User talk:Stricnina
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
I reverted your edits because it wasn't clear what you meant. You specified one language in {{etyl}}, but then another in {{m}}, so I can't tell if the term is supposed to be Spanish or Nahuatl.
Aside from that, {{etyl}} is deprecated, so you should not use it anymore, there are other templates like {{der}}, {{inh}} and {{bor}} that replace it. —Rua (mew) 18:13, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Why was the etymology for "unan" removed? It is clearly an elision, and other Philippine languages have preserved "ulunan" to mean the exact same thing which is "pillow". 136.158.32.90 13:58, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Removing Synonyms[edit]
Hey @Stricnina, I'm wondering why you're removing synonyms, in astronomiya and hilabigat. Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- I don't see any particular reason adding not widely used or not successful nor accepted protologisms as synonyms. Stricnina (talk) 05:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Stricnina: We're a descriptive dictionary, so given that there are groups that do consider these new coinages as part of lexicon, and their inclusion in accepted dictionaries (like dalubtalaan), and as long as they are under the word inclusion criteria of Wiktionary of attestation (publications, etc.), there's no reason why they shouldn't be added as synonyms, if you want, you can add a label of "neologism" under the synonyms. What you do is add "|q1=neologism" in the synonym list. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:40, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Stricnina: Also, please don't remove other editor's edits without consulting them first. Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Mar vin kaiser: I believe a lot of the Maugnayin words won't even pass the Wiktionary criteria of attestation. Does "luntidinsol" or the different "balni-" words for example even pass the basic criteria? Stricnina (talk) 05:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Stricnina: That's a good discussion to have. For me, I think there's sort of a gray area here, on one hand, some of them were adapted by KWF, some of them are heavily used here and there without KWF promotion, some of them are used in the modern day by people who are interested in having technical terms that are locally derived, which has gotten some traction online, though some of those terms I admit are limited to specific publications (often rare, more than 3), that actively use Maugnayin. I've tried to collect some resources in this area so I've seen how it was actively used by small groups throughout the late 20th century. Though I get your point lol. Any further thoughts? I'd love to have a discussion on this with a fellow editor, and we could bring in the other Tagalog editors. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:58, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Stricnina: I've been reading up on whether it is a "protologism" or not. The way Mikhail Epstein defined it, if the term has been published in a website or book independent of the coiner, it's no longer a protologism, so that makes the entire Maugnayin corpus as not protologisms, I think, but as legit neologisms. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:06, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Mar vin kaiser: I have to review again the policy regarding neologisms and protologisms in Wiktionary. On the other hand, a compromise would be to create an entire category of Maugnayin words, like how the words affected by the KWF spelling reform got their own section, with an explanatory note of the history of the Maugnayin vocabulary list and its current status. That would be slightly better instead of tracking which Maugnayin words pass the basic criteria of attestation and which do not. Stricnina (talk) 06:17, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Stricnina: That's a good discussion to have. For me, I think there's sort of a gray area here, on one hand, some of them were adapted by KWF, some of them are heavily used here and there without KWF promotion, some of them are used in the modern day by people who are interested in having technical terms that are locally derived, which has gotten some traction online, though some of those terms I admit are limited to specific publications (often rare, more than 3), that actively use Maugnayin. I've tried to collect some resources in this area so I've seen how it was actively used by small groups throughout the late 20th century. Though I get your point lol. Any further thoughts? I'd love to have a discussion on this with a fellow editor, and we could bring in the other Tagalog editors. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:58, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Mar vin kaiser: I believe a lot of the Maugnayin words won't even pass the Wiktionary criteria of attestation. Does "luntidinsol" or the different "balni-" words for example even pass the basic criteria? Stricnina (talk) 05:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Stricnina: Also, please don't remove other editor's edits without consulting them first. Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Stricnina: We're a descriptive dictionary, so given that there are groups that do consider these new coinages as part of lexicon, and their inclusion in accepted dictionaries (like dalubtalaan), and as long as they are under the word inclusion criteria of Wiktionary of attestation (publications, etc.), there's no reason why they shouldn't be added as synonyms, if you want, you can add a label of "neologism" under the synonyms. What you do is add "|q1=neologism" in the synonym list. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 05:40, 16 October 2021 (UTC)