User talk:Wikitiki89

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive – 2008–2010201220132014


Phoenician help[edit]

Howdy, I was intending on working on the Latin and AG terms Corduba and Κορδύβη and was looking into their etymologies, which eventually led me to make this edit on Córdoba. Could you take a look at the Phoenician and tell me if it makes sense. Feel free to tell me I was completely off base. In a related note, do you have any advice on getting the Phoenician Unicode to display correctly? Sorry to pester so much; I have been appreciating your edits from afar. Thanks! —JohnC5 (Talk | contribs) 11:37, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

@JohnC5 Sorry for taking so long to reply. What is your reference for the Phoenician word? It looks like it is close to the words קִרְיָה ‎(qirya) and قَرْيَة ‎(qarya), but if it is the same word, it is strange that it has an extra 𐤀 ‎(ʾ) and is missing a 𐤁 ‎(y). As for the Unicode displaying properly, you just have to have the fonts installed. --WikiTiki89 19:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
It mentions it here; though to be honest, I can't find my more authoritative source now. The rest is idle speculation based on Carthage (which is why I wanted you to check it out). I could not find a good text mentioning Juba in Phoenician; so again, that spelling is a guess. Feel free to just remove all the unverified material. Just thought I'd give it a try. JohnC5 09:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Your bot is making some mistakes[edit]

Re: User talk:DerbethBot#Your bot is making some mistakes:

  • خبز - if the audio is wrong, go to Wikimedia Commons and ask it to be removed, giving an explanation. The bot is not a human and can never judge whether the sound sounds correct and not - and this will never be corrected, because it cannot be!
  • أهلا - AFAIK there is no rule that two recordings with pronunciation of the same word should not appear in the entry. The bot is not a human and cannot judge which file is 'better'. This will never be fixed. Again, if the recording is broken or of too poor quality, ask at Commons to remove it.

Please do not write on the talk page of the bot, because it is not a human. It cannot talk. Please leave messages on the operator's talk page (i.e., mine). Regards --Derbeth talk 14:51, 12 January 2015 (UTC)


The redlinked category Catgeory:Hebrew פ״ז hif'il verbs has been sitting in Special:WantedCategories for a while because I have my doubts about whether there really is a פ״ז verb class. Could you either create the category or fix the entry at הוזיל? Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 00:43, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

No there is nothing special about verb roots starting with ז. The strange thing is that this verb looks like its root is י-ז-ל rather than ז-י-ל, but I'll have to change my Even-Shoshan when I get home. --WikiTiki89 13:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Latin sēmita ⩼ Aramaic *simta ⩼ Arabic سَمْت (samt)[edit]

Hi Wikitiki. I wonder if I may pick your brains. w:Zenith#Origin states:

The root of the word "zenith" in Proto-Indo-European was reconstructed as '*mei-' ("to change"). In Latin we find 'meare' ("to pass"). With the prefix 'sē-' ("aside") it became 'sēmeare' ("to branch off"). Then the noun 'sēmita' ("side-way") was formed.REF: {{cite book|last=Wyld|first=Henry Cecil Kennedy|title=Universal Dictionary of the English Languages|date=1932|pages=715, 1089}} When the Romans occupied Syria, shortly before the time of Christ, the resident Arameans adopted the word 'sēmita' as 'simta' ("side-way").REF: {{cite book|last=Avinoam|first=Reuben|title=Compendious Hebrew – English Dictionary|date=1968|location=Tel Aviv|publisher=Dvir}} The Romans left. As the Arabians conquered the land in the seventh century they took the word 'simta' from the Arameans as 'samt' ("side-path") and also coined astronomical expressions.REF: {{cite book|last=Fraenkel|first=Siegmund|title=Die aramaeischen Fremdwoerter im Arabischen|date=1886|location=Leiden}}

Our entry for the Arabic سَمْت ‎(samt) currently states that the word derives from the root س م ت ‎(s-m-t). Which is right, do you think? Do you happen to know an Aramaic word that could be transcribed simta and which would work as an intermediate etymon between the Latin sēmita and the Arabic سَمْت ‎(samt)? Thanks in advance for any elucidation you can provide. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:54, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

@I'm so meta even this acronym Many of our Arabic entries say "From the root XYZ" even when the root is really a back-formation from the word in question. The link to the root is useful, but the text is misleading. I honestly don't know how best to fix this. In some case, I have changed the text to say "Reanalyzed as belonging to root XYZ", but I'm not sure if that is the best thing to do since such "reanalysis" is a regular part of the Arabic language (and Hebrew for that matter). --WikiTiki89 18:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Please excuse the 11½-week delay in my response. I suppose I'm most interested in the supposed Aramaic word. Any idea about that Aramaic [script needed] ‎(simta, side-way)? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
A while ago I suggested having categories for terms derived from each PIE root. Perhaps the same could be done for these languages but with modern-day roots (perhaps alongside actual Semitic roots). Such a category would bypass issues of synchronic vs diachronic origin: it's simply about whether the word has the root or not. —CodeCat 22:47, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
@I'm so meta even this acronym: I think I found the word you are talking about in CAL: סימטא ‎(S-Y-M-Ṭ-ʾ) / סימטה ‎(S-Y-M-Ṭ-H), which I'm guessing was probably voweled as סֵימְטָא ‎(sēməṭā) or סִימְטָא ‎(sīməṭā). @CodeCat: I agree, that would be a good idea. --WikiTiki89 12:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: Thank you very much; it's nice to have it confirmed that that Aramaic word exists. Now, was I right to do this? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 19:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I guess so. I don't think we have ever discussed what to do with Aramaic transliterations when the vowels are not known for certain. --WikiTiki89 19:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, the all-caps looked kinda shouty. Do you think that the Aramaic word is plausibly descended from the Latin sēmita? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 23:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh it definitely is, I don't think there is any reason to doubt that. --WikiTiki89 01:13, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Awesome. Thanks for the confirmation. What about the Arabic سَمْت ‎(samt)? Do dates of first attestation and facts of language contact make the hypothesis that the Arabic سَمْت ‎(samt) derives from the Aramaic סימטא at least possible? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:48, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
The language we call Arabic has had plenty of Aramaic borrowings since the language itself was first attested. Even the Arabic alphabet is a borrowing from Aramaic (specifically the variety of the alphabet that we now call Syriac). But I can't tell you anything specific about سَمْت ‎(samt), except that it is not in the Quran, but it is in Lisan al-Arab (1290). --WikiTiki89 21:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
OK. Looking at The C.A.L.’s entry, it seems that the Aramaic סימטא is attested in the Palestinian (AD 200–500) and Babylonian (AD 200–700) recensions of the Talmud and in responsa of the Geonim (AD 589–1040). That indeed seems to "make the hypothesis that the Arabic سَمْت ‎(samt) derives from the Aramaic סימטא at least possible". Is it therefore fair to state this? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 23:52, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

"I honestly don't know how best to fix this"[edit]

כ־ת־ב ‎(k-t-b)

We could do what Hebrew wiktionary does and just say "root". Of course our structure is different than theirs, so if we didn't list "Root: X-Y-Z" under the L3 etymology header, we'd have to make an L3 "Root" one, which seems a bit much. — קהת — 14:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Or we could have a floating box on the right like this. --WikiTiki89 14:44, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Such a box was what I had in mind for PIE roots originally as well. —CodeCat 16:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I kind of like it, but I can see it sometimes interfering with pictures. — קהת — 18:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
@Dick Laurent, Wikitiki89, CodeCat: FWIW, I really like the box; it looks a lot like what's done for multi-hanzi Chinese terms. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 19:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


Somehow I didn't notice, but we have this module set to transliterate everything automatically, which is a really bad idea if it isn't capable of recognising when it certainly shouldn't try to transliterate. Of course, we'll never be able to teach it to transliterate טעם as taam rather than tem, but it should certainly be coded to refrain from transliterating when the letters only found in words from Hebrew are present. I simply don't have the Lua abilities to do this, hence me asking you despite the fact that you've been fairly inactive. Are you willing to help? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:35, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

See also User_talk:Vahagn_Petrosyan#Automatic_transliteration. I second the request but it's quite challenging.
How many are the words of Hebrew origin, which are pronounced irregularly and cannot have diacritics? I wonder if it's the matter of just maintaining Yiddish entries and translations? Other languages also need hardcoded transliterations at times. The automatic transliteration can be turned off but I think it's the worst cases scenario. BTW, Hebrew terms can potentially be also autotransliterated with about 90% accuracy, if the word stress can be ignored. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
We've discussed this before. My opinion is still that if a transliteration is missing, it's better to have a transliteration of just the consonants (which is effectively what happens) than to have nothing at all. Therefore, in my opinion, it would be better to simply have the transliteration module add a cleanup category if the term has Hebrew-only letters, rather than removing the transliteration entirely. Feel free to disagree. Either your proposal or mine would be fairly easy for me to implement. --WikiTiki89 14:06, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Cleanup categories sound like a good idea. Perhaps adding words with no vowels would also work. Chinese modules have large volumes of readings for characters. Is it (theoretically) possible to have updatable lists of irregular words either for exclusion or for customised transliteration? In any case, there's ongoing work for editors but I don't see many dedicated Yiddish editors. Pls don't forget about Hebrew transliteration, I still believe it's possible to achieve good results, similar to the success with the Arabic module. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 14:28, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
@Atitarev Making hardcoded lists is an impractical idea for Yiddish, and even more prone to issues IMO.
@Wikitiki89 We have an inherently different viewpoint; you think of shbs as being closer to שבת than nothing, but I think of shbs as being incorrect and that lack of information is better than misleading information. But in the meantime, I would very much appreciate that you create a cleanup category, because translations especially need to be dealt with and we'd hit a lot of offenders with the Hebrew-only letters. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:46, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge Why is it impractical - too many words, no data available, all inflections should be included as well or all these together and something else? I also think that "shbs" could be used as a signal that there's something wrong and better than nothing. The partial transliteration could be used to make a correct one by an editor, especially in example sentences where only one word may be transliterated incorrectly. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
@Atitarev Too many words and there is never going to be a finite or manageable number; some texts borrow from Hebrew extensively when talking about anything religious. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge I disagree with your use of the word "borrow". Many Hebrew words in Yiddish are direct continuations from the time when Hebrew was still the native language, so you can't say they were "borrowed". In fact it would be more correct to say that the entire Germanic part of Yiddish was what was "borrowed", while the Hebrew part was simply "kept". --WikiTiki89 19:38, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I have just transliterated a random first sample Yiddish text and I got this: mayn letst lid rkhl bushevski-kaplan 1 may, 1958 ayngehoykert in dreyen, bagis ikh mit trern mayn veg. troyerik iz mir tsu tseyln, mayne letste teg... gehoybn di oygn tsum himl, fun betn bin ikh shoyn mid. vayt, gants vayt shoyn farblondzhet zingendik mayn letst lid ... a lid fun benkshaft un khrth, vi khlumus iz alts fargangen, gevigt hot mikh dos lebn un gevorfn, punkt vi in felder, di zangen. krank un farshemt, kh'fal anider, dos lebn iz geven zeyer shver, aykh kinderlekh, vel ikh shtendik zayn mukhl in mayne oygn vet eybik blishtshen a trer ... azoy sheydt zikh in eynzamkeyt a mame, fun kinderlekh zeyer fil, keynmol hot ir keyner farshtanen, geshtorbn aleyn in der shtil .... I reckon the core Yiddish vocabulary is Germanic and transliteratable. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:16, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
It would be very unhelpful to reject an entire transliteration like that just because it has some Hebrew words here and there. As for the frequency, it really depends on the subject matter and/or author of the text. You happened to pick a more Germanic one. --WikiTiki89 19:02, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Of course! I don't disagree on that. Manual transliteration is allowed and is necessary for those words. It would be possible to add to attention categories words transliterated without vowels, wouldn't it? I disagree on frequency (religious words are not the core vocabulary) but I'll let slide. All words are important. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
I know you don't disagree, that was more intended toward Metaknowledge. But as for vocabulary, it's not only religious words that are Hebrew. In fact it was the educated secular Jews in the 19th century, who received the bulk of their higher education in Modern German, that pushed away the less familiar Hebrew-derived words from their writing in Yiddish and even introduced new borrowings from German such as שפּראַך ‎(shprakh). At the same time, the religiously educated were incorporating more Hebrew words into their Yiddish. But outside of these two influences, the "core" vocabulary was thoroughly mixed and Germanic words may have been the majority, but not an overwhelming majority. --WikiTiki89 01:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Also, I have updated Module:yi-translit to add terms as needed to Category:Yiddish terms with Hebrew-only letters needing transliteration. --WikiTiki89 20:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. This category is catching issues that don't actually have any Hebrew-only letters, but still need to be dealt with. Why is the module transliterating ־ונג ‎(-ung) and אַדורכשמועסן ‎(adurkhshmuesn) thus? This is something that should be easily predictable. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:06, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Because when I originally wrote the module, I was under the impression that CuV would be written with dot in the vav. Only when I made this category today did I notice that I was wrong about that. Although I should fix this, it's not very common and I probably won't have time to fix it any time soon. As for ־ונג ‎(-ung), that's only because the module does not treat makaf as a letter, which it shouldn't be, so suffixes starting with vocalic yud or vav will display incorrectly. Since it only applies to suffixes, I'm not sure whether it's even worth fixing. --WikiTiki89 21:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I think it's worth making it actually work rather than not, so if you ever have time I would appreciate if you could make the module more functional. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
What I meant to say is that a hyphen/makaf should not be treated as a letter in general, but only in suffixes. Is a hyphen/makaf occurring at the beginning of a string sufficient to be sure it is a suffix? --WikiTiki89 22:56, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
For the full string, yes. For any substring, no. That shouldn't be hard to implement. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I'll do it when I have the time. --WikiTiki89 23:30, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:00, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge Done. It was easier than I thought (and I also added some detection of Hebrew words with the letter א ‎(a) and improved their default transliteration). --WikiTiki89 19:02, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Probably the biggest source of bad transliterations that we're still not finding is links in {{plural of}}, like in this old version, where the word linked to has a Hebrew spelling without any Hebrew-only letters. These can definitely be caught if you (or someone else capable) is willing to generate a list of pages that have a Yiddish section, end in ים or ות, and use {{plural of}} without the tr= parameter being specified. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:09, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
    We would need a bot to catch the form-of entries, since I would not want to modify non-Yiddish-specific templates such as {{plural of}}, but we could catch lemmas from the headword template by requiring a transliteration for the singular if the plural ends in ־ים and also requiring that if either one of the singular or plural is manually transliterated, then they both should be. In my mind, the old version of קרבנות you linked to is much less of a problem than lemma entries. --WikiTiki89 21:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
    I haven't reconfigured my bot since I got a new computer; can you still run yours? I agree re lemma entries, that would be great to implement. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
    Well actually we don't need a bot, but just a search of the dumps and I don't have time to write the code for that, especially considering there are others who do this all the time. We should just put in a request at the WT:GP. Meanwhile, I can write something for {{yi-noun}}. --WikiTiki89 14:34, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Stress mark on monosyllabic terms[edit]

Привет, для чего используется знак ударения в таких словах, как כיס? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Я был против, но так было решено. --WikiTiki89 01:08, 17 April 2015 (UTC)


I see more use י than ה, especially in things organized by root like verb stuff. Barron's for example. — [Ric Laurent] — 19:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh Gosh I almost forgot, שבת שלום — [Ric Laurent] — 21:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
@Dick Laurent Even-Shoshan, for example, uses ה. It's also what we have been doing (see צ־ו־ה and כ־ס־ה). I personally wouldn't mind using י and ו, but we would have to change our existing entries. Plus, you can't expect people looking up roots to know when to look for י and when to look for ו. And אַ גוטע שבת to you too. --WikiTiki89 21:32, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
It could be done, I'm pretty sure. Actually now that I look again Barron's lists these roots like this קרה (קרי) If we don't use the י and ו forms in pagenames, I think we should at least mention them somewhere in the root entries themselves. — [Ric Laurent] — 21:47, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

א נייע קאץ[edit]

Hypothetically — if there were a category specifically for halachic terms (since obviously Judaism encompasses more than just halacha) do you think it would be better to go with the format Category:he:Halacha or Category:he:Jewish law? (pingponglekh tsu @Metaknowledge)[Ric Laurent] — 16:44, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I think that since Wiktionary is not primarily targeted toward Jews, using a term that is readily understood by readers unfamiliar with Judaism is probably a better idea. Our choice would not matter so much if it were only for Hebrew entries, but since this applies to English entries as well, I think Category:en:Jewish law would be better. This also relieves us from having to choose a spelling for הלכה. --WikiTiki89 17:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
I actually preferred using the native term since the translation isn't entirely precise, but I would agree that "Jewish law" would be better entirely on the basis of your last point :D — [Ric Laurent] — 17:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Not that there are too many languages that need that level of granularity for Jewish terminology, but have fun rooting through the cats for Hebrew and Yiddish to fill the bloody thing. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Category:he:Judaism and Category:yi:Judaism don't have terribly much in them, anyway. If I were to do it, (which I might not, because I forgot that the topic cat templates use JS which I don't know at all so I can only make categories with those ugly "this isn't a real category" things) it would probably only take a morning. — [Ric Laurent] — 05:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
They don't use JS, they use Lua. I'll do it if you don't. --WikiTiki89 14:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I created the following categories: Category:Jewish law, Category:en:Jewish law, Category:he:Jewish law, and Category:yi:Jewish law. All I had to do in Lua was this. --WikiTiki89 14:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
If only {{cx}} were smarter — [Ric Laurent] — 11:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
It is smarter. It just lacks knowledge, and I can fix that. --WikiTiki89 15:35, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Done. --WikiTiki89 15:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Righteous — [Ric Laurent] — 16:10, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

ʾiʿrāb question(s)[edit]

What's the deal here? I recently was editing ἀμερμουμνῆς and was doing my best to learn the vowel system of Arabic for the word أَمِير المُؤْمِنِين ‎(ʾamīr al-muʾminīn) (and doing it poorly, I might add). I know WT:AAR says that lemma should not have ʾiʿrāb, but in the past you added them to سَلَاطِينُ ‎(salāṭīnu) at salateen. So should a compound lemma like أَمِير المُؤْمِنِين ‎(ʾamīr al-muʾminīn) be:

JohnC5 05:27, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Our policy on this kept changing, but now that we have declension tables we agreed that we no longer need ʾiʿrāb in headword lines, links, or mentions, except perhaps for certain exceptions like اللهُ أَكْبَر ‎(allāhu ʾakbar). --WikiTiki89 18:59, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
So... أَمِير المُؤْمِنِين ‎(ʾamīr al-muʾminīn) in this case? —JohnC5 19:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
That's right. BTW with full ʾiʿrāb it would be أَمِيرُ المُؤْمِنِينَ ‎(ʾamīru l-muʾminīna). Benwing (talk) 03:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
That makes sense... —JohnC5 04:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Modern Greek *rhēxis, *rhêxis?[edit]

Hi Wikitiki. Are you sure that you meant to add requests for Modern Greek entries for *rhēxis and *rhêxis to WT:WE? Obviously, they're not in the Greek script, but even as transliterations, they're valid for Ancient Greek, not Modern Greek. Were you thinking of ῥῆξις ‎(rhêxis), perchance? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 00:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I think you're confusing me with WikiWinters (talkcontribs), who was the one who added those. --WikiTiki89 12:22, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
My apologies, Wikitiki89 (talkcontribs). ;) --WikiWinters (talk) 13:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, Wikitiki. I was knackered when I posted that message and failed to distinguish you two Wiki-prefixed editors. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 11:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, you're right. I was hoping that someone would sort it out, but I should've consulted someone like you first, I'll admit, before adding them. I wasn't sure for which Greek (Ancient nor Modern) terms the transliterations were. I'm a regular editor of Chinese entries, so I guess I'm used to entries being created for pinyin and other romanizations. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears now that this is not done for Greek entries. What is the next step of action, I'm so meta even this acronym (talkcontribs)? Also, I requested rhexis on the English requests page because I noticed that it was very common in the breakdowns of English medical terms (such as keratorrhexis, which I created from the requested entries page), which got me thinking that there should probably be the original Greek term as an entry. I apologize for the confusion and the inconvenience. --WikiWinters (talk) 13:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
@WikiWinters: English vocabulary derived from Greek almost always derives from Ancient Greek, rather than Modern Greek (compare Category:English terms derived from Ancient Greek [8,625 members] with Category:English terms derived from Greek [137 members]). And no, Romanisations of Greek (Ancient or Modern) are not currently given entries. Out of respect for Wikitiki, we should continue this discussion at User talk:I'm so meta even this acronym#-rhexis / -rrhexis / -orrhexis. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 11:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


=kesuvem? (Somehow it isn't in any of my easy-to-search dictionaries.) — [Ric Laurent] — 18:04, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I would think כּתובֿים ‎(ksuvem), just like כּתבֿ ‎(ksav) and כּתובה ‎(ksube). --WikiTiki89 18:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
That was my other thought, but I feel like I remember seeing a lot of words whose first vowel in Hebrew was a shva being pronounced with it in Yiddish. Then again. — [Ric Laurent] — 18:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
I think in many cases the vowel is optional, but I can't picture it being pronounced in this case. I've definitely heard ksuvem before (albeit in Ashkenazi-English), but never kesuvem. (Unrelatedly, can you check the transliteration in the first quote at לחמא?) --WikiTiki89 18:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Isn't Yiddish is about as Ashkenazi as it gets? :D
Actually the only talmud masekhta I own is Chagiga (too bad it wasn't from the mishna for berachot, I actually have that one), but I'll see if I can find that bit menuqad online. — [Ric Laurent] — 18:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
I meant that it wasn't actually Yiddish, but English. --WikiTiki89 18:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
But is it reaaally English? :D
שַׂמּוּחֵי, but I'm having trouble finding the quote we've got on the page itself so I dunno. — [Ric Laurent] — 19:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Well is it reaaally Yiddish if the speaker doesn't speak Yiddish? And thanks, there seem to be different versions of the Talmud out there; I picked this quote, which I found in CAL, because I didn't have to translate it from scratch. --WikiTiki89 19:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
It's toward the bottom of the page: אלא חמרא סעיד ומשחא לא סעיד וחמרא מי סעיד והא רבא הוה שתי חמדי כל מעלי יומא דפסחא כי היכי דנגרריה ללביה וניכול מצה טפי טובא דריר פורתא סעיד ומי סעיד כלל והכתיב ויין ישמח לבב אנוש ולחם לבב אנוש יסעד וגו' נחמא הוא דסעיד חמרא לא סעיד אלא חמדא אית ביה תרתי סעיד ומשמח נחמא מסעד סעיד שמוחי לא משמח —This unsigned comment was added by Dick Laurent (talkcontribs) at 19:21, 26 May 2015‎.
Yeah, I guess that version uses the word נהמא instead of לחמא (and adds a whole bunch of extra words), defeating the whole purpose of a quote for לחמא. --WikiTiki89 19:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Now that I look more closely, Masekhet Berakhot has almost the same number of pages in the Bavli and Yerushalmi. I might just be looking at the wrong one. The investigation continues — [Ric Laurent] — 19:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Yerushalmi has almost completely different Gemara text, and most of it is actually in Hebrew. It's definitely Bavli. --WikiTiki89 19:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
I was sure the Gemara would be different, but I had no idea about the language difference. Though it makes sense :D Thanks lol — [Ric Laurent] — 20:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


Hi there. I can't help noticing that we haven't got an entry for Judeo-Tat yet. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:53, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! We do now. --WikiTiki89 16:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
speaking of tat, I dunno how to make the yi-xlit do right for טאַטויִרונג ‎(tatuirung) — [Ric Laurent] — 08:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I was going to suggest doing טאַטוּיִרונג ‎(tatuirung), but it seems your spelling is more common in Google Books. Anyway, fixed. --WikiTiki89 15:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I just used the spelling I found on Forverts lol. שבת שלום אחי — [Ric Laurent] — 15:16, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

One question[edit]

Imagine that a native Korean speaker learns Hebrew. Exactly what kind of difficulty would he or she face while learning Hebrew? (Hebrew is a extremely rare language in South Korea, so to speak.) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:23, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

@KoreanQuoter Wikitiki89 doesn't speak Korean but you do speak English and some Russian, so it's not so extremely hard for you any more. Semitic languages like Hebrew and Arabic have (usually trilateral - i.e. consisting of three consonants) root systems where words and word forms are created by using meaningful root consonants plus various prefixes, infixes or root vowels and suffixes, all of which may have vowels and some consonants. See Semitic root. What makes reading in Hebrew (also Arabic) difficult, is that (short) vowels are usually omitted but native speakers can "guess" where they are needed. Special texts supply vowels, which are usually unwritten (religious texts, texts for children or foreign learners). Foreign learners are required to master many words and grammar before they can read out texts in Hebrew or Arabic, both are only partially phonetic. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 13:40, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Wow. This is like a whole new world. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:42, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
IMO, despite lexical differences, Semitic languages are somewhat easier for European language speakers (grammatically and syntactically) than for speakers of East Asian languages such as Korean or Japanese, let alone Chinese. I know very little Hebrew (mainly theoretically) but Arabic, which I know a little, is a close language, so I used it for comparison. Arabic has a complicated diglossia situation, which makes mastering any variety of Arabic very difficult (you can't practice what you learn from the books in the street and you can't brush up your spoken Arabic by reading books) plus lack of resources. So, Arabic is among the four most complicated languages for English speakers (level 4). The other three are Chinese, Japanese and Korean. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 14:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Following what Tolya said about written Hebrew, I started learning Hebrew almost 7 years ago. I haven't focused on it intensely for that whole time, but I still have problems reading unvowelized text, and I can still be pretty slow about reading text with vowels if the words have unfamiliar prosodic forms. — קהת — 14:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I've been reading Hebrew with vowels from a very young age (without understanding the vast majority of it). Because of that, when I started learning to understand Hebrew and to read without vowels, I already had many of the patterns ingrained into my subconscious. However, I have met many people who started completely from scratch later in life and did fine. I have met at least one Korean and a few Chinese in Israel learning Hebrew. In short, I would say that learning Hebrew for you (regardless of the variety of Hebrew) would be roughly equivalent to learning English completely from scratch. Think about how much effort you spent getting to each level of English and that is roughly the effort it would take for you to get to that level of Hebrew. At any point, switching to another variety of Hebrew would be comparatively very easy, and learning Arabic would be much easier than it would have been otherwise. --WikiTiki89 15:30, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
To add a fun dynamic to that, I've met native speakers from Israel who can't read nikud at all because they didn't pay attention in school :) — קהת — 15:41, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
There are many Chinese who can't read pinyin or other romanizations too :) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 18:14, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Well of course, pinyin is in a foreign alphabet, but nikkud is native to Hebrew. However, I have heard that in Taiwan, many young people can read and type, but not write with pen and paper. --WikiTiki89 18:18, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Or Koreans who don't know any Chinese characters and these people struggle in universities. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:50, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Come on...[edit]

We're specific enough for

שיבולת \ שִׁבֹּלֶת • (shibólet) f (plural indefinite form שיבולים \ שִׁבֳּלִים, singular construct form שיבולת \ שִׁבֹּלֶת־, plural construct form שיבלי \ שִׁבֳּלֵי־)

but not for

נוֹלַד • (nolád) (nif'al construction, 3rd person masculine singular future ייוולד \ יִוָּלֵד, active counterpart יָלַד)

? — קהת — 06:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

So you don't think that
לָקַח ‎(lakákh) ‎(pa'al construction, infinitive לָקַחַת, m sg present לוֹקֵחַ, ‎3rd person m sg future יִקַּח, m sg imperative קַח, passive counterpart 3rd person m sg past לֻקַּח)
is a little too long compared to
לָקַח ‎(lakákh) ‎(pa'al construction, infinitive לָקַחַת, present לוֹקֵחַ, future יִקַּח, imperative קַח, passive counterpart לֻקַּח)
 ? --WikiTiki89 14:47, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't think all of those forms should be present in the headline. I think the headline should be reserved for the principle parts (which for Hebrew I would say are the 3rd person singular masculine perfect and imperfect), otherwise why are we just including the masculine singular forms instead of all of them? I prefer conjugation tables to listing a bunch of forms in the headword line. The lack of specificity in your second example makes it look to beginners like there are no other forms, and to non-beginners like we're, at best, leaving out important grammatical details, or, at worst, giving inaccurate descriptions of what each form represents. Conjugation tables are infinitely more useful than listing the masculine forms in the header. — קהת — 17:08, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
My plan was to include all of the non-obvious parts. In this case, maybe לוֹקֵחַ is not completely necessary, but the others are. As for the non-specificity, we do that for Arabic also, labeling يَكْتُبُ as the "non-past" of كَتَبَ. --WikiTiki89 17:12, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I'd say that technically all of the parts are non-obvious, but still they're only non-obvious to beginners, and they're going to vary depending on the shoresh and binyan, and conjugation tables are still better at showing them. I think the forms that the headword template can handle should only be included if every word needs those forms shown. If you know enough Hebrew to be able to figure out the conjugations based on limited information, generally that only requires the past and future forms. — קהת — 17:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
"If you know enough Hebrew to be able to figure out the conjugations based on limited information, generally that only requires the past and future forms." That's exactly what I'm talking about, but sometimes other parts are also required and I want to show those. Also, the future is only required in pa'al verbs. --WikiTiki89 17:51, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
If you need more than the past and future to figure out the conjugation, a full table is going to be more helpful than a handful of masculine forms. (I think that's the sentence I've been trying to put together this whole time lol). I guess that's what I don't get, why not just make the tables, which I think we both agree are useful to any learner. I would probably be working on tables if somebody hadn't changed them to a color scheme I find hideous :( — קהת — 18:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
If you already know enough Hebrew, having to look through the table to find all the irregularities takes more time than to have them highlighted for you in the headword line. I have nothing against also including a full table. --WikiTiki89 18:26, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
What other language do we have where the headword line only lists the lemma and irregular forms? — קהת — 19:05, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
We currently do that for Arabic nouns; the dual, construct, and "informal" forms are shown in the headword line whenever they are irregular (in addition to the full declension table). --WikiTiki89 19:26, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Arabic isn't the best example, since it's only recently that anybody started really standardizing it on here. It's been utter chaos for years. And anyway, Arabic is insanely irregular. — קהת — 19:33, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
This is what most print dictionaries, anyway. And I think it is useful. Also, Arabic is also insanely regular in other ways. The dual and construct forms are almost always regular, which is why they only need to be shown when they aren't. We aren't talking about the plurals. --WikiTiki89 19:38, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Wiktionary isn't a paper dictionary. Focusing only on the irregulars is going to do a disservice to beginners and intermediates who would be better served by conjugation tables, which are regular in form and not that difficult to navigate for Hebrew verbs. I don't think Barron's 500 Verbs series exists just to be cute. There's no place on Wiktionary where someone just starting to learn Hebrew is going to find out how to guess feminine forms from looking at the masculine ones. My question isn't whether or not it's useful, it's how to be the most useful to the broadest base of people. In my opinion, an organized chart is more useful than a string of random forms. That is, it's easier to read a chart than to scan through a list for the forms you want. Especially if the forms you want aren't there at all. — קהת — 05:35, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Like I said, I do plan on also including a full conjugation table. The headword line just serves as a summary of the important parts. --WikiTiki89 11:43, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Lol I guess I just prioritize the tables. That was always my favorite thing to do until we started doing them in more advanced code that I've never understood. Ah well. שבת שלום — קהת — 14:40, 12 June 2015 (UTC)



Ты забыл протранслитерировать גְּזוּזְטְרָה. Это "gezuzetera"? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:58, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

По нашей системе — "g'zuzt'rá". Но это не я это слово добавил. --WikiTiki89 04:04, 12 June 2015 (UTC)


Why is the emphatic the lemma for nouns but the absolute for adjectives? — קהת — 16:06, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Because those are the default forms in late Aramaic, where nouns almost never occur in absolute form (and even the construct state is pretty rare), while adjectives are still frequently used in the absolute state as predicates (and the construct state for adjectives was always very rare). I would even have preferred to use absolute state as the lemma for nouns, but there is a strong case for this only in Samaritan Aramaic and older varieties of Aramaic. --WikiTiki89 17:21, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
It almost seems like a bad idea to treat all Jewish Aramaic under just one header, given the timespans and divergences — קהת — 18:08, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Not much worse than it is for Hebrew. I would actually prefer to unify all varieties of (non-neo-) Aramaic because it just creates too much duplication. Regional, temporal, and ethnic varieties can be handled with usage notes. CAL, for example, lists the applicable varieties before every sense of every word. --WikiTiki89 21:23, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

אלטע זאכן[edit]

Can you check the Yiddish. Enosh (talk) 09:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

It's right, but I linked the two words separately. --WikiTiki89 15:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


In modern Hebrew I've only heard these forms pronounced with a v. Think that should be mentioned somewhere? It's not really relevant to the other letters, since their final shorashim don't change pronunciation, but maybe for this one? — קהת — 21:31, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Maybe in a usage note. There are tons of words that are pronounced "incorrectly" by most Modern Hebrew speakers. --WikiTiki89 21:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
The usage note is what I was thinking. — קהת — 21:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


The translation table in this entry had lots of fossilized markup from before there was a {{t}} template. Someone decided to clear this out, but managed to leave the Hebrew translations seriously mangled. I tinkered with it a bit, but gave up: I have no idea what the person who originally added it was trying to do, and no idea what would be right for the entry. Could you take a look at it? Chuck Entz (talk) 01:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I think I see what they were trying to do and made it so. But I'm also unsure it's the best link/display to have there. — קהת — 10:29, 2 July 2015 (UTC)


Hey, would you like to check out טב and קדיש and critique? — קהת — 13:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

  1. I've never heard of a form like טָבִי ‎(ṭāḇī) or קַדִּישִׁי ‎(qaddīšī) for the
  2. I think we should have only ־א for and only ־ה for Of course, both were used for both, but there is no need to list all alternative spellings for everything.
  3. We probably should include the very common טָבֵי ‎(ṭāḇē) and קַדִּישֵׁי ‎(qaddīšē) as alternative forms for the
  4. Is "determined" the right word? I remember this usually being called "emphatic".
--WikiTiki89 17:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
I followed the little table in Max Margolis's guide to Talmud Bavli Aramaic. He lists the -ī form of the m.p abs as a "newer" form. (I thought about making a note of the older/newer forms where relevant, but I'm not sure how to word this, or how to note that the construct basically fell out of use at a certain point.)
I'll add the -ē for m.p det, but Margolis says this is only used of substantivized adjectives, so I think I won't be able to avoid adding some kind of note to the table. Personally, neither determined (which is what the English translation of Margolis uses) or emphatic makes any sense to me... I'd prefer "definite," but if emphatic is the most common, I don't really have much problem using that instead. — קהת — 18:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Just note that the only Aramaic grammar I read was of Biblical Aramaic, so I'm not an expert on later dialects. I didn't realize there was a difference between nouns and adjectives in terms of ־ַיָּא ‎(-ayyā) vs. ־ֵי ‎(). I just thought that the latter was a later contraction of the former influenced by the construct. But I may have been wrong. Also, the construct state for adjectives was always fairly rare, well before it even mostly fell out of use for nouns. I'm curious where the evidence is for ־ִי ‎() and how it could be distinguished from ־ֵי ‎(). --WikiTiki89 18:46, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Hah, ironically I've almost only read of Babylonian Aramaic grammar. I really should start learning about the Biblical grammar, but... anyway.
Of the ־ִי ‎() for plural absolute, Margolis says it was only used for adjectives and participles. The table and notes to it are on page 28 of his book, which I'm sure can be found online somewhere. I can't remember exactly where I found it. The full title is "A Manual of the Aramaic Language of the Babylonian Talmud." To be simple, I frequently find it infuriating, but it's better than nothing. :) — קהת — 18:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
But how do they know the pronunciation? I'll take a look at that grammar. BTW, for BA I recommend A Short Grammar of Biblical Aramaic by Alger F. Johns—short, sweet, and thorough. --WikiTiki89 18:58, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
I couldn't begin to guess :) Thanks, I'll look for it — קהת — 19:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
(I didn't have to look far, turns out I already have it and didn't realize it lol) — קהת — 19:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


I got this one from Jastrow. — Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 19:58, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Maybe the ink is wearing off? I got it from CAL. --WikiTiki89 19:59, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Lol not unless it wore off in the same way three times; he lists alternative spellings חנוותא and חנואתא all with segol. — Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 20:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
CAL has four citations from Jewish texts that have nikkud, all from Targum Jonathan: Jeremiah 37:16 (חָנְוָתָא), Ezekiel 27:17 (בְחַנְוָתִיך), Ezekiel 42:71 (בְחָנְוָתִיך), Ezekiel 42:72 (חָנְוָתִיך). I'm not sure where Jastrow gets its nikkud from, but I don't trust any vocalized versions of the Talmud to be accurate. The problem is Aramaic is a macro-language and we have made no decisions about what to use as our lemma dialect. --WikiTiki89 13:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


The IP that made that edit is our well-known IP who likes to insert unattested words, remove the * from links, and make other disruptive nonsense edits. They've been rather active lately. I have taken the stance that nothing by this user can be trusted, so I just revert anything that looks slightly suspicious or that I can't verify. That doesn't mean the edit is wrong necessarily, I'm just being cautious. —CodeCat 14:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

The only part I resotred was the Akkadian script, which is phonetically correct. That doesn't mean it's definitely the correct spelling, but I'm willing to trust him on that. Most of his edits show that he does have at least some knowledge of the languages. --WikiTiki89 14:42, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Requests for deletion#L.P.[edit]

Do you have any thoughts on this? It would be much appreciated if you could give your opinion. Thank you. --WikiWinters (talk) 22:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@WikiWinters: I'm not sure why you nominated it at WT:RFD when it is already about to fail WT:RFV. If what you meant is that it someone should finally delete it and close the discussion, that is not what RFD is for. All you need to do is comment something like "RFV failed" in the RFV discussion and strike out the heading, and then (if you're not an admin) add {{delete|RFV failed}} to the page so an admin will find it and delete it. --WikiTiki89 15:00, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
My apologies. --WikiWinters (talk) 15:44, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
@WikiWinters: You misunderstood a bit:
  1. The RFV has already failed, you don't need to vote "Delete" on it.
  2. You should strike the header of the RFV discussion, because it is over.
  3. You still haven't added the {{delete|RFV failed}} template to the L.P. page (if you were an admin, you could delete the page yourself, but since you are not, you can add this template to request an admin to delete it for you).
No need to apologize. I'm not being critical; I'm just trying to teach you. --WikiTiki89 16:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
I know you were trying to teach me, and I'm very grateful, so thank you! I was simply apologizing because my edits seemed disoriented, and I hate making things more confusing for other editors. Again, thank you for helping me learn how to go about this process! :) --WikiWinters (talk) 18:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
No problem. I feel like we should have a page describing how RFD and RFV processes work. --WikiTiki89 18:30, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

за жизнь[edit]

Вот страница из орфоэпического словаря под редакцией Аванесова. Если у вас есть источник на вашу транскрипцию, то покажите его, пожалуйста.--Cinemantique (talk) 16:42, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

English pronunciation sections[edit]

Hello, again! I was wondering if my edits to the pronunciation sections of arbitrage and certificate were done properly. I added noun and verb senses, which I don't know if were properly listed, and I added IPA pronunciations. I also added rhymes. For rhymes, are you supposed to include the entire part of the word that is emphasized? For one of the senses of arbitrage, the emphasis is placed on all syllables from the start, so I assumed the rhyme was the entire word. Also, for the hyphenations that I added, are they supposed to be at the bottom of pronunciation sections, and what is the proper order? Thank you. --WikiWinters (talk) 21:09, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, if a word begins with a stressed vowel, then the entire word is the rhyme. At least in English. It's not likely that it will actually rhyme with anything else, though. —CodeCat 21:27, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
The pronunciation differences for arbitrage do not have to do with part of speech. --WikiTiki89 21:29, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
You may be right, but if I recall correctly, the second pronunciation is for the archaic sense, which I have just added. --WikiWinters (talk) 21:34, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
I think it's also a dialectal variant. --WikiTiki89 21:38, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
That's very likely. --WikiWinters (talk) 21:41, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
It seems that British dictionaries give both variants, while American ones only give /-ˌɑʒ/. --WikiTiki89 21:41, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
That's probably why the archaic definition I saw used the variant pronunciation, as archaic words' pronunciations seem to resemble British pronunciation more often than American pronunciation. —  WikiWinters ☯ 韦安智   00:25, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

root cats[edit]

Should these indicate shin/sin, like התנשק is doing now? Just checking — Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 23:32, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes. If you do it wrong, I made it give you an error. Don't go crazy with it yet, though. --WikiTiki89 23:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm out of control. — Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 23:35, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
So, what else is new? ... Chuck Entz (talk) 00:57, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Your face.
Your face is new.
Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 01:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey. תווית - are we gonna use תו״י or תו״ה? — Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 15:25, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Is that even the root? Maybe it's just ת״ו. --WikiTiki89 15:30, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Got it from the AcademyZ. [ קהת ] b"A. — 15:37, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
I seem to have already disagreed with the Academy on בן and רב. Do you know any words related to תווית? I was thinking תו, but any verbs? --WikiTiki89 15:42, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Nah, this is the first time I've ever seen it. — Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 15:53, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
תווי \ תְּוַי ‎(route, path) might be related. Enosh (talk) 11:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Oh and there's תָּווּי and תיווי \ תִּוּוּי, so that settles it as {{HE root|תוה}}. --WikiTiki89 13:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
@Dick Laurent, Enoshd: By the way, now there is {{HE root see}}. See כ־ת־ב and ח־שׁ־ב. --WikiTiki89 19:51, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I like it.
שבת שלום. (וצום קל למי יצום).Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 20:23, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
שייבנה הבית ולא יהיה צום --WikiTiki89 20:38, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

{{HE root cat}}[edit]

Any way you could take this a step further and have it parse everything from the page title if the parameters are left out? Chuck Entz (talk) 04:27, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I could if there is a good reason for it, otherwise it would be too much work. As it is now, it also provides a check to make sure you're creating the category on the right page. --WikiTiki89 13:03, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

קו״ם \ קי״ם[edit]

I think these might be two separate roots. Bolozky lists קו״ם as being the root of verbs like קומם and התקומם and קי״ם as being the root of קיים and התקיים. What do you think? — Z. [ קהת ] b"A. — 10:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Bolozky is more interested in being useful than historically correct. I am fairly certain it's the same root, although I can't say for sure whether it was originally קו״ם or קי״ם (but I'm leaning toward קו״ם). --WikiTiki89 16:44, 28 July 2015 (UTC)


I'd just like to quickly thank you for my Whitelist nomination! Stephen MUFC (talk) 08:13, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

No problem. --WikiTiki89 12:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

About the goddess ˤntjt - w:Anat[edit]

Written as

ti i t

, should it be ˤntjt or ˤnt? --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:38, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Written that way, it should definitely be ˤntjt. Also, am I interpreting the egg and cobra correctly to mean "daughter-goddess"? --WikiTiki89 14:09, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
I missed the "btlt ‘nt" (Virgin Anat) in English Wikipedia. I'm curious why "‘nt" cannot be found. I would also interpret it as "daughter-goddess", since El addresses her as daughter. --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
"btlt" is a Semitic word, not an Egyptian one. --WikiTiki89 13:10, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Rewriting Russian declension templates[edit]

(also @Atitarev) I notice there are a bunch of old Russian declension templates. Is there a programmatic way to rewrite them to use e.g. {{ru-decl-adj}}? If so, I could potentially do this in a bot. Benwing (talk) 11:32, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, each old template has a straightforward conversion to the new one (although there may be a couple left that are not fully supported yet by the new one). Let's start with adjectives, which are the easiest. Most of the old adjective templates work like this:
The new one works like this:
The short forms should be stripped of hard-coded links, but comma-separated variants should be left (preferably with spaces stripped after commas for aesthetic purposes). If the short forms are blank, the arguments should be omitted. Also, notice that the order of FSHORT and NSHORT is swapped. The ENDING depends on the template number (although in most, but not all, cases it can be deduced from the ending of the word itself). Irregular ones are bolded:
--WikiTiki89 12:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, this looks doable. What do you mean when you say "irregular ones are bolded"? Are these simply cases of irregular declensions or is the conversion from old to new irregular? I also presume that I can rewrite {{ru-adj-table}} to {{ru-decl-adj}} and treat Template:ru-adjectiveN the same as Template:ru-adjN? BTW it would be could if you or Anatoli could add some documentation to {{ru-decl-adj}} (and maybe think about implementing {{ru-adj11}}). Benwing (talk) 12:30, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
They are the cases where the ENDING parameter cannot be deduced from the actual ending of the word. And yes, everything you said in about redirects is the case. --WikiTiki89 12:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
The problem with {{ru-adj11}} is more of a conceptual error. It conflates the declension of the surname with the declension of the adjectival form of the surname and gives a table that is not a good representation of either. The same would be true of {{ru-adj12}} and {{ru-adj13}} as well, except that the adjectival forms happen to all match up with the actual surname forms. The entries that use them should really have two declension tables or even split into two POS sections. --WikiTiki89 12:42, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, I wrote the script to convert these templates; wasn't too much work. I'll run it later. While I'm at it, what about the noun declension templates? Can you write out a similar conversion chart? Thanks! Benwing (talk) 14:01, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I can, but it will take longer (there are simply more of them). I'm not sure whether I'll have time today. --WikiTiki89 14:04, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, thanks ... whenever you can get to it. Benwing (talk) 14:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── A few more templates:

It looks like all could be rewritten as indicated (with further conversion to Template:ru-decl-adj) except that they add the category Category:Russian participles. (Contrary to the docs, they don't add categories like Category:Russian past passive participles; this is done by the definitional template.) One thing I could do is create a template Template:ru-decl-part that is identical to Template:ru-decl-adj but also adds the category; or we could add a |part= param to Template:ru-decl-adj, perhaps with values like |part=pres-pasv (or alternatively |part=prp for short) if we're concerned about losing info that we might want to regain at some later point. Benwing (talk) 05:09, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, participle templates can be merged with adjectives, as long as the categorisation still works - by headwords or by templates. We can get rid of the currently required parameter for prepositional cases - о (before consonants) or об (before vowels) (no longer used with participles). They are predictable for 99.9% of adjectives and participles. There are just odd cases like "обо мне", "обо всём", "обо всех" (but о всех людях) where it's not one of the two. Besides, it's by far not the only preposition used with the prepositional case. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Rewriting Russian noun templates[edit]

OK, I'm guessing the following:

  • {{ru-noun-1|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|1|STEM||BARE}} (and convert |anim=1 -> |a=an, |note= -> |notes=, leave |n= alone; BARE parameter omitted if omitted or empty in source)
  • {{ru-noun-2|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|2|STEM||BARE}} (ditto above)
  • {{ru-noun-2-а|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|2|STEM|-а|BARE}} (ditto above)
  • {{ru-noun-3|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|3|STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME||BARE}} (ditto above)
  • {{ru-noun-3-а|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|3|STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME|-а|BARE}} (ditto above)
  • {{ru-noun-5|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|5|STEM or UNSTRESSED or PAGENAME|}} (ditto above)
  • {{ru-noun-а-[12]|UNSTRESSED|STEM|UNSTRESSEDBARE|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[12]|STEM or UNSTRESSED|а|BARE or UNSTRESSEDBARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-а-6|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|6|STEM or UNSTRESSED|а|BARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-ин|UNSTRESSED|STEM|FULL}} -> {{ru-noun-table|N|STEM or UNSTRESSED|ин}} with the value of N determined by:
    If STEM or UNSTRESSED + ин = FULL (with the stress in the same place), then N = 1
    If STEM or UNSTRESSED + и́н = FULL (with the stress shifted to the -и́н), then N = 4
    If STEM or UNSTRESSED = FULL (with the stress in the same place), then N = 1 and instead of ин for the third parameter.
    Otherwise, it is not yet supported (if such cases exist).
  • {{ru-noun-о-[123]|UNSTRESSED|STEM|UNSTRESSEDBARE|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[123]|STEM or UNSTRESSED|о|BARE or UNSTRESSEDBARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-е-3|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|3|STEM or UNSTRESSED|е}}
  • {{ru-noun-я-[12]|UNSTRESSED|STEM|UNSTRESSEDBARE|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[12]|STEM or UNSTRESSED|я|BARE or UNSTRESSEDBARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-я-4|UNSTRESSED|STEM|UNSTRESSEDBARE|BARE|IRREGPL|IRREGACCSG}} -> analogous to {{ru-noun-а-4}}
  • {{ru-noun-я-[56]|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[56]|STEM or UNSTRESSED|я}}
  • {{ru-noun-ь-[1256]-m|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[1256]|STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME|ь-m|BARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-ь-3-m|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|3|STEM or UNSTRESSED|ь-m}}
  • {{ru-noun-vel-[124]|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[124]|STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME||BARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-vel-3|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|3|STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME||BARE|loc=LOCSG}} (loc omitted if LOCSG is omitted; assert that LOCPL = UNSTRESSED or PAGENAME + а́х, i.e. the same as prepositional)
  • {{ru-noun-vel-5|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|5|STEM or UNSTRESSED or PAGENAME|}}
  • {{ru-noun-vel-а-[1246]|...}} -> rewrite as {{ru-noun-а-[1246]}} and process further
  • {{ru-noun-vel-о-[12]-и|UNSTRESSED|STEM|UNSTRESSEDBARE|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[12]|STEM or UNSTRESSED|о-и|BARE OR UNSTRESSEDBARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-sib-[123]|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[123]|STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME||BARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-sib-3-а|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|3|STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME|-а|BARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-sib-5|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|5|STEM or UNSTRESSED or PAGENAME|}}
  • {{ru-noun-sib-а-1|UNSTRESSED|STEM|UNSTRESSEDBARE|BARE}} -> rewrite as {{ru-noun-а-1}} and process further
  • {{ru-noun-sib-а-2|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|2|STEM}}
  • {{ru-noun-sib-а-6|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|6|STEM or UNSTRESSED|а}}
  • {{ru-noun-ц-[12]|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[12]|STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME||BARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-ца-1|UNSTRESSED|STEM|UNSTRESSEDBARE|BARE}} -> rewrite as {{ru-noun-а-1}} and process further
  • {{ru-noun-й-[123]|UNSTRESSED|STEM|BARE}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[123]|STEM or UNSTRESSED|й|BARE}}
  • {{ru-noun-ь-[15]-f|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[15]|STEM or UNSTRESSED|ь-f}}
  • {{ru-noun-sib-ь-[15]-f|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|[15]|STEM or UNSTRESSED|ь-f}}
  • {{ru-noun-мя-1|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|1|STEM or UNSTRESSED|мя-1}}
  • {{ru-noun-ий|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> ??? {{ru-noun-table|1|STEM OR UNSTRESSED minus и|ий}}
  • {{ru-noun-ие-2|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> ??? {{ru-noun-table|2|STEM OR UNSTRESSED minus и|ие}}
  • {{ru-noun-иё|UNSTRESSED|STEM}} -> ??? unsupported? {{ru-noun-table|1|STEM OR UNSTRESSED minus и|иё}}
  • {{ru-noun-нок|UNSTRESSED|STEM|UNSTRESSEDPLURALSTEM|PLURALSTEM}} -> {{ru-noun-table|2|STEM OR UNSTRESSED minus ё/о́|ёнок/онок}} Use ending removed from STEM to decide between ёнок and о́нок. Assert that STEM minus ё/о́ = PLURALSTEM minus я́/а́; I'm 99% sure this should always be true. Also assert that the STEM goes with the PLURALSTEM ending, i.e. that ё was used with я́ and о́ with а́.

Benwing (talk) 06:35, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

OK, the above is not quite right; e.g. {{ru-noun-N}} seems to vary a bit depending on the value of N; some have the params as UNSTRESSED|STEM rather than STEM|BARE, and {{ru-noun-4}} has a weird plural. Benwing (talk) 06:42, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
The above is right for most cases, but as you noticed, the old templates have a lot of inconsistencies. Some of them have been recently updated by CodeCat not to need the unstressed parameters, while others have not. The weird plural of {{ru-noun-4}} is handled by {{ru-noun-table|4|STEM|-ья}}, but it is already orphaned (I just converted its one last use manually). The rest of them are fairly straightforward once you take into account those irregularities, except that {{ru-noun-це-N}} should use о rather than е as the third parameter to {{ru-noun-table}}.--WikiTiki89 10:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I'll expand the conversion tables when I have a chance and ask you to look over them. Meanwhile, I added a -е declension for цыга́н; not sure if there are any other nouns that behave this way. Benwing (talk) 10:59, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Can you help with the last four entries above marked ??? ? Benwing (talk) 11:10, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Before I do that, can you make me a list of all the places where {{ru-noun-table|N|...|ий/ие/ия}} is used, especially where N is not 1 (if any such cases exist). --WikiTiki89 11:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, that will take a little while, I don't have access to my machine with pywikibot set up on it right now. Can you explain to me when exactly the "bare stem" (4th arg to {{ru-noun-table}}) is used? I'm trying to figure out how to convert some of the {{ru-noun-N}} and {{ru-noun-vel-N}} templates, which have a "reduced" form (param 1) and a "stem" form (param 2 or 3) (both of which can be missing, e.g. in the call to {{ru-noun-vel-2}} in жук ‎(žuk)), but esp. the "reduced" form (param 1) is often missing). The "stem" form does not appear to always be the same as the "bare stem" form of {{ru-noun-table}}. Benwing (talk) 11:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
The bare stem is used when there is no suffix (more accurately, when there is no syllabic vowel in the suffix). This is usually the and n/ In the module, it is all the suffixes that are "", "ь", or "й". In cases where one or the other is missing, they are both the same. I guess which one is allowed to be missing may be different in different templates. This is one of the reasons I made this module, because the old templates are such a mess. --WikiTiki89 12:05, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
@Benwing: Do you happen to know Prolog? Because if you do, the above rules would be more concisely and accurately described in a Prolog-inspired syntax. --WikiTiki89 12:50, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I don't know Prolog unfortunately, studied it in a programming-language class in college but never really learned it. But I might be able to make sense of the rules if you write them out -- Prolog is basically just logic, I think. Benwing (talk) 12:57, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
BTW take a look above at {{ru-noun-а-4}}, which has some weirdness; not sure what to do with it. Benwing (talk) 12:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Prolog is all about pattern matching. I'm not going to rewrite the rules now that they are there, but I will keep it in mind for the future. As for {{ru-noun-а-4}}: As far as I can tell the IRREGPL is only for alternation of е/ё, in which case it should be merged with the regular STEM. IRREGACCSG is something I already had in mind when writing the module and decided that these should just use overrides. This is in fact just another stress pattern, which maybe we could add support for as 4a and 6a or something, but it may not be worth it. --WikiTiki89 13:31, 12 August 2015 (UTC)--WikiTiki89 13:31, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, have you ever used Scala? It also has pattern matching in it (as do other functional languages like Haskell). Benwing (talk) 14:13, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
BTW are you sure about "STEM or UNSTRESSED or BARE or PAGENAME"? E.g. in the template code for {{ru-noun-3}}, BARE is not a backup of STEM or UNSTRESSED, and having it as a backup will fail when BARE has an extra "epenthetic" vowel in it compared with the stem. Benwing (talk) 14:13, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
But Prolog is only pattern matching; there are no if-statements or anything. Yes, BARE will have an extra epenthetic vowel, but (for the masculine and ь-f declensions) so will PAGENAME. So if the stem is not specified, there is nowhere to get it from anyway and it must be assumed it is the same as BARE. --WikiTiki89 14:27, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, that makes sense concerning BARE. BTW take a look at Template:ru-noun-vel-3 above -- it has |13=LOCSG and |14=LOCPL. AFAIK your module doesn't support LOCPL; is this a spurious form that never actually exists for any nouns? Benwing (talk) 15:52, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, the locative plural is never different from the prepositional. --WikiTiki89 16:00, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
You mention above that ru-noun-це should have decl class о; does this also apply to ru-noun-sib-е? Benwing (talk) 16:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I guess it does. I don't know why I had it in my mind that it was just ц. --WikiTiki89 17:08, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Finished table above. Note there's one "unsupported" case; perhaps we should support it. Benwing (talk) 17:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Great! That case actually is supported, but бытиё ‎(bytijó) was the only entry that transcluded it, so I fixed it manually. --WikiTiki89 18:07, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Please check bot changes for rewriting adjective declension templates[edit]

@Atitarev I had my bot do the first 27 adjective changes. Can you check them to make sure everything looks OK? It should be the latest changes; if not, they were made around 5:10AM UTC on August 13. Thanks. Benwing (talk) 05:17, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I went through them all. Your bot did everything fine, but I did find that in the case of ёмкий ‎(jómkij), the short forms were in the wrong order to begin with. Perhaps your bot can also check to make sure that they all have the right endings (-, -о/е, -а/я, -ы/и). --WikiTiki89 05:37, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I did implement the check for endings, and it's already found some problems; I'll post them when it's done. I'm not sure how to check for the masculine singular -- can it assume that it shouldn't end with any of the other endings?
Also, the old declension templates add the pages to Category:Russian adjectives, which the new one doesn't do, and which consequently moves pages like 5-ый ‎(5-yj) and 6-ой ‎(6-oj) out of the category. Should we add back the category? Benwing (talk) 06:52, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Masculine singular always ends in a consonant (including ь). I consciously decided that categories should be added by the headword template and not by the declension table. Theoretically, we might use an adjective declension table in a noun section, for example. The entries you mentioned are missing headword templates, so adding them would put them back in the category. --WikiTiki89 07:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Short adjective declension warnings[edit]

Benwing (talk) 07:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Fixed them all. Glad there weren't too many. --WikiTiki89 07:34, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Cool, thanks. Benwing (talk) 07:34, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
One masculine warning here: яблочный; fixed. Benwing (talk) 07:42, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

stress should be removed in Module:ru-noun for one-syllable words[edit]

I converted век ‎(vek) to use {{ru-noun-table}} but I had to accent the stem, and it shows up accented in the nominative/accusative sg as well even though it's only one syllable. Formerly it didn't and I think the accent should be removed from one-syllable words. Benwing (talk) 10:54, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

It's not wrong to have an accent in one-syllable words. In fact, I find it makes declension tables more consistent and easier to read when the one-syllable forms have a stress mark. --WikiTiki89 11:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Is there a phonemic difference between presence and lack of stress? —CodeCat 12:52, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Actually yes, and monosyllable nouns do have stress on their only syllable. Some particles and prepositions are entirely unstressed. --WikiTiki89 12:56, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Combining Module:ru-noun and Module:ru-noun-old?[edit]

It seems like there's lots of code duplication here. If I'm not mistaken the main difference is the declension types themselves -- the two could be combined by e.g. creating the old declension under old_declensions["foo"] = { ... } and creating entry points and export.show_old with the implementation largely shared. Similarly for Module:ru-adjective and Module:ru-adjective-old. Ultimately you might want to combine the noun and adjective modules as well, since it appears there are nouns that decline according to the adjective declensions. (Module:ar-nominals has them combined, for example -- although granted this is a significantly more complex module that does all sorts of things.) Benwing (talk) 12:08, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I diffed the two modules and they definitely can and should be combined. They are already starting to diverge due to code getting inserted into the new one and not propagated to the old one -- exactly the typical situation with duplicated code. It looks in fact like you can systematically generate the new declensions from the old ones with a few substitutions. Benwing (talk) 12:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes, you can generate the new declensions from the old ones and I considered doing that, but decided not to because that would require anyone who wants to add declensions to have to know the old orthography. If it were possible to do it the other way around (derive the old declensions from the new ones) I would have done it that way. I guess the real reason I made separate modules is because it was easier to just copy and paste it. There are a few differences, however, in how links are generated. For old declensions, I decided to strip the ё to е in the link. --WikiTiki89 12:59, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I went ahead and merged the two; you should delete Module:ru-noun-old. I preserved the differences and generated the new decls from the old ones. Someone who wants to add only a new-style declension can do it if they really want to by adding to declensions instead of declensions_old. Benwing (talk) 15:50, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I still don't think that was the best idea, but whatever. --WikiTiki89 17:24, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
@Benwing Please check Category:Pages with module errors. They seem to be all cases of declension types not recognized by this module. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz fixed. Benwing (talk) 04:08, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Supporting a separate plural stem in Module:ru-noun[edit]

Looks like we need to support a distinct plural stem for certain nouns. I've been running code to convert the noun decls and has complained about бесёнок and пизда and чертёнок. There's also око and небо and озеро and господин and ухо and such, which are handled currently by manually specifying all the case forms using {{ru-decl-noun}}. Is this something you can add? Benwing (talk) 09:56, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I can try adding -ёнок/-онок, they are rather common for baby animals. The others are special cases, there will be many more - сосед, татарин. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:59, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't understand now how the module works (never learned how to properly debug modules) but котёнок and мышонок are typical for -онок/-ёнок declension, чертёнок is irregular. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
The -онок/-ёнок declension is already supported. To debug modules, the only way is with print statements, either using error() or mw.log(). Benwing (talk) 12:03, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I implemented the special pl stem. Benwing (talk) 12:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz Fixed a bug; the module errors will disappear in time. Benwing (talk) 13:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I've been meaning to dot this myself, but you beat me to it. --WikiTiki89 17:34, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Latest round of warnings[edit]

  • Page 1451 бесёнок: WARNING: Strange plural: {{ru-noun-нок|бесё|бесё|бесеня|бесеня́|anim=1}}
  • Page 1813 бросок: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-2||||}}, skipping
  • Page 1959 бюллетень: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-ь-1-m||||}}, skipping
  • Page 2334 водовод: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-1|||водово́д}}, skipping
  • Page 2426 вокал: WARNING: Can't locate stem in {{ru-noun-1|n=sg|||}}, skipping
  • Page 3364 двойка: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||дво́ек}}, skipping
  • Page 3427 дежа: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2||||}}, skipping
  • Page 3732 дождик: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||до́ждик}}, skipping
  • Page 4075 железа: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-а-6||||желёз}}, skipping
  • Page 5851 консилер: WARNING: Can't locate stem in {{ru-noun-1|||}}, skipping
  • Page 6054 костяшка: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||костя́шек}}, skipping
  • Page 6465 лапша: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2||лапш}}, skipping
  • Page 6497 левша: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2||левш}}, skipping
  • Page 7549 моча: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2||мо́ч}}, skipping
  • Page 7598 мультиплекс: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-1||||}}, skipping
  • Page 8645 опричник: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||}}, skipping
  • Page 9317 переселенец: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-ц-1||||переселе́нец}}, skipping
  • Page 9438 пизда: WARNING: Strange 'irregular' plural пёзд, not substitutable for stem пизд, skipping
  • Page 10270 правша: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2||правш}}, skipping
  • Page 10515 приманка: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||прима́нок}}, skipping
  • Page 10929 пунктир: WARNING: Can't locate stem in {{ru-noun-1|||}}, skipping
  • Page 11204 раскольник: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||}}, skipping
  • Page 11477 ржа: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2||рж}}, skipping
  • Page 11634 рулет: WARNING: Can't locate stem in {{ru-noun-1||руле́т}}, skipping
  • Page 11843 саранча: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2|||саранч}}, skipping
  • Page 11923 свинец: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-ц-2||||}}, skipping
  • Page 11981 северянин: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-ин||||}}, skipping
  • Page 12027 село: WARNING: Strange 'irregular' plural сёл, not substitutable for stem селу́, skipping
  • Page 12681 спасатель: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-ь-1-m||||}}, skipping
  • Page 12703 спецназ: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-1||||}}, skipping
  • Page 12777 срыв: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-1||||}}, skipping
  • Page 12849 стегно: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-о-4||||||стёгн}}, skipping
  • Page 13020 ступень: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-ь-1-f|||ступе́нь}}, skipping
  • Page 13052 судимость: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-ь-1-f|||суди́мост}}, skipping
  • Page 13319 телеканал: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-1||||}}, skipping
  • Page 13486 тишь: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-ь-1-f|loc=тиши́}}, skipping
  • Page 13547 торг: WARNING: Unexpected locative plural на [[торга́х]]: {{ru-noun-vel-3||то́рг|13=на [[торгу́]]|14=на [[торга́х]]}}
  • Page 13815 тысяча: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2|||ты́сяч}}, skipping
  • Page 13974 улочка: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-а-1|||||у́лочек}}, skipping
  • Page 14599 холдинг: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||}}, skipping
  • Page 14883 черемша: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2||черемш}}, skipping
  • Page 14907 чертёнок: WARNING: Strange plural: {{ru-noun-нок|чертё|чертё|чертеня|чертеня́|anim=1}}
  • Page 15255 штоф: WARNING: Can't locate stem in {{ru-noun-1||што́ф}}, skipping
  • Page 15303 щепа: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-а-6||||}}, skipping
  • Page 15304 щепка: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||ще́пок}}, skipping
  • Page 15441 энергетик: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-vel-1||||}}, skipping
  • Page 15614 ямча: WARNING: Extraneous parameters in {{ru-noun-sib-а-2||ямч}}, skipping

Can you check the declensions of these warnings? The ones that say "Extraneous parameters" are probably OK (note that the template given is after expected params have been removed; if all params appear blank it's because there's an extra blank param), and if so you don't need to correct them, as I'll just add some code to remove all extraneous params; the others might need to be corrected. Thanks! Benwing (talk) 10:15, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

BTW I made one fix, on the page ат. Hopefully it is correct. Benwing (talk) 10:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
@Benwing улочка lacks stress marks. Checking others, mostly look good! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:43, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
щепка is wrong. See щепка@ru:wikt. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
@Atitarev Thanks. I fixed those. Can you also check the five nouns listed above with the warning "Can't locate stem"? All of those needed to be fixed; hopefully they're correct. Benwing (talk) 10:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Also, is ты́сяча ‎(týsjača) "thousand-ruble banknote" correct? Doesn't look it. Benwing (talk) 10:59, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Also fixed тишь ‎(tišʹ), please check. Benwing (talk) 11:02, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
What's up with село? Does it have a locative селу́ ‎(selú)? Benwing (talk) 11:05, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Something is wrong with the decl for приманка and двойка and костяшка. Benwing (talk) 11:09, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Checked all. Fixed some. The unusual plurals (пизда, чертёнок) are correct. Both locative and prepositional for село is селе́, so locative is unnecessary. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Rename {{ru-decl-noun}} -> {{ru-decl-noun-irreg}}, {{ru-noun-table}} -> {{ru-decl-noun}}?[edit]

@Atitarev For consistency, I wonder if we should rename {{ru-decl-noun}} -> {{ru-decl-noun-irreg}} and {{ru-noun-table}} -> {{ru-decl-noun}}. This fits with the name of {{ru-decl-adj}} and with the naming scheme in other languages, where there's e.g. {{ar-decl-noun}} and {{ar-decl-adj}}. Likewise {{ru-decl-noun-unc}} -> {{ru-decl-noun-irreg-sg}} and {{ru-decl-noun-pl}} -> {{ru-decl-noun-irreg-pl}}. What do you think? Benwing (talk) 18:24, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. If they are true exceptions. Some are just using those templates but they are standard. Ideally, irregular declensions should also be handled by the module. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:32, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I've been meaning to propose this. --WikiTiki89 17:31, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Misc warnings[edit]

@Atitarev One warning left, from the adjective decl not agreeing with the page name:

  • Page 883 клёво: WARNING: Page name клёво doesn't end in expected ый, skipping

Benwing (talk) 17:59, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Does it persist? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:49, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Cinemantique fixed it. Benwing (talk) 09:25, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Adjectives like 3-ий[edit]

@Atitarev These adjectives need to use {{ru-adj}}, or something; they have (or had) a manually-formatted headword. I changed 3-ий but I'm not sure the best way to format the fact that they're abbreviations. The others are 9-ый, 8-ой, 7-ой, 6-ой, 5-ый, 4-ый, 2-ой, 12-ый, 11-ый, 10-ый, 1-ый, 0-ой. Benwing (talk) 02:43, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Benwing These abbreviations can be declined as their full forms by replacing the stem with the number + "-", e.g. {{ru-decl-adj|тре́т|ьий}} = {{ru-decl-adj|3-|ьий}}, etc. but I am not sure I can easily convert to use {{ru-adj}} right now. I need to get more comfortable with the new ways. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
This is what it should look like ideally. @Atitarev: Is it really spelled 3-ьему? I would have thought 3-ему. --WikiTiki89 10:26, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
You're right, "ь" or "ъ" are never used after hyphens, it should indeed be 3-ему. In all other cases, the stems could be replaced with numbers, I think. @Benwing --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:50, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Russian possessive adjectives[edit]

@Atitarev The old {{ru-adj7}}, {{ru-adj8}}, {{ru-adj9}}, {{ru-adj11}}, {{ru-adj12}}, {{ru-adj13}} all put the adjective into Category:Russian possessive adjectives. We can have Module:ru-adjective do the same for {{ru-adj7}}, {{ru-adj8}} and {{ru-adj9}} because they have special declension types, but not so easily for {{ru-adj12}} or {{ru-adj13}}. But in any case this maybe isn't the right approach. Should we instead maybe change the headword template to be {{ru-poss-adj}}? Benwing (talk) 03:15, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, except that the uses of {{ru-adj12}} and {{ru-adj13}} are mostly actually proper nouns ... Benwing (talk) 03:17, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
@Benwing I am personally fine with sacrificing Category:Russian possessive adjectives. They are just a different declension type. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Participles like снижающийся[edit]

@Atitarev These used to be categorized as adjectives. Currently they're categorized only as participles and as non-lemma forms, which doesn't seem quite right. There are four such cases: снижающийся, извозюкавшийся, пенящийся, увлекающийся. Benwing (talk) 03:27, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Benwing It seems OK to me. They are indeed participles, not adjectives. If they are (also) adjectives {{ru-adj}} could be used as well but the declension is identical for participles and adjectives (also ordinal numerals).
Please note participles and numerals never have short forms and for adjectives, only qualitative adjectives (usually) have short forms (currently short forms are a bit misused here and @ru:wiki). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:10, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Anatoli, passive participles have short forms.--Cinemantique (talk) 04:18, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
@Benwing, Cinemantique Yes, absolutely, thank you @Cinemantique! @Benwing. Yes, that should be addressed in the module. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:27, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
I would say that they are both adjectives and participles. --WikiTiki89 10:36, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Sibilant nouns with -ья plural[edit]

@Atitarev, Cinemantique I would expect these to have genitive plural in -ьей but the only example I can find, муж ‎(muž), has gen pl -ей. Are there other such nouns and if so, how do they behave? Benwing (talk) 06:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Benwing This word is unique in its declension, there are no other such nouns. сосе́д ‎(soséd), тата́рин ‎(tatárin) are also unique, AFAIK. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:44, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. Benwing (talk) 06:50, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
@Benwing See also plural nom. and gen. of князь ‎(knjazʹ) and друг ‎(drug). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:51, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Historically speaking, the ь is the е in the gen pl -ей, so there is no reason to expect -ьей. --WikiTiki89 10:34, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


Why did you revert this? What features does my new version not support? The old way will not autolink multiple variants for a given form, for example. I would rather use the same module for everything; this makes it possible e.g. to change the format in one place, if we want or need to do that. Benwing (talk) 11:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

IMO the old way on сей looks terrible[edit]

Because the numbers aren't superscripted. Benwing (talk) 11:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes they are (for me at least). Also, I think we should try to use modules less for things that don't need them. --WikiTiki89 11:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, never mind, I do see the superscripts. As for using modules or not, you seem not to care much about code duplication, which surprises me ... in this case we have lots of HTML formatting and such duplicated between the template and the module, and junky things like Template:ru-table entry-adj. Benwing (talk) 11:29, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
My preference is to have as much HTML formatting as possible in templates. I'm even considering having the module invoke the template to format the table at the end. {{ru-table entry-adj}} is very useful because it allows you to easily create table templates. See how {{uk-decl-adj}} is implemented, for example; it's very simple and clean and uses modules only to format the links themselves. --WikiTiki89 11:41, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
I just took another look at {{ru-table entry-adj}} and got what you were talking about (that is, if you were referring to the hackish way it is different form {{ru-table entry}}). It's not ideal, but I can't think of a better solution that still keeps it simple. If I had it my way anyway, we would transliterate -ого as -ogo and not need any of these special cases. --WikiTiki89 12:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

More warnings (about Latin chars masquerading as Cyrillic in the decl template)[edit]

@Atitarev, Cinemantique

  • Page 1030 атеизм: WARNING: Stem aтеи́зм has Latin chars in it: a (index 0)
  • Page 1942 бык: WARNING: Stem бык (animate) has Latin chars in it: a (index 5), n (index 6), i (index 7), m (index 8), a (index 9), t (index 10), e (index 11)
  • Page 1942 бык: WARNING: Stem бык (inanimate) has Latin chars in it: i (index 5), n (index 6), a (index 7), n (index 8), i (index 9), m (index 10), a (index 11), t (index 12), e (index 13)
  • Page 7017 марксизм: WARNING: Stem мaркси́зм has Latin chars in it: a (index 1)
  • Page 8235 носач: WARNING: Stem ноcа́ч has Latin chars in it: c (index 2)
  • Page 10197 потомок: WARNING: Stem потóмк has Latin chars in it: ó (index 3)
  • Page 10197 потомок: WARNING: Bare form потóмок has Latin chars in it: ó (index 3)
  • Page 14551 Хезболла: WARNING: Stem Xezboll has Latin chars in it: X (index 0), e (index 1), z (index 2), b (index 3), o (index 4), l (index 5), l (index 6)
  • Page 91 Айова: WARNING: Stem А́йoв has Latin chars in it: o (index 3)
  • Page 673 Дюймовочка: WARNING: Bare form Дюймóвочек has Latin chars in it: ó (index 4)
  • Page 735 Золушка: WARNING: Bare form Зóлушек has Latin chars in it: ó (index 1)
  • Page 1413 Самуил: WARNING: Stem Cамуи́л has Latin chars in it: C (index 0)
  • Page 1586 Тамара: WARNING: Stem Тaма́р has Latin chars in it: a (index 1)

Benwing (talk) 12:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --WikiTiki89 12:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Bot to convert nouns is running[edit]

@Atitarev, Cinemantique It might take 5 hrs or so. If the meantime, if you see any thing wrong, let me know, and if something goes drastically wrong, please block the bot, because I'll be offline for awhile. Benwing (talk) 14:02, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Entries needing headword line templatized, and remaining warnings[edit]

Four acronyms needing headword line templatized:

Warnings concerning lack of accents in the declension line:

  • Page 1338 бега: WARNING: Stem бег lacks accents (ru-noun-3-а)
  • Page 5039 ишак: WARNING: Stem ишак lacks accents (ru-noun-vel-2)
  • Page 5067 каблук: WARNING: Stem каблук lacks accents (ru-noun-vel-2)
  • Page 6032 косарь: WARNING: Stem косарь lacks accents (ru-noun-ь-2-m)
  • Page 6032 косарь: WARNING: Stem косарь lacks accents (ru-noun-ь-2-m)
  • Page 10780 простец: WARNING: Stem простец lacks accents (ru-noun-ц-2)
  • Page 10930 пузырь: WARNING: Stem пузыр lacks accents (ru-noun-ь-2-m)
  • Page 12776 срамота: WARNING: Stem срамот lacks accents (ru-noun-а-2)
  • Page 13253 талыш: WARNING: Stem талыш lacks accents (ru-noun-sib-2)
  • Page 16 Абдулла: WARNING: Stem Абдулл lacks accents (ru-noun-а-2)
  • Page 1073 Маяк: WARNING: Stem Маяк lacks accents (ru-noun-vel-2)
  • Page 1 СПИД: WARNING: Stem СПИД lacks accents (ru-noun-1)
  • Page 2 ГЛОНАСС: WARNING: Stem ГЛОНАСС lacks accents (ru-noun-1)
  • Page 3 г-н: WARNING: Stem г-н lacks accents (ru-noun-1)
  • Page 1 СМЕРШ: WARNING: Stem СМЕРШ lacks accents (ru-noun-sib-1)

Thanks. Benwing (talk) 19:31, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Fixed all the stresses, did not templatize the headword lines yet. --WikiTiki89 21:33, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Can you help delete now-unused Russian templates?[edit]

There are a lot of them. All listed in Category:Russian noun inflection-table templates. I processed all references to these templates in the main space, but you might want to check for any other dangling refs. Thanks! Benwing (talk) 19:49, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Real-life emergency has come up[edit]

@Atitarev, Wikitiki89, Cinemantique Something important has come up in real life and I need to take an unplanned Wikibreak for a few weeks. If you need to contact me please use email. Thanks! I'll be back later. Benwing (talk) 20:42, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

@Benwing All the best with whatever you're doing and thanks a lot for your great efforts! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)


This has a module error, but I have no clue how to fix it. Could you take a look at it? Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 02:56, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Declension modules[edit]

Hi there, are you the one who programmed the modules for Russian?'Modules like this are clearly the future of Wiktionary. As I've been working on Lithuanian lately, I'd be interested in helping to create modules for Lithuanian too. Inflection type is almost entirely predictable, and these templates could easily be covered by a simple module. Lithuanian phonetics is very conservative and the modules should generally be easier to create than Russian. I can probably take on the bulk of the work myself, but I'll need some assistance with coding. Could you help me out? --Itsacatfish (talk) 09:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I could help with that. Just a question, though, do all nouns that end in -dis, -dys, -tis, -dė, -tė, and -ti change the -d- or -t- to -dž- or -č- in the appropriate places, or do some of them keep the -d- or -t-? --WikiTiki89 13:48, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. That is just a regular phonetic change. -t- and -d- become palatalized before non-syllabic -i-, which is represented orthographically by an -i- before back vowels, i.e. -ia-, -ią-, -io-, -iu-, -iū-, -ių-. This is a universal regular phonetic rule, so I suppose it should be put into Module:lt-common.
  • The only word I can think of that is totally irregular is žmogùs, although the irregularity is simply a different plural stem "žmon-"
  • The words ending in -uõ-, and one word in -ė̃- (duktė) have eliptical nominative forms, and their oblique stems contain an additional -en- (e.g. akmuo), -un- (šuo) or -er- (sesuo) when inflected.
  • The fourth declension -is (gen. -ies) is probably about 70% feminine, but can sometimes be masculine. The only difference in declension is the dative singular form (m. -iui-, f. -iai-) The notable irregularity here is that the genitive plural is mostly -ių- (pilis) and sometimes -ų- (dantis, naktis) (note that in the case of the latter both are acceptable).
That's just about all the irregularities I can think of. Practically all variations in verbs are covered already in the template lt-conj-mixed, although to cover various stress patterns, I was forced to create three additional ones.
I understand that it is a regular phonetic change, but are there every any exceptions, for example in loanwords? --WikiTiki89 15:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
No, it also affects loan words in endings. The combinations tiV and diV occasionally occur in loanword stems, but never in endings.--Itsacatfish (talk) 17:40, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. This should be pretty easy then. --WikiTiki89 17:45, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Can you link me to some detailed information about the stress patterns? The Wikipedia articles are not very good. --WikiTiki89 20:15, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Presumably you saw the Wikipedia article on Lithuanian accentuation? Although granted this isn't perfect. I also know about the tables in [1] (first/second accent patterns) and [2] (third/fourth accent patterns). The best English-language resource I've seen on this is the book "Beginner's Lithuanian" by Leonardas Dambriūnas, which is full of accent-pattern tables (and which one reviewer on Amazon says is "Great for linguists, but maybe not really for beginners" :-) ). If we can't find any better tables online, I can try to scan the pages out of that book and upload them. Benwing2 (talk) 21:04, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes I saw that Wikipedia article and the first table made sense to me, but then the three tables after that are not labeled so I have no idea what patterns they are talking about. The ones after that make some sense again. --WikiTiki89 21:15, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
* In the second table, the nouns are respectively I, II, III, IV; I, II, III, III, IV, IV.
* In the third table, the nouns are respectively I, II, III, IV; I, II, III, IV, IV.
* In the fourth table, the nouns are respectively I, II, II, III, IV.
Class I has fixed accent (that is never ending-stressed, I think); Class II has ending accent on the acc pl but not the other pl cases; Class III does not have ending accent on acc pl, but does on the other pl cases (maybe excluding nom pl); Case IV has ending accent on acc pl as well as the other pl cases (maybe excluding nom pl). Benwing2 (talk) 22:51, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok, you've given an explanation of the stress in the plural, but the singular looks a little more complicated. --WikiTiki89 23:57, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
See the links above to They have explanations of the accent class patterns. E.g. for class II they say "The penultimate syllable has the circumflex or the short intonation. The circumflex or the short stress remains constant, except: in the (a) instrumental singular and (b) accusative plural. If the noun ends in -as, then in addition to the two cases above, the locative singular is also stressed on the ending, e.g., batè 'shoe'. If the noun has -a in nominative singular, then this -a is stressed, e.g., pupà 'bean'." Benwing2 (talk) 00:24, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
@Itsacatfish One thing I might suggest for your verb conjugation templates is to name the underlying table template something like {{lt-conj-table}} rather than just {{lt-conj}}; that way you can reserve {{lt-conj}} for a future general verb-conjugation template that uses a module rather than just template code. Benwing2 (talk) 23:08, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, this is all the information I've collected regarding noun declension and stress patterns. Essentially the information there should be all you need. Another couple of things that may or may not be useful.
  • In my declension table, the longer (bracketed) forms are literary. The shortened forms are very common colloquially. When a word is ending-stressed, the stress always falls on the final syllable of the ending.
  • For some nouns and adjectives an illative form exists in -n. These are generally seen as fossilised adverbs now, but historically this was a productive case.
  • If the stem has acute stress, we always see stress pattern 1 or 3.
  • If the stem has non-acute (circumflex/short [`]) stress we always see stress pattern 2/4 in monosyllabic stems (katė̃, kiaũlė). In polysyllabic stems, stress patterns 1/3 are also possible. 3a is used to indicate acute stem stress, 3b is used for circumflex.
  • The stress in stress patterns 1/3 always alternates between the first and last syllable. (the only exceptions are compound nouns where variations are sometimes possible - e.g. angliakasỹs → acc. añgliakasį OR angliãkasį, and the numerals 7, 8, 9.)
  • The stress in stress patterns 2/4 alternates between the last and penultimate syllable.--Itsacatfish (talk) 11:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


It was the software being rude. When I posted my post, yours wasn't in there. —CodeCat 22:36, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

@CodeCat: Ok, sorry about that then. --WikiTiki89 23:54, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Are you sure about your change concerning 6ins/2ins?[edit]

There is apparently no such thing as 4ins but your change will trigger it as well. This is a problem unless you're sure there are no class-4 ь-f nouns. And are you sure that 2ins/6ins occur only and always with ь-f nouns? Benwing2 (talk) 01:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The reason there is no 4ins is probably because there are no "ь-f" nouns with stress pattern "4". I'm pretty sure the reason for this is that the -ю in the instrumental is never stressed anywhere ever, so it's not really a different stress class, but an unstressable ending. --WikiTiki89 01:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Names for declension categories[edit]

@Atitarev I am thinking of having Module:ru-noun create categories like Category:Russian nouns ending in -о, both to make it possible for users to browse the categories and to make it easier for editorsto see what is in each category in case I have to verify the declension or make changes that may affect a whole category. Some possible categories -- please comment:

  • Russian nouns ending in a hard consonant [or should these cats say "Russian terms ..." since some aren't nouns? An alternative is a pos= param so that e.g. pronouns go into "Russian pronouns ending in ..."]
  • Russian nouns ending in -о
  • Russian nouns ending in -о with plural in -ы
  • Russian nouns ending in -о with plural in -и [or should I combine the latter two classes, something like "Russian nouns in the о-ы declension class" or "Russian nouns in declension о-ы" or whatever?)
  • Russian nouns in accent class 6 [do we really want "Russian nouns in accent class 6*" with a star, or should we substitute a prime symbol (')?]
  • Russian nouns with locative singular [or just "Russian nouns with locative" or whatever?]
  • Russian nouns with irregular genitive plural [based on overrides]
  • Russian nouns with irregular plural stem [based on pl=]
  • Russian nouns with reducible stems [based on param "bare"; should this be "reduceable", which is what the old templates used but which looks wrong and which Google corrects?]

Benwing2 (talk) 04:33, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

3rd decl feminine nouns that don't follow the retraction rule for ins sg[edit]

пять and other numbers. The multisyllabic numbers have a strange pattern with initial stress in nom/acc and ending stress elsewhere, similar to accent class 5 and 6 in the plural although all these numbers decline as singular. Monosyllabic numbers like пять would be expressible by accent class 2 if not for the ins sg retraction. Benwing2 (talk) 08:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

The numbers just have irregular instrumentals, all of them seemingly shifting their stress to the end (probably conditioned by the requirement of a following noun, which receives more phrase-level stress). This applies to the smaller numbers too (двумя́ ‎(dvumjá), тремя́ ‎(tremjá), четырьмя́ ‎(četyrʹmjá)), which stress a syllable that doesn't even exist in other instrumentals. I wouldn't sacrifice the regularity of everything else just to conform to the numbers. Also, the regularly stressed пя́тью ‎(pjátʹju), ше́стью ‎(šéstʹju), etc. also exist but with another meaning. --WikiTiki89 01:06, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Added some autodetection to Module:ru-noun[edit]

@Cinemantique, Atitarev I added code to the module so you can specify the full stem including the ending, and either leave the declension type blank or just specify a gender, and it will figure out the correct declension type from the ending. So for example {{ru-noun-table|3|до́ждь|m}}, or {{ru-noun-table|6*|го́лова}} or {{ru-noun-table|2|бытие́}}. Currently it ignores the gender except in nouns ending in -ь, where the gender is required. In the case of reducible nouns, you still have to specify the main stem, which is not always the stem of the nominative singular; I'll fix that soon. I'm also planning on making it so you can specify irregular plurals as -а, -ья, -и or -ы and it will still autodetect the stem type and convert it if possible into the variant incorporating that plural type.

A question: Currently the autodetection code detects the special -ёнок/-онок ending (with plural -ата) but not yet the special -ин ending with plural -е; that's because I'm not sure that it's safe to assume that nouns in -ин always belong to this declension. Are there -ин nouns that don't have plural -е, and if so how common are they compared with -ин nouns that do have plural -е? Are there other features that I can use to make the guessing more accurate? E.g. it seems a lot of those -ин nouns are in -нин or even -анин. Benwing2 (talk) 08:51, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

@Benwing2 тата́рин ‎(tatárin) is a rare exception, behaves differently from other -ин nouns but it's an exception. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:09, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
I added tracking code to check for other exceptions and unfortunately there are a number of them, see [3]. E.g. аргинин, камин, магазин, апельсин. Except for тата́рин ‎(tatárin) they all look like loanwords but of course the module can't figure that out. Benwing2 (talk) 11:05, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Try to use only -анин/-янин. And look at the animacy.--Cinemantique (talk) 11:17, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Well there is also ба́рин ‎(bárin), and maybe others. I just don't get why autodetection is necessary. The ending is really easily split off by a human. It would be more useful if it were possible to fully omit the word, but then there is no way to mark the stress. Also, this ends with having to put the wrong stress on non-masculine words of stress patterns 2, 4, and 6 (as you did with голова above), which is confusing. (Forgot to mention, I appreciate the Twin Peaks reference.) --WikiTiki89 01:18, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes, in addition, боярин, господин (with irregular nom_pl ending -а́), болгарин, хазарин, татарин (all with irregular nom_pl ending -ы), шурин (with irregular plural шурья́, шурьёв... along with type 1a), хозяин (with irregular plural хозя́ева, хозя́ев...)–the same way домохозяин, квартирохозяин, сохозяин. That's all. Exceptions from the animate nouns ending with -анин/-янин are гражданин, согражданин (both with irregular stress in plural forms), and семьянин (standard). Other exceptions should be very rare.--Cinemantique (talk) 08:21, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Then there's the matter of жабры, which seems to have stumped the module. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:10, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
    The stress pattern was left out, I fixed it. --WikiTiki89 13:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Code to implement Russian declension, stem and stress categories[edit]

I wrote the code; it's sitting in Module:User:Benwing2/ru-noun. Please try it out. To try it out, you will need to copy/paste it into Module:ru-noun without saving, and use the preview pane with specific page names.

First try a page like небо and you'll see how I expect things more or less to look. There's a traditional declension category, a singular-ending category, a plural-ending category, a combined singular/plural ending category, a stress-pattern category and in this case a category because of the irregular plural. яблоко is another one to check out, with a couple more categories specific to velar stems. For more complicated pages like мост there may be a few more categories. However, for some pages there are clearly too many categories, e.g. житие; this is because there are less-specific and more-specific categories being triggered in various combinations. Perhaps you can suggest how to reduce the category numbers. You may think there are too many categories even in небо; if so, let me know what you think should be taken out. I think this code should be safe to save in Module:ru-noun provided you set 'enable_categories = false', which will disable all category insertion; but I'm not gonna do that yet until the code stabilizes a bit. Benwing2 (talk) 04:50, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I think to reduce the number of categories, we can limit each category to one feature. You can already get intersections of categories with {{#categorytree}}, so we really do not need to do it manually. --WikiTiki89 11:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
What is {{#categorytree}}? How does it work? Benwing2 (talk) 05:04, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
See w:Extension:CategoryTree. In short, it lists pages in categories (like in {{suffixsee}}), but it has more features than we actually make use of. But I may have been mistaken about the intersection feature, as I can't seem to find it in the documentation. I swear I thought I saw it there before. --WikiTiki89 06:11, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
OK. w:Extension:CategoryTree links to a deleted page. I reduced the number of categories by eliminating the less-specific/backup versions of various categories. Benwing2 (talk) 06:53, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry typo: mw:Extension:CategoryTree. --WikiTiki89 06:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I would also really like User:Atitarev's opinion on which categories we should and shouldn't have. --WikiTiki89 06:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I redid the categories to further reduce their # and eliminate redundancy. Benwing2 (talk) 11:09, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@Atitarev, I would still like your input here. --WikiTiki89 13:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@Benwing2 It's not easy for me to decide on categories. I think, ideally, nouns should have A. Zaliznyak's declension types (and subtypes and anomalies) and stress patterns numbers as categories. For this, you would need to cooperate to with Cinemantique, even if your implementation is different. Since you're using a different approach, it may not be possible, I don't know. Tiki, I can send the reference file to you as well, if you send me an email. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:40, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Old gen pl of ёнокъ?[edit]

Module has -я́т, should this be -я́тъ? Benwing2 (talk) 09:34, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes. --WikiTiki89 12:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Nouns in ёночек?[edit]

Vitalik's module has a special case for nouns in -ёночек, nom pl maybe in -я́тка. Should we support this? Benwing2 (talk) 09:39, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

First of all, it would be -я́тки. Second of all, these are usually treated as separate lemmas (see ребя́тки ‎(rebjátki)) and to me that feels right, against all logic. If we do decide to put them in the same table, then I think pl= parameter should suffice. --WikiTiki89 12:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)