɲ 'heavy' in Mon, but usually labeled 'clear' and 'breathy' voice in western descriptions (see Thongkum 1988, 1990 for phonetic studies of registers in Mon). The light register regularly occurs in words with original voiceless initial consonants and the implosive (glottalized) ɓ and ɗ (as well as ʔ and h) and the aspirated nasals and approximants. The heavy register, which is pronounced with breathiness and low pitch, occurs after originally voiced initials."

I have another reason for being nervous. Mon language lacks standard variety while a number of dialects exist. Jenny (2005:32) might be just a tip of the iceberg.

• Bauer (1982:xvii)
  • "Dialectal differences occur in almost every settlement, and vary from village to village or even from hamlet to hamlet. They do not coincide with neat settlement patterns."
• Jenny (2015:555)
  • "Mon does not have an official standard variety and the dialects vary greatly, mostly in phonology and vocabulary."

These accounts imply that even some dialects have normal stops /d, b/, that is not necessarily applicable to other. Therefore I am even reluctant to gather up many dialects with label of 'Thailand' or 'Myanmar'. I prefer the way I did before like this.

Now we turn back to the two implosives. Beside Jenny, Bauer also includes them in his inventory for modern dialects in Northern and Central Thailand. As I said, they should have employed /d, b/ if their implosiveness had been lost.

• Bauer (1982:2)
  • "/ɓ, ɗ/ are voiced glottalized, imploded, stops, bi-labial and dental respectively; /ɓi/ 'river', /ɓòa/ 'elder sister', /ɗoa/ 'in, on, among &c.'."
• Jenny (2015:556)
  • "The only real voiced stops in Mon are the two implosives, /ɗ/ and /ɓ/."

With the above-mentioned elements, it may be wise for us to append any reference every time we show Mon pronunciation and to replace what we do NOT think is true with a new reliable source.--Eryk Kij (talk) 19:25, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

I agree with changing grave symbols to real breathy symbols (that is what I thought long ago but not sure). And also, then, we should keep both implosives and explosives in the line. About my some sources, they cannot be bibliographically refered because they are sqlite database and handwritten notebooks. I converted them to easy pdf already. [14] (You already know that it is my personal storage)--Octahedron80 (talk) 00:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for accepting some of my ideas. By the way, I filed a RFV for ကွေန်ၚါ်တြုံ and ကောန်ညာ်တြုံ. I apologize for my delayed notice, but I took seriously the situation where a native speaker is furiously protesting that these spellings are non-existent and even serious offenses toward his parents' language (see User_talk:咽頭べさ#Mon_Vocabulary_problem_explanation_(ကွေန်ၚါ်တြုံ)). I googled and looked up one of your sources (พจนานุกรม มอญ-ไทย, p. 17) and Sakamoto (1994:35–41) for these two, ending up failing to obtain good results. Please note that I also tried to view Mon-Thai Dictionary.sqlite but I failed so please show evidence at the above-mentioned RFV if it includes these two spellings or they are based on another source. There is no guarantee that showing sources would always protect us from getting into a trouble, but I think we should do so as long as possible in order to avoid causing suspicion that we were inventing falsehood. In the case of ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ‎, I put the term ကောန်တ္ၚာ်မၞိဟ်တြုံ which is also not found in Google-searching but is attested in Sakamoto (1994:36), line 10, as in ကောန်တ္ၚာ်မၞိဟ်တြုံလေင်ဝါတ် (“boy is hard to raise”) as a synonym with the above-mentioned reference. --Eryk Kij (talk) 16:21, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Module Errors

For future reference, the procedure when you get massive module errors due to edits to a highly transcluded module (in this case 4,972 transclusions in mainspace) is to

1. revert to the last good version
2. figure out what went wrong
3. click "Undo"
4. use the edit window that comes up to correct the errors
5. then click "Publish changes".

Once I did that first step, there was no reason whatsoever to restore to a version that you knew would cause thousands of module errors. I didn't undo for the second time because I don't like being reverted. I did it because I was watching CAT:E drop progressively from 4,339 entries to about 2,500 entries, then suddenly go back up to 4,339 entries. I prefer not to second-guess people who know more than I do, but that was too much- and totally unnecessary. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:25, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Actually, the error does not from pi-Latn-tranlit that you reverted. It was from pi-headword that incorrectly call its function. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:40, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Identification of the author of พจนานุกรม มอญ-ไทย (1984)

The dictionary is anonymous even in catalogue records of some university libraries ([15]) though its preface contains someone's (partially) unintelligible autograph. As I revealed before, I am not good at Thai and do not know even basic words well, but managed to identify ร้อยตรี (th), which means a kind of military rank. Through Google Search, I obtained some pages mentioning that its author is (ร้อยตรี) อนุสรณ์ สถานนท์ ([16]). In the preface it is written as 'ร้อยตรี [unintelligible] (อนุสรณ์ สถานนท์)', so should we credit the author merely as อนุสรณ์ สถานนท์ since ร้อยตรี is a title? --Eryk Kij (talk) 17:28, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

อนุสรณ์ สถานนท์ is his name & surname. ร้อยตรี is an army rank. In bibliography, it should be written as อนุสรณ์ สถานนท์, ร้อยตรี. The [unintelligible] is just his signature. He is not renowned anywhere. However, the catalog is not the same book as his. His book is handwritten and starts with 'a'. (It might be only one book in the world.) I do not really own this book; I got scans from its owner by this post. And then I converted into PDF. --Octahedron80 (talk) 19:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, but the record at khunmaebook.com seems to differ definitely from พจนานุกรม มอญ-ไทย (1984) (= your handwritten one) in terms of years (1984 and 1987) and authors appearing in the prefaces (ร้อยตรี อนุสรณ์ สถานนท์ and ดร.คุณบรรจบ พันธุเมธา), thus they have apparently nothing to do with each other. So I think there is no problem about this topic anymore, isn't it? --Eryk Kij (talk) 20:13, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

What's the Tamil IPA module based off of?

I think some things are pretty questionable, such as ஷ/ஶ being represented as separate sounds when the latter isn't even in use nowadays, or the use of [ʌ] instead of [ɐ] or [ə]. Could you please point me to the source you used to make the module? I'd like to update it myself to better reflect on Tamil phonology. - SourceIsOpen (talk) 11:20, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I forgot where I got it. (I thought it was one of Wiktionaries that use ʌ so I applied it either.) You can suggest enhancement I could do. You also can check Wikipedia about Tamil IPA too. ஷ/ஶ does have separate sounds. --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:23, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

The paper that it cites has no mention of those sounds. I've no idea who added them. And as a native speaker, I can say for certain that the retroflex fricative doesn't exist in the language, in any dialect at any period of time. Even that paper seems fairly questionable given that it mixes up the literary and spoken variants of Tamil(Tamil is diglossic) and some transcriptions are given in both, but the paper doesn't mention the existence of these sounds anywhere. It also doesn't mention [ʌ] and uses [ə]. - SourceIsOpen (talk) 15:04, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Under the IPA table it said: 2. [s] and [ɕ] are allophones of initial /t͡ɕ/ in some dialects. 3. /f/, /z/ and /ʂ/ are found only in loanwords and frequently replaced by native sounds. So ஷ/ஶ is possible to have different sounds in some words; more symbols should be added there are enough symbols already.

I found where I get those IPA. Please look at w:Help:IPA/Tamil. About miscellaneous rules, they are footnoted in old 2019 version of the page. I still lost [ʌ] where I got. However, changing [ʌ] to [ə] does not hurt. --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:23, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I know the page has that, but that's almost certainly wrong, since the paper is cites has no mention of it. I'll probably try to get some other source later which described Tamil phonology to show that it is not a sound used anywhere. [s], [ɕ], and /t͡ɕ/ are allophones, which is true. In word-initial positions, most dialects use [s], and /t͡ɕ/ is only used geminated. [ɕ] is the sound which is found in loanwords which use ஷ, such as விஷயம், which is used in some dialects like the Brahmin Tamil dialect(in Sanskrit loanwords, and English ones), while the allophone [s] is used in most other dialects. - SourceIsOpen (talk) 15:19, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Pre-Hlai

Why "Pre-Hlai" instead of "Proto-Hlai"? Does this have a different referent? @Justinrleung —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:31, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Pre-Hlai is predecessor of Proto-Hlai. They are not the same language. (I didn't remove Proto-Hlai.) See Norquest's paper in chapter 4. Nevertheless, Hlai also has many subgroups that cannot be reconstructed into Proto-Hlai. You may see Appendix:Proto-Hlai reconstructions. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:33, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

As far as I know, we don't allow pre-proto language codes. --{{victar|talk}} 01:10, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps should I put it in etym-only instead? --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:42, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

We also have no pre-proto language etym-only codes. Unless there is an entry for the reconstructions this code is being used for, it shouldn't exist. --{{victar|talk}} 06:21, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Most of Category:Hlai terms inherited from Proto-Hlai use it. Please have a look. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:28, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Adding Pre-Hlai has caused Module:family tree to fail with a stack overflow, so that family trees are no longer shown in language categories. I believe it's that Proto has Pre as its parent, and Pre has Proto as its parent because Proto is the common ancestor of the family that Proto and Pre are in, and so on forever. — Eru·tuon 22:08, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

I've temporarily reverted to fix the language trees. Please add the language back but preview Module:family tree before saving to check for stack overflow. I can think of two solutions for the infinite cycle of parentage. First idea, put Pre-Hlai as the common ancestor of the Hlai languages in Module:families/data and add Proto-Hlai as ancestor to any languages that can be traced back to it. Second idea, create a separate family for Pre-Hlai and set Pre-Hlai as the common ancestor of it. — Eru·tuon 22:19, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

I must review and update the whole structure before doing this. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:04, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought I had checked for uses of the Pre-Hlai language code but I didn't do the search correctly, so there are now module errors (I'm not sure how many because there are many unrelated ones right now). — Eru·tuon 01:09, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Erutuon there are 11 at the moment, by my count (boux, caus, coem, dzax, fas, Hlai, hoem, Moei, noms, nyaen, tiep). Can something be done about this? As you noted, the more pages there are in CAT:E, the easier it is to miss new problems. I managed to fix a couple of the out-of-memory entries by replacing some reference and category templates with hard-coding, so these and {{ne-conj}} are the only fixable ones left. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't know if Pre-Hlai should exist unless there are words that don't have Proto-Hlai but Pre-Hlai. I'm not entirely familiar with the reconstruction, but it doesn't seem necessary to bring people to that level because it's kind of confusing. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Never Mind. I removed disabled the language codes that are used in them. But I still leave them as non-code because they are worth to mention; they would be connection nodes to other branches of Kra–Dai. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

If you think they should be kept, it would be nice to somehow link people to a page explaining what Pre-Hlai is in the first place. Also, the Pre-Hlai terms should not be linked with {{m|lic}}, but probably {{m|und}}. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Proto-Be-Tai

Hi, how reliable is Proto-Be-Tai in Kosaka (2007)? It seems to be a conference paper, and it's before Chen's Proto-Ong-Be or Pittayaporn's Proto-Tai. Is there any other systematic reconstruction of Proto-Be-Tai? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:29, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Pittayaporn refers to the paper at page 40; I don't know if it is reliable. But indeed, Be and Tai families can be grouped together among various authors: Hansell, Edmondson & Solnit, Norquest, Ostapirat. And Proto-Be-Tai must be happened. Kosaka is only the one who said about Proto-Be-Tai. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:37, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

But I don't know if it's good to put Proto-Be-Tai just based on one conference paper. Have you discussed with others who might be more knowledgeable on this? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:46, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

So I better remove Proto-Be-Tai words from entries until a dedicated paper releases some day. I have no one to discuss. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:17, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:54, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

ถามหน่อยสิ

อยากทราบว่าคำว่า មាន ของเขมร มีความเป็นไปได้ไหมที่มาจากคำว่า มี สงสัยมานานล่ะ Lalalulilalia (talk) 15:34, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Khmer មាន came from Pali māna. Thai มี came from Proto-Tai *miːᴬ. They were impossible to cross over. (Although, Thai also has มานะ from the same Pali.) By the way, you should have looked for the words before you asked. --Octahedron80 (talk) 15:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Octahedron80:(ต้องบอกก่อนเลยว่าไม่เก่งอังกฤษ) งงยังไม่เข้าใจแฮะ พอเข้าไปอ่าน មាន Borrowed from Pali māna (“pride; conceit; arrogance”) แล้วคำว่า māna ของบาลีมีความหมายเหมือนกับไทยไหม คืองงตรง Verb មាន (miən) to have, possess, own: to exist; there is, there are to be rich, own property to happen to (+ verb), to have occasion to (+ verb)
เหมือน มี Verb มี • (mii) (abstract noun การมี) to have; to own; to possess. to contain; to include; to consist (of); to be composed (of). to exist, to be in existence; to happen, to occur.
you should have looked for the words before you asked คือก็เข้าไปดู แต่ก็ยังไม่เข้าใจเลยมาถามผู้ชำนาญเกี่ยวกับภาษา คือขนาดเราเป็นไทยเชื้อสายเป็นมอญ-จีนแต่ก็ไม่เข้าใจภาษามอญและจีน เพราะมันยาก ขนาดอังกฤษยังไม่เก่ง Lalalulilalia (talk) 12:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Equivalents in pi-noun

When and how could parameters for masculine and feminine equivalents be added to the template {{pi-noun}}? --Apisite (talk) 01:14, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

ขอถามอีกครั้ง

คำว่า มโหรี มาจากภาษาเขมรเก่าใช่ไหม? พอเข้าไปดูแล้วไม่มีบอก Lalalulilalia (talk) 21:36, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Modern Khmer also has similar មហោរី but Old Khmer does not. Pali and Sanskrit do not have the word either. So the root of มโหรี/មហោរី is still unknown. Nevertheless, the names of many instruments (e.g. ฆ้อง โทน รำมะนา ตะโพน ระนาด etc) in the mahoree band are neither Thai or Khmer. I guess they are from Mon and Malay. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:39, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

แต่พระยาดำรงเคยบอกว่ามาจากเขมร เขมรก็เลยเคลมไปแล้วช่วยไม่ได้ Lalalulilalia (talk) 23:48, 25 March 2021 (UTC)