User talk:Saltmarsh/Archive 9

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archive for 2018 and 2019[edit]

παρακαλάω[edit]

Is not a rare form. Is just a form with some special meaning. It is chiefly used in "continuous aspects" (something like "I make requests, petitions, begging" etc.). It is never used in cases where παρακαλώ is used as interjection (answering the phone, responding to thanks, etc.); thus the "search" engines false counters may give rare usage... Also can't be used in Φέρε μου, σε παρακαλώ, έναν καφέ. These two phrases:

  1. Σε παρακαλώ να μου φέρεις έναν καφέ
  2. Σε παρακαλάω να μου φέρεις έναν καφέ

may have different meanings. First may mean Please, bring me some coffee but also may have the meaning of the second (possible unfinished sentence) I am pleasing you (or I am pleasing you a while) Apart of that "παρακαλούνται" (in ux in παρακαλώ) is the passive form, which is not included in Conjugation, and may arise inquires to the reader. (And happy new Year.)--Xoristzatziki (talk) 14:18, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ευχαριστώ πολύ @Xoristzatziki:! We need every bit of help that we can get from native speakers, so you must feel free to edit errors like this when you come across them. And please add any help you can give with invaluable "Usage notes" (such as you give above). So please, please edit other's errors! As one of our help pages says "Please feel free to be bold in editing pages!" Thank you again and Καλή χρονιά! (you comment on the lack of passive forms in the conjugation table - I am revisiting this subject and will bother you for comments soon!) Saltmarsh (talk) 16:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

happy new verbs[edit]

Salt, happy 2018! Your year, i understand, starts with verbs, verbs, verbs. Mine started with nouns, nouns, nouns, but before i do anything, I will have to ask you a few things. After you conclude your ρηματοδρομία (i made up the word in your honour). sarri.greek (talk) 00:02, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
2018.01.10. Salt, I thank you for adding my name at that list... I do not understand exactly what it does, but thank you... very kind. I checked nouns in various grammars, with your list as a guide. Here is a comparison of wiktionary-DSGM noun tables. Whenever you have time... I've done some example-edits. Please, add a >>NO<< or >>YES<< if you want me to do continue in this line:

  • 1) ροδάκινο >> << (Is that 'το' terribly unwiktionarian? --cannot do the reference thing right--).
    • @Sarri.greek: - I've resurfaced :)
    • no - I don't think the "το" a good idea, although each language has its own style, I don't know of any in Wiktionary which do this. — I always assumed that it was the traditional way of indicating gender in Greek dictionaries (although then it would probably be "ροδάκινο (το)").
    • Your space is in the wrong place! <references /> is what you need. Saltmarsh (talk) 07:53, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2) βοοειδή >> << @Sarri.greek:
    • I would do it this way. (a) I often put the non-lemma POS heading below the lemma POS heading, it seems the most logical even if it bends the rules. (b) The etymology belongs at the top. (Strictly it should probably have Etym 1 & Etym 2 headings.)
    • I have in some cases omitted creating a Noun Lemma page, but put in a gloss line like this hypothetical example - also with a Category link to categorise it as a Noun:
1 busy, industrious
2 (as a noun) a busy person

Also i changed Αγίες Τράπεζες to Άγιες Τράπεζες. Priests say: Οι Αγίες X adn Z (the saints), quasi the singular Η αγία. But there is no 'αγίες' type anywhere. sarri.greek (talk) 11:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Participle v Adjective[edit]

And then i thought, why don't i do something easy: Inflection-pages for participles. Αααααχ geek_participles! I messed up even the easiest task: inflection pages of θλιμμένος. The lemma is participle and all the infl.pages i made by mistake adjectives. But the confusion developed from a real ambiguation.

  • problem 1: If we write PoS=adjective we LOOSE them from Cat:participles. How will we get them in that list? αγαπημένος χαμένος Grammatically, they ARE participles. Semantically they are adj. Sometimes substintivized too.
  • problem 2: Lots of them are described as 'Participle' σκέτο (αιματοβαμμένος) or as 'Past Participle' which does not exist as a Category (αγαπημένος) The new schoolgrammar by Philippaki et al.) labels them as κλιτή μετοχή -μένος -μένη -μένο & άκλιτη μετοχή -οντας -ώντας, adding that it functions as adverb (in el.witkonary we find 'επιρρηματική μετοχή' sometimes (el:αγοράζοντας)). Althouth this book is for children, it is good.
  • problem 3: perfect participle of θλίβομαι (not mentioning the 'passiveness') / in geek it would have been: μετοχή παθητικού παρακειμένου του θλίβω.

I'll correct the mistakes, and if there is a decision on PoS Participle versus Adjective, I will go on. P.S. I checked your name: salt marsh. I thhhhink it is not αλυκή. Maybe el:λιμνοθάλασσα/lagoon?? like the one we have at Μεσσολόγγι photos of both αλυκή & λιμνοθάλασσα, where poor Byron died. Αλυκή is very sunny, no plants. Ta-ta!! sarri.greek (talk) 11:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1) @Sarri.greek: When I started editing here I created participles as "adjectives" - might even sometimes have put in an etymology saying it was a participle. Then I noticed that Βικιλεξικό had "Μετοχή" ! And started doing this here. Hence the ambiguation. But some words with the appearance of a particple don't seem to have a verb (or maybe a very rare one).
2) For what it is worth I would use an "Adjective" PoS heading for all of them, put the particple info under "Etymology", and put a [[Category:Greek ....]] statement to categorise it (twice - as adj and participle).
3) Would you like to lead a discussion on this - perhaps at Category talk:Greek participles - and draw in some of our other 'Greek' editors, particularly Greek ones! I have avoided addressing this for some time partly because such discussion can take forever without reaching a definite conclusion. Saltmarsh (talk) 07:38, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Saltmarsh: very much. I will follow your 2) (adding both) and linguists may fight their battles in the meantime. The participles are in rebellion and want to get out of the verb-conjug-tables :)) P.S. Περαστικά σας. sarri.greek (talk) 07:46, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

your verbs are great[edit]

Dear mentor, I am following your hard work with the verb templates. Tell me if you need me to do sth for you. sarri.greek (talk) 14:38, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

πικάπ[edit]

Hi, would you mind checking whether the cite at πικάπ (pikáp) is under the correct sense? Thanks in advance. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 13:38, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lingo Bingo Dingo:I don't think it's sense specific. I've rearranged the entry and have to check the translation (ξαναβάλω is unknown to me and may be colloquial in this context). — Saltmarsh. 06:30, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for butting in. I've tightened the translation for you: "ξανάβαλε την πρίζα πίσω" means "he/she put the plug back in". -Stelio (talk) 10:35, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
All right, the entry looks good now, thanks to both of you. (@Stelio) ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 10:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Verb inflection templates[edit]

@Sarri.greek, Xoristzatziki, Stelio, Rossyxan — I believe that the current verb inflection tables could be improved - for example most other sources include passive forms - so I have been working on a new set of templates (they are still changing so please don't use them other than in a sandbox). Sarri.greek has been invaluably helpful, but if you believe this is a mistaken exercise please say! The current templates are over-complicated and difficult to improve - the new ones should be easier to edit, for that reason every alternative form will not be shown.

The new ones are listed in Category:User:Saltmarsh and example can be seen at User:Saltmarsh/Sandbox3.

1. Is the general layout and terminology OK? If not PLEASE say. The header is only for use during development. Any comment on the actual verb forms shown can follow later.
2. If you are interested in experimenting (and please do!) look at the parameter list there and try out the template - are the names, although abbreviated, meaningful. You should be able to see how they work from the example "λύνω" shown. Those with TABLE in their names are secondary and called by the other three.
Thank you in advance — Saltmarsh. 11:32, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I like it! That's a great layout with powerful content. I particular like the centring of terms. A couple of small fixes:
  • The ↑ mouseovers are inconsistent: some are just Greek, some just English, some a mix. (And the one for "Dependent" has a typo.)
  • Redlink entries are showing in black for me. Possibly the order of formatting needs tweaking in the CSS (I haven't dug into this, since you're still in development - let me know if you want me to diagnose).
Great work; well done to you both!
Out of interest, have you looked also at how Βικιλεξικό handles verb tables? -Stelio (talk) 11:53, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Salt, you are TOO kind to me. And patient with my notes. Please publish!!!! We are waiting! sarri.greek (talk) 15:21, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well — there were so many of them! See some below. — Saltmarsh. 15:47, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I mean publish VERBS. We are looking forward to it. (I didn't mean the notes) sarri.greek (talk) 15:57, 19 February 2018 (UTC) Ohhh just saw it. You do not need all these here... Erase them... Oh dear... I would never litter you page with all this blah-blah of mine:) sarri.greek (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek: Συγγνώμη — Saltmarsh. 18:37, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, was my fault. the word publish. Thanks, you page looks nicer now. sarri.greek (talk) 22:23, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Active/Passive format[edit]

@Sarri.greek, Stelio It was suggested or I was asked (elsewhere I think) about splitting the active and passive tables so that we had more horizontal room for the alternative forms. Please say which you prefer of the two options (see User:Saltmarsh/Sandbox3 (the "conjugation of …" headings will change!) — thanks — Saltmarsh. 07:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I like the juxtaposition of Active Passive. Perhaps for very long words, split. The tables I have seen in Wiktionary (various languages) splitting horizontally, have very differnet structure: everything is horizontal (the persons). Yours are different. Λύω looks so slim without λύομαι. IF yout had all moods horizontally, then it would be a different story. (by the way: αναπαρΑστάθηκα αναπαρΑστημένος. sarri.greek (talk) 07:34, 22 February 2018 (UTC) +Your old tables would split. That's what I mean. As the now published λύω. But now you changed structure sarri.greek (talk) 07:40, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek: That sounds like a good compromise - the editor will have the choice of two tables for long words. — Saltmarsh. 11:49, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
oh lovely if there is option for both... May I show you? at Sandbox... sarri.greek (talk) 11:51, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please do @Sarri.greek:! — Saltmarsh. 11:55, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
-Stelio (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks @Stelio: — The Category:Greek mediopassive verbs contains mediopassives - I think that the morphology is the same for deponent, passive forms, mediopassive, etc — the same template can be used and the heading text can be changed by the editor. I have already have single voice verbs covered (see Category:User:Saltmarsh and truncated ones like έχω can be dealt with separately.
  • By all means discuss in the Beer Parlour, I probably shouldn't say but I'm a bit cynical about it. Either no reply arrives or ten people reply with twelve points of view - So Cheers — Saltmarsh. 06:22, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That reminds me of the Polish phrase: gdzie dwóch Polaków, tam trzy zdania. ;-) -Stelio (talk) 10:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ενδιαφέρων[edit]

Hi, I noticed that there are the same mistakes on these pages ενδιαφέρουσα, ενδιαφέροντες and ενδιαφέρουσες (the last two before my edit). It says that the non-lemma is the vocative form of ενδιαφέρων, except ενδιαφέρων has no vocative case. On all three pages it should actually be the accusative form of... It's no big deal but I thought that maybe you used some tool or script to generate these pages and thus the same error might be elsewhere too. — Orgyn (talk) 17:30, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Saltmarsh: The template are already without the vocative case. However, I've seen that on the Greek wiktionary and another website (lexigram.gr) that the vocative case for these kind of adjectives do exist. So maybe the case should in fact be added? — Orgyn (talk) 21:16, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Simple past of καλούμαι[edit]

Hi, in the καλούμαι entry you wrote that the simple past is καήθηκα, but all the sources I've seen gives κλήθηκα instead. Was this a typo? — Orgyn (talk) 13:06, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Orgyn: An odd typo, but looks like something like that - thanks for your time searching it out — Saltmarsh. 05:28, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Issues in βλέπομαι[edit]

Hi, there are three small mistakes in the conjugation table of the verb (but maybe hard to fix). The aorist form always starts with "ει" even in the first and second person plural, i.e. ειδωθήκαμε, ειδωθήκατε. Same thing for the alternate form of the third person plural. I think the problem is that, because the accent changes, the "future" form is used by the template... If you could fix it, that would be great :D. Many thanks! — Orgyn (talk) 09:41, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Orgyn: THANKS for noticing and telling me - it'll be a while before I can attend to it, in the meanwhile I have rem'ed it out. I am working on some new - simpler to use - conjugation tables and it's useful to have "irregulars" to test with. — Saltmarsh. 11:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Orgyn: - done, it was less of a problem than I thought. — Saltmarsh. 14:22, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Saltmarsh: Perfect! Your new templates are great, thanks for the work! — Orgyn (talk) 14:36, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Categories of verbs[edit]

Dear Salt, thank you for all your verb templates! About categories:

  • 1) As a rule, do you always open a new category for 1.normal (active+passive) / 2.active only / 3.for passive only / 4.for active-imperfective / 5.for passive-imperfective (even if they have verb few verbs). As you do at Cat 'ορίζω'?
  • 2) The distinction of a bisyllabic verb (λύω) which has a visible augment (έλυσα) while a longer word (παραλύω) does not: παράλυσα or παρέλυσα. I understand that we put such bisyllabic verbs, in the general Cat?

Thanks, boss! sarri.greek (talk) 16:20, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Difficult question @Sarri.greek! I think I must rely upon the knowledge of a native. The trouble will be that two natives could probably devise 3 ways of doing it, so there probably cannot be any absolute rules. I would suggest:
1. All verbs following one act/pass pattern (like Category:Greek verbs conjugating like 'ορίζω')
2. If a category like Category:Greek verbs conjugating like 'κερδίζω' proves to have only one member (this is only an example) it could possibly be merged with another.
3. We should be prepared to merge and split cats in the light of experience.
Q.2 above. If your question is, should λύω ανδ παραλύω be in the same cat. I don't know. I would tend to say yes, but not with any degree of confidence!
— Saltmarsh. 06:10, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek we have an example already σκίζω, σχίζω, βρίζω, κτίζω do these augmented ones belong with ορίζω ? — Saltmarsh. 06:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, @Saltmarsh, the Cats can be SO MANY!. On your last comment (σκίζω etc) I think the bisyllabic verbs can be together with the longer, hyperbisyllabic verbs: no harm, everyone understands. Of course, when we say it conjugates like we do not mean IDENTICALLY (as we see at fr:Catégorie:Conjugaison en français). E.g. the prefixes of the compounds behave differently.
As for voice: if a verb is only-active or only-passive, i think, it should go separately. 5 categories for each group (counting the imperfective ones too)... (2)_The ones with 1-4 members only could just go to Cat:active-only verbs, with no further categorization.
There is another solution: very BROAD categories, but the expression should not be conjugate like. There could be cats as in DSMG, plus the irregulars α...ω.
I would love it if Wiktionary had lots and lots of precise categories like the French, but, they are going to be so many... It is yourrrrr decision!. sarri.greek (talk) 07:34, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It will be perhaps easier @Sarri.greek to split large categories later - either way the decision can't be mine. — Saltmarsh. 09:37, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

groups of categories[edit]

Your description, Salt, at Category:Greek verbs conjugating like 'ορίζω' is excellent. My trials with different vowel-ending verbs with irregularities, show me that the solo-verbs (unique) are TOO many. Your proposed solution is to mention the sister-categories. Why not create groups of categories? e.g, Category:Greek verb conjugation group 'κλείω' (or something meaning group of conjugations) which will have in it the main active+passive Category:Greek verbs conjugating like 'αποκλείω', and all the unique verbs (not forming categories). If a subcategory has more than X verbs (5? 10?), then it may form a Cat..conjugating like zzzz. Here is the group 'κλείω' (€ = any vowel sound, ∅ = no sound). The group 'λύω' with the Category:Greek verbs conjugating like 'διαλύω' on the other hand, has the [∅-s-θ-∅] vowel-ending verbs (-ω-σα-θηκα-μένος). And so on, for the consonant-ending verbs...

[€o] [∅-s-st-s] Category:Greek verb conjugation group 'κλείω'
        act-pass CAT like αποκλείω, απέκλεισα, αποκλείστηκα, αποκλεισμένος
        bisyllabic: κρούω, έκρουσα, κρούστηκα, κρουσμένος

[€o] [∅-s-st-s] (-΄ω, -σα, -στηκαsometimes also sθ, -σμένος) i.40+41
Bisyllabic with augment

Hyperbisyllabic:

Is it possible? sarri.greek (talk) 06:36, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek Since I know nothing about linguistics and not a lot about Greek verbs I feel totally unqualified to classify verbs. But grouping categories is an excellent idea — Category:Greek verbs conjugation group 'xxxx' sounds like a good general style. And aside from "conjugation" categories more general ones are possible like Category:Greek verbs using an internal augment. — Saltmarsh. 07:25, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh boss! This is a Xmas gift: lovely. solves everything. I am reluctant to create new things, unless you say yes. And about 'internal augments'... Yes, it could: manually, I guess. Neither am I a linguist, I just follow the classification: vowel-ending and for consonant ending: labials, dentals etc. Thank youuuu sarri.greek (talk) 07:38, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Happy New Year[edit]

Salt! Happy, happy 2019!! Could you check this Template:el-adj-fem back from April 2018. Someone made it for αλληλοσυγκρουόμενη (from αλληλοσυγκρούομαι). Your sarri.greek (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And the same to you @Sarri.greek - and thanks for all your work in 2018. I'll delete {{el-adj-fem}} unused and unneeded! — Saltmarsh. 06:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Broken templates[edit]

Please see here and review if you made other errors like this. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:30, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Koavf Thanks for letting me know, a bulk edit that went wrong, I don't suppose there are any others - let's hope so anyway! — Saltmarsh. 06:23, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

template question[edit]

Sorry to bother you, Salt, with 'outside' work, but I need to ask this: I am making a template at el.wikt (haaaaa!!), where i combine words {tempname|word1|word2.. etc. and for each one I add a category. Fine up to here. BUT now, I need to 'recognize' and distinguish them as

  • prefix (hyphen...anycharacter)
  • interfix (hyphern...hyphen)
  • and suffix (anycharacter...hyphen)

Is this possible? Or do I need lua? {*_*} sarri.greek (talk) 23:17, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek Just checking: you want the template to examine (and categorise) a word: detect whether it has a hyphen at the beginning, at the end or at both? Or do you mean something else? — Saltmarsh. 06:33, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good morning @Saltmarsh, yes that's what I mean. I need it to 'read' the characters. sarri.greek (talk) 06:36, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek I'm sorry - I don't think you can do this in a template. As you say - you probably can with Lua, which behaves like a proper programming language. I think that if I had learnt to use Lua it would have been much easier to do these inflection tables. I made a brief foray into it, didn't find the help files very helpful and wasn't prepared to spend the time. I gave up (although I have spent at least 20 years of my life doing programming in a variety of languages). So I'm sorry I cannot help. — Saltmarsh. 06:51, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

little question[edit]

Saltmarsh, sorry to bother you for a non-en.wikt question, but I need your advice, teacher! I am to make an infobox for el.wiktionary. I made two templates. This one with a table and another with no table. Which one, do you think is more 'error-free'? Are there any terrible mistakes? I have no idea why that clear:right; clear-left; does not work from the div section, so, I used br=clear all. Thanks (I am doing πίνω, i did not forget!) --sarri.greek (talk) 03:13, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek I find it difficult to see exactly what-is-what, because your template is jumbled up with other text. IMHO it would be better to have your templates as a stand-alone units (like {{el-see}} say) and call it from another page. As for which is better (I'm not sure about error-free, reading other people's code can be confusing) but I would "keep it simple" and if you want a table in a box use a simple one. Sorry - that's not much help :) — Saltmarsh. 06:53, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

little question - contd[edit]

@Sarri.greek Sorry for the delay, can I look later? I have done a bit of routine, and then got tied up with αναστολέας and ανασταλικός. — Saltmarsh. 07:06, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Saltmarsh ok! I will learn what αναστολέας means! (unknown word). SALT! I have done Template:el-conjug-'πίνω', Template:el-conjug-'-πίνω' (compounds). and Template:el-conjug-'-πίνω'-act but I do not know if the names are ok... sarri.greek (talk) 07:09, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek they sound fine — Saltmarsh. 07:11, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘αναστολέας — @Sarri.greek now you know!
Do you have strong feelings about substantive adjectives - ανασταλτικό/ανασταλτικός - do you create the noun or just do something like this under the Adjective heading:

1 inhibitive
2 (used as a noun) inhibition
— Saltmarsh. 07:41, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
strong fellings?? @Saltmarsh I mention at the adjective def, as you show here + see ανασταλτικό, and of course i do the noun, with Ety 'substantivized adjective by ellipsis of the neuter noun φάρμακο'. (I presume that is the correct meaning) this particular noun is not terribly substantivized: neither DSMG nor Babi mention it as a noun, but that's how i would do it. why? sarri.greek (talk) 07:55, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Saltmarsh I am LOOKING for it as a noun and I cannot see anything there. It is just, that sometimes people omit the noun (wheather it is about law or medicine or whatever). sarri.greek (talk) 07:59, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

big question[edit]

@Saltmarsh I need to ask you: At the moment, I am too slow with adding conjugations. I can make verb-conjugations (especially of many compounds) quite safely and fast, for many red lemmata. Also the IPA i can do very fast. But i cannot do the definitions and the blahblah. There meanings are too subtle, often idiomatic and my Magenta e-dictionary is at my old computer which is half-out-of-order. It takes me too long to find the correct translations at the internet. What can we do?

  • 1. I make a draft page with all conjugations, and you may use them later, whenever you open the lemmata.
  • 2. I open the lemmata with IPA, conjug and a refdef

What would you like me to do? sarri.greek (talk) 08:08, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek
1. Oh - please {{rfdef}} them — I will try and keep up with them! And - if you're at a loose end - the verbs in Category:User:Saltmarsh need the new templates (and then the old templates can be deleted) - but don't feel you have to do them immediately.
2. ανασταλτικό/ανασταλτικός — I have done these two in the way in which I generally do these noun/adjs. I have been known on a lazy day to leave out the noun heading under ανασταλτικό and leave a def labelled as used as a noun …
— Saltmarsh. 09:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok @Saltmarsh about the verbs. I am very busy at el.wikt with my new responsibilities there (soooo many things to do, I ll need your advice about many things), but i do verbs by group: it is easy to add them when i deal with each subgroup or caterory.
2. >>generally do these noun/adjs<< Salt? are you under the impression that EVERY adjective substantivizes its neuter?? This would be a misunderstaning. It has to be stated at a dictionary that it does to. sarri.greek (talk) 09:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek (1) I used to (occasionally) add en translateions to el-wikt, probably not often enough - but one cannot do everything! (2) No! No! only where I found dcitionary entry for a word. But where they occurred I felt we ought to create as with ανασταλτικό - I'll carry on doing that. — Saltmarsh. 09:49, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Form-of templates in etymology lines[edit]

@Sarri.greek Hello. Sorry to bother you guys. I notice that you normally put {{el-participle of}} template calls in etymology lines. {{el-participle of}} functions like a form-of template, and the normal convention that's used elsewhere is to put such template calls on the definition line. Hence instead of: 

===Etymology===
{{el-participle of|μουσκεύομαι|perfect|nodot=1}}, ''passive voice of'' {{m|el|μουσκεύω}}.

===Pronunciation===
* {{IPA|/musceˈmenos/|lang=el}}
* {{hyphenation|μου|σκε|μέ|νος|lang=el}}

===Participle===
{{el-part|tense=perfect|f=μουσκεμένη|n=μουσκεμένο}}

# [[sodden]], [[soak]]ed, [[drench]]ed
#: {{ux|el|Έβρεχε και είμαι '''μουσκεμένος''' μέχρι το κόκαλο.|It was raining and I am '''soaked''' to the bone.}}
#: {{ux|el|Τι ζέστη! Είμαι '''μουσκεμένη''' στον ιδρώτα.|So hot! I am '''soaked''' in sweat.}}
#: {{ux|el|Στύψε τα '''μουσκεμένα''' ρούχα, σε παρακαλώ.|Please wring the '''soaked''' clothes.}}

the normal convention is to write: 

===Pronunciation===
* {{IPA|/musceˈmenos/|lang=el}}
* {{hyphenation|μου|σκε|μέ|νος|lang=el}}

===Participle===
{{el-part|tense=perfect|f=μουσκεμένη|n=μουσκεμένο}}

# {{el-participle of|μουσκεύω|passive perfect|nodot=1}}: [[sodden]], [[soak]]ed, [[drench]]ed
#: {{ux|el|Έβρεχε και είμαι '''μουσκεμένος''' μέχρι το κόκαλο.|It was raining and I am '''soaked''' to the bone.}}
#: {{ux|el|Τι ζέστη! Είμαι '''μουσκεμένη''' στον ιδρώτα.|So hot! I am '''soaked''' in sweat.}}
#: {{ux|el|Στύψε τα '''μουσκεμένα''' ρούχα, σε παρακαλώ.|Please wring the '''soaked''' clothes.}}

Here I also changed the lemma listed in the call to {{el-participle of}} to the active lemma; AFAIK, passive infinitives in Modern Greek that aren't deponent aren't separate lemmas from their corresponding active infinitives any more than in Latin, Ancient Greek or English. I left out the etymology section, which is normal in non-lemma pages (participles in Wiktionary are normally considered non-lemmas). If you want an etymology section, it can be written like this: 

===Etymology===
{{nonlemma}}

which is just a placeholder.

Again, pardon me for intruding, and my apologies if I'm missing something fundamental in Modern Greek grammar; maybe User:JohnC5 and/or User:Rua can comment. Benwing2 (talk) 23:13, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Benwing2 Mea culpa and no need for apologies. I probably suggested to @Sarri.greek that this achieved an end. As you say if it's a "participle-of" it doesn't need an etymology. Sarri will correct me, but if the word is derived from an Ancient term it should probably be classified as an adjective (quite often it is questionable which PoS a term is). — Saltmarsh. 05:11, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. I would say that if a given participle doesn't synchronically belong to any verbal paradigm, then it's an adjective, not a participle. English has various examples, e.g. "drunken", once the past participle of "drink" but now just an adjective (the normal past participle is "drunk"). Benwing2 (talk) 06:19, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek Thanks — Saltmarsh. 09:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

some deletes[edit]

I think i have marked some pages with delete, but cannot remember which. There is also σπουργιτίου and σπουργιτίων. Could you delete those too. (I fixed the σπουργιτιού & σπουργιτιών. Thanks. sarri.greek (talk) 11:16, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
oops, and all the στρωατοποίηση froms are mistyping of στρωματοποίηση. sarri.greek (talk) 11:17, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

λύνομαι[edit]

Dear Salt! At λύνομαι and at λύνω there have been some changes: the definitions which are specific to the passive, were removed. And the link to them, from λύνω. Also at βρέχει. @Saltmarsh, I keep on adding conjugations, always grateful for your lovely templates! I am moving a bit slowly, but i try to do some examples from each category. Also, thanks for notifying us about italiot φουμάρα (sorry that I know nothing about italiot greek except some songs). PS. Your archives 20018 has one extra zero :) Your sarri.greek (talk) 22:20, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Sarri.greek Thanks for noting my typo! As you will see I've left a note for Rua and reverted her edit. It's difficult to know where to work, so I just follow what interests me on a particular day. It's interesting that the w:OED started in 1857 and in 1900 they had only published as far a G ! — Saltmarsh. 05:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Appendix:Books of the Bible (Greek)[edit]

Can you remember your intentions regarding Acts under Appendix:Books of the Bible (Greek) and possibly implement them? --StephanNaro (talk) 14:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • :-) I'll permit myself to assume that you didn't look at the page. There is a typo that looks like this: "el|Πράξεις]], [[Πράξεις των Αποστόλων}}", and I thought you might see immediately what measures to take. (Anyway, it's not important to me - in fact I've opted for different sources.) --StephanNaro (talk) 07:34, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Latin/Greek etymologies for scientific names[edit]

Hi. I am one of the Commissioners for the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. We had a meeting of the Commission recently, and one of the things I am following up on is evaluation of online sources as potential use as "official" lexicons for scientific names of Latin/Greek origin (especially crucial for words derived from Greek). I realize that Wiktionary presumably does not have a formal administrative body, but I believe that for at least an initial set of questions, talking a few things over with an admin such as yourself might be helpful. If you have a chance, I would greatly appreciate an e-mail from you, or maybe a recommendation as to other admins who might be able to assist. Thanks in advance. Dyanega 23:41, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in taxonomic names, have a bare few sources of etymologies, and would welcome the chance to facilitate the process of enhancing our coverage. See Category:Requests for etymologies in Translingual entries for some of the missing ones, principally names of genera, but also higher taxa not formed by suffixation on names of genera. DCDuring (talk) 02:04, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyanega I am afraid that I am barely qualified to find Modern Greek names, Ancient Greek and Latin are beyond my competence and I rarely venture into the field of etymology — so sorry! — Saltmarsh. 04:20, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps @Metaknowledge, Chuck Entz have interest and knowledge in this area. DCDuring (talk) 05:53, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It would likely be a little awkward to try to discuss things here in detail, so - if possible - e-mail will be preferable (my WP page has my e-mail listed). Just to give an idea, a basic thing that I'm trying to establish is whether or not policies can be put in place in Wiktionary to (1) create categories that link to terms of nomenclatural relevance (especially suffixes, of which Wiktionary presently has relatively few), and (2) prevent circularity; by the latter I mean that the ICZN Code compels authors to determine (for example) whether a word is a noun or an adjective by using an actual Latin/Greek lexicon, but a very small number of the entries I've seen in Wiktionary claim that certain terms (mostly noun phrases) are adjectival solely because they appear in scientific names (with no other supporting evidence), and that is circular reasoning, which violates the requirements of the Code. How biologists use a name says nothing about its actual grammatical status, because biologists are frequently wrong (e.g., a paper just published this week that changed a species name from erebus to ereba because they did not realize it was a personal noun, and none of the reviewers caught the mistake). If errors made by biologists are used to justify listing nouns as adjectives, this will only perpetuate the errors, and render Wiktionary useless as an independent and objective "check" for nomenclature. Thanks. Dyanega 06:56, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyanega: Hi Doug. We're a bit anarchistic here, so it would probably be better to discuss your ideas on-wiki rather than by email — you can post in the Beer parlour with your thoughts if you'd like to take it to a wider audience. I'm also in academic science, but I don't do systematics; that said, if you want someone to email or skype with, I'd be happy to chat (and I suspect we have a handful of acquaintances in common). I'd like to improve Wiktionary's coverage of taxonomic nomenclature, but I want to warn you that it's going to be a long time before we can be a useful resource for ICZN's purposes, so your suggestions are probably going to help us without helping you. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 09:49, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

αγμένος[edit]

Hey Saltmarsh, please see sarri.greek's message on αγμένος, they suggest that it should be deleted. - TheDaveRoss 12:28, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Verbs like φτιάχνω[edit]

Hello boss! Hope you had/having a great vacation sur le pont d' A. I was thinking of perhaps renaming the Category 29+30 from φτιάχνω to perhaps ψάχνω, with your permission. Because φτιάχνω is a bit weird: one can see 3 syllables φτι.ά.χνω but it is pronounced and conjugated as bisyllabic φτιά.χνω (synizesis for [ia]). It's a bit tricky. sarri.greek (talk) 14:25, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek renaming the category would seem very sensible - we'll be on the train to Provence in 3 weeks time. — Saltmarsh. 05:37, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: could you delete αναδείκνομαι. It is a mistyping of αναδείχνομαι, alt. of αναδεικνύομαι. sarri.greek (talk) 14:40, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

αναδείκνομαι is no more — thanks for spotting it — Saltmarsh. 05:46, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Polytonic Greek[edit]

Continuing our discussion about polytonic greek (Template talk:el-poly-of)... To add them at normal categories or not to add them?
Salt! I have done only very few polytonics (ἱκέτευσα, ἁγιοποιημένος, ἅπαξ λεγόμενον, etc), as an experiment, to see how they work. My conclusion is that it is impossible to add any more for the following reason:

  • Theoretically, every word starting from a vowel and every word which used to have a perispomene, will one day become a polytonic page, duplication of a corresponding monotonic.
  • They go to: 1a) Category:Polytonic Greek, and the numerous forms perhaps at a 1b) Category:Greek forms in polytonic spelling. But they also enter 2) the normal PoS categories.
  • Thus, the number of lemmata at the normal categories of Modern Greek will be rocketed to approximately plus half. E.g. 12.000 nouns will become ~18.000, 4.000 verbs will become ~6.000 and so on. These numbers are totally false.

The duplication of a word: -diacritics +diacritics is ONE lemma with 2 pages: a central page, and a shadow page.
Vice versa for Katharevousa and older words: the central page is polytonic, their shadow page is monotonic.
I do not know if other languages have this problem of a shadow-spelling-page. Perhaps arabic, but there, the diacritics are a reading aid. For Greek, it is just a typographic simplification with NO other implication.
At the moment, the problem is not evident, because no one is going to start adding polytonics. But eventually, there has to be some policy to face it for Greek, and possibly for other languages.
PS. Polytonic is now 'transliteratable' only by grc. The code el can be used only for monotonic. Which is an extra subject involved. Your sarri.greek (talk) 10:47, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So! Every noun (say) with perispomene will be doubled up in Category:Greek nouns, I don't think that this is a problem. We already have loads of form-pairs, αγαλματοποιΐα/αγαλματοποιία for example; English has colour/color, archaeology/archæology/archeology. But I don't think that this is a problem. — Saltmarsh. 04:53, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Salt! αγαλματοποιΐα is a misprint.
>> I don't think this is a problem.<< You mean, if Cateogry nouns = 18.000 words, that is ok? They are NOT! They are TOO MANY. Oh never mind... Polytonics are not going to be added anyway. It was just a theoretical question. sarri.greek (talk) 07:38, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek — I think that we both ought to be happy about the way things are organised. If it is Modern Greek (attested since 1453) and its a noun then I think it should be in Category:Greek nouns. If we would like these sub-categorised perhaps we should try to do this. Katharevousa nouns, polytonic nouns, etc, etc. Wwe could probably arrange for any that aren't so labelled to be categorised as something else Category:Greek nouns - name to be arranged. This could perhaps be arranged (or not) by having a further parameter in {{el-noun}}. — Saltmarsh. 11:06, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Allow me to make a distinction. If a form is Katharevousa or a Medieval word, that indeed is a lemma. Katharevousa belongs to modern times, Medieval to medieval times. (note: 1500-1700 is either late medieval or early modern). They were originally written in polytonic. Standard Greek was also written originally in polytonic, but we present it here with its current script: monotonic. But my question was: are we going to double each and every lemma? Katharevousa polytonic+monotonic. Med.polytonic+monotonic. Greek.monotonic+polytonic...
Whether a lemma (Medieval or Katharevousa or even ancient) is written today in polytonic or monotonic has nothing to do with the form itself. E.g. The Med.dictionary by {{R:Kriaras Medieval}}, has volumes 1-4 in polytonic and then swaps to monotonic by his own decision.
I have no idea how this could be done in wiktionary. I am sorry that I cannot help. I would do it with pseudo- or shadow- pages. Also: what about polytonic transliteration? But, I guess all this has to do with the general policy in wiktionary. I only asked the question, because i thought that Categories also carry statistical information. Please, do not bother yourself too much. The issue will not come up. Not soon, anyway sarri.greek (talk) 12:22, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek — When I said Modern Greek above I really meant all Greek words that won't be found in the Ancient Greek Wiktionary. But to go to your question - do we double each term - I'm sorry I don't know. es perhaps we should leave it :) — Saltmarsh. 04:41, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could you...[edit]

Hello!!! I was admiring your huge work at Appendix:Greek verbs! I will try to fill as many cells as I can, but first, I want to finish more verbs (I need a month or so to finish with labials: -πω-βω-εύω-φω-πτω-φτω. Ι spotted 2 misprints: perhaps you could delete them? αγλάϊσμα, αγλαισμένος, μουσεύτηκα and ανεπηρρέαστος. The επηρεάζω is often written επιρρ- because of the 2 nouns: επήρεια & επιρροή. You may wish to put it at Misspellings, but I would delete it, not to confuse readers. sarri.greek (talk) 12:12, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
O! I had made a mistake: Category:Greek perfect participles with reduplication is really: Category:Greek passive perfect participles with reduplication. Could you delete the first one? Thanks. --sarri.greek (talk) 12:27, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Update: For some Greek participles which were quite different from the rest: I have put them in special categories. They are only few.
PS. I just realized that at Appendix you use † ‡ § with superscript: I will correct them. By the way: do you want forms added there at the moment? Or do you prefer to leave them blank until they are actually have a page? sarri.greek (talk) 20:24, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek if there are only two typos I should be surprised! Many come from Jiordi, when I bought it at Helennic Bookservice in London (a really amazing facility) the salesman warned me it contain many "errors", but a Levi said "a language unconfined …". I wouldn't want to drag you away from what you do on Βικι, so thank you all you can do. — Saltmarsh. 04:42, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Saltmarsh! Reminder for deletion for αγαλματοποιΐα, αγαλματοποιΐας, αγαλματοποιΐες, αγλάϊσμα, αγλαισμένος, μουσεύτηκα and ανεπηρρέαστος. They are misprints. The ΐα words are tricky. sarri.greek (talk) 10:56, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Saltmarsh/Archive 9,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wiktionary and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update[edit]

Good morning cher Saltmarsh!. New word for me, that prorogation. I thought it was pro-rogueation... Update:

  • an IP added conjugations at γεννώ (which I moved as new conjug to γεννάω) and at αναγεννώ which was difficult: I made this new Template:el-conjug-2nd-A2A1 for it. It is a combination of αποσπώ and αγαπάω. Hope it is ok. I thanked the IP, and hope s/he will come again and add some more cojugations!! because I am too slow.
  • during vacation, I thought of checking the model pages for simple things like {IPA|el|...} {{el-form-of... etc, so that people could copy an updated style, if that's ok with you.
  • For NEXT year: I keep thinking about major issues like polytonic, period 1453onwards (polytonic), and at greek etymologies, about inherited words which are internal revivals of ancient words (template and Cat needed). They are, as we have discussed, theoretical questions -no one is going to add medieval words- but, I keep thinking about them...

Your sarri.greek (talk) 04:19, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek Prorogation - huh!
This all sounds good - thank you for your dedicated work - updating the model pages - much needed!
After each election I've had hopes that a new intake of young MPs might seek to bring parliament into the 20th century (21st might be a step too far), for heaven's sake, it takes 30 minutes to take a vote! No such luck. They are currently spending a few billion making the building safe - still no suggestion that there should be sufficient seats for everyone to have a place. It is said that the cloakroom still has a loop of pink ribbon for them to hang up their swords. In post revolution Britain (News from Nowhere, William Morris) the building was used for storing horse manure - excellent! Tomorrow we are en vacances. — Saltmarsh. 05:02, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Salt!! Have a wonderful time, my best wishes to Fr too. And... do tell me if you need anything more. sarri.greek (talk) 05:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Saltmarsh/Archive 9,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back[edit]

I hope you had a wonderful time (and not suffered from the Cook story). Alors, bienvenu! sarri.greek (talk) 11:50, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merci @Sarri.greek, our journey (by train) was smooth — everything was très bon. Happily we avoided Thomas Cook, although my great-grandfather went to Lucerne with them in the 1890s. — Saltmarsh. 04:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Too blue[edit]

Boss, before I add more: isn't this CAT too blue with all these links? I tried this one without links. What would your recommend? sarri.greek (talk) 05:07, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek If you mean the quantity of text above the "Subcategories" heading, I think that is OK. — Saltmarsh. 05:19, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK. You mean the one with all forms linked as this CAT is OK as a model? sarri.greek (talk) 05:42, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Whichever is most useful, I might only have included the lemmas - but if the inflections are there I would link them.— Saltmarsh. 05:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Saltmarsh/Archive 9,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Verb HWL and participles[edit]

Dear Salt, we have discussed the two issues (which are interwined, if ppp was to be mentioned in the HWL). As I go on adding verbs, I feel it is such a pity, not to have a full HWL. Could we just add params for the passive past and passive perfect participle before closing the parenthesis? You have tried elaborate ways (with tooltipcs, etc)... Couldn't we have a simple extra possibility for these two forms -without too many innovations-?

Also, participles: could there be a 'switch' thing for their type? Most of them are

  • Passive perfect participles (ppp)

and more rarely

  • Passive present participles (pprep)
  • Active present indeclinable participles (aprep)
  • Active present declinable participles (aprep-d)

and probably some more categories will come up.

I am bringing up again these two, for the new year. My edits would be more complete and acurate. Sorry for bothering you again... sarri.greek (talk) 12:50, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Saltmarsh PS. I am doing User:Sarri.greek/verbs, if you would like to take a look sarri.greek (talk) 12:53, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarri.greek Could we just restrict it to adding the ppp? All my other efforts with this HWL were directed to reducing the chance that it will spread out onto a 2nd line. In the eventually (en understatement) all verbs will have a full conjugation - I have made a note to get in resurrect the template and get in touch with you on 2nd January or thereabouts.
ανερέθιστος: thanks for your edits — the less said about my effort the better! — Saltmarsh. 06:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ΟΚ, never mind the ppp for the headwordline. At least the passive past: it is more important for the 4.stems pattern. I could make sure the line never wraps. I could skip second forms. Thanks! Have a nice Xmas holiday. My regards to F. sarri.greek (talk) 10:51, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarri.greek Do you visualise the passive verb's hwl remaining as they are at present?
Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Saltmarsh/Archive_9&oldid=61611093"