User talk:Stephen G. Brown

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



Ejaculation revert[edit]

Hi Stephen, you reverted my recent edit of this article. I added a video iaw Wiktionary policy to include appropriate images within definitions to improve understanding and I subsequently amended the text to improve the definition. I understand the view that amendments on this term may be vandalism but I assure you my adds are not and are appropriate. Please advise on your reasons for the revert so I can adjust my adds accordingly. BigBearLovesPanda 22:09, 26 January 2015 ()

That video is unnecessarily graphic. Some people are offended by such videos. I know that Wikipedia often accepts videos and images of that type, but I don’t think there is any need for it here. We only provide simple definitions to words, and the definition for this is not so cryptic that film clip needs to be provided. If someone needs a more detailed explanation, they can use the link provided to go to Wikipedia. —Stephen (Talk) 23:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

توخي الحذر - беречься?[edit]

Привет, Стив. Ты не мог протранслитерировать эту фразу? Я её не понимаю, какая здесь лемма? حذر может быть и существительным и прилагательным - "осторожный" и "осторожность"? Я сейчас на работе, не могу посмотреть слово توخي. Какой это глагол - какой корень и порода (verb form I-X)? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:54, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Привет, Анатолий. توخى это глагол (стремиться), а الحذر является существительным (осторожность). Корнем глагола توخى является وخى (waḵā). Так вот, توخى это форма V... تَوَخَّى (tawaḵḵā) (tawaḵḵā). Так, tawaḵḵā al-ħiḏr. —Stephen (Talk) 01:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Спасибо за подробное объяснение, я добавил арабский перевод в take care. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

fear can't hurt you anymore than a dream can[edit]

"Angst kan je niet meer pijn doen dan een droom zou kunnen" sounds really good, but I feel there should be dat or "dat kan" after "droom", making it "Angst kan je niet meer pijn doen dan een droom [dat kan]". I suppose it works both ways, I'm not sure what is prescribed in Dutch though, just personal preference on my part. 16:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Kannada Transliteration charts[edit]

I'm interested in getting back into the transliteration of Kannada words, but I'm having trouble finding charts of all the letters and the conjunct ones as well. I'm pretty much looking for an easy chart to look at to help me in my transliteration. Do you know of any such thing? Thanks, Razorflame 01:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

There is a table at the bottom of w:Kannada alphabet which you could copy. It doesn’t have the transliterations, but you could add transliterations using the following:
ಅ a · ಆ ā · ಇ i · ಈ ī · ಉ u · ಊ ū · ಋ r̥ · ಌ l̥ · ಎ e · ಏ ē · ಐ ai · ಒ o · ಓ ō · ಔ au
ಕ ka · ಖ kha · ಗ ga · ಘ gha · ಙ ṅa · ಚ ca · ಛ cha · ಜ ja · ಝ jha · ಞ ña · ಟ ta · ಠ ṭha · ಡ ḍa · ಢ ḍha · ಣ ṇa · ತ ta · ಥ tha · ದ da · ಧ dha
ನ na · ಪ pa · ಫ pha · ಬ ba · ಭ bha · ಮ ma · ಯ ya · ರ ra · ಱ ṟa · ಲ la · ಳ ḷa · ವ va · ಶ śa · ಷ ṣa · ಸ sa · ಹ ha · ೠ r̥̄ · ೡ l̥̄ · ೞ ḻa
—Stephen (Talk) 01:36, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. There was this awesome page that I had a couple of years ago that I no longer have, and I got it off the internet, and I don't remember where I got it from, so I'm kind of unhappy about that. Hopefully, I can find it again :) Until then, I'll use that and this for now :) Actually, that chart at the bottom of that Wikipedia page you showed me is the exact chart I used to have, except it had the transliterations next to each letter :( Razorflame 03:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
What about WT:KN TR? You can add any symbols missing (e.g. diacritics) like (), (), etc., which are missing. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I already looked at that, but it didn't show the entire alphabet like it did on the page Stephen linked above, so it would make it VERY difficult to transliterate. I might have to go digging later tonight to see if I can actually dig up that page that I used a few years ago to help me with the transliteration :) Razorflame 03:20, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
I've made a list of ALL Kannada characters on Wiktionary_talk:Kannada_transliteration#Kannada_-_all_symbols, including diacritics and numerals. Check, which characters you don't know. Note, like in Hindi, the ligatures are not included. You might want to download SC Unipad. You can paste any character there and decompose into any parts (e.g. separate diacritics, break up ligatures). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the help, but I don't see any transliterations of any of the symbols, so that wouldn't be of much help :( Razorflame 03:34, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Could you do some work and add transliteration to those, which are already in the table or given by Stephen and I will add the remaining ones? It's a bit time-consuming, you know :) --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
If you just use the table at w:Kannada alphabet, you can put the vowels in English across the top, like this:
a ā i ī u ū r̥ e ē ai o ō au -ṁ -ḥ
Then put the consonants vertically down the far right column, like this:
k kh g gh ṅ c ch j jh ñ ṭ ṭh ḍ ḍh ṇ t th d dh n p ph b bh m y r ṟ l v ś ṣ s h ḷ ḻ
Then you just choose any letter in the table, look over to the right to see the consonant, and look to the top to see the vowel. —Stephen (Talk) 04:55, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Stephen, could you check Wiktionary_talk:Kannada_transliteration#Consonants, especially those with ???. Some symbols are were not used at the Wikipedia page but I found their description in the SC Unipad. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Done. —Stephen (Talk) 06:57, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 10:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Steven :) Might I be able to bother you when I finish transliterating words for verification before I put them out into the big world of entries again like we did in the past? Thanks, Razorflame 16:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Telugu Transliteration[edit]

How hard would it be to get into Telugu transliteration once I get myself established in Kannada transliteration? I figure that since they are fairly close languages that it would not be too difficult, right? I'm still wanting to broaden the horizons on which I edit here, so I'm looking for other languages that share connections to languages that I already have established as languages that I can make entries in. Let me know what you think of this idea, Razorflame 16:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

The Telugu script is very close to that of Kannada. Almost all of the Indic scripts work pretty much the same way. The main exception are those that use Arabic script. Many of the other scripts used in Indo-China also work like the Indic scripts, but some of them are considerably more difficult, for one reason or another (such as Burmese, Khmer, Thai, Tibetan). Probably the easiest of all the Indic scripts to learn is Tamil. —Stephen (Talk) 21:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the help. Do you know where I can find a chart like the one you helped me make for Kannada for Telugu and Tamil? Thanks, Razorflame 21:57, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Also, would you be willing to continue our arrangement over at User:Razorflame/Kannada/KNTL/TBC? Razorflame 21:57, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Tamil is at Index:Tamil. For Telugu, there is a table at w:Telugu script that just needs the transliterations added. The vowels across the top are:
a ā i ī u ū r̥ r̥̄ e ē ai o ō au -ṁ -ḥ
The consonants in the leftmost vertical column are:
ka kha ga gha ṅa ca cha ja jha ña ṭa ṭha ḍa ḍha ṇa ta tha da dha na pa pha ba bha ma ya ra la va śa ṣa sa ha ḷa kṣa ṟa
Yes, I don’t mind checking Kannada transliterations. —Stephen (Talk) 22:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much for all your help! You've been invaluable to me! Also, I'm going to start working on transliteration in Telugu as well fairly soon, so would you also be willing to check any Telugu words I transliterate as well? They'll be on a separate part of my userspace :) Thanks again, Razorflame 22:19, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
No problem. —Stephen (Talk) 22:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


Hello Stephen,

I have a question, could you tell me the Russian word for 'superlaborer'? Not literally, but in Dutch they talk about a Soviet type of worker called 'stootarbeider' (which means more or less 'shockworker'). I did some searching around Alexey Stakhanov, but couldn't find the Russian term equivalent to Dutch 'stootarbeider', could you help me out? 12:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

It's стахановец m (staxánovec), стахановка f (staxánovka), see also workaholic#Translations. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 12:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Also ударник (udarnik), udarnik.--Vahag (talk) 13:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you guys! Also, thank you Stephen for us using your talkpage. 15:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


There's a Russian translation team you're part of? Sweet! Can I be of assistance? Should I refer to anyone else with that? My account is old, but I'm as good as new actually. (And I think I should delete this once my questions are answered...) --Uncle Looney

night, 24 July 2013

Привет, Uncle Looney. Спасибо за предложение. Мы всегда можем использовать помощь. Вот некоторые страницы, где у нас есть необходимость перевода на русский язык или с русского: w:Wikipedia:Translation, Wiktionary:Requested entries (Russian), Category:Translation requests (Russian), Category:Requests (Russian). —Stephen (Talk) 21:08, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


Hi, Stephen. The vote has finished. Could you use your bureaucrat powers and make Z an admin? --Vahag (talk) 10:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


Can you add the transliteration for this term, please? Thanks, Razorflame 03:35, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


Could you add some translations to the translation table under the adverb grimly, please? Thanks, Razorflame 22:57, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. —Stephen (Talk) 06:31, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :) Razorflame 02:54, 29 July 2013 (UTC)


I just looked at the page for this on the Kannada Wiktionary. There are a LOT of words that this can mean O_O I'll try to get the transliterations for them all going, but it's going to take a long time. I'll begin with the transliteration for this word. Cheers, Razorflame 03:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Could you also take a look at the four transliterations I did here? Thank you, Razorflame 03:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Done. —Stephen (Talk) 06:23, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to do that :) I appreciate it! Razorflame 21:11, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi there Stephen. Could you take another look at the page linked here and check over these transliterations? These ones are a bit longer and thus, more prone to mistakes, and I want to make sure that they are right before I put them as the transliterations :) Thanks, Razorflame 04:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Done. —Stephen (Talk) 04:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your invaluable help! Razorflame 05:14, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


I'm a bit puzzled about the mark underneath this letter: ತ್ತಾ. What is this transliterated as? Thanks for the help in advance, Razorflame 21:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

This is a complication that most of the Indic scripts have. Letters are not confined to consonant+vowel...there can also be consonant clusters. ತ್ತಾ is a consonant cluster, transliterated as "ttā". When you put ತ್ + ತಾ together, you get ತ್ತಾ. The first consonant (t) appears as normal, then the second consonant becomes a "leg", and finally the vowel, if any, is attached to the first consonant.
Some others:
ಕ್ಕ್ ಖ್ಖ್ ಗ್ಗ್ ಘ್ಘ್ ಙ್ಙ್ ಚ್ಚ್ ಜ್ಜ್ ಝ್ಝ್ ಞ್ಞ್ ಟ್ಟ್ ಠ್ಠ್ ಡ್ಡ್ ಢ್ಢ್ ಣ್ಣ್ ತ್ತ್ ಥ್ಥ್ ದ್ದ್ ಧ್ಧ್ ನ್ನ್ ಪ್ಪ್ ಫ್ಫ್ ಬ್ಬ್ ಭ್ಭ್ ಮ್ಮ್ ಯ್ಯ್ ರ್ರ್ ಲ್ಲ್ ವ್ವ್ ಶ್ಶ್ ಷ್ಷ್ ಸ್ಸ್ ಹ್ಹ್ ಳ್ಳ್ ಕ್ಷ್ ತ್ರ್ ಜ್ಞ್
kk khkh gg ghgh ṅṅ cc jj jhjh ññ ṭṭ ṭhṭh ḍḍ ḍhḍh ṇṇ tt thth dd dhdh nn pp phph bb bhbh mm yy rr ll vv śś ṣṣ ss hh ḷḷ kṣ tr jñ
By the way, this is what makes Tamil so much easier than most Indic scripts. In Tamil, they just put a dot over the first consonant (to show that it has no vowel) and write the second consonant after it in the regular way. No complex consonant clusters to learn. —Stephen (Talk) 05:01, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm butting in again, sorry. I find handling consonant clusters is easier with a tool like SC Unipad. For example a ligature (cluster) ಕ್ಕ್ is understood when broken up into its components: (ka), (), (ka) and () - ka, viraga, ka, viraga = "kk". I can then look up individual symbols. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


I came up with the transliteration of ganṭa for ಗಂಟಿ, however, my transliteration chart is saying that this is ga-ṁta. Which is right? Thanks, Razorflame 22:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

ಗಂಟಿ = gaṇṭi (livestock). Gaṁ + ṭi = gaṇṭi. —Stephen (Talk) 04:04, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Is this the case in front of most other consonants where the ṁ becomes an ṇ? Razorflame 04:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
ಗಂಕ್ ಗಂಖ್ ಗಂಗ್ ಗಂಘ್ ಗಂಙ್ ಗಂಚ್ ಗಂಜ್ ಗಂಝ್ ಗಂಞ್ ಗಂಟ್ ಗಂಠ್ ಗಂಡ್ ಗಂಢ್ ಗಂಣ್ ಗಂತ್ ಗಂಥ್ ಗಂದ್ ಗಂಧ್ ಗಂನ್ ಗಂಪ್ ಗಂಫ್ ಗಂಬ್ ಗಂಭ್ ಗಂಮ್ ಗಂಯ್ ಗಂರ್ ಗಂಲ್ ಗಂವ್ ಗಂಶ್ ಗಂಷ್ ಗಂಸ್ ಗಂಹ್ ಗಂಳ್
gaṅk gaṅkh gaṅg gaṅgh gaṅṅ gan̄c gan̄j gan̄jh gan̄ñ gaṇṭ gaṇṭh gaṇḍ gaṇḍh gaṇṇ gant ganth gand gandh gann gamp gamph gamb gambh gamm gany ganr ganl ganv ganś ganṣ gans ganh ganḷ —Stephen (Talk) 04:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Ah, what I meant is if another cosonant, like kha or ka were in front of the circle diacritic. I know it goes to n in front of vowels, but does it do it in front of every other consonant like kha ka etc? Thanks, Razorflame 05:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
No, it depends on the following consonant. Dental consonants make it dental (n), labial consonants make it labial (m), etc. That’s why I made the above examples. In the first example, it precedes a k (gaṅk); in the second, a kh (gaṅkh); the third is a g (gaṅg); the fourth a gh (gaṅgh); and so on. If you look at all 33 examples, you’ll also find some with n̄, with a plain n, and with an m. —Stephen (Talk) 08:37, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


Sorry for making so many different topics, but again, I'm having difficulty with another diacritic: ಮ್ಮ Which does this signify? I'll make sure to add it to my list of things to remember, I promise :) Thanks again, Razorflame 22:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

ಮ್ಮ = mma (ಮ್ + ಮ, making a consonant cluster). —Stephen (Talk) 04:06, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the information! Razorflame 04:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Same as below - () (a virama) suppresses "a", so it's "mma", not "mama". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Yep, I know about the consonant clusters :) I just was not sure about the diacritic as it was one I had not seen before. Razorflame 04:12, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


Sorry to make one more topic, but I've come across another weird diacritic or special symbol that I have no idea what it means. ರ್ಜಿ Do you know what that symbol after the Kannada letter is and what the transliteration of it would be? Thanks, Razorflame 23:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Razorflame, you haven't downloaded the SC Unipad? This tool lets you break up diacritics. All symbols are in Wiktionary_talk:Kannada_transliteration: (ra) + () + (ja) + ಿ (ಿ) = "rji". The second symbol () is a virama, which suppresses the inherent vowel "a", so it's "rji", not "raji". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:07, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
ರ್ಜಿ = rji. (ರ್ + ಜಿ makes a consonant cluster) —Stephen (Talk) 04:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
I've never seen the diacritic after the actual letter. So this is the case where it is backformed, right? Razorflame 04:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
I don’t know what you mean by backformed. It’s just like the other legs, except that it comes after, not below. —Stephen (Talk) 04:22, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I see what you mean. I don’t know why the character formed in this way. In many of the Indic scripts, there are a lot of glyphs where the initial consonant appears on the right (like they were switched) or even in between a sandwiching pair. Usually this involves a consonant and certain vowels, but it seems to be the same principle. —Stephen (Talk) 04:45, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

ఖా vs కా[edit]

You've checked the translations of the family name Conley in Telugu: "ఖాన్లి (te) (khānli)". Telugu Wikipedia prefer the transcription కాన్లీ: Frances K. Conley and Brian Conley. --Кашко (talk) 20:54, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

That’s fine with me. You added the translation, I only did the transliteration of it in Roman letters. If you preferred కాన్లీ, you should have just changed it. —Stephen (Talk) 08:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the fast reply. --Кашко (talk) 10:06, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
కాన్లీ is correct; but not ఖాన్లి.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 15:46, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Kannada entries[edit]

Do you find it weird that some Kannada entries have like 5 to sometimes 25 different etymologies? There must be some words that are incredibly common in Kannada which make for some major etymology numbers, but is this normal for Dravidian languages? Razorflame 21:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

No, it does not seem unusual. I’d say it’s pretty common for many languages of South Asia and Indo-China. There are some words in Japanese, for example, that probably have closer to a hundred etymologies. Luckily, they use a script that writes words differently when they have a different etymology, even though they have the same pronunciation, so each etymology is spelt differently and has a separate page. —Stephen (Talk) 21:21, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the confirmation :) I've been working tirelessly in Kannada lately, as you can see with entries like: ನಡೆ and ತಡೆ. Both of these terms have a ton of etymologies and a TON of synonyms.
Is it normal for Kannada to have many different words for the same English word, like in the case of all the synonyms on ನಡೆ? Razorflame 21:29, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Lots of languages have many words for the same English word, and there will also be many English words for the same word in Kannada or other language. —Stephen (Talk) 21:34, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Do you find the number of synonyms on ನಡೆ to be too many, or did I do a good job on getting all of them? Razorflame 21:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
There are more etymologies than that. I think you are getting in way over your head. I think when someone who knows the language takes a look at that page, they’re going to find a lot of problems. You should not do a page like that until you can speak and read the language fluently. —Stephen (Talk) 21:52, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I know that there are more etymologies than that. What I'm trying to do is do as much as I can in each entry to make it right. I don't think I'm making any mistakes, but there could be translation errors that people have made over on the Kannada Wiktionary. I'm not going to try to include every synonym or etymology that I can, but for the ones that I can confirm are accurate translations, I'm going to include as many synonyms as possible.
As for the entry that I linked, there were two other etymologies listed on the Kannada Wiktionary that did not have any English translations, so I was unable to add them here. Those different etymologies had ~15 more synonyms as well. Cheers, Razorflame 22:20, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
I think you’re making a big mistake that’s going to come back to bite you. I don’t know how you are confirming the accuracy of translations, etc., but I think you won’t be ready to do a page like this until you have four years of college study of the language successfully behind you. If I were you, I would delete it. It’s up to you, but I think you are making trouble for yourself that you won’t be able to fix or justify later on. —Stephen (Talk) 22:32, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
So, you're saying that I should delete all the synonyms I added to this page and that I should stop making entries in Kannada with multiple etymologies? Razorflame 23:27, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
I have not checked out the page except to note that some etymologies are missing, but I don’t see how you could have done a good, accurate job of it. I don’t inspect Kannada pages, I limit myself to other things. Sooner or later someone who knows Kannada and English will get around to looking at it. Unless you’re certain that you’ve done a proper job with it (and I don’t know how you could have), then you’re gambling with your reputation. As I said, it’s up to you. Maybe it’s good. When I do a Russian entry, I always draw heavily on my years of education and experience with the Russian language. I know you don’t speak Kannada, so I can’t imagine how you could make a Kannada entry (apart from simple tasks like transliterations). —Stephen (Talk) 04:10, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
You are right. I don't know much Kannada, but I am learning. I've found a good resource in terms of learning the language, and it's going somewhat alright. I've been stuck for a little while now, but I'm sure I'll get unstuck. As for the entries, I know I'm gambling with my reputation, and I know that there are things missing, but in terms of how accurate the page is, I'd say it's 95% accurate in terms of what's there currently. There's always a little uncertainty in terms of translations. Razorflame 04:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Nothing personal, Razorflame but I have rfv'ed two of your Kannada entries. You're probably too brave in creating entries in a language you know very little. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I remember saying something very similar to that, though much less diplomatically, when he first started editing here. Nobody listens to the guy who speaks the truth in an unfriendly way :3 — [Ric Laurent] — 19:11, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I've taken your advice, Stephen, and have nominated both of these entries for deletion. Razorflame 04:30, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Navajo sort keys[edit]

How would a sort key for Navajo be generated? Can you create one in Module:languages or help me make one? —CodeCat 22:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I can help you make one if I understand correctly what it is. Navajo is written using the following letters:
a, b, ch, chʼ, d, dl, dz, e, g, gh, h, hw, i, j, k, kʼ, kw, l, ł, m, n, o, s, sh, t, tʼ, tł, tłʼ, ts, tsʼ, w, x, y, z, zh, á, ą, ą́, é, ę, ę́, í, į, į́, ó, ǫ, ǫ́, ń
a, á, ą, ą́ = a
e, é, ę, ę́ = e
i, í, į, į́ = i
o, ó, ǫ, ǫ́ = o
words that begin with nd or ńd = nid
words that begin with nj or ńj = nij
words that begin with nl or ńl = nil
words that begin with nt or ńt = nit
l, ł = l (ł should actually follow l, but not fall after z as it currently does)
n, ń = n
ʼ, ’, ' = (nil)
Treat everything else normally. That’s all that comes to mind at the moment. —Stephen (Talk) 09:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, that's very helpful. A sort key is generated by replacing characters with other characters, usually to remove diacritics and such. So it should make the following replacements if I understand correctly:
  • Remove combining acute accent.
  • Convert á or ą to a, é or ę to e, í or į to i, ó or ǫ to o.
  • Convert nd or ńd to nid, nj or ńj to nij, nl or ńl to nil, nt or ńt to nit, if they occur at the beginning of a word.
  • Convert ł to l. I could convert it to l followed by some character with a really high Unicode codepoint, so that it gets sorted at the end of the L section. Is that ok?
  • Convert ʼ ’ ' to nothing. I'm not sure what the difference between those first two is, though.
CodeCat 10:52, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Converting ł to l ... yes, any codepoint as high or higher than m.
  • Converting ʼ ’ ' ... the first is \u02bc (glottal stop, which is the correct letter), the second is \u2019 (right curly quote, it looks the same but is not really correct). Only the first one should occur, but most people will put the second or third because they’re easier.
  • And also convert ń to n (it may occur in other places than the above). —Stephen (Talk) 11:17, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I've made the changes to Module:languages. I made it so that it replaces ń with n first, and then it replaces word-initial n followed by d, j, l, t with ni followed by that same letter. —CodeCat 11:25, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that áchʼą́ą́h does not remove the ʼ in its sort key. Is that a mistake? —CodeCat 11:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes, a mistake. Fixed. —Stephen (Talk) 11:31, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thank you. If the generated sort key is correct (which it hopefully is) then you shouldn't need to add sort= to any more Navajo entries, and you can safely remove it when it's present. —CodeCat 11:56, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Telugu words with Sanskrit roots[edit]

I have found the Sanskrit roots to some Telugu words. Can you tell me how to add this link in the Etymology section. Should it be in the etyl template or should I use a separate one. See this page బుద్ధుడు.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 07:53, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the etyl template. I think you did it correctly. —Stephen (Talk) 08:55, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I am asking you about the linking the Telugu words with Sanskrit roots. बुध् is root of Sanskrit word. Should I or not give the Sanskrit root for this Telugu word.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 14:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes, if the Telugu word comes from the Sanskrit word, or if part of the word comes from Sanskrit, then you should show the Sanskrit word in the Etymology. —Stephen (Talk) 14:41, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I am thankful for you helping Telugu etymology templates. After some gap, I would like to resume my work in Telugu and English Wiktionary. You have helped me in creating te:మూస:te-నామవాచకము for Telugu nouns. I would like to link the categories between the two languages. Can you make sex in the template to work in Telugu wiktionary. So that I can link the Telugu masculine/feminine/neutral nouns with తెలుగు పుంలింగ/స్త్రీలింగ/నపుంసకలింగ నామవాచకాలు. Thanking you.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 09:58, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Do you mean that you want these categories linked: te:వర్గం:తెలుగు పుంలింగ నామవాచకాలు, te:వర్గం:తెలుగు స్త్రీలింగ నామవాచకాలు, and te:వర్గం:తెలుగు నపుంసకలింగ నామవాచకాలు? By the way, te:వర్గం:తెలుగు నపుంసకలింగ నామవాచకాలు does not exist. Is it the correct name? —Stephen (Talk) 21:18, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes sir. The categories are same. Telugu masculine and feminine nouns categories I have created; but not the neutral nouns. I request you link these categories with Telugu noun template. So that It saves time. There are many thousands of Telugu nouns in Telugu wiktionary. Thank you.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 03:31, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I added the categories to te:మూస:m, te:మూస:f, and te:మూస:n. See if it works. I’m not sure if it will work. —Stephen (Talk) 16:31, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
It is made as separate template and is working. But if it made as part of te:noun template, I would like to use it in a single template. In Telugu language, each noun has gender. So that I need do the same two times. It should work like English noun template en:noun|g=f. Thank you.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 09:37, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
I don’t understand. en-noun does not have genders. As I understand it, you just have to put te-noun|g=m and that should be all. You have to indicate m, f, or n for each noun, and doing that should automatically add the gender category. —Stephen (Talk) 04:39, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
I understand it and following the same method in English wiktionary. I would like to request your help to establish the same method in Telugu wiktionary.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 05:45, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, I copied Template:te-noun to te:మూస:te-noun. This template is very complex and I don’t understand how it works. I don’t know if it will work on Telugu Wiktionary. —Stephen (Talk) 06:18, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Stephen and Rajasekhar1961, It won't work unfortunately. It calls complicated modules, which don't exist on Telugu Wiktionary. I can't help either but you can try asking for help on Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/March. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:27, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
We are using te:మూస:te-నామవాచకము there.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 06:25, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
I copied it to te:మూస:te-నామవాచకము. It looks like there are problems and I don’t know how to fix them. Anatoli says it requires complicated modules. I don’t know anything about modules, except that they have something to do with Lua Programming Language. I don’t know any programming languages. —Stephen (Talk) 06:49, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
I am very sorry to trouble you.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 07:00, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
An older template, without modules, could be tried but then, each template and category it's using (inside the template) should also exist on te:Wiktionary in their Telugu name. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 09:51, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
He wants to be able to create a file on English Wiktionary, then copy it to Telugu Wiktionary without changing any of the formatting. —Stephen (Talk) 12:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

на воле[edit]

This is a very tricky Russian phrase for me. What does на воле mean exactly? Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Literally, it says "at will", but the meaning is subtle. It means in the wild, free, outside, at liberty, at large. Also, not in prison; not in jail; not locked up; not in confinement. —Stephen (Talk) 17:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The translations are correct but it's a SoP, IMHO, not very idiomatic, perhaps. The term воля (vólja) means 1) will 2) freedom. "отпускать на волю" means set free, liberate. Not sure what caused confusion, as "freedom" is one of the meanings of "воля". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it is simple for a native Russian, but English-speaking people have difficulty with it. Given the meanings of на (na) (on, at) and воля (volja) (will, willpower, power, freedom), Americans have a hard time trying to understand and translate phrases such as Бегать на воле, Рожденные на воле, Сумасшедший на воле, Теперь я – на воле, Донской казак на воле, Ручной медведь лежит на воле. —Stephen (Talk) 05:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
I've added a couple of examples. Let me know if they are not helpful. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Это прекрасно. Спасибо, Анатолий. —Stephen (Talk) 07:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Не стоит благодарности. Всегда рад помочь. :)--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 11:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

flame out[edit]

Привет, Стив. Я хотел бы добавить перевод на русский (по запросу), но не уверен, что определение на английском единственно правильное. Наверное есть другие значения. Посмотри пожалуйста, если будет время. Или поучаствуй в обсуждении в flame out. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Привет, Анатолий. Обычно flame out это существительное, а значит срыв пламени. Возможно, глагол будет потушить? Также может быть использовано образно: "Salazar flames out in Indians loss to Twins" (Салазар с треском проваливается в потере команды Indians в команду Twins). Или: Mary’s temper flamed out (нрав Марии вспылил). Или: The fire flamed out when the wind blew again (огонь вспыхнул, когда дул ветер снова). Есть, вероятно, другие значения слова flame out, но мне нужно видеть примеры использования. —Stephen (Talk) 01:36, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Спасибо, Стив. Извини, что очень долго молчал. Думаю, здесь подойдёт: тухнуть, гаснуть, глохнуть (непереходные), тушить значит "put out" (переходный). Я постараюсь разобраться попозже и добавлю новое значение к английскому термину. Твой пример: "The fire flamed out when the wind blew again" будет очень кстати. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

речки, рече[edit]

Could you tell me what these words mean? I've been reading Boris Pilynak's "The Naked Year" and it features "Chornyye Rechki" and a place called "Chernoreche". Is it meant to be some generic name for a village? Thanks in advance! 09:18, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Черноречье (Černorečʹje) (literally, Black River, name of a village). Чёрные речки (literally, Black Rivers, where речка (rečka) = small river). Not sure about the specific reference since the words are not in context. There are lots of Чёрные речки in Russia, especially in the northwest (Karelia), and there are lots of place names that are named for one of these rivers, such as the "Black River subway station". —Stephen (Talk) 02:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Request for you to consider a Wikipedia edit[edit]


I didn't see anything in your user page that you prefer to stick with Wiktionary vs. Wikipedia, and I found a section on a Wikipedia article about the number 13 that I thought could benefit from your knowledge.

The section is currently called Grammar. Someone along the way thought it would be worth including the fact that in Germanic languages thirteen is the first number that is obviously a compound form of the a number 1-9 + the number ten. Subsequent editors (I suspect probably because of the superstition surounding the number 13 lending it more interest) decided to include info about the word for the number thirteen in a whole host of other languages.

My problem with the way the section is set up now is that info about languages other than English is a little misleading and possibly irrelevant. My thought was to mention that in English 13 is the first number that can still easily be analyzed as a compound form and then go on to mention that this is true in all of Germanic. To go on from there I really don't have enough knowledge to decide what might be a relevant thing to say. I don't think it is productive to go through umpteen different languages to show if there is anything special about the way the name for the number 13 is formulated. I've heard that the etymology for English eleven and twelve is similar to how many teen numbers in Lithuanian are formed, which might be interesting to mention. There could be a lot of things that might be interesting to mention but I don't have the knowledge to make those decisions. (I blabbed on about the section a little in the article's talk section already if you will want to take a look).

If you would be interested in looking over this or know someone who would be, Wikipedia would be better for it.

Thanks J'odore (talk) 18:03, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Not sure what I could add to it. Speakers of the Germanic languages in ancient times probably did not have need of numbers above twelve, and since the Indo-European numbering system was based in decimal (the number of digits on one’s hands), they only needed to make up compounds for eleven and twelve (these were needed for times, since the Indo-European concepts of time were inherited from the Babilonians, who gave us the 12-hour day and the zodiac). Lithuanian, which makes compounds meaning "one left", "two left", beginning with the number eleven, borrowed that trick from the early Germanic people whom they came into contact with. Later on, when the Germanic languages needed larger numbers than twelve, they borrowed ideas from the Slavic (or possibly Latin), to create numbers from thirteen through nineteen.
But there are many languages in the world that do not count with a base of ten. Most of the American Indian languages seem to have a base of Ojibwe: bezhig (1), niizh (2), niswi (3), niiwin (4), naanan (5), ingodwaaswi (6), niizhwaaswi (7), ishwaaswi (8), zhaangaswi (9), midaaswi (10).
So thirteen is the first number that is easily analyzable as a compound only because it is a more recent invention, and its parts are still easily recognizable. Eleven and twelve are much older, and their parts have become obscure with time. —Stephen (Talk) 00:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)


Hullo there. Can you inspect this entry to make sure that I did not fuck anything up? Thank you, sir. --Æ&Œ (talk) 03:01, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

It all looks good to me. I didn’t see anything wrong with it. —Stephen (Talk) 11:44, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

[1] ditto. --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:47, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 01:54, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I am building a Romanian verb conjugator on Wikcionario, and I was hoping that you could review it; check for errors and offer some suggestions. Ѯ&Π(talk) 08:13, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I’m not particularly good with templates. Dick Laurent is the one who really knows templates and also knows a lot about Romanian. He hasn’t been inclined to help much lately, but Romanian has four conjugations, and you can see descriptions and links to verb templates at Appendix:Romanian first conjugation.... —Stephen (Talk) 09:11, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


Can you inspect this one? --Romanophile (talk) 22:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

It looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 23:05, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

[3] this one requires a review, urgently. The content was largely based off of that of,, and --Romanophile (talk) 12:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

[4] I’m mostly worried about the Spanish. If it’s too difficult to comprehend, you can use aller#French as a reference, or just ask me. I also intentionally avoided translating word for word (more or less). --Romanophile (talk) 09:27, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I noticed that you only had to correct a small amount. Is this a sign that my Spanish is finally improving‽ --Romanophile (talk) 05:34, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it has improved quite a bit. —Stephen (Talk) 06:52, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
A few enquiries:
1. Why proporciona and not provee?
2. Why does tenemos que sound better than debemos?
3. Is visitar intransitive? --Romanophile (talk) 07:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
proporcionar just sounds so much more natural.
Either tener que or deber could be used, but tener que is the usual choice, and deber is weaker. deber is more like should or must.
visitar can be intransitive, but in this sentence it is transitive. Since the family is a group of humans, it needs the preposition a to make it a direct object. —Stephen (Talk) 07:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

You can review this expanded entry if you have the time, interest or both. It’s long, but I have to admit that this one was a bit of a rush job, lots of copying and pasting, lack of elaboration in some of the definitions, missing conjugation tables, it’s generic. You may ignore the Spanish section per se, since I hardly modified it. I just included more language sections. At the very least, I want the information to be true, then maybe later I can reexpand on the entry. --Romanophile (talk) 12:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 13:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

[5]. It’s also used in Catalan, but I couldn’t find the Catalan definition for it, so I left that section out. --Romanophile (talk) 12:16, 19 December 2014 (UTC) This also requires review: [6]. Is everything correct? --Romanophile (talk) 16:21, 19 December 2014 (UTC)


Hello Steve, I am looking for, how to translate Russian prefix при-.

  • Закарпатье (Zakarpatʹje) — Transcarpathia
  • Подкарпатье (Podkarpatʹje) — Subcarpathia
  • Предкарпатье (Predkarpatʹje) — Ciscarpathia
  • Прикарпатье (Prikarpatʹje) — ????carpathia
It is difficult to translate into English. I would say that it means "in front of", "approaching", "at the foot of", or "this side of". English does not have native phonemes for those meanings and must borrow what is available in Latin. —Stephen (Talk) 16:00, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
so "ad-" or "juxt-"? Moldavians from Pridniestrovie are bilingual (Russian and Romanian) and I think, that they know it.
I don’t think that Adcarpathia or Juxtacarpathia are used in English. Nobody would understand those words. If you can tie it to a particular village, or a particular province, such as Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast, you could explain it in terms of that. English simply does not have all of those prefixes that the Slavic languages use. —Stephen (Talk) 16:25, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


place name: Polabí (German: Elbeland; Polabian_Slavs), Podunají (around Danube; or Reichsgau_Niederdonau , Reichsgau Oberdonau).

Po- has several meanings. In the word Polabian, it means entlang der Elbe. —Stephen (Talk) 02:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


Hey, why did you revert my edit? I think it can be helpful to show the literal meaning of the term, it'll help users understand how the terms are connected. Taliandr (talk) 01:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but it belongs in an etymology section on the Дед Мороз page. Not practical to add that sort of information to a page dedicated to a different word. —Stephen (Talk) 05:12, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

English to Khmer[edit]

Hello, I was wondering if there is anyway for English initials to be translated into Khmer initials. Like for example, just the two letters in "OG"? If not, are you able to translate the words "The Originals" into Khmer? Thank you.

Sometimes. Khmer has a drastically different sound system and many English letters have no good equivalent in Khmer. For "OG", it would depend on what OG means. Khmer doesn’t have a /g/ sound, but there is a special letter that can be used when necessary to represent the foreign sound /g/: ហ្គ៊. Khmer vowels are different from English vowels, and "O" might be represented in different ways, such as អុ. But different letters might be better, depending on what "OG" expands to.
Khmer does not have a word for "the", and nouns don’t have plural forms, so "The Originals" could be ដើម (daeum) (daəm, original). —Stephen (Talk) 05:27, 14 September 2013 (UTC)


Why did you remove the explanation of the origin of Ojala?

There is no evidence supporting your explanation. I think it is what we call folk etymology. —Stephen (Talk) 01:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Корейская транслитерация[edit]

Привет Стив,

Как ты оцениваешь свои познания в стандартной транслитерации? Нужна твоя помощь, см. User_talk:KoreanQuoter#Korean_transliteration (сразу две темы :)) и Module:ko-translit/testcases. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

위키백과는 위키를 이용하여 전 세계 사람들이 함께 만들어가는 웹 기반의 다언어 백과사전입니다. 위키백과는 중립적이고 검증 가능한 자유 콘텐츠 백과사전의 제공을 목적으로 하는 프로젝트로, 누구나 참여하여 문서를 수정하고 발전시킬 수 있습니다.
OLD: wikibaekgwaneun wikireul iyonghayeo jeon segye saramdeuri hamkke mandeureoganeun wep gibanui daeoneo baekgwasajeonimnida. wikibaekgwaneun jungnipjeogigo geomjeung ganeunghan jayu kontencheu baekgwasajeonui jegongeul mokjeogeuro haneun peurojekteuro, nuguna chamyeohayeo munseoreul sujeonghago baljeonsikil su itseumnida.
NEW: wikibaekkwaneun wikireul iyonghayeo jeon segye saramdeuri hamkke mandeureoganeun wep gibanui daeoneo baekkwasajeonimnida. wikibaekkwaneun jungnipjjeogigo geomjeung ganeunghan jayu kontencheu baekkwasajeonui jegong-eul mokjjeogeuro haneun peurojekteuro, nuguna chamyeohayeo munseoreul sujeonghago baljjeonsikil su itsseumnida. —Stephen (Talk) 08:53, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Стив, не обижайся, пожалуйста, но я исправил твои примеры в Module:ko-translit/testcases. Очень хотелось бы, чтобы модуль работал по последнему стандарту, принятому в Южной Корее - "Новая романизация корейского языка". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:07, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


What do you make of this edit: diff (the IP geolocates to Brazil). The ones I've been able to check seem ok, and they seem to know our formatting and language policies very well, but any time translations in over a hundred languages appear in one edit, it makes me very nervous: how do you patrol it? And did they copy a list from somewhere? There doesn't seem to be an online list that includes all of them. I find Alabama ilokfa particularly curious, since there are only a few references that have it. On the other hand, they didn't include Hungarian, which should be pretty easy to find. Very odd. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

The Alabama translation seems to be correct; I've added the Koasati translation which is cognate to it. In both languages, the word used for "clothing" in general can also refer specifically to a "shirt". Perhaps they were just embarrassed by how poor our coverage of such a basic word was and trawled online dictionaries to help us out. I dunno. - -sche (discuss) 04:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I have an Alabama dictionary (Koasati, too), and I had already checked the translation. I haven't studied either language, so I didn't feel comfortable adding translations without making sure I knew what I was doing, first. Whoever it was seems to have only done two edits as that IP. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:03, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
I checked a bunch of translations in the languages I have resources for and they were all excellent. I'd trust the rest. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:04, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
It’s a lot to add all at once. It appears to me that he has been collecting and researching the list for some time. I have not looked at everything, but the ones I did look at seem okay. I would have done a couple of the transliterations differently (like Bengali: pośāk), but I’m tolerant of transliteration differences such as ś/sh, ā/a, etc. I don’t think such differences are important.
The few times that I have checked large lists such as this on other sites (like I love you in hundreds of languages, or Merry Christmas), I have always found a very large number of errors, so this edit seems surprisingly good. I think we should accept it and if, in coming months and years, someone disagrees with one or two of them and makes corrections, that’s how it’s supposed to work. —Stephen (Talk) 08:08, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Бейсбольная терминология[edit]

Привет, Стивен. Приглашаю посмотреть тему - Wiktionary:Translation_requests#A_sports_term_-_Russian_into_English. Ты не знаком с бейсбольной терминологией? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:57, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Привет, Анатолий. Это трудно, не так ли? Я знаком с большинством терминологии на английском языке, но я не видел бейсбол описан на русском языке. Вот некоторые основные термины:
Большое спасибо, Стив. Надо пополнить спортивную лексику, хотя бы переводами. :) --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:50, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed changes to Russian templates[edit]

I noticed you saw the changes I made. For {{ru-noun}}, the parameters can be entered as {{ru-noun|headword|gender|genitive|plural}} as well as the original {{ru-noun|head=headword|g=gender|gen=genitive|pl=plural}}. So they are still optional changes, so you're not required to do it that way, you can still use head=. I've already done it for Slovene and Ukrainian templates and it seems to work well. I didn't want to just remove the old parameters for Russian because it would confuse people and maybe not everyone likes the new way, so I wanted to see what others think. What do you think of doing all Russian headword templates this way, with the headword with accents as the first parameter? —CodeCat 14:23, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I think the headword with accents as the first parameter is a good idea, but why the genitive and plural? Those forms are already shown in the declension table. I know some dead-tree dictionaries do that for Latin and Greek, but that’s intended as a clue to the declension, since the full declension is not provided. —Stephen (Talk) 14:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
We include the genitive in Latin entries even when inflections are provided, and the same for verbs too. We also do so with other languages. I think the idea is to provide "principal parts" that allow you to get a basic idea for the inflection without having to examine the table (which is more time consuming). Besides, the Russian noun template already had parameters for the genitive and plural, and several entries already had these parameters before I started to work on the templates, so that wasn't even my idea. I just think it's nicer to use numbered parameters. —CodeCat 14:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Два вопроса[edit]

Привет, Стив.

Как ты думаешь лучше отобразить (показать) "большой" в статье? В настоящий момент comparative больше or больший предполагает, что больше и больший - синонимы. Я предлагаю добавить к "больше" (adverbial), но таких прилагательных гораздо больше, чем тех, что имеют сравнительную форму в виде прилагательного, например больший, меньший, старший, лучший, смотри User_talk:Atitarev#Russian_comparatives_and_superlatives, вопрос об этом.

Ещё, ты думаешь параметры impftr и pftr очень важны для глаголов? Я теперь и сам не уверен. Смотри Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2013/October#Transliterations_for_inflected_forms_in_headwords.3F --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:42, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Привет, Анатолий,
Сравнительные и превосходные формы являются сложной проблемой. Я не знаю, что будет лучшим решением. Может быть, нам нужна дополнительная таблица. Если у тебя есть предложение, давай попробуем.
Я не думаю, что необходимы параметры impftr и pftr. —Stephen (Talk) 01:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Решено, уберём impftr и pftr совсем. Насчёт сравнительных и превосходных степеней придётся подумать. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


You wouldn’t happen to have a good grasp of African‐American English, would you? I’m kind of interested in practising it; it sounds fun. --Æ&Œ (talk) 22:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Mmm, not really. I can understand some of it, but not a speaker. —Stephen (Talk) 22:52, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Tibetan word for “princess”[edit]

Hello Stephen G. Brown. I wonder whether you can help me with a Tibetan enquiry of mine. I recognise that Tibetan (bo) is not included amongst your extremely many Babel boxes; however, your comment at Talk:ཡིག་མགོ་ཕུར་ཤད་མ (from over two years ago) suggests that you may have some knowledge of the language. If you do, can you tell me what the Tibetan word for “princess” is please? There is an image here which purports to be a PNG image of that word. However, I don't know if it's accurate, I can't read the Tibetan script, and I can't input the characters displayed in that image. If it is within your ability, could you perchance create an entry for the word, including a Romanised transcription of it and an IPA transcription of its pronunciation, please? Even if not, any help you can give would be much appreciated. Thanks for your time. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 18:23, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Tibetan does not have these European stations, their system is different. So when they have to translate princess, they use སྲས་མོ (sras mo) (sras mo), which means daughter. For example, Princess Diana is translated as སྲས་མོ་ཌ་ཡ་ན (sras mo da ya na). My antivirus program won’t allow me to view that says it’s a dangerous page. I can’t do the IPA, the IPA is very different from the transliteration, and I have never delved into it. —Stephen (Talk) 19:17, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. Could you, in that case, create སྲས་མོ (sras mo), please? And do you know if Tibetan is written phonetically? If so, I can try to piece together a rough IPA transcription for myself. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 19:24, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Tibetan spelling represents a very ancient form of the language, pronunciations that have long ago become impossible in the language. Some examples of transcriptions versus IPA are: rdya = kja; rgya = gja; rmya = ɲa; skya = kja; sgya = gja; spya = tɕa; sbya = dʑa; smya = ɲa; skra = tra; sgra = dra; spra = tra; sbra = dra; smra = ma. I can make a page, but not the IPA. —Stephen (Talk) 19:40, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Well, that's great anyway. Thank you very much for your help. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:10, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Молодым везде у нас дорога, старикам везде у нас почёт[edit]

Привет Стив,

У этой фразы наверное нет английского эквивалента, во всяком случае, я затрудняюсь с переводом. Она из песни. используют её сейчас по-разному, иногда с сарказмом, но в основном смысл примерно такой - "the young (people) are given opportunities (way, road), the old (people) are given honours/respect". Фразу "age before beauty" иногда дают как перевод (за неимением лучшего перевода?), но мне кажется, что он совершенно неправильный. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:07, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Привет, Анатолий.
«age before beauty», кажется, не прав, но я не могу придумать лучшего. Возможно, в некоторых случаях «youth is wasted on the young»? —Stephen (Talk) 03:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Это скорее пропагандистский лозунг в форме песни с коммунистического времени, имеющий в виду, что всем хорошо в «Стране Советов» - и молодым и старым. Сейчас каждый вкладывает в эту фразу свой смысл, высмеивая старый лозунг. Фраза "е́сли бы мо́лодость уме́ла, е́сли бы ста́рость могла́" наоборот, выражает сожаление, что ни старые, ни молодые не могут по разным причинам - молодые ещё не умеют, старики уже не могут. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
The young have not yet learned how, the old are no longer able...это была бы хорошая пословица. —Stephen (Talk) 04:17, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Мне тоже нравится. :)--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:23, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Neanderthal language[edit] Böri (talk) 09:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I don’t know what you think that article proves. It does not prove anything. I’m trying to explain to you that you are wasting your time here with that topic. You might be able to make an encyclopedia page for Wikipedia, but you are not going to be able to find anything that you can add to Wiktionary. —Stephen (Talk) 10:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
The Basque language came from the Neanderthals. And we can find some "Neanderthal words" in Indo-European and in Circassian languages... / Also some Indo-European words came from the Black-Africans (= Homo sapiens). Böri (talk) 11:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
If you don’t have the proof, it is just a hypothetical idea that you have. We do not accept ideas like that. As I said, maybe you can make a Wikipedia article about it, but you can’t put it anywhere on Wiktionary. —Stephen (Talk) 11:17, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me, Böri. But um.... Wiktionary is a dictionary, not an anthropologic nor a scientific forum. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:25, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

с былым[edit]

Forgive me. What does с былым mean? I have a hard time looking at my paper dictionary. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:11, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

It means "with the former."
День Побе́ды в Ки́еве уже́ не отмеча́ют с былы́м разма́хом
Denʹ Pobédy v Kíjeve užé ne otmečájut s bylým razmáxom
Victory Day in Kiev is not celebrated with the former panache
—Stephen (Talk) 09:25, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:33, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

User:CodeCat/ru headword template missing[edit]

Привет Стив,

Здесь ещё много слов, которые не используют шаблоны, например {{ru-noun}} и другие. Я постепенно их исправляю, но их ещё очень много. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:07, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Привет, Анатолий,
Да, есть. Очень приятно, что у тебя есть список. Я всегда считал, что очень трудно найти проблемы с кодированием. —Stephen (Talk) 01:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Это не мой список, это сделала CodeCat. Да, очень полезный список. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

арабский язык[edit]

Стив, есть новые предложения в Wiktionary talk:About Arabic. Ответь пожалуйста, если у тебя есть возражения или замечания. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:29, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


¿Puedes traducirlo al español? --Æ&Œ (talk) 12:24, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

  1. zangolotear, jugar con, inquietarse, ajustar, mover
  2. estar lleno de gente ocupada, estar lleno —Stephen (Talk) 13:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

How to De-Sysop?[edit]

I'm not sure how to de-sysop myself. Any questions on how to do that? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 23:21, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

You can look here, but I’m not sure you can make that change yourself. If you want, I can do it for you. —Stephen (Talk) 07:09, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm considering becoming either a bureaucrat, a steward, or both. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:30, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
You don’t need to de-sysop for that. In fact, you stand a much better chance of advancing to bureaucrat or steward if you are already (and are still) a sysop. —Stephen (Talk) 12:45, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

pocan, scoke[edit]

I just saw contributions you made in Ojibwe. Perhaps you could help with probable Native American origins of these two words for pokeweed, Phytolacca americana.

Phytolacca americana, American pokeweed, pokeweed, poke, pocan is a common, edible plant found in much of North America east of the Rockies. Century 1912 speculated that pocan was of American India origin. I'd guess they're right. There are other possibilities, as it was a common food among slaves. If you could keep an eye out for it, I'd appreciate it. Other names are garget and scoke (See Talk:scoke.). 01:12, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I don’t think it’s Ojibwe. I think pocan comes from Powhatan poughkone (/pakkan/) (compare Unami [peːkɔːn]). —Stephen (Talk) 01:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Powhatan is a good fit with the supposed synonym Virginian pocan. The plant was used medicinally and could be found from Texas and the upper Great Plains east to Maine and south at least to Georgia, so most languages – perhaps not Navaho – must have had a word for it, though some think that the name in some languages was shared with other plants with some similar uses, such as for dyes. DCDuring TALK 04:43, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Все части речи для весь[edit]

Привет, Стив, приглашаю тебя поучаствовать в обсуждении Wiktionary:Requests_for_cleanup#весь. Если есть мнения или дополнительная информация, пожалуйста сообщи. CC: Вааг Петросян. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:05, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

requests for reviewing[edit]

[7] --Æ&Œ (talk) 12:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 14:27, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

[8] --Æ&Œ (talk) 14:59, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Looks good. Also often translated by these verbs: plagar, afectar, castigar, apenar, apesadumbrar. —Stephen (Talk) 18:26, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

[9] --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:59, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

wealthy: acaudalado, acomodado, adinerado, afortunado, creso, lujoso, millonario, opulento, próspero, pudiente, ricacho, ricachón, suntuoso
succulent: agradable, apetitoso, deleitable, deleitoso, delicado, delicioso, exquisito, gustoso, sabroso, suculento
copious: abundante, copioso, exuberante, feraz, fértil, floreciente, prolífico, próspero, valioso —Stephen (Talk) 18:08, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

[10] --Æ&Œ (talk) 16:38, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

[11] --Æ&Œ (talk) 23:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

[12] --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:16, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 08:55, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

[13] (I am especially worried about the etymologies). --Æ&Œ (talk) 07:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I don’t know how to use the Spanish templates, but I would use this etymology instead:
del prefijo Ancient Greek φρήν (phrḗn, mente) y el sufijo λόγος (lógos, conocimiento). —Stephen (Talk) 07:37, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Done. I don’t know why you classify those as affixes, though. Feel free to relook. P.S. The Italian etymology is from [14]. --Æ&Œ (talk) 19:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Looks good. φρήν (phrḗn) really is not a prefix, it’s a stem. The way you have it is good. —Stephen (Talk) 21:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

[15] --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:43, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. To me, the principal meaning is to misread. Also, I think I would have stated the third definition differently (concerning losing one’s mind), though there are many ways to put it. So, you might add the following:
  1. leer mal
  2. (familiar) decir tonterías, o hacer disparates
  3. (familiar) perder la cabeza por la lectura de un montón
—Stephen (Talk) 07:15, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Is it perfect now? --Æ&Œ (talk) 20:12, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
I think you should keep the original definitions as well. Probably a good idea to ask Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV to check it out as well.
  1. Volver a leer una obra muchas veces.
  2. Inferir o interpretar (un significado o una intención).
—Stephen (Talk) 22:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I should note that I am incertain if the velocipede is either a hyponym or a hyperonym of bicycle (or perhaps a synonym of it). --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:41, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. It’s a hypernym of bicycle. Velocipedes may have from one to four wheels and include the monowheels, unicycles, bicycles, dicycles, tricycles, and quadracycles that were produced between 1817 and 1880. —Stephen (Talk) 06:08, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

[17] & [18] --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 08:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

[19] --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

[20] --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Some of the definitions seem strange to me. The French says: "Tercera persona del singular (ella, él, ello; usted, 2ᵃ pers.) del pretérito de indicativo de conter." However, the French third person is only the regular third person, it does not include usted (vous). I would have changed it, but it’s a template. I believe the Italian has the same problem. Otherwise, looks good. —Stephen (Talk) 06:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
I believe that French does have second‐person pronouns that must be handled like third‐person pronouns, but they’re probably all unfashionable these days. Any way! It should be fixed, now. --Æ&Œ (talk) 07:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

[21] --Æ&Œ (talk) 11:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

[22] & [23] --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

They look good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 06:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

[24] --Æ&Œ (talk) 09:46, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

quebra-cabeça is masculine. Otherwise, it looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 10:14, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

[25] & [26] --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:58, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

They look good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 03:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I am going to assume that my e‐mail did not arrive again. [27] --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

It arrived, but right after I looked at it I went to bed and then forgot. It looks fine to me. —Stephen (Talk) 08:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

[28] --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

¿Sólo uno error? ¿De veras? --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:47, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
That’s all I noticed. I wondered about the etymologies, but I don’t have a convenient source to check that. —Stephen (Talk) 08:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

[29] --Æ&Œ (talk) 23:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 05:01, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Is there any way you can verify the words listed here? Basically I don’t know for certain when Old Italian ended. I’m worrying. --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I think the Old Italian period ran from 900 CE to about 1550 CE. You would probably have to search Italian books for each word to see the dates it was in use. It would be a labor-intensive project. We have Category:Old Italian language here which might be of help. I assume that someone has researched the words listed there. —Stephen (Talk) 12:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

[30] (really requires peer review). --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:57, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I didn’t spend a lot of time on it, but nothing struck me as odd. I think it’s good. —Stephen (Talk) 11:27, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

[31] --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

A couple of minor corrections, otherwise looks good. —Stephen (Talk) 13:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

[32] --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:43, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

[33] --Æ&Œ (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

[34] & [35] --Æ&Œ (talk) 02:38, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

[36] --Æ&Œ (talk) 18:04, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 03:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

[37] --Æ&Œ (talk) 16:38, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

[38] (updated). --Æ&Œ (talk) 23:08, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

[39] --Æ&Œ (talk) 23:32, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 05:53, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Not sure if you can do much, but here: [40]. The dictionaries that I used contradicted each other, so I thought ‘fuck it’ and decided to pile all the stuff together. Any comments? --Æ&Œ (talk) 21:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I think it’s fine. What specifically was contradictory? That might be easier to work out, but otherwise it seems okay to me. —Stephen (Talk) 06:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
actualmente is used as a brief definition, but in the synonyms section it is treated as it were a significantly different synonym.
Notice how the synonyms are less divided? --Æ&Œ (talk) 03:31, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
You’ve lost me, I don’t get what you’re referring to. —Stephen (Talk) 04:58, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Those are the dictionaries that I used, and the synonyms are listed differently between each other. They also have separate definitions. I’m not sure what’s unclear about my message, but I’m willing to attempt to deobfuscate myself (if I know what is wrong). --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:07, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
The message is completely unclear to me. I don’t know what words you are looking at or what thoughts you have about the words when you look at them. Maybe if you list the problem synonyms and explain why they are mutually exclusive (if that is the problem). I don’t know how to explain it any better because I don’t know what you’re looking at or what thoughts you’re having about what you’re seeing. It wouldn’t be a question of misunderstanding actualmente, would it? actualmente doesn’t mean actually, it means currently, at the present time. If that’s not the problem, then I simply cannot figure out what is contradicting what. —Stephen (Talk) 07:01, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
On second thought, you can just forget about it. I don’t see much productive coming out of this discussion. --Æ&Œ (talk) 17:39, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

[41] --Æ&Œ (talk) 09:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

It looks good. I added the etymology to repertare, but not to es:repertare since I don’t know how the Spanish template works. —Stephen (Talk) 10:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

[42] --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:53, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 10:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

[43] --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:23, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Linked "ad" and "supra" to their Latin sections. --kc_kennylau (talk) 09:20, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 08:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

[44] --Æ&Œ (talk) 20:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 11:20, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

[45] (the Romanian section may require expansion). More: [46] --Æ&Œ (talk) 02:35, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

[47] --Æ&Œ (talk) 22:05, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

They look very good to me. —Stephen (Talk) 15:23, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

[48]. Did you stop caring? --Æ&Œ (talk) 18:49, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

It looks fine to me. I’ve been exceptionally busy with a Navajo-language discussion page for Navajo speakers. Our membership has been increasing rapidly (already over 10,000 members) and I can barely keep up with it. —Stephen (Talk) 12:08, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Here’s something different for a change: [49]. Is it at least comprehensible? --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:47, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I fixed what I could, but it was very difficult to understand. Some of it was not comprehensible at all and I could not even venture a guess. If you could translate it back into English, it would be a lot easier to fix the Spanish. —Stephen (Talk) 00:48, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Damn… that’s really, really disappointing.
Somebody already added the link to the English version. --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:12, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

[50]. I tried to make it look complete, but I probably made a few errors. It may also be incomplete. --Æ&Œ (talk) 03:16, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi Stephen. This word is said to come ultimately from a Classical Arabic “qaiṭūn” – but I can't find that in any of my dictionaries so I'm not sure what it means or exactly how it's spelled. Any ideas? Ƿidsiþ 16:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

That’s Maghrebi Arabic قيطون (qiiTuun, tent), from Classical Arabic قطن (qáTana, to dwell), cognate with قطن (quTn, cotton). —Stephen (Talk) 18:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Module talk:te-translit[edit]

Привет, Стив. Посмотри, пожалуйста на результат. Как тебе нравится транслитерация? Она правильная? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:09, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Привет, Анатолий. На мой взгляд, это почти идеально. Единственная проблема, что я вижу, это «анусвара» (), что приводит к различной транслитерации в зависимости от следующего согласного:
లిపినుండి (lipinuṃḍi) (предпочтительная: lipinuṇḍi), udbhaviṁciṁdi (udbhavin̄cindi), kālaṁlō (kālanlō), sāmaṁtulugā (sāmantulugā), aṁducēta (anducēta), nuṁḍi (nuṇḍi), udbhaviṁcinā (udbhavin̄cinā), nuṁḍi (nuṇḍi), dhātukaraṁḍamupai (dhātukaraṇḍamupai), aṁṭāru (aṇṭāru), lipinuṁḍē (lipinuṇḍē), ceṁdāyi (cendāyi). —Stephen (Talk) 05:33, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
О да, «анусвара», в сингальском и хинди та же ситуация, где я прокомментировал «until a better method is found» :) Module:hi-translit. Там некому убрать «а», которая не читается, поэтому модуль для хинди не включен. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:48, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Позднее придется проблему с анусварой решить, когда будут желающие помочь, но пока придется оставить так. Думаешь, это приемлемо как временное решение - "ṁ"? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 11:42, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Да, приемлемо. Должно быть ясно, что имеется в виду. —Stephen (Talk) 23:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Navajo surnames[edit]

There's something weird or wrong with also putting these into Category:Navajo proper nouns.

Proper noun, yes. Navajo? Well... totally butchered, anglicized, and misspelled resemblance of what once was Navajo, maybe. Are Miiller and Shmeet German proper nouns? Seb az86556 (talk) 19:32, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Foreign personal names are always problematic. For example, is Schmidt an English surname or a German one? There are lots of Schmidt’s in the phonebooks of large American cities. On the Navajo surnames, they are (mostly) common among the Navajo people and the etymology section tries to explain how they came about. If you had rather that they be changed to English surnames and English proper nouns, it’s okay with me if you want to make that change (although I think it would be weird in reverse).
The way our templates work, there is no way to divide a word up, categorizing it as a Navajo surname but an English proper noun. I don’t know of any other way to handle these names. —Stephen (Talk) 01:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Then the template doesn't account for the correct categorization in this case. They are indeed Navajo surnames, but only appear in English language texts and are therefore English proper nouns. (btw, it's true you'll find Schmidt in American phonebooks, but you'll also find them in German phonebooks. I highly doubt you'll find any Miilers or Shmeets in German phonebooks, though) Ah well... Seb az86556 (talk) 00:09, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I recall that there have been discussions about this in general (what language should names be in, considering the country of residence or birth versus ethnic origin and so on). I tried to find some of the discussions but I could not. But if I recall correctly, the consensus was that names belong principally to ethnic origin. That does not answer every case, unfortunately. For example, what language is a name that has been transliterated from a non-Roman script into the Roman script...Путин is clearly Russian, but what language is the transliteration Putin? (I suppose it would be English, since the transliteration of Путин into Dutch or French alphabets would be different.) Here we run into a difficulty because we require that language entries be in their proper script. Anyway, it’s a confusing and complex matter. In my opinion, these names are Navajo because they have a Navajo origin and are used only be Navajos or people of Navajo descent. On the other hand, a lot of these names are anglicized in spelling and pronunciation. On the other hand, a lot of Navajos have names that are clearly English (but we still consider these names to be English because of the ethnic origin of the names). As I said, I don’t mind if you want to change them somehow ... but many changes would trigger an error response from a bot. Maybe a new category could be created and added, such as "Navajo names that are anglicized". (That doesn’t sound very good, but you get the idea.) —Stephen (Talk) 08:37, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

insulto auto‐despectivo[edit]

¿Hay insultos contra los españoles o castellanos en esta lengua? Saludos, --Æ&Œ (talk) 07:06, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Against Spaniards? There aren’t many that I can think of. In Mexico at least, they can call them gachupín. The name chapetón is only slightly offensive, referring to a Spanish immigrant who is fresh off the boat from Spain (with rosy cheeks as opposed to real Mexicans who usually have ruddy cheeks). Sometimes gallego can be used offensively (but only slightly) in some Spanish-speaking countries, but more often gallego referring to a Spaniard is meant affectionately. —Stephen (Talk) 07:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Quels sont les termes injurieux en cette langue pour les français ? --Æ&Œ (talk) 07:57, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

gabacho, franchute. —Stephen (Talk) 08:29, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Hein, c’est‐à‐dire, en français. --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
The French-Canadians or French-speaking Algerians may have derogatory terms for the French, but I don’t recall ever having heard any. —Stephen (Talk) 10:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Merging Levantine Arabic dialects into one language[edit]

Hi Stephen, I think your input may be useful at WT:RFM#Merge North Levantine Arabic ("apc"), South Levantine Arabic ("ajp"), and Syrian Arabic ("sem-syr") into Levantine Arabic. --WikiTiki89 06:26, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I think they could be merged. I would never have separated them in the first place, until (and unless) a knowledgeable contributor requested it. That’s how we started off doing it. I don’t know who separated all the Arabic language codes into separate languages, but I assume it was someone who knows little about Arabic. —Stephen (Talk) 12:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
I think it was just a direct result of each of them having its own ISO code. Anyway, it would help if you gave your opinion in the discussion that way everything would be together in one place. --WikiTiki89 19:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Of course it was because of the ISO codes. What so many don’t realize is that ISO codes are granted rather freely. If some people insist that their speech is different from the rest and want a code, they get it. There is no committee that checks out whether there is really a difference. —Stephen (Talk) 22:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Hello, you reverted my edit on суп. I believe this was done in error as the pronunciation had been listed twice in two separate sections and I had removed the duplicate. Cloudlet (talk) 09:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Right, the section was duplicated. Reverted. —Stephen (Talk) 10:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Who told you >that<? Sounds strange... Seb az86556 (talk) 15:26, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Al Yazzie explained that there many ways to say it, but prefacing with this chicken term makes for a not-so-uncomfortable question when addressing the elders. I suppose that the other meaning of ayęęzhii makes it a ticklish choice of words. I think in Monument Valley they call eggs naaʼahóóhai yázhí. —Stephen (Talk) 21:43, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Weird. akʼǫ́ǫ́ʼ are just for plants... In any case, you wanna build a phrasebook that useful, common and practical. This phrase isn't. Seb az86556 (talk) 06:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Granting bot flag to User:Wyangbot[edit]

Hi Stephen. The vote Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2014-03/User:Wyangbot for bot status has finished, indicating support for granting User:Wyangbot a bot flag. Could you please review the result and grant the account a bot flag if there are no problems? Thanks in advance, Wyang (talk) 04:47, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Done. —Stephen (Talk) 05:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Wyang (talk) 05:13, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Could you please add User:Wyangbot to Wiktionary:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage too? Thanks. Wyang (talk) 05:15, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Added. —Stephen (Talk) 05:56, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Wyang (talk) 05:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)



Можно спросить вас насчёт статьи «Стихия»? Вы записали, что у этого слова есть синоним «элемент». Ни один человек с родным русским языком (кроме, может быть, каких-то сверхобразованных товарищей, которые по-древнегречески говорят чаще, чем по-русски, или что-нибудь в этом духе) не примет эти два слова за синонимы. Даже в голову не придёт. В обычном русском языке у этих двух слов совершенно разные, никак друг с другом не связанные значения. Может быть, имеет смысл как-то переменить статью? Спасибо. - 17:40, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Вот, я поменял "Synonyms" на "See also". Так лучше? --WikiTiki89 17:57, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
По-моему, да; спасибо, Викитики. Не могли бы вы заодно прокомментировать ещё тот текст на странице "Discussion", который я написал полгода назад? По-моему, определение всё же хромает; даже если оно по содержанию и верно, оно всё равно не отвечает тому использованию, которое большинство русских находит для слова «стихия». Спасибо большое. - 18:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Я теперь добавил все смыслы, которые есть в русском Викисловаре. --WikiTiki89 19:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

English to Sanskrit request[edit]

Hi Stephen can you please translate below in Sanskrit alphabet;

"One contains all"


ऐकगुण्य सर्वधा (aikaguṇya sarvadhā) (doublecheck it, please) —Stephen (Talk) 08:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, mulțumesc pentru remark[edit]

BAICAN XXX (talk) 08:56, 10 April 2014 (UTC)


You removed a lot of sense. --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

No, there was nothing there. Are you thinking of the Sanskrit requests? Those were too long and complex, and I don’t do them when they are like that. —Stephen (Talk) 11:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Номинация на администратора[edit]

Привет, Стив.

Не забыл ещё русский?

Подскажи, пожалуйста, шаги как номинировать на администратора. Какие ссылки? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:39, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Привет, Анатолий.
Да, я до сих пор помню, как говорить по-русски.
Во-первых, спроси кандидата (User:Xxxxx), если хочет стать администратором. Если согласно, то создай этот файл:
Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2014-04/User:Xxxxx for admin


  • Nomination: I hereby nominate Xxxxx (talkcontribs) to be a local English Wiktionary administrator. Xxxxx is a reliable contributor. ~~~~
  • Vote starts: as soon as the nomination is accepted
  • Vote ends: 24:00, <day month year> (UTC)
  • Acceptance:





Затем на Wiktionary:Votes, добавь « |sy-2014-04/User:Xxxxx for admin » под Current and new votes. —Stephen (Talk) 06:44, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Спасибо, Стив! --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Help with Russian words[edit]

Hi Stephen,

I wondered whether you could help me with some Russian words. I sometimes hear someone saying 'na pustim' or 'na pushtim', forgive me if this does not make sense. He seemingly says it in the way he says 'naprimér', but, seeing as I don't know what 'na pushtim' means, this could not be the case at all. Thanks in advance 19:19, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure he's not saying допу́стим (dopústim, let's assume that...)? --WikiTiki89 19:26, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Could be, do you mean it in the same way as in 'let's say...'? That would make sense. I heard pustim most clearly, but did not quite catch whether it was do or na, that would be my mistake. Thanks for your help. 20:31, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I mean it in the same way as in "let's say...". Also note that the "o" is pronounced the same as an "a", so the only difference is the "d" consonant. --WikiTiki89 20:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Could also be допусти́м (dopustím, allowable, valid). But if you’re not accustomed to the sounds of Russian, there are other things that you could have misheard. —Stephen (Talk) 11:14, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but Wikitiki was right. It was used when looking for some sort of example, almost exactly like 'naprimer'. 15:27, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

English to French translation[edit]

Hi, no one seems to have touched my translation request for a sentence that I want translated into French for an example usage. Don't worry, take your time. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 02:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Русское произношение - подробности[edit]

Привет, Стив,

Если у тебя есть какая-нибудь информация по темам: User_talk:Vahagn_Petrosyan#Слогоделение, простановка знака ударения в русском, User_talk:Wanjuscha#Удвоенное (долгое) произношение согласных, пожалуйста помоги! Главная битва здесь: Module_talk:ru-pron/testcases и Module:ru-pron/testcases. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


Привет Стив,

Предсказуемо ли кхмерское письмо? Есть ли исключения, много ли их? Как ты думаешь, возможна ли автоматическая транслитерация кхмерской письменности? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Привет Анатолий.
Автоматическая транслитерация будет очень трудно. Возможно только для производства очень неточной транслитерации. Как и в тайском языке, нет пробелов между словами. Нет никакой индикации, когда слог сводится к согласным без гласной. Поэтому, транслитерация не разделяет слова, и вставляет гласную после каждого согласного, даже если не существует гласной. —Stephen (Talk) 09:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Лаосский и бирманский модули - Module:lo-translit и Module:my-translit уже работают и дают автоматическую транслитерацию - ວັດຈະນານຸກົມ (wat cha nā nu kom) и အဘိဓာန် (a.bhi.dhan), их сделал Wyang. Мне кажется, то же самое можно сделать с кхмерским. :) --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 13:39, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Ну, мы можем попытаться. Кхмерский язык не похож на лаосский или бирманский... кхмерский имеет сдержанные слова, а не независимые слогов. Я не думаю, что будет возможно, но попытаться можем. —Stephen (Talk) 14:23, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Usurpation Request (SUL)[edit]

Hi Stephen, my request here has been hanging since 7 June, while most of my requests on other wikiprojects have already been accepted. I understand this is not very urgent, but I request you to please look into this sometime soon. I am also willing to wait if this has been a part of the process of informing the target username for usurpation. Thank you. D abhi (talk) 19:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

other methods of contact[edit]

Hullo. Is there some other way I can contact you besides Wiktionary? I’d e‐mail you, but I still can’t send e‐mails thro’ Wiktionary for some annoying reason. The reason I’m asking that is if I ever become blocked here, I still want to contact you for reviewing my works on Wikcionario. Cheers, --Æ&Œ (talk) 13:54, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

w:User talk:Stephen G. Brown and w:nv:User talk:Stephen G. Brown. Also I have a Facebook page at Stephen G. Brown. —Stephen (Talk) 21:01, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I dont know what you did?[edit]

On the I dont know page, you like removed my definition. There was hardly anything about the term. Tinton5 (talk) 01:51, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

That term is considered SoP (sum of parts), so it does not need a definition. If not for the useful translations, the page would be deleted, because SoP does not meet our criteria for inclusion. —Stephen (Talk) 03:51, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

cabeza cuadrada[edit]

Hey, can you confirm that this locution is dictionary‐worthy, if it pleases you? --Æ&Œ (talk) 16:45, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

’Tis. — Ungoliant (falai) 17:06, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it’s good. I suppose you are thinking of the derogatory word for a Dutchman. So called because of fixed ideas, rigid mindset. —Stephen (Talk) 17:44, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


For the pronunciation, see any major American dictionary. For example: 20:18, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

defense already has the US pronunciation displayed. When you changed the RP to US, you lost the RP pronunciation and duplicated the US pronunciation. Only need the US pronunciation the one time. —Stephen (Talk) 00:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Is charcutier really a good synonym of boucher? --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:03, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes. —Stephen (Talk) 08:34, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

¿Cuáles son los sinónimos de recargar (una arma)? --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

volver a cargar. —Stephen (Talk) 00:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

¿Cuáles son los sinónimos de pico (de ave)? --Æ&Œ (talk) 08:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

boca. —Stephen (Talk) 10:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Would cavidad oral work? --Æ&Œ (talk) 10:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
I think cavidad bucal is more usual, but no, I wouldn’t say it’s a synonym for pico ... the cavidad bucal excludes the pico. —Stephen (Talk) 11:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

regarder & observer sont bons synonymes ? —Romanophile (talk) 20:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

What are the synonyms of haineux? --Romanophile (talk) 14:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, regarder and observer are synonyms.
Synonyms of haineux: enfiellé, fielleux, malveillant, malfaisant, mauvais, méchant, pervers, rancuneux, rancunier, venimeux, vindicatif, vipérin. —Stephen (Talk) 14:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Are there other ways of saying fruncir el ceño? --Romanophile (talk) 09:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

fruncir el entrecejo, arrugar el entrecejo, desaprobar. —Stephen (Talk) 09:36, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

An important message about renaming users[edit]

Dear Stephen G. Brown,

I am cross-posting this message to many places to make sure everyone who is a Wikimedia Foundation project bureaucrat receives a copy. If you are a bureaucrat on more than one wiki, you will receive this message on each wiki where you are a bureaucrat.

As you may have seen, work to perform the Wikimedia cluster-wide single-user login finalisation (SUL finalisation) is taking place. This may potentially effect your work as a local bureaucrat, so please read this message carefully.

Why is this happening? As currently stated at the global rename policy, a global account is a name linked to a single user across all Wikimedia wikis, with local accounts unified into a global collection. Previously, the only way to rename a unified user was to individually rename every local account. This was an extremely difficult and time-consuming task, both for stewards and for the users who had to initiate discussions with local bureaucrats (who perform local renames to date) on every wiki with available bureaucrats. The process took a very long time, since it's difficult to coordinate crosswiki renames among the projects and bureaucrats involved in individual projects.

The SUL finalisation will be taking place in stages, and one of the first stages will be to turn off Special:RenameUser locally. This needs to be done as soon as possible, on advice and input from Stewards and engineers for the project, so that no more accounts that are unified globally are broken by a local rename to usurp the global account name. Once this is done, the process of global name unification can begin. The date that has been chosen to turn off local renaming and shift over to entirely global renaming is 15 September 2014, or three weeks time from now. In place of local renames is a new tool, hosted on Meta, that allows for global renames on all wikis where the name is not registered will be deployed.

Your help is greatly needed during this process and going forward in the future if, as a bureaucrat, renaming users is something that you do or have an interest in participating in. The Wikimedia Stewards have set up, and are in charge of, a new community usergroup on Meta in order to share knowledge and work together on renaming accounts globally, called Global renamers. Stewards are in the process of creating documentation to help global renamers to get used to and learn more about global accounts and tools and Meta in general as well as the application format. As transparency is a valuable thing in our movement, the Stewards would like to have at least a brief public application period. If you are an experienced renamer as a local bureaucrat, the process of becoming a part of this group could take as little as 24 hours to complete. You, as a bureaucrat, should be able to apply for the global renamer right on Meta by the requests for global permissions page on 1 September, a week from now.

In the meantime please update your local page where users request renames to reflect this move to global renaming, and if there is a rename request and the user has edited more than one wiki with the name, please send them to the request page for a global rename.

Stewards greatly appreciate the trust local communities have in you and want to make this transition as easy as possible so that the two groups can start working together to ensure everyone has a unique login identity across Wikimedia projects. Completing this project will allow for long-desired universal tools like a global watchlist, global notifications and many, many more features to make work easier.

If you have any questions, comments or concerns about the SUL finalisation, read over the Help:Unified login page on Meta and leave a note on the talk page there, or on the talk page for global renamers. You can also contact me on my talk page on meta if you would like. I'm working as a bridge between Wikimedia Foundation Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Stewards, and you to assure that SUL finalisation goes as smoothly as possible; this is a community-driven process and I encourage you to work with the Stewards for our communities.

Thank you for your time. -- Keegan (WMF) talk 18:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!



You added once this. In French we write île de Pâques instead of Île de Pâques — you can see w:fr:Wikipédia:Conventions_typographiques#Toponymes (I fixed it). Apparently, same for the Catalan (see the text in w:ca:Illa de Pasqua), and maybe for others languages it could be reviewed.

Thanks for your attention. — Automatik (talk) 00:03, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Changes undone on report[edit]

@Stephen G. Brown:Your changes have flabbergasted me. I will try to explain here why I do what I do, or at least what I do that you seem to object to. I will confine myself to the changes you seem to have made to the first sense.

  • On defdate, I make a superscript out of the th so that I can remove the following space and avoid widowing (see here).
  • When I give the name of an article that is available on-line, I enclose it in brackets preceded by its URL so that the presentation of the link is at its simplest, and much better than when it is given in a separate url= entry.
  • When I want to give a link, I like to keep it simple: thus I code {{w|American Scientist}} rather than [[w:American Scientist|American Scientist]] and it works.
  • When I code a simple bracketed ellipsis, that is, a {{...}}, I do not put blank spaces before or after. The template does this for me.
  1. If I have missed any problems you see, please tell me what they are.
  2. If you know of any reasons why I should abandon my practices, please tell me what they are.
  3. Otherwise, would you please undo what you have done.

ReidAA (talk) 07:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I have no idea what you are referring to. —Stephen (Talk) 07:58, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


Привет Стивен,

Что такое "тун"? Какой перевод на английский и какое было бы определение слово, если бы была статья об этом слове? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:48, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Привет Анатолий,
Я не уверен в значении этого слова. На мой взгляд, это значит большая бочка специально для вина (hogshead, puncheon, tun, butt). Я думаю, что один тун обычно эквивалентен 252 галлонам. —Stephen (Talk) 04:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
1882, James Edwin Thorold Rogers, A History of Agriculture and Prices in England, p. 205:
Again, by 28 Hen. VIII, cap. 14, it is re-enacted that the tun of wine should contain 252 gallons, a butt of Malmsey 126 gallons, a pipe 126 gallons, a tercian or puncheon 84 gallons, a hogshead 63 gallons, a tierce 41 gallons, a barrel 31.5 gallons, a rundlet 18.5 gallons.
Спасибо, я сделал статью тун (tun), но оставил без определения и этимологии. Ты можешь добавить? Я не нашел нигде русского определения. Ты уверен, что это русское слово? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Ну, я нашёл его, используемое в том примере в Wiktionary:Requested entries (Russian) (смотри Святой праведный Иоанн Кронштадтский). Оно также перечислено в, но без определения. —Stephen (Talk) 07:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Спасибо! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


...w/o object is haʼagééd. Seb az86556 (talk) 07:02, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

But can haʼagééd be used as a noun, as in a coal mine? I thought that would be haagééd, as in łeejin haagééd. So, if the ore or mineral is not named, then it’s haʼagééd? —Stephen (Talk) 07:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Correct. (> naalkaah/naʼalkaah) Seb az86556 (talk) 15:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
nouns, not verbs. Seb az86556 (talk) 17:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Y&M lists naashkaah (CI), nináshkah (R), niséłkááʼ (P), ndeeshkah (F), naoshkaah (O) = to investigate it, and so on. I think the 3rd person imperfective form is naałkaah; the naalkaah form would be a passive (or mediopassive). —Stephen (Talk) 19:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
3rd is neiłkaah and naʼałkaah (Y&Mrev, page 591, na-3, 3o & 3i).
naalkaah: Noun derivative of *KÁÁʼ2, Y&M Analytical, page 310, left column, section D- ex(3),(10),(12),&(15).
Seb az86556 (talk) 23:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Ah. I didn’t think to look at na-3. Occasionally I look at those tables, but I tend to neglect them. I don’t have the Analytical yet, I really need to get it. —Stephen (Talk) 12:43, 19 September 2014 (UTC)


I've seen you around here many a time, but I can't figure out what your niche here is (if you have one). In other words, I'm asking what you most contribute towards Wiktionary and/or what kinds of pages you usually edit. Tharthan (talk) 20:01, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi. For years I did most of the Russian here, but the declension and conjugation templates have been changed and I don’t know how to use them anymore. I used to do most of the Arabic here, as well, but big changes in templates and transcription have crowded me out of Arabic. I used to do most of the Cherokee, Navajo, and Ojibwe, but changes in WT:CFI made most words in polysynthetic languages unacceptable for inclusion, so most work in such languages has ended. I used to help Æ&Œ with his Spanish, French, and Portuguese questions, but he has left the project. Now I just add the occasional Khmer, Thai, or Navajo word to the translation sections. Also, I’m a global renamer when someone needs to change their username.
The time that I save here has been retargeted toward the Navajo Wikipedia and to the Navajo Language group on Facebook. —Stephen (Talk) 08:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Ah, I see. So you have expertise in non-eastern Native American languages. Very interesting. I remember noticing a lot of Navajo words under colour translations years ago, and was impressed by the amount of effort that had been put into their inclusion. So is the Navajo Wikipedia growing at a good rate, or is it severely limited due to lack of speakers able to contribute or the like? Tharthan (talk) 16:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
The Navajo Wikipedia grew rapidly and steadily for about four years, but there are systemic problems arising from the fact that most Navajo children have been removed from their homes at an early age and sent to BIA boarding schools, which focused on interdicting the Navajo language and on stamping out Navajo spiritualism and culture. The result is that over half of the Navajo population cannot speak Navajo except for a few simple words, even though many of them are able to understand it when others speak; and probably 95% of the population is unable to read or write Navajo even if they speak it fluently, and can only read and write English. So most Navajos, including those who speak it fluently, cannot read the articles on Navajo Wikipedia, and we have not been able to attract any native speakers who know how to write the language and also know wiki and html encoding.
Our basic task in the Navajo language group on Facebook is teaching fluent speakers how to read and write. Since Navajo orthography is complex, and a single missing or misplaced diacritic can completely change the meaning of a word, the work proceeds slowly. But we have almost 14,000 members and they are (most of them) determined to learn how to read and write, so....
I had the intention of adding a lot of Navajo vocabulary here, including verb conjugations, and then adding audio files to each page. I thought this would be really useful if helping Navajos learn to read and write their language. But since WT:CFI was changed in a way that blocks most words, it is not possible to do that here now. That’s why we started the Facebook group. —Stephen (Talk) 17:15, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I see. Is there any reason why the criteria changed in the way that it did? It seems relatively counterproductive to have such restrictions put into place. Tharthan (talk) 17:59, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I would point out that not everyone agrees with Stephen's interpretation of what the change to WT:CFI means for Navajo. See Wiktionary talk:About Navajo#WT:CFI and Navajo. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:09, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
So at this point we're not even pretending to care what people who know what they're talking about think.
This is freedom. — [Ric Laurent] — 22:04, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Angr, after reading through that discussion, I conclude that the policies probably were detrimental to less literarily attested languages like Navajo, as Stephen was suggesting. Furthermore, I have this to ask: Why is there such a stark fear amongst Wikipedians and Wiktionarians that the English Wikipedia and English Wiktionary will become almost like a modern Holinshed's Chronicles in terms of accuracy? I especially question this fear when anent the English Wiktionary. Unlike the English Wikipedia, the English Wiktionary seems to get itself by pretty well in terms of reverting vandalism and providing accurate content on a good basis. So why be so restrictive on what a maven of a relatively poorly attested language can contribute? If you have concerns with an individual contributor's accuracy, it would most likely be better to sleuth them, and determine from the get-go if they are trustworthy or not than to make a change to a criterion for inclusion that will just function as a stonewaller's block for honest contributors.

This all brings to mind this WP essay Tharthan (talk) 23:17, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

I work mostly on LDL languages (Irish and Lower Sorbian) myself and I feel like the changes to CFI have made it easier, not harder, to add entries in those languages; the rules have been relaxed, not tightened. But maybe that's because Irish, unlike Navajo, has a long literary tradition, and neither Irish nor Lower Sorbian is polysynthetic, so there are fewer forms that need to be worried about. I also think that Stephen commands enough respect around here that if he says "I know from my expertise that such-and-such a form is a grammatical word of Navajo, even though it won't be found in a dictionary and even though I can't actually find a text in which it appears", most people will believe him. That courtesy might not be extended to newbie Navajo editors, but of course only a tiny fraction of entries ever get challenged at RFV anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:31, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I see. Fair enough. Tharthan (talk) 11:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
The change in WT:CFI concerns attested use of words, which is similar to Wikipedia’s requirement for citations. We don’t accept protologisms, and we tend to take a dim view of neologisms. Polysynthetic languages have few fixed words, and most words in a given text are built up of stems and affixes, and nobody has ever tried to list all possible words of such a language (with or without definitions). There is nothing comparable to the OED for these languages. Also, these languages have little literature written in them. Navajo was written with a woefully inadequate spelling system (if it can be called a system) since first contact until the mid-1900’s. There is an impressive old Navajo dictionary called An ethnologic dictionary of the Navaho language, published around 1902 by the Franciscan Friars, but it is almost unusable today because nobody can decipher most of the entries (for example, the Navajo word néʼéshjaaʼ bíńdáhii is written as [nǽĕshjā băˊnă'ái] in that dictionary). During WW II, most existing Navajo texts and dictionaries were gathered up by the War Department and burned in an effort to keep the language secret. The modern spelling system for Navajo was not developed until the 1940’s, and even after that, its use has been denied to Navajo children by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, therefore few Navajos know how to read or write their language and there is virtually no literature written in it. There are few Navajo dictionaries with the modern spelling, and no dictionary tries to list more than a smattering of words. Almost all existing Navajo dictionaries have a lot of typos and other mistakes, so they must be used very carefully. Since Navajo is a polysynthetic language with extremely complex verbs and deverbal nouns, few words found in any Navajo text will be found in any dictionary. On top of that, Navajo (like most polysynthetic languages) has few set nouns, and most nouns are descriptions (for example, the word for teacher is báʼóltaʼí, which means "the one for whom he reads/counts"...and it cannot take the usual possessive prefixes such as my, your, or their, but instead it is treated as a verb: "the one for whom we read", "the ones for whom you two will read", and so on). This means that there are as many ways to say something as there are descriptions that can be made. And finally, there is a strong tendency for Americans to think that Navajo and other Native American languages can only say things that were relevant to the tribes in the 1800’s and before (like tepee, scalp, wampum, and buffalo), and that Native American languages cannot have words for modern things such as helicopters, nuclear power, computers, or footballs. They think that if words are suggested for plants and animals that are not native to the U.S., such words are neologisms at best, and if Navajos have been seeing orcas in aquariums and books for the past 80 or so years, their words for the orca can only be a neologism, and since there are no Navajo books about orcas, it’s an unacceptable neologism. But polysynthetic languages have words for anything that can be described (which is everything), yet neither these words nor most of the old "traditional" words such as quiver, titmouse, or umbilicus, can be found in any text and rarely (if at all) in any dictionary. As a result, only editors who are versed in these languages are able to make judgments about them, and other editors who happily go about adding or challenging words in languages that they don’t know such as Russian, French, or Arabic, cannot make any edits to polysynthetic language or even offer much in the way of useful opinions about the entries. It does not sit well with editors accustomed to European languages and other popular languages, and words have already been deleted because editors who do not know Navajo could not find them in dictionaries and could not imagine that Navajos could have a word for something that was unknown before 1900. —Stephen (Talk) 23:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Reverted edits[edit]

I am at an absolute loss. Are you a bot? —Wiki Wikardo 06:48, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

No, I am a person. —Stephen (Talk) 15:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Stefan is guma. Tharthan (talk) 19:36, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

In the future, it would be appreciated if you didn’t revert good-faith edits with boilerplate summaries. —Wiki Wikardo 20:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
What summary would you prefer? —Stephen (Talk) 21:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


Thank you for the defense above (section "Hey"), esp the last part ("And finally, there is a strong tendency for Americans to think that..."), I often feel very alone when preaching this. I should print it out and frame it.

But what I came here for is: standard orthography changes high-tone long to high-tone short when -ígíí is added (cv́v́c > cv́cígíí), so for example, this should be sǫʼ nanidéhígíí. (This is only true for high-tone and only for -ígíí) Seb az86556 (talk) 23:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I had never noticed that change before. —Stephen (Talk) 23:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

"Non-Oxford British English"[edit]

There is no such thing as "non Oxford British English". The closest thing would be Commonwealth English. Dlpkbr (talk) 09:49, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

I should also note that Commonwealth English deems Oxford English as wrong and that words spelt with an -ize are not actually British English.Dlpkbr (talk)
There is probably a better way to put it than non-Oxford BrE, but the point it tries to make is that the Oxford spelling is with -ize. Please do not make any further changes of that sort. If you know of recent changes to the OED, or if think you have a valid argument against this convention, please discuss it first at WT:BP and get a consensus before making such changes. —Stephen (Talk) 10:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
What is even the point of listing "Oxford spelling"? It is not official in any of the counties that speak British English. Is WikiMedia receiving sponsorship from the company Oxford University Press now? Will the Macquarie Dictionary also be talked about as well? Why was this implemented throughout Wiktionary and made into a "convention", when clearly no one who was involved had any understanding of the matter? Lastly, why is a consensus needed to to remove a non-existent made up term?

Dlpkbr (talk) 10:44, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

You should ask these questions at WT:BP. Those involved with the convention are British and if they don’t understand British orthography, you should tell them, because I don’t think they are aware of it. —Stephen (Talk) 11:47, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Where exactly is this convention that you speak of recored? Dlpkbr (talk) 15:16, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
That is all a British matter. You have to discuss it with the British editors at WT:BP. I am American, I don’t use the Gallic spelling, I use the older English spelling. You have to take your questions and views to WT:BP. —Stephen (Talk) 17:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Or maybe the WT:BP? Is this a technical question (GP) or a policy question (BP)? - -sche (discuss) 18:07, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Yes, WT:BP. My brain was elsewhere. —Stephen (Talk) 18:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
  • @Dlpkbr: some points:
  • Wiktionary is a descriptive dictionary; it is more concerned with how language is actually used than with what is 'official'. (Perhaps the clearest sign of this is that for languages which have governing bodies, e.g. French, we don't include 'official' words unless they're attested in actual use, and we do include words which are attested in use regardless of whether or not they're official.) In this case, the wording is designed to describe how only one group of 'British' English speakers writes things like "realised the colour was red", while another group writes "realized the colour was red". (The latter group includes a major publishing house and dictionary, which ensures that their spellings are well-attested.)
  • This is not quite here nor there, but in the case of many of the Commonwealth countries, what is 'official' in the country (British spellings of whatever sort) bears little relation to what is actually used (American spellings, which have come to be used especially by younger generations due to the prevalence of American media).
  • We are open to suggestions of better ways of wording the labels, but please note that the wording has been discussed many times before, and every wording which has been suggested to date has its flaws. For example, 'Commonwealth spelling' is flawed because the spellings are not used in all Commonwealth countries (e.g. Canadian English has been influenced by US English, and some Commonwealth countries don't officially use any variety English, and unofficially use American English—see the previous bullet point), while they are used in non-Commonwealth countries (e.g. Ireland). Lists of all the countries where particular spellings are official would be prohibitive long. 'British spelling' at least conveys the origin of the spellings, with 'Oxford' qualifying the Oxford spellings and the other spellings being distinguished as 'non-Oxford'.
  • - -sche (discuss) 18:07, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.[edit]

I just wanted to thank you for all of your countless amount of help in Translation requests in so many different languages. You really are very intelligent to know all these different languages. Thank you so much! Rædi Stædi Yæti {-skriv til mig-} 02:46, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

You’re welcome. You should always have translations verified by a native speaker. —Stephen (Talk) 03:10, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


Hello Stephen,

could you perhaps tell me whether дьяволёнок is related to devil or to any of the words devil originated from? Thank you. 22:58, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I have added etymology sections to both дьяволёнок and дьявол. English devil is ultimately derived from the same Ancient Greek source. --WikiTiki89 23:09, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh, and could you also explain to me when it's okay to use иметь? Again, thank you very much. 22:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
What's your question about иметь? I don't understand. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:02, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Anatoli, he’s asking when it’s proper to translate English "have" as Russian иметь and when do you need to use an expression such as у меня or у меня есть. —Stephen (Talk) 05:45, 19 November 2014 (UTC), learning when to use иметь is going to require practical experience. All I can tell you is this:
иметь is not often used. Until you have enough experience to develop a feeling for it, always try to avoid using it. When an object of possession is referred to in a general sense, usually you use у меня есть. If the object of possession is referred to specifically, then omit есть. You could think of the construction WITH есть as having an indefinite object of possession; and of the construction WITHOUT есть as having a definite object of possession:
У меня есть деньги = I have money.
Деньги у меня = I have the money.
To express nonpossession, you must use нет, and the object of possession is in the genitive:
У меня нет денег = I have no money.
So, do not use иметь unless you cannot figure out how to say it using у. —Stephen (Talk) 05:45, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the sage advice. Is there also something you can say about the usage of иметь? Many thanks in advance. 12:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

No, simply conjugate it as shown on the иметь page. Sometimes you may need the infinitive, in which case иметь would be handy:
Было бы замечательно иметь дом в Москве — It would be nice "to have" a house in Moscow.
иметь is used more with abstract nouns that cannot literally be possessed, such as причина, честь, право, надежда, нужда, несчастье, счастье, дело, etc. If you use it with a concrete noun, such as имею книгу, you will be understood perfectly well, but it sounds weird, like a direct translation from English. —Stephen (Talk) 12:55, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

глагол While на русском[edit]


Можно я буду задавать тебе вопросы по оформлению переводов? А то я не всегда знаю как поступить.

Например вот такой случай: на русский похоже надо перевести как проводить (время) коротать (время). Как это правильно оформить в mediawiki-разметке? --Nataraj (talk) 14:33, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Привет. Можно сделать так: корота́ть вре́мя impf (korotátʹ vrémja) или корота́ть (ru) impf (korotátʹ) (вре́мя). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 15:07, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Please take another look at my translation request[edit]

Hi, can you please take another look at my Sanskrit-to-English translation request, now that I've provided the proper diacritics?

Gender reverts[edit]

I believe that your rollbacks of my contributions to they and two-spirit are incorrect. Timeraner (talk) 09:57, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I’m sure they are correct. Genderqueer is not in common use and not well-known. Besides that, two-spirits are not the same as gay, and a word like genderqueer does not belong there. —Stephen (Talk) 10:36, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Did you read what genderqueer means? Timeraner (talk) 11:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
The definition of genderqueer has nothing to do with Native Americans, which means it isn't a synonym of two-spirit.
Desist. — [Ric Laurent] — 11:09, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Example sentence on two-spirit page:

2010, Walter L Williams, The Guardian, 11 Oct 2010: Instead of seeing two-spirit persons as transsexuals who try to make themselves into "the opposite sex", it is more accurate to understand them as individuals who take on a gender status that is different from both men and women.

Definition of genderqueer:

Neither exclusively man nor woman; identifying as (has a gender identity which is) outside of the gender binary; rejecting cisnormativity.

Genderqueer is an umbrella term that would include two-spirit Native Americans. I did not write genderqueer as a synonym but it needs to be "see also." Timeraner (talk) 11:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Genderqueer is not widely understood or used. There are important cultural and practical differences involved and two-spirits already have enough trouble in their communities by being identified by white people as gay or queer. Definitions of and assumptions about two-spirits by white people are far off the mark. The definition of genderqueer does not cover two-spirits, in spite of what some non-Native Americans may claim. I do not wish to discuss two-spirits with you; please move on to something else, preferably something you know about by personal experience. —Stephen (Talk) 11:31, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
You are one revert away from an edit war, which will result in a block for you. —Stephen (Talk) 11:34, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay. I use "they" pronouns for my gender identity. Compromise on they for "unknown or irrelevant gender." My gender is known, it is genderqueer. Timeraner (talk) 11:59, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

We might be able to compromise on they as long as you don’t use genderqueer. Please stop trying to push that word on us. —Stephen (Talk) 12:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
It has multilingual academic support on the Wikipedia article and other language Wiktionaries. What do you suggest alternatively? Timeraner (talk) 12:45, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I suggest that you stop bothering me with genderqueer. I don’t use that word, I don’t know anybody who uses it or understands it. If you want to call yourself genderqueer, be my guest, but please stop bothering me. I am not interested in your weird word. —Stephen (Talk) 12:58, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
תודה על זה סטיבן. :) Myself being a nonhetero, I get tired of all these people trying so ferociously to pigeonhole themselves and demanding everyone around them respect their choices. Centering your entire identity around your sexual oddities is some kind of insanity. You gave me a little extra hope today. — [Ric Laurent] — 16:03, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Stephen, I am going to edit the article to say "whose gender is unknown, irrelevant, or does not fit the gender binary." Timeraner (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Comment "genderqueer" is actually almost as common (or as rare, if you prefer) as "two-spirit" itself, according to ngrams. I don't think it's a problem to list it in the See also section (and "genderqueer" has nothing to do with sexuality), but I'm not going to push that issue. (What I might do is make a list template that would contain a collapsed list of all the various gender-related terms, which could then be deployed to the See also sections of all of them.) - -sche (discuss) 04:57, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Maybe they are uncommon/rare because they are terms coming from tiny minorities. — [Ric Laurent] — 12:34, 16 January 2015 (UTC)


Please see comment at -- 23:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Request a little help[edit]

Hi Stephen. I saw you handle quite good the arabic and french languages. Can you patrol the contributions from this IP on the fr.wiktionary. He added few arabic translations but all were revoked by a patroller... and somes of them seems to be good for me (the 1st one : اللسانيات per linguistic as exemple). So can you merged the that can be restored. Thank you. V!v£ l@ Rosière /Whisper…/ 05:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. It is difficult for me because I do not know the policies of the fr.wiktionary. Most of his entries consisted of multiple words (such entries are often considered to be SoP, « somme des parties »); most of the entries included the definite article; and some of his entries included vocalizations (vowel pointing). I don’t know if the fr.wiktionary permits such entries. Most of them would not be accepted here on the en.wiktionary. Apart from these problems, the entries are good Arabic. Depending upon your policies, they might be good entries, though perhaps with some modification. —Stephen (Talk) 06:57, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, we don't accept locutions unless they are considered as "frozen" like bite the dust & co. But if it's standard Arabic it's a good point, then I'll try to find out if it has this "frozen" trait. Anyway thank you for your answer. V!v£ l@ Rosière /Whisper…/ 01:14, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
This revoke] was wrong. To make them work need to do {{trad-|ar|ذكر|ذِكْر|m}}, since French Wiktionary doesn't support delinking diacritics. Same with Persian but Persian could be without diacritics, just "ذكر". See our Arabic entry ذِكْر (ḏikr). Pls. note that diacritics are removed on the link in the English Wiktionary. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:58, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, French Wiktionary doesn't seem to support alternative views, I ended up using "ذكر" for Arabic as well, the form "ذِكْر" uses diacritics but should link to the entry without them. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:04, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
@Atitarev: Hi, if by "support alternative view" you mean "orthgraphic variations" yes we support it and included it on French wiktionary. But fact is we don't have any Arabic language specialist and also no discussions and no consensus about the treatment of these diacritics, so it's quite a pioneer foggy area. Thank for the help, I restore that one. EDIT : Didn't saw you've already done it. ;-) V!v£ l@ Rosière /Whisper…/ 08:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


Hi! I was just wondering about this edit to łééchąąʼí, in light of your comment on the talk page which claims that the opposite is the case. Did you find a better source on the etymology of the word? Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

It is sometimes difficult to uncover the true origins of some words such as this because a lot of people today are bothered by the idea and they want to promote a more romantic explanation such as "crying horse" (łį́į́ʼ yichaʼí). In my Navajo language group, we have over 15,000 members, most of whom are fluent speakers, and I also have much better printed resources now, and after six years of studying the language and culture, I have a better grasp of the language than I did in those early days. —Stephen (Talk) 12:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No problem, thanks for the explanation. I must admit, I'm a little disappointed that it's not because they're "shitty pets" compared to horses, but it's definitely better for Wiktionary to be right than romantic on this sort of thing. Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:42, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Khmer នំបុ័ងវែង / នំប៉័ងវែង ("baguette") a word or just SOP?[edit]

Hi Stephen.

In case you hadn't notice I'm finally in Cambodia trying to learn at least a bit of Khmer.

None of the dictionaries I have or can find online have an entry for baguette though of course such bread is extremely common here. I finally found out today from a native speaker fluent in English that they call baguettes "long bread", so នំបុ័ងវែង / នំប៉័ងវែង (numbângvêng).

With your Sprachgefuhl for Khmer, would you say this qualifies as a "word" and therefore for an entry in Wiktionary? Or would you say that it's just SOP. It can be really hard to tell in monosyllabic languages and languages whose writing systems don't use spaces between words. Of course it can be hard to tell in any language. (-:

I also noted that there's three ways to write "bread" in Khmer in Unicode, due to order of and interaction between diacritics and vowel signs, and can't tell which is "correct". These two are much more common than the third way though so I didn't include that. — hippietrail (talk) 16:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I figured that you were in that area. That’s a good word, since it is impossible to predict or deduce. Khmer is subject to a lot of variations in writing, because the written language is so very old and pronunciations today no longer match the spellings of a 1000 years ago, and because Cambodians tend to spell things in a way that is personally logical, not necessary according to a standard the way we do in English. Also, there are often different ways of writing that achieve the same result. Add to that the fact that some of the "legs" (subscript consonants) look exactly like another "leg".
Now you’ll have to learn to read អក្សរមូល (qâksârômul) (round script), which looks so different from អក្សរឈរ (qâksârôchhrô) (standing script). —Stephen (Talk) 01:18, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


I made сагитировать a while ago. I wonder if you could check my edit. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:09, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

And искриться, too. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
And I also reorganized аблактировать. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:40, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
I think they look good. —Stephen (Talk) 07:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

And I also made звереть. It is sort of a very unusual Russian verb. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
And восстановить. I think I made a mistake here. --08:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Also агонизировать. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:46, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
One more: веселить. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:47, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
@KoreanQuoter:. Thanks for edits. I'll also check your Russian entries when I get back from my leave early in March. Thanks, Stephen! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:51, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Pls try using {{ru-IPA}} for pronunciations in new entries. It works for most cases, you can use |phon= for irregular pronunciations. Pls note pronunciation of "восстановить": IPA(key): [vəstənɐˈvʲitʲ] (usually no gemination in this case). :) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:01, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I also have a problem with the conjugation in чтить. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:09, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Are you referring to the 1st-person singular "ччу́"? I think this is a problem with one of the Lua modules, which is improperly changing чт to чч. @Atitarev: created the modules, and I do not understand Lua. I think we have to wait until Atitarev can look at it. —Stephen (Talk) 08:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Wow, thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:56, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
And I'm not sure about посчитаться. I think the meaning could be changed in the perfective form. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:34, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm also confused with this баллотироваться article. I think I made a handful of mistakes but I wouldn't know. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:03, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
I think they are good now. —Stephen (Talk) 10:29, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Please wait when I get back go fix чтить and others. It's currently awkward with irregular desktop and Internet access. Verbs with incorrect inflections or requiring attention should be marked accordingly, anyway. Or request inflections. Pls don't leave entries with problems. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 18:50, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

How about замерять and вибрировать? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

But one question. Does говорить have to perfective verbs? Or maybe each meaning have a different perfective verb? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:51, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
говорить has both сказать and поговорить as perfectives. сказать is the basic perfective, but поговорить is used as well. сказать and поговорить have slightly different meanings. The prefix по- (po-) often gives a connotation of "a little", or "for a while", and it adds this to the verb поговорить. —Stephen (Talk) 11:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Please check my [51]. I think the style should be slightly different. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:23, 7 March 2015 (UTC) Sorry, I edited again. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:26, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation. And I need your wise insight on these: наладить, больше не, согревать. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
@KoreanQuoter: Hi, I am back home. I'll go through your edits over the next few days, sorry for not being responsive lately (including my talk page). At first glance, I see that the entry "больше не" should be deleted, it's not an idiomatic word/expression in Russian. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Sure thing. I understand. I went through the process of organizing the больше entry and thought of making that entry. It was my mistake. But anyways, it's great to see you back into action. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:16, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Need to check выписывать, please, and thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:44, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

The very first verbal conjugation template for Sanskrit.[edit]

I made Template:sa-verb-pres yesterday. It's the very first verbal conjugation template for Sanskrit. This template only has the present tense. I based it on the famous Sanskrit textbook written by Robert P. Goldman et al. You can see the examples भवति, हन्ति, अस्ति, वदति, and भाषति, and enjoy looking at them. It's a very small template in terms of size. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:39, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. There is a problem with it. The persons were listed from 3rd down to 1st, but the pronouns were shown from 1st down to 3rd. I corrected the persons to list from 1st down to 3rd (I know that Sanskrit is often listed from 3rd to 1st, but we have been doing it from 1st to 3rd, which is more familiar to most people). However, when I looked at भवति, I see that the verbs themselves are from 3rd to 1st.
In my opinion, it is better to keep the pronouns as you have them, and change the verb forms to 1st down to 3rd.
Eventually, I hope that someone who is familiar with Sanskrit and who knows Lua programming language will be able to create Lua modules for Sanskrit verbs, as we have done for the Russian verbs. Myself, I don’t know anything about Lua programming language or how to write verb modules. —Stephen (Talk) 00:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
The Russian modules were started off by me with only a basic knowledge of Russian grammar. I think if I can get a good idea of how things work and what is needed, I could make a start with the module, enough so that it's easy to extend even for someone with little experience in it. —CodeCat 00:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
CodeCat, you can use to find a verb class (for exameple, class 1) and the root (shown between { _ }). Then if you go to, you can enter the class and the root (choosing Velthuis for Romanization, or Devanagari as needed), you can see the conjugations in the tenses and moods. —Stephen (Talk) 00:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
What is mainly important for me is what information is necessary to generate a paradigm. That is, which forms or stems or other inflectional features can't always be predicted and must be entered as part of the template's parameters. —CodeCat 01:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Sanskrit verbs have very many irregular conjugations. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:47, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes. I have no idea how to handle irregularities, except by entering the conjugations manually. —Stephen (Talk) 04:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I consulted to a person who knows about Sanskrit and I found out something important. First, Classical Sanskrit and Vedic Sanskrit are two very different "kinds of monsters". Both of them are rather grammatically different to each other. It's just that Classical Sanskrit is more of a "artificial koine" language that is influenced by Vedic Sanskrit. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:30, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Questions on Russian Grammar[edit]

I'm trying to put a Usage notes in the article, перед. I based it on a content from my Russian textbook (in Russian).

Using перед with a sense of time denotes an event that had ended immediately, while до denotes that there is a short interval between two events.

I don't think I explain it very well and I don't think I understand it quite well.I wonder if you could fix it? And while at it, I think I need some improvement from my edit. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:44, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Extra note: перед and до are rather confusing for native Korean speakers who are learning Russian. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:46, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

When speaking about time ...
до (до момента) can mean quite a long period, whereas перед (перед моментом) means just before the very moment.
Давай встретимся до работы (let’s meet before work, which means any time between now and when we start work, and the meeting could be anywhere).
Давай встретимся перед работой (let’s meet before work, which means "just before we start work", "immediately before work", probably at the job site).
До города ещё далеко (the city is still far away, measured from here to there).
Я дошёл до перекрёстка (I reached the crossroads, going from here to there).
Перед союзом «что» ставится запятая (a comma is placed before the conjunction "что", meaning immediately before that word). —Stephen (Talk) 14:29, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I wonder if you could improve the перед article with a Usage note or something. It's because I found out that there are very poor explanations of articles pertaining to Russian conjugations. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I have a question. What is the difference between two conjunctions оттого что and потому что? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:46, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

оттого что answers the question отчего; потому что answers почему. Nevertheless, a question introduced by отчего is often answered by потому что.

почему / потому что literally means "according to what grounds? / on the grounds that"; отчего / оттого что literally means "from what cause? / due to the cause that". Occasionally one sounds better than the other, as in:
Отчего́ сего́дня так темно́?Otčegó segódnja tak temnó? ― Why is it so dark today? (from what cause?, answered with оттого что)
Отчего́ вы так бле́дны?Otčegó vy tak blédny? ― Why are you so pale? (from what cause?, answered with оттого что)
Почему́ вы говори́те э́то?Počemú vy govoríte éto? ― Why do you say this?, (on what grounds?, answered with потому что)
Почему́ он жела́ет ви́деть меня́?Počemú on želájet vídetʹ menjá? ― Why does he wish to see me?, (on what grounds?, answered with потому что)
But, generally speaking, оттого что and потому что are almost the same and quite interchangeable. However, потому что is far more commonly used. —Stephen (Talk) 13:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Is it ok if I can use your explanation as a usage note? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:18, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay. —Stephen (Talk) 05:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Does French have neuter pronouns?[edit]

I’m attempting to think of some French pronouns that are strictly neuter. There are some in the Iberian languages (e.g. isto, esso, aquilo), but there’re precious few of them. The neuter gender mostly assimilated into the masculine one because of phonetic similarity (and probably not for sexist reasons, but I could be wrong). --Romanophile (talk) 06:19, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

le is a neuter object pronoun as well as a masculine one. In a construction such as this:
Si vous êtes satisfait, je le suis aussi.
...le is neuter.
ce and il can be neuter subject pronouns. When ce is a neuter subject pronoun, it governs a plural verb:
Ce sont mes CDs préférés. — They’re my favorite CDs.
Note the plural verb. Also, any adjectives or participles that refer to it are in the masculine. This is formal usage; in informal, colloquial speech, ce may take a singular verb.
Il est important de passer du temps ensemble. — It’s important to spend time together.
With neuter il, the verb it governs is singular.
In addition, ceci (this), cela (that), and ça (this/that, informal) are neuter demonstrative pronouns.
Ne fais pas cela. — Don’t do that.
Ça suffit ! — That’s enough! —Stephen (Talk) 07:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Slavic loanwords in Russian[edit]

Has Russian borrowed extensively from (modern) Slavic languages? Judging from our own categories, it doesn’t seem like it. --Romanophile (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Russian has borrowings from (or via) modern or older Polish, Ukrainian and less commonly from other languages. It's not always easy to tell, if words are borrowed from such languages as there are cognates in Russian or similar regionalism. Loanwords from Old Church Slavonic often sounds like native Russian words as well and Russian shares a lot of words with Bulgarian from Old Church Slavonic. You can see the appropriate categories but they are obviously incomplete.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:23, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
A lot of Orthodox Christian religious figures from the Slavic-speaking Balkan Peninsula moved to Russia and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth after the advance of the Ottoman Empire. Hence (Old) Church Slavonic was quite enforced in Russia. And you can look up Meletius Smotrytsky's "Slavonic Grammar with Correct Syntax" that was popular at that time. I would say that the "high-style" of Russian writing often employ (Old) Church Slavonic words. But based on my experience (my former university professor was a native Polish-speaker), East Slavic and South Slavic are more similar to each other than West Slavic. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I think User:Romanophile's question was more about loanwords. Yes, "high-level" words are often similar between Russian and Bulgarian because of the common literary past (Old Church Slavonic) but grammatically, syntactically I find West and East Slavic languages closer and hence easier to learn, understand, especially Polish and Russian. Slovenian seems the most distant. Ukrainian and Belarusian share much more common vocabulary with Polish and have much more borrowings than Russian. Nevertheless, Ukrainian and Belarusian are the closest to Russian in most aspects - grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, the way of expressing things. Overall, Slavic languages share about 60%+ common roots but pronunciation, usage, grammar make them sometimes not immediately mutually comprehensible, without some exposure. If gaps are filled in a short period, Slavic people are able to communicate with each other with various degrees of difficulty. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Learning "formal" grammar in the pre-modern past was more than learning syntax or morphology. It also included "how to use the right words" in writing in contrast to the commoners or to isolate from the commoners. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:22, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean by this but (Old) Church Slavonic has affected Ukrainian and Belarusian as well. West (specifically) Polish and East Slavs had much more interaction (positive and negative) than South and East Slavs since. While Bulgarian shares a lot of formal vocabulary with Russian, it has a lot of older words, native Bulgarian words or Turkish loanwords. Plus grammar differences make Bulgarian and Russian less mutually comprehensible. Serbo-Croatian stands even further away, common Slavic roots also acquired different senses or other roots are used. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm just going through the history how some of those "fancy words", that can be easily be traced in (Old) Church Slavonic writings, are used in formal writing in Russian.--KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I see. The "fancy words" are not the core vocabulary, though, otherwise close languages would be less mutually comprehensible. Cf. Hindi and Urdu - basically the same languages but they have different literary traditions and often different "high level" languages, they prefer to borrow from. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:46, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I would arrange major Slavic languages from the Russian point of view in order of their similarity to Russian (see dialect continuum) in this order (core vocabulary): Russian - Ukrainian/Belarusian (together) - Polish - Slovak - Czech - Bulgarian - Macedonian - Serbo-Croatian - Slovene. Literary forms would make Bulgarian closer but not enough to replace closer languages. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

More requests for reviewing[edit]

Because the last topic is enormous.

[52] --Romanophile (talk) 18:17, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

[53] --Romanophile (talk) 20:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)


Thank you very much Stephen for helping in the translation of EN to Latin. It is always good to know that still exists people in this world capable of helping others. I Wish you the best.