User talk:Wyang/Archive4

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


Your bot broke 調試 and 调试[edit]

Hey, I came here to say I saw your bot User:Wyangbot made 調試 redirect to 调试 and 调试 redirect to 調試 back in january. It must be a mistake. If this faulty bot behaviour hasn't been fixed since then, it might still do this. 汤玛斯 (talk) 18:18, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it to my attention, but this is not the bot's fault: [1]. Wyang (talk) 01:01, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Ah I see. Funny, those human mistakes. 汤玛斯 (talk) 11:56, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Pronunciation of 場 in Taiwan?[edit]

Is 場 pronounced cháng in Taiwan? If so we should make it automatically appear at entries like 場地, 收場, etc. ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Moedict seems to indicate that it is. Could you add it to the script? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Hey mate, thanks for reminding me. Don't think it is used in reality much - if you click on the audios for compounds of this character, they all pronounce it as chang3. Wyang (talk) 22:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Possible issues with an anon[edit]

@Wyang, Atitarev, Tooironic, and any other ZH / JA / maybe even LA editors -- (talk) is a bit of a problem. Some of what they add is of value, and some of what they add is rubbish. The big issue with the rubbish is that it's often close-but-off-target as opposed to obviously wrong. Things like this edit, or this edit, among others. Some of their English terminology is decidedly odd (such as using contemn as a gloss), and they're not aware of current conventions (such as using outdated template arguments).

I'm going through their JA edits, but I don't have a lot of bandwidth to do so. Could you all help out by at least vetting their ZH and other edits? And is the situation bad enough to warrant a block while we get things cleaned up? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:21, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Can't speak for the mostly Japanese edits. The handful of Chinese ones aren't too bad. I've made some changes to the respective entries. Good luck. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with this, EU. I don't see much in the way of Latin edits, but if anything questionable comes up LA-wise, feel free to ping me. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Graphical etymology of 去[edit]

I think you added this to the etymology of 去:

One is that the ideograph represented a man with a hole marked in his crotch, and the inventors of writing had perhaps "anus" (i.e. getting rid of) in mind.

Could you provide a source for this? — Justinrleung (t...)c=› 01:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Justin, this is in Schuessler's "ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese". Cheers, Wyang (talk) 06:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I couldn't find this explanation anywhere online, so I was just curious where you got it from. — Justinrleung (t...)c=› 07:07, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Etymology of 한글[edit]

Hi Frank,

How are you? Are you able to write the etymology of 한글, please? Also calling @TAKASUGI Shinji, KoreanQuoter. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 21:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

한글 is a fairly recent term coined in 1910 by scholars 최남선 and 주시경. (source) It used to be called 언문 (諺文), 조선문자 (朝鮮文字), 언서(諺書), 언자(諺字), 언해(諺解), 암클 (women's writing) and 중글 (Buddhist monks' writing) in the past (extra source) and it was called 국문 (國文) right before the Japanese colonial takeover. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Anatoli. I hope all is well. Thanks to KoreanQuoter above - I've added etymology there. Wyang (talk) 05:04, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you both! I had to temporarily protect the page since someone started copying stupidities from Wikipedia. Wikipedia's Hangul now shows "韓㐎" and "朝鮮㐎" as hanja for 한글 and "조선글"! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Taiwan pronunciation of [edit]

When you have time would you mind adding zhí as the Taiwan pronunciation of for words like 投擲, 拋擲, 虛擲, etc.? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Sure thing mate, finished. Wyang (talk) 23:53, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Cheers! ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Wu pronunciation of 無錫[edit]

無錫 had a Wu pronunciation recording available on Commons so I felt obligated to add it, but I don't know how the tones work (´;ω;`) —suzukaze (tc) 21:28, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid this is not Shanghainese. I added the theoretical Shanghainese pronunciation anyway. :) Wyang (talk) 10:12, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Remaining Korean Tbot entries[edit]

Hi Frank,

Do you mind checking two remaining entries Category:Tbot entries (Korean): 어미 and 을 따라서, please? :) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

No problem, Anatoli. Wyang (talk) 23:26, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you!-Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:32, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Chinese entries without definitions or requests for definitions[edit]

Hi Frank,

I find entries like (gōng) - a big problem. Not because they don't have definitions but because such entries are not easy to find for fixing. Do you think you can find some time making a list of such entries or run a bot and insert (as a minimum)?:


# {{rfdef|lang=zh}}

I have asked other Chinese editors not remove {{rfdef}} but they keep doing or they are some old remainders. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:29, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Anatoli, here is a list: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 㿿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 乿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 仿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 伿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 俿, 倀, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 宿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 尿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 巿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 廿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 滿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 祿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 觿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 跿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 輿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 骿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 鹿, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . A script is needed to generate those contents on these pages and definitions should be moved from Translingual to Chinese, although I'm a bit short in time to do this. :( Wyang (talk) 00:41, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Great job, thank you, Frank! I'll save the list. Some bot writers might be able to do this. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
IMO the Translingual definitions are too unreliable to be moved to Chinese. Sometimes the defintions' formatting does not conform to Wiktionary standards, such as "" and "𠀒", and other times there are the weirdest things listed. —suzukaze (tc) 00:49, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
I think most of the translingual definitions come from the Unihan Database, which might isn't always correct and may include definitions for other languages. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 01:01, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Some Template:ja-usex grieves[edit]

Hi Frank,

There are some problems with {{ja-usex}} (see the bottom of the talk page), re っ, ヶ. Do you mind helping out a bit, if you have time? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:26, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Anatoli, the little ga should be fixed. Wyang (talk) 00:04, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Could you also fix っ in あの (えだ) (さくら) () (じゅっ) ()だけあります。
Ano eda ni sakuranbo ga jukko dake arimasu.
There are only ten cherries on that branch.
, please? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:50, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Done. :) Wyang (talk) 01:17, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


This edit to the Wu pronunciation may need checking. —suzukaze (tc) 21:45, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

That was my fault. Thanks to the anon for fixing this. Wyang (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:zh-pron and Template:zh-see[edit]

It looks like sort key generation for Mandarin needs some work...

suzukaze (tc) 08:26, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

@suzukaze-c At 哪些 the {{zh-pron}} was misused (fixed), not sure about Template talk:zh-see#不可胜计. It's a mess but why is it there? 不可胜计 looks fine. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
The problem for 不可胜计 is with the automatically generated sortkeys. You can see the generated code here, and the weird sortkey ([[Category:Cantonese idioms|non-standard in Mainland]]) in action here, where 不可胜计 ends up between noi and nong. —suzukaze (tc) 05:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. The problem is at Module:zh-pron function make_cat. Further lines are needed to extract the reading from the parameter 'm'. I don't have the time to fix this at the moment; hopefully someone fixes it, otherwise might come back to this later. Wyang (talk) 00:35, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
It's not too important anyways. —suzukaze (tc) 00:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

夏#Old Chinese, 夏#Middle Chinese[edit]

Is there any way to preserve this information in the unified Chinese format? The infobox does present

Old Chinese
/*[ɢ]ˤraʔ/ great
/*[ɡ]ˤraʔ (~ *[ɡ]ˤraʔ-s)/ summer

, but not "Pertaining to the Chinese civilization". (I'm sorry for bothering you so much >_<) —suzukaze (tc) 04:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem. The link to all the OC pronunciation information is under the editor in the Edit mode. diff. Wyang (talk) 23:59, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Devanagari transliteration[edit]

Hi Frank,

Hope you're well. Since you are now working with Nepali, maybe you can improve the transliteration module? There are some guys who can (I hope!) help with both Lua User:Benwing2 (aka Benwing) and transliterations for Devanagari languages User:Aryamanarora and User:DerekWinters. There should only be minor differences, if at all, between Hindi and Nepali. I am sure you can do this yourself, you did many great jobs before. I know Aryamanarora now possesses the new Oxford Hindi-English dictionary, which is very good compared to all previous dictionaries - has genders and standard and detailed transliterations and descriptions. (I didn't get it but I saw it). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:48, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Anatoli. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! I did some edits on Module:hi-translit (if I understood you correctly) to make the module account for (1) complex consonants, (2) permissible final clusters and (3) nasalised diphthongs. I changed "ḍā'unloḍ" to "ḍāunloḍ" as the latter doesn't appear to be ambiguous. I suggest that Hindi editors adopt a system which readily allows manual transliteration, including in headwords (probably as spelling pronunciation similar to Nepali) and examples. All words can be assumed to be schwa-dropping unless enclosed by <>. This is contrary to what I did to Nepali, where the default is non-dropping and use of <> allows for final schwa-dropping, because schwa dropping is much more common in Hindi. Wyang (talk) 09:57, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you too, Frank! Thank you so much for fixing the remaining failed test cases. I am not always 100% sure about all cases of schwa-dropping. Besides, as I have seen in that dictionary, there are cases of optional dropping of "a" and cases where it's "light". I am not so sure about loanwords like बैटरी (baiṭrī), कंपनी (kampnī), फ़िल्म (film) or अलार्म क्लॉक (alārma klŏk). If the rules were clearly defined and implemented, then manual transliteration won't be required for Hindi, unless there are exception. I only know that Hindi speakers habitually avoid using nuqta and candra ("chandra"), so even when they write फिल्म (philm), they still pronounce it "film" and कॉफ़ी (kŏfī) can be written as काफी (kāphī) without any affect on pronunciation. We can transliterate such words as they are written (without the nuqta and chandra) but keep nuqta-words and chandra-words as lemmas. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't have any Hindi resources at hand so I'm not sure about the pronunciations of these words either. I do have some hard-copy Nepali dictionaries, and Nepali has a lot of words which are exceptions of pronunciation rules, mainly nouns, numerals and adjectives. Hindi and English loanwords often retain their pronunciations in Nepali, becoming exceptions. I would envisage Hindi to be largely the same, considering its large loanword proportion. Wyang (talk) 11:05, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Hindi is very phonetic, more than Nepali, AFAIK. The mismatches between written and spoken are minimal. Missing nuqta, candra is like "cafe" instead of "café" or Russian "ребенок" instead of "ребёнок". Foreign words are written phonetically and pronounced in the native way, foreign accent is not standard. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:44, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Anatoli, in written Hindi, foreign borrowings are very rare (unless you are writing in a Persianized register, then it's like written Urdu in the Devanagari script), so it's hard to tell how people write English loanwords. Generally speaking, the nuqta and chandra is dropped in writing, but this practice is frowned upon by some. As for spoken Hindi, the nuqta is always pronounced.—Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 18:52, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
True but it's the loanwords from Persian, Arabic and European languages (but not from Sanskrit), which are unregulated and can cause some issues in spelling and pronunciation. Google searches show that nuqta are often dropped in writing, despite the pronunciation but dictionaries should include them as lemmas, if they are pronounced. Failure to write nuqta and chandra created alternative or new pronunciations and cases of overcorrection. It's the same with Arabic hamza (over and under alif - أ and إ vs ا) and dots under letter yāʾ ي vs ى) and Russian ё instead of е. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 19:30, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

व in Nepali[edit]

Hi Frank,

Is धन्यवाद pronounced धन्यबाद in Nepali? Also, there should be a shwa dropping as well in Nepali, AFAIK. Correct me if I'm wrong. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

It's pronounced as धन्नेबाद् or धन्न्यबाद्. Yes, there is schwa-dropping, but it's much less widespread than in Hindi. Wyang (talk) 14:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Interesting, thanks. It seems Nepali is much less regular in reading. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Nepali resources?[edit]

Hello Wyang!

What resources are you using for Nepali? I've been seeing you churn out hundreds of entries the past few days and I was just wondering. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 01:08, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I had Ralph Turner's Nepali-English dictionary and it was a beauty. Wyang (talk) 15:36, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
This one? Turner also made this cool comparative Indo-Aryan dictionary. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 00:45, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Don't think that was its name, but the content seems very similar. It was a thick green book. I will check when I return from Nepal. Great work with the Hindi entries by the way! Wyang (talk) 14:39, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll see if I can find it online. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 18:59, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Capitalisation doesn't work here[edit]

Hi Frank,

The capitalisation doesn't work here for some reason (using ^) -

俄羅斯國家杜馬 / 俄罗斯国家杜马  ―  Éluósī guójiā dùmǎ  ―  Russian State Duma

. Could you please fix, when you're free? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev: Fixed in his behalf. --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:31, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@Kc kennylau Thanks but why is there an apostrophe - "'Éluósī ..."? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:38, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@Atitarev: It was there before I touched with it, but I'll (try to) fix it now... --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@Atitarev: Done. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@Kc kennylau Thanks! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@Kc kennylau Another one without capitalisation:
隨著時間流逝沒有發現身邊親人 [MSC, trad.]
随着时间流逝没有发现身边亲人 [MSC, simp.]
Suízhe shíjiān de liúshì, nǐ yǒu méiyǒu fāxiàn shēnbiān de qīnrén yuè lái yuè shào le? [Pinyin]
Have you found that, with the passing of time, your loved ones have become fewer and fewer?
--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:29, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
@Atitarev: Sorry, fixed. --kc_kennylau (talk) 01:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
@Kc kennylau Sorry, not fixed.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:15, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
@Atitarev: Sorry, fixed. --kc_kennylau (talk) 07:53, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
@Kc kennylau, Atitarev: I don't think the issue with vowels is solved yet. See the example in 民主 (mínzhǔ) (specifically 奧巴馬). — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 23:40, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Justinrleung A null-edit seems to have fixed it.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:46, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Module:nan-pron, IPA[edit]

牛仔毋捌虎一頁中的國際音標有問題:「捌」字的國際音標重複了。(The IPA in that page is in error: the IPA of the word 捌 is repeated.) --kc_kennylau (talk) 09:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

謝,已修復。Wyang (talk) 16:14, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
請問你如何修復?--kc_kennylau (talk) 12:14, 23 January 2016 (UTC)


Could you please add the non-Mandarin language readings for shīdiào? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

No worries, Justin seems to have added some. Wyang (talk) 01:57, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Lovely. Thanks everyone. ---> Tooironic (talk) 13:08, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Mora counting in Template:ja-pron[edit]

Heya Wyang --

I just added a pronunciation to ディスクジョッキー, and had some fun trying to get things to work correctly. The second mora (ス) is devoiced, but for some reason the template requires dev=3 instead of the expected dev=2. Similarly, the downstep is after the fourth mora, but specifying acc=4 results in [dìsúkú jíꜜョkkìì] (showing the incorrect behavior when dev=2) instead of the expected [dìkú jóꜜkkìì]. Experimenting, I found that acc=5 doesn't work right either, producing [dìsúkú jóꜜkìì], missing the geminate [k].

I dimly recall somewhere that you (or someone else?) had mentioned that the positional arguments count kana instead of morae. It looks like dev is counting kana, while acc is counting morae, which is an unintuitive and undesirable inconsistency. Sutegana should be consistently counted as part of the preceding regular-sized kana, with the exception of geminate-marking small-っ.

I'd greatly appreciate it if you could look into updating the module code. Pinging Haplology, Anatoli, Shinji as well for your input, and in case Wyang is busy and one of you has the time and coding ability. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Eirikr, thanks for the heads-up. I fixed the bug in downstep. 'acc' uses morae as this follows the practice in Japanese accent dictionaries, whereas using kana position for devoicing is easier for the inputer. I am happy to have them made consistent if necessary, however time doesn't allow... Wyang (talk) 21:30, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for pinging. Frank, you also promised a while to allow multiple syllables to be devoiced, e.g. すこし and しかし. Do you think you can add it to your list? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:09, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
@Eirikr: I could take this task. Would you want both to be counting morae or both counting kana position? How do you plan on changing the rest of the entries after the module is modified? Multiple syllables would be devoiced by putting "dev=1,3" for すこし. --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
  • kc_kennylau, ideally, both acc and dev would count morae -- there is never a case where sutegana are treated separately from the mora to which they belong, with the exception of the geminate-marking small っ.
Re: how to change existing entries, one approach would be to define a different parameter name for devoiced vowels for the new approach, then treat the old one as [VALUE] - 1 so they'll appear correctly to readers, and add a maintenance category to flag these for editors (or bots) to go and change them over to the new parameter. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
@Eirikr: Done. The parameter for mora is "devm". Refer to ディスクジョッキー. --kc_kennylau (talk)
  • That's the only entry I've seen so far. The romanization on that entry is a little weird too -- there's a small ッ showing up in the pitch-accent IPA. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 08:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
    @Eirikr: Thank you. Without your example, I would never have known that the current algorithm to count morae was wrong. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
    @Eirikr: By the way, the entries that use "dev" are located in Category:Kenny's testing category. --kc_kennylau (talk) 16:27, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Thai transliteration and pronunciation modules[edit]

Great job, Frank, very impressive! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 13:54, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

หอย is the first failed xlit test, unfortunately :) Could you please add entries with {{th-pron}} to Category:Thai terms with IPA pronunciation and create a pronunciation test module? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 14:08, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Cheers Anatoli. Category added. I think you discovered where the testcase page was... that case has been fixed. Wyang (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, Frank! Do you mind if I add more (failed) test cases, if I discover? The last failed case broke the module, though. No rush in fixing, if you're busy, my Thai is poor and I won't be adding hundreds of entries but I'd like to improve my Thai skills and increase Thai contents at Wiktionary. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:43, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that would be great. Thanks! Wyang (talk) 00:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
OK! Also, I think we might need Module:th-pron/testcases as well? Shall I invite our Thai editors to test and use the new modules/templates? (You can do it yourself, of course, if you know who I mean). Let me know if you think it's still raw. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:46, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, please. They may have some useful insights regarding improvements of the module. I think I have done the work I can do now. That testcase page might be a little hard to generate as the module generates all the formatting too - {{th-pron/documentation}} can perhaps be used. Wyang (talk) 00:57, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


此典藏有閩南白話字條目如hong-bīn,何以待之?--kc_kennylau (talk) 06:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

繼續藏著。Wyang (talk) 06:38, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
開玩笑。這個我沒有什麼建議,因為很少碰。Wyang (talk) 06:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
是否應該將讀音改用{{nan-pron}}?— justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
該模板為閩南代名詞所用。--kc_kennylau (talk) 08:18, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
@Kc kennylau 真失禮,應為{{nan-pronunc}}。— justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 08:20, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


You seem to have triggered a module error here by having pi-Latn-translit feed the string "&nbsp;" to {{lang|th}} Chuck Entz (talk) 02:54, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. Wyang (talk) 03:28, 2 February 2016 (UTC)


Hi Frank,

Do you think you could do another magic for Thai accelerated entry creation? I would appreciate if you could, please :) I'm thinking of using phonemic spelling(s) as a mandatory parameter (comma-separated) for various parts of speech. A simple one would do. @Iudexvivorum would probably be interested in the idea. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:30, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

An example noun entry การจูบ - with the code {{th-new|n|กาน จูบ|kiss}}? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:36, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Taiwan pronunciation for [edit]

Hiya, could you add the Taiwan pronunciation for (zuò) when you get time, so it can show up automatically in entries like 確鑿? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:53, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi mate. Are you 100% sure it is pronounced as zuo4? All the audios I could find for 鑿 on pronounce it as zao2, including audio at 鑿 itself. Wyang (talk) 10:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
@Wyang, Tooironic This is one of the many discrepancies between the standard pronunciation in Taiwan (dictated by 國語一字多音審訂表) and the pronunciation provided by 國語辭典 (focused on historical usage). Since 國語辭典 lists it, I usually label these with variant in Taiwan. In addition, zuò labelled as 讀音 in 國語辭典, so it could also have the label of "literary". — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 10:34, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Understood. I'll add the variant pronunciation to the respective entries manually when I get around to it. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC)


I'm quite dissatisfied with my attempt here. Would you kindly assist me, please? --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:16, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Sure. I tried my best. Wyang (talk) 03:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)


Is this edit okay? I noticed line 594 of Module:cmn-pron and thought that it might be appropriate @ 查某, if I understand its purpose correctly. —suzukaze (tc) 08:41, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

"Min Nan" by itself may be misleading, so I changed it to "imitating Min Nan". Wyang (talk) 11:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


Is "b+l+ā+s+t+i+k" really pronounced /pʰlaːɡ/? --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:36, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I think Anatoli has fixed it. Wyang (talk) 11:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

th module[edit]

Problem 1 (solved)

Sorry to bother you. But there seems to be a module-related error on this page. --iudexvivorum (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Problem 2 (solved)
I've also added a new test case to Module:th-translit/testcases. Please fix this too. Thank you so much! --iudexvivorum (talk) 16:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
@Octahedron80 Hi, I saw that you made changes to the Module:th-pron module. Would you mind fixing the module error at จดหมายเหตุ (jòt-mǎai-hèet) and Module:th-translit/testcases? Thanks so much. :) Wyang (talk) 20:56, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
I don't know how it works. I must say that some words have extra vowel at coda without reading, especially at the end of term, for example เหตุ เกตุ ชาติ อาบัติ สมบัติ ปฏิบัติ เมรุ etc. (heet, keet, chaat, aa-bat, som-bat, pa-ti-bat, meen) that will make the 'glide' nil. (?) They are all derived from Pali or Sanskrit. When these words become prefixes, the vowels are mostly read. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
We will find out more and more exceptions in the future. How about to make a list module of special cases? Module:th-pron/exceptions --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Umm. Is this list still needed, considering we don't aim to predict the pronunciation based on orthography directly? Wyang (talk) 06:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

For some reasons, the module error on จดหมายเหตุ (jòt-mǎai-hèet) and other pages is now no more. But the wrong pronunciation according to the new test case remains. --iudexvivorum (talk) 02:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

The error came from เหตุ and I hardcoded it with tr2=hèet. So the problem is not completely gone. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The pronunciation problem I referred to is another thing. The module renders 'โหน' as 'nǒo', but correctly it should be 'hǒon'. --iudexvivorum (talk) 03:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
This problem is like แหน that can be 'haen' or 'nae' at the same time. โหน (hoon) can appear as สะ-โหน (sa-noo) either. I think this can not be fixed. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:36, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
@Iudexvivorum, Octahedron80 I think it can be fixed if more strict parameters are used in the phonemic Thai. You guys need to change the module a bit then. E.g. use "หฺ" (with anusvara) when it's silent and is only used to convert consonants to high class, otherwise use normal "ห". Alternatively, parameters could be used, e.g. "|h=y" for "h" reading. {{th-pron|แหฺน}} or {{th-pron|แหน|h=y}} for 'nɛɛ' and {{th-pron|แหน}} for 'hɛɛn' examples --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Modified according to Anatoli's comment. There may be exisiting entries with h+n/ng/m/l/r/y/w respelling sequences which should actually be h+VOWELLESS+n/ng/m/l/r/y/w. We can modify the module to categorise them collectively and track them down. Wyang (talk) 06:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Problem 3 (solved)

Sorry to bother you once again. But the module seems to work improperly on this page, as Paiboon and IPA do not show. --iudexvivorum (talk) 15:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@Octahedron80 Could you please take a look at this? You made a lot of changes at Module:th-pron and I'm not sure I can understand the rationale of each edit. Thank you! Wyang (talk) 20:19, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
When I removed either รา or ราด, it worked. When I put both, it failed. I think there's somthing about letter detection? I didn't edit that part. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:41, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
ปฺระ-ชา-ชาด (ประชาชาติ) results the same problem either. It has ชา and ชาด in the word. My assumption is right. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:53, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the algorithm was affected when part of word 1 is in word 2. Fixed now. Wyang (talk) 06:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


Is using {{zh-see}} in this way okay? It's completely sensible but at the same time feels so wrong... —suzukaze (tc) 04:12, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I think we should add another option for the second parameter for second-round simplified characters (and while we're at it, for the old Singaporean simplified forms as well). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:52, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Just append v parameter in this case. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:30, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


Would you mind checking if the Min Nan is different when used to mean "main points; clues", as it is in Mandarin? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I think Justin (who is more competent) has modified the entry to clarify the senses. Wyang (talk) 06:24, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Frank! Here are the sources if you're wondering:
(Suzukaze-c dropped some clues, 我才有點眉目.)
For "sequence of ideas (in an article)", I just figured it probably wouldn't be the vernacular reading, so I just put it under the literary reading for now. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


So I see that you deleted the page titled "䡒䡒". When I created that page, I used this page as a source, which states that "䡘" is only used in "䡘䡘", and that "䡘䡘" is also written as "䡒䡒". So is it okay if I recreate the page, or should I wait until the standard form 䡘䡘 has gotten its own entry? - VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 14:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes please create the entry 䡘䡘 first. :) Wyang (talk) 06:26, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


Hi Frank,

Thanks for your effort with Thai modules! When you have some time could consider fixing an issue and add one feature to Thai usage examples function, please?

One request is here Template talk:th-usex and another on my talk page, mentioned by User:หมวดซาโต้, see entry เมืองหลวง (mʉʉang-lǔuang). Additional spaces are currently shown as some symbols - commas or ampersands. We also need the ability to suppressing links when needed (like @ with the Chinese module). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Anatoli. Replied there. Wyang (talk) 06:27, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


Got problem with คืนหมาหอน (คืน-หฺมา-หอน). Error come from หอน. --Octahedron80 (talk) 10:39, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

By the way, looks like big error at Module:th-translit/testcases --Octahedron80 (talk) 10:41, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, both fixed. Wyang (talk) 10:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Before the fix, there were 65 module errors from th-pron. Now there 73. I think a little more fixing is in order... Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 11:01, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, separate issue at Module:links. Now fixed. Wyang (talk) 11:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Much better. Now there are three. Chuck Entz (talk) 12:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

nhãn kính?[edit]

I'd suggest you try something better, rather than just a Vietnamese-English Dictionary (some quotation for starters?). You probably don't know that lexicographers can go pretty far from the truth to make their dictionaries look "complete" or "correct": for example, some might make up false or unattested readings or senses (for example, "truyến" for 傳 or "mùi" for 未 in Thiều Chửu's dictionary); some may even argue words like "bác sĩ" are used "incorrectly" (as in Nguyễn Quốc Hùng's dictionary). I've been consulting Vietnamese academic sources for quite some time and all I've got is disbelief because of the terrible inconsistency; a Vietnamese-English dictionary couldn't be more unreliable. I'm not convinced that such word as "nhãn kính" has ever been in actual use, unless in some Chinese text in the past (Vietnamese writers did write in Chinese).
As for "misreading", what I mean is non-conventional Sino-Vietnamese readings. Those can be dialectal variants or simply outright misreadings due to confusion with character shapes; unfortunately there's no way to tell which is which so I just had to go with "misreading". ばかFumikotalk 06:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Replied on your talkpage. Wyang (talk) 10:33, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Like I said, I'd like to be shown some quotation or the like to prove its practical legimtimacy, whether in the past or present. Thiều Chửu's Hán Việt tự điển and Đào Duy Anh's Hán Việt từ điển are essentially Chinese-Vietnamese dictionaries: even basic entries like nhãn aren't qualified as Vietnamese since we don't say "người có hai nhãn" but we say "người có hai mắt". Sino-Vietnamese elements like nhãn are not used as legitimate words, but only as bound morphemes in a limited number of borrowed compounds as a whole; not all Sino-Vietnamese words are practical words (I'd love to claim *mạn hoạ as a Vietnamese counterpart of manga, manhua and manhwa but I just can't because no one uses it for that purpose); and you might notice that Thiều Chửu's dictionary only cite Chinese text. The article you refered to basically explains Chinese characters; I'd like to know in what period of history people actually used *viễn vọng kính instead of kính viễn vọng.
Even well-known dictionaries like Thiều Chửu's has some questionable information. Like I said, it provides strange readings even for common Han character. 傳 has one (basically) unattestable reading "truyến". It's defined as some sort of "station". But when I searched for it on Google or Google Books, all I got are stupid misspellings like "*truyến thuyết", "*truyến giáo". Another example is 子 which has the reading "tí" considered as Sino-Vietnamese; it is just plain irregular for the MC rising tone to evolve into the Vietnamese sắc tone, and "" is more likely to be an "Old Sino-Vietnamese" or "nativised Sino-Vietnamese" reading just like "Mùi", "Thìn", "Mẹo". only occurs in Nam mô so I suspected it was a mere irregular variant of "vô" which was borrowed wholly in the saying Nam mô A Di Đà Phật, and like I said there's no telling what its true nature might be so I went with "misreading". ばかFumikotalk 11:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Tibetic language classification[edit]

Howdy Wyang! I'm not sure we've spoken before (please correct me if I'm wrong). I was thinking of working on the classification of Sino-Tibetan languages, which can be seen here if you scroll down to Proto-Sino-Tibetan. At first look, I realize we should probably have a Tibetic family that stems from Old Tibetan, but what other major families/proto-languages should I add? Also, whom else should we included in this language discussion? Thanks for your help! —JohnC5 15:42, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi JohnC5, the STEDT database has a neat classification system for Sino-Tibetan languages, which forms the basis of the phylogeny used in Appendix:Proto-Sino-Tibetan pages here (Wiktionary talk:About Proto-Sino-Tibetan). A problem with the proto-languages within the language family is that only a handful were uncontroversial and had been variously reconstructed. A lot of the times researchers disagree on the basic divisions of Sino-Tibetan, for example the placement of Chinese in the phylogeny. An example of a fairly complete page of all currently known languages is *g-sum. User:Angr has been a prolific Burmese contributor on Wiktionary and is probably interested in this topic too. Wyang (talk) 02:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm interested in Burmese, but I know absolutely nothing about Sino-Tibetan historical linguistics or how the various languages are related to each other. I add etymologies to Burmese words descended from Proto-ST only if someone (usually Wyang) has created a page for the etymon. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay and thanks for the advice. In truth, I'm not super worried about proto-languages―more about families. But given this information, I'm not sure I can make much headway without the help of someone more expert. In the mean time, are there any of the languages in this list that should be descended from other members? We can at least get the inheritance of attested language in order. —JohnC5 03:36, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
I've made some changes and categorized some stuff. Please correct me if I've screwed anything up too much. 05:54, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
The basic structure seems good. I think it would be best to follow the STEDT phylogeny, to simplify our tasks a bit. Just one suggestion regarding Chinese: Cantonese, Gan, Xiang, Wu, etc. should descend from Middle Chinese. Wyang (talk) 04:30, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
I've fixed Chinese mostly. I'm thinking of adding Lolish and Bai next. Also, where should Literary Chinese go? Under Middle or Old Chinese? —JohnC5 05:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Literary Chinese descends mostly from Old Chinese - the current arrangement is fine. Nice work! Wyang (talk) 05:45, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Tibetan cleanup[edit]

Hi Wyang. Could you please check and clean up (as necessary) the Tibetan entries that Special:Contributions/Willy2000 has recently made? Your help would also be appreciated in checking any others you are familiar with. @Atitarev, Stephen G. Brown: Maybe there are others that you can help with as well? Thanks everybody! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:57, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Sure, done. :) Wyang (talk) 11:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Gan Chinese translations[edit]

Hi Frank,

There are Gan Chinese translations at Gan#translations, which we don't support:

Do you have a way of verifying them? I think transliteration "gon ua" looks suspicious and I marked it for verification. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:25, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't think these can be verified... Wyang (talk) 11:21, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I thought so. It won't be possible to verify Gan translations or entries. I think they all should be removed as an original research or a copy from Wikipedia. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:45, 14 March 2016 (UTC)


Hello. I see you speak Chinese. Please proofread this notice I merely created earlier with Google Translate: . Thanks. --Octahedron80 (talk) 15:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

PS. Don't care about zh-hans page. I just have requested to delete it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 15:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

No worries. done. Wyang (talk) 00:45, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Thai entries[edit]

Hello! There are several issues concerning Thai entries.

  1. Certain entries are automatically given Category:Thai terms spelled with รร, a category intended for the terms in which -รร serves as a vowel (e.g. ครรลอง, บรรเจิด, บรรลัย (ban-lai), สรรหา, etc.). But there are terms which do no fall under such category (e.g. นครราชสีมา (ná-kɔɔn-râat-chá-sǐi-maa), นครรัฐ (ná-kɔɔn-rát), etc.), because the letters are just together (not serving as a vowel); yet their entries are put into this category. Can you fix any related template or module to allow exceptions?
  2. The function "p=" in Template:th-l does not work anymore. For example, the template transliterates ดร. as dɔɔn. ({{th-l|ดร.}} gives ดร. (dɔɔn.)), but the correct pronunciation is dɔɔ-rɔɔ. When we use {{th-l|ดร.|p=ดอ-รอ}} to make it transliterate the term as dɔɔ-rɔɔ, it does not work. This seems to happen with other transliteration-related templates too, such as Template:m ({{m|th|ดร.|tr=dɔɔ-rɔɔ}} gives ดร. (dɔɔ-rɔɔ)) and Template:l ({{l|th|ดร.|tr=dɔɔ-rɔɔ}} gives ดร. (dɔɔ-rɔɔ)). Can you fix this too?

Thanks a million!

@Atitarev, Octahedron80 Let me ping you, as this topic may interest you.

--หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 04:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Topic 1 fixed in th-headword. If the same thing occur next time, I must add word exception because it's no better logic. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

@kc kennylau Would you be able to address the second issue since you did subsequent edits on Module:links? Thanks! Wyang (talk) 06:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
@Wyang: I thought your intention is that transliterations given on the page overrides manual transliterations. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:17, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
@kc kennylau
You might see that the module/template sometimes gives a transliteration different from that given on the page. An example is ดร. The module/template keeps transliterating it as dɔɔn., despite a different transliteration having been given on the page.
Furthermore, manual transliterations are sometimes needed. For example, the homograph เพลา can be pronounced plao (meaning "wheel") and pee-laa (meaning "time"). At present, the module only transliterates เพลา as plao. And even though different pronunciations have been provided on the page of เพลา, the module will generate a transliteration according to the first pronunciation only. When we need the second pronunciation, a manual transliteration will thus be required.
A concrete example is on the page เวลา, where pee-la is required for เพลา. But the template generates plao for it. And the manual transliteration, such as {{th-l|เพลา|p=เพ-ลา}}, {{l|th|เพลา|tr=pee-laa}}, or {{m|th|เพลา|tr=pee-laa}}, does not work.
--หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 17:49, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Moved from Module_talk:inc-translit ...Also, please address Module:links as requested in User_talk:Wyang#Thai_entries. Thai transliterations worked correctly and overrode manual wrong translits before you made some changes but I don't know what you changed. Sorry, you seem to have stuffed up something. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:35, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev: I am quite confused at the moment. Should I make manual transliteration override or not override? --kc_kennylau (talk) 02:44, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
@kc kennylau If a term is defined and uses {{th-pron}}, the entry's first transliteration takes precedence over manual. When I asked you to remove italics on Angr's talk page, you did some changes, some users are not happy about, including me ;) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
@Atitarev: See the newest comment on that page, by a native speaker (I presume). Should I just ignore his/her suggestion? --kc_kennylau (talk) 03:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
@kc kennylau I saw her comment and I agree with it. (I think she's a woman by Thai particles she used). Where do you find any controversy to what I said, though?
Let's see. ดร. (dɔɔn.) is currently transliterated incorrectly (should be "dɔɔ-rɔɔ"), although it's defined and uses {{th-pron}}. The automatic transliteration didn't use the entry's transliteration but other.
In case of the currently undefined เพลา (pee-laa), which currently shows "plao". Here, the phonetic respelling or manual transliteration should be used. For the reading "plao", the phonemic is "เพฺลา", for the reading "pee-laa", the phonemic is "เพ-ลา". E.g. {{th-l|เพลา|p=เพฺลา}} and {{th-l|เพลา|p=เพ-ลา}} produce เพลา (plao) and เพลา (pee-laa). The phonetic respelling does the trick. Does it make sense? Also, it works for ดร. (dɔɔ-rɔɔ) but a defined term shouldn't need that, in my opinion. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:49, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Atitarev: So you mean that p should override auto-transliteration, which should override tr. --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@kc kennylau Yes, in this order. (I am moving the discussion here, if it's OK). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
@Atitarev: Sorry if I am too stupid. Could you tell me what exactly I need to fix? --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
They want p= in Template:th-l to work again to be processed with Module:th-pron. It worked for some time until Kenny made change in Module:links. Can you fix that? --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:11, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
@Octahedron80: I thought it is working. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:23, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes, p= is working, as demonstrated above. Before some change (unknown to me), this code เอเชีย (th) (aychia) would ignore the manual "aychia" and use the entry's transliteration, "ee-chiia". The term is defined and uses {{th-pron}} (these are important conditions), as if it were เอเชีย (th) (ee-chiia)}. It may be easier for Wyang to fix it, as he designed it. It's not easy to explain all details.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 15:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Some attention[edit]

There are more cases that is still defective. See Module:th-translit/testcases --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:11, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Octahedron80 I think the automatic transliterations shouldn't be done with consonant clusters. If character pintu - พินทุ (pin-tú) - ◌ฺ were used strictly used for kl, br, etc. (consonant clusters), then แคล (kɛɛl) (should read "kɛɛl") and แคฺล (klɛɛ) (should read "klɛɛ") would never be mixed up. Or default should be "kɛɛl" reading and "klɛɛ" only if pintu is present in the phonemic Thai - "แคฺล". Do you agree that default should be "kɛɛl" for undefined form or you think the automatic trasliteration should be disabled for ambiguous cases with consonant clusters? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:25, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
It should be first result by default (kɛɛl). Until pintu is added, it would be cluster (klɛɛ). --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification. Changed accordingly. Wyang (talk) 08:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)


Could you add exception to เงิน ? This word is special that reads short (ŋɤn˧) but there is no way to express. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:16, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Sure, please see my change at เงิน. Wyang (talk) 05:48, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Good work. Thanks a lot. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:51, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you both. If I used my paper dictionary (also by Paiboon), I would have noticed that it's romanised with a short vowel - "ngən". --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:21, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Automatic pinyin for zh-l[edit]

It's clever, but is it really safe to do all the time? For example, 漂亮#See_also now shows “(Cantonese, Hakka) (jìng)”. —suzukaze (tc) 03:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Safe... in most of the usage instances. I've thought about cases like that and how to deal with interdialectal correspondences. My opinion is we need to develop better infrastructure for accommodating these. We need to combine the qualifying tag with the link itself, possibly in the form of a new template along the lines of {{zh-var|c,h|靚}}, or even better, combining all dialectal information e.g. {{zh-var|c,h:靚|mn:媠}}. This template would then grab the pronunciations according to the variant info. Secondly we need to think about where to put all the "see also"-type information such as this. This kind of information is mostly sense-specific. Unfortunately Wiktionary has a poorly designed support for building a clever dictionary, but we can gradually improve the skeleton. Codes such as {{zh-var|c,h:靚|mn:媠}} should be placed immediately after the line of definition that says "beautiful", cf. the format of sense 14 in . Wyang (talk) 03:55, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
What about 大#Etymology? —suzukaze (tc) 05:19, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
If you are sure you would like to get my opinion, then (as the person who wrote it) I think it is ... excellent. Wyang (talk) 05:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Cantonese -a-[edit]

Do these come from Middle Chinese -i- and -aa-? If so, then where do the -i- and -aa- in Cantonese come from? Are they explained as literary vs vernacular readings? kc_kennylau (talk) 04:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Kenny, I'm short in time - this document may be helpful. Cheers, Wyang (talk) 09:47, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

闲 - which is the main trad and which is the variant?[edit]

For 闲, which should we take as the main traditional form and which as the variant? 閑 or 閒? I can't find any conclusive answers online. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:23, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

From my experience, 閒 is much more common than 閑. 閑 is reserved for literary senses, like these definitions from Chinese Linguipedia:
@Tooironic — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 13:56, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
OK. Here's our coverage as it stands:
main: 閒行 variant: 閑行
main: 閒人 variant: 閑人
main: 閒暇 variant: 閑暇
main: 閒話 variant: 閑話
main: 空閒 variant: 空閑
main: 休閒 variant: 休閑
main: 閒談 variant: 閑談
main: 閒聊 variant: 閑聊
main: 悠閒 variant: 悠閑
main: 得閒 variant: 得閑
main: 閒散 variant: 閑散
main: 閒職 variant: 閑職
plus three more that I just swapped around:
main: 餘閒 variant: 餘閑
main: 閒空 variant: 閑空
main: 偷閒 variant: 偷閑
That should be nice and consistent now. Thanks ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


Could you check this edit? —suzukaze (tc) 19:30, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

I can't seem to verify this. Wyang (talk) 23:46, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Glyph origin for Han characters[edit]

@Atitarev, Tooironic, suzukaze-c Are we supposed to put glyph origins under Chinese since that's where Han characters came from? The current (albeit outdated) Wiktionary:About Han script page tells us to put glyph origins under translingual, as the translingual section is usually for information about the written character. AFAIK, the current convention is to put glyph origin information under the etymology section in the translingual section. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:46, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Convention and that page says it goes under Translingual. (FWIW if there was a vote to move it to Chinese I would support it.) —suzukaze (tc) 22:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the script as a whole (along with most of its characters) is a Chinese invention, but not all of the individual characters are of Chinese origin. There are enough kanji, hanja and chữ nôm that originated outside of China to make things difficult if everything were moved to the Chinese section. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
There could be Japanese > Glyph origin too, of course. —suzukaze (tc) 23:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, let's do it. There are characters of non-Chinese origin and the "Glyph origin" should be appropriately placed to make that apparent (e.g. ). Wyang (talk) 23:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm a little hesistant about this. Take the Latin script as an example. The glyph origins of the letters are not placed under Latin, but under the translingual header. Why would Han characters be different? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 00:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
We should look at the rules themselves to assess their appropriateness, not by the fact the rules are implemented without citing the rationales. There are two cons of placing this as etymology in Translingual: first is that this is a misuse of the word "etymology" - "Etymology is the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time. " (Wikipedia); second is that the origin of a glyph is always language-dependent, and it doesn't make sense to say a character originated as a phono-semantic character Translingually (e.g. ). Wyang (talk) 00:42, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
IMO, this will make work on single-character entries even more complicated. Even if does make some sense, adding pronunciations and senses is one thing and adding glyph etymologies is much more difficult.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:56, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
I do agree it is misusing the word "etymology". However, if we are to implement this change, we might have to get the agreement of Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese editors. We can't just suddenly pull everything from the translingual into Chinese. I don't think putting glyph origins in Chinese would make it too much more difficult than what we are doing right now. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:03, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Let's get the ball rolling. It has to be raised and changed, sooner or later. Wyang (talk) 02:41, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


Why did you remove the etymology for 羊羹 for the yokan sense? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 09:15, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

I didn't remove etymology - I merged the two, as I didn't think it was necessary to separate them. There is no differentiation in pronunciation AFAIK. This may be comparable to 文化 (wénhuà) where the conflation of etymologies is better explained in one place. Wyang (talk) 09:41, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
I guess it's fine to be put together, but it doesn't have an etymology section anymore. Nothing indicates that it's from Japanese (except the note under Hakka). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 09:54, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Good suggestion. I added a one-sentence etymology there. Wyang (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Template:zh-l's automatic pinyin and commas[edit]

It looks like the template('s module back-end) needs to be able to tell the difference between , and ; see 一二三四五,上山打老虎#See_also. —suzukaze (tc) 10:14, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Damn. Fixed. Wyang (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


Do you think Chinese etymologies 1 and 2 for (ruǎn) can be conflated? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes I think it is best to merge them, and etymology can describe the evolution of the instrument (maybe also one sentence saying this is now the commonest surname in Vietnam), whereas in definitions the surname sense is put first. Wyang (talk) 01:30, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Thai vowels "e" and "ee"[edit]

@Octahedron80 Sorry to bother you again. Would you please fix the Thai module, as the vowel "เ-" ("ee" - long) is now rendered as "e" (short)? For example, it renders เดดสะมอเร่ as "dét-sà-mɔɔ-rê", but correctly it should be "déet-sà-mɔɔ-rêe". Thank you very much, sir. --iudexvivorum (talk) 05:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I saw it on ฮ่องเต้, เท่, เท่ห์, เสน่ห์ too. I didn't notice earlier because I was not sure. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

เห (hěe) is OK, though. Please add new cases to Module:th-translit/testcases for tracking (phonemic Thai). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

It seems like the module renders the vowel short if there is a tone mark. For example, เร (ree) vs เร่ (rêe), เห (hěe) vs เห้ (hêe). --iudexvivorum (talk) 08:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Guys - what should the rule regarding this be? Vowels@Thai-language says "When any tone mark appears with เ--, or in some rare cases, such as เพชร , the syllable has a short vowel sound". Is this correct? Thanks! Wyang (talk) 10:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

  1. "เ-" always gives a long vowel sound in open syllables. As for closed syllables, "เ-" + tone marks can give both short and long sounds.
  2. This is my suggestion: You may fix the module to let it render "เ-" as a long sound, because (1) whenever a short sound is needed, we can just add the vowel shortener (as in the case of "เพชร", which is respelt as "เพ็ด"), (2) there is no vowel extender in Thai, so if the module automatically produces a short sound, how would we extend it when a long sound is needed? Or you may create a vowel extension parameter or function for the module or related templates.
--iudexvivorum (talk) 11:13, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Easy peasy. Thanks. I followed your advice. Wyang (talk) 11:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Gramercy to thee, milord! --iudexvivorum (talk) 11:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

How about แต (dtɛɛ)-แต่ (dtɛ̀ɛ)-แต้ (dtɛ̂ɛ), แปฺล (bplɛɛ)-แปฺล่ (bplɛ̀ɛ)-แปฺล้ (bplɛ̂ɛ), แหฺล (lɛ̌ɛ)-แหฺล่ (lɛ̀ɛ)-แหฺล้ (lɛ̂ɛ), แห (hɛ̌ɛ)-แห่ (hɛ̀ɛ)-แห้ (hɛ̂ɛ) ? They are still incorrect. Let's apply above rule on แ too. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:52, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Sure. Are the current effects correct? Wyang (talk) 04:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Those are correct now. Thank a lot. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:12, 11 April 2016 (UTC)


I have an idea. It would be better if th-pron table can display homophones as another row. There are a lot of homophones in Thai, for example, กาญจน์, กาน, กานต์, กานท์, การ, การณ์, การย์, กาล, กาฬ all are read 'กาน' (gaan). They should display under the pronunciation section. At the first state, we could add homophones by hand. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:08, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that is a good idea. I can't think of a way to automatically make the template detect homophones in existing pages. But a workaround is to compile a list of homophones, e.g. Module:zh/data/cmn-hom (effect: 暴利). This list can be produced automatically with a script. Wyang (talk) 05:54, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

th-pron → thwikt[edit]

Hi. I copy your th-pron module to use on Thai Wiktionary. But I must reduce some functions such as getCharSeq and Paiboon because they are not needed there. I also begin collect Thai homophones and then modify your code to display them later. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:09, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

PS I don't know what cimenohp is. But I suggest not to use it in id= because id= cannot be duplicated. (The function can be called many times.) Should use in class= instead. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:27, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Haha certainly, but please make sure the original version is mentioned. I'm glad it is considered useful. I am compiling a list of homophones from current Wiktionary data on en.wikt (which should be done in one hour). Wyang (talk) 06:50, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm collecting from homophone dictionaries at my place. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:00, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
กด	กฎ/กด
กอ-ทอ-มอ	ก.ท.ม./กทม.
กะ-ลา-โหม	กลาโหม/กะลาโหม
กาน	การ/กาฬ
ก้าว	ก้าว/เก้า
กฺรุง เทบ	กรุงเทพ/กรุงเทพฯ
ขอ	ข/ขอ/ฃ
คอ	คอ/ฅอ
คฺราด	คราด/คราส
คฺริด-สัก-กะ-หฺราด	คริสต์ศักราช/คฤสตศักราช
ฉ่ำ-สะ-มิ-หฺลา สง-ขฺลา ปัด-ตา-นี แฟน-ตา-ซี-พู-เก็ด	ฉ่ำสมิหลา สงขลา ปัตตานี แฟนตาซีภูเก็ต/ฉ่ำสะมิหลา สงขลา ปัตตานี แฟนตาซีภูเก็ต
ชน	ชน/ชล
ช็อก	ชอล์ก/ชอล์ค
เชียง-ไหฺม่	เชยีงใหม/เชียงใหม่
ตุ-ลา-กาน-พิ-วัด	ตุลาการภิวัฒน์/ตุลาการภิวัตน์
ตุ๊ก-ตุ๊ก	ตุ๊ก ๆ/ตุ๊กตุ๊ก
ทะ-เล-สาบ	ทะเลสาบ/ทะเลสาป
ทาน	ทาน/ธาร
ท้าว	ท้าว/เท้า
ทุก ทุก	ทุก ๆ/ทุกทุก
เท่	เท่/เท่ห์
เท่า	เฒ่า/เถ้า/เท่า
โท	โท/โทร
นะ-คอน-ลำ-พาง	ณครรลำภาง/นครลำภาง
นา-ยก	นายก/นายกฯ
บอ-รม-รา-ชา-ทิ-ราด	บรมราชาธิราช/บรมราชาธีราช
บัก-เต-รี	บักเตรี/บัคเตรี
บัว	บวว/บัว
บาด	บาด/บาตร/บาท
ปะ-ระ-โลก	ปรโลก/ปะระโลกย
พอ	พ/พอ
พัน-ลึก	พรรฦก/พันฦก
พุด	พุทธ/พุธ
พูด	พูด/ภูติ
พฺระ-นะ-คอน-สี-อะ-ยุด-ทะ-ยา	พระนครศรีอยุทธยา/พระนครศรีอยุธยา
พฺระ-ราด-ชะ-พง-สา-วะ-ดาน	พระราชพงศาวดาร/พระราชพงษาวดาร
มะ-ขาม	มะขาม/มะฃาม
มัด-สะ-หฺยา	มัตสยา/มัสยา
แม็ก-นี-เซี่ยม	แมกนีเซียม/แม็กนีเซียม
ย่า	ย่า/หญ้า
ยาน	ญาณ/ยาน
รด	รถ/รส
ระ-ดับ	รดับ/ระดับ
ระ-ลึก	รฦก/ระฦก
ราม-เม-สวน	รามเมศวร/ราเมศวร
ลบ-บุ-รี	ลพบุรี/ลพบุรีย
ลิ-เที่ยม	ลิเทียม/ลิเธียม
ลือ-ชา	ลือชา/ฦๅชา
เล้ส-เบี้ยน	เลสเบียน/เลสเบี้ยน
วอก-นัก-สัด	วอกนักษัตร/วอกนักสัตว
วัน-พฺรึ-หัด	วันพฤหัส/วันพฤหัสฯ
วี-ระ-กำ	วีรกรรม/วีระกรรม
สม-เด็ด-พฺระ	สมเดจ์พระ/สมเด็จพระ
สอ	ศ./ศอ
สะ-หะ-พัน	สหพัน/สหพันธ์
สะ-หะ-รัด	สหรัฐ/สหรัฐฯ
สะ-หฺมุด	สมุด/สมุทร
สะ-หฺวัด	สวัส/สวัสดิ์
สับ	ศัพท์/สรรพ/สับ
สี	ศรี/สี
สี-ช็อก	สีชอล์ก/สีชอล์ค
สุก	ศุกร์/สุข
หาน	หาญ/หาร
หำ	หรรม/หำ
หฺมื่น-นะ-คอน	หมื่นณครร/หมื่นนคร
หฺย่า	หย่า/อย่า
อะ-นุ-ยาด	อนุญาต/อนุญาติ
อะ-ลู-มิ-เนียม	อลูมิเนียม/อะลูมิเนียม
อา	อา/อาร์
อี-เมล	อีเมล/อีเมล์

Here is a list of Thai homophones I extracted from current usages of {{th-pron}}. It might be helpful. :) Wyang (talk) 07:50, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

According to above, some of them are collected misspellings or obsolete spellings. I think they should be marked (with daggers for example) if want them to display along with suitable words. My progress is now around 500 homophones. --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:02, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
@Octahedron80 Excellent work on Module:th-hom. Would you like to make {{th-pron}} automatically detect the homophones (like 暴利 (bàolì))? Wyang (talk) 04:07, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Firstly I thought about it. But there would be following problems about multiple-reading word that homophones not matched, and long list of homophones against short word. They would make the table ugly. So I keep it simply. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:21, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
I think it is better to incorporate the two into one template. The format change shouldn't be too dramatic and worst case scenario, homophones don't have to be go into the table and be generated automatically under the table. I will try some codes on {{th-pron}}. Wyang (talk) 04:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Your table looks good. I'm removing uses of th-hom. However, I'll keep the template; it might be useful in the future. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks! Wyang (talk) 06:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


There is something out there. Thwikt really has some words already read to audio files. They must display under the pronunciation section either. I wonder if th-pron can add more parameters for the audio files. I'll leave this to you. --Octahedron80 (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I added the audio file feature. Audio files are stored at Module:th-pron/files so that they can be accessed by all homophones. The audio width is dependent on respelling length. See ญี่ปุ่น (yîi-bpùn), สหรัฐอเมริกา (sà-hà-rát-à-mee-rí-gaa), ประเทศไทย, รัก (rák) and งู (nguu) for some examples. Wyang (talk) 00:22, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


Do you have a source for the Dutch etymology? ---> Tooironic (talk) 14:55, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Please see the talk page (the pdf file linked to) and The Chinese Name for Australia. Wyang (talk) 15:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
I cannot see anything in that PDF which suggests that 澳大利亞 is a transliteration from Dutch. ---> Tooironic (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
It says that Australia was recorded as 奧大利亞 in Wei Yuan's 1852 map in Illustrated Treatise on the Maritime Kingdoms (海國圖志), with the variant name of Nova Hollandia (新荷蘭地亞). A bit of search on the background of Wei Yuan and the previous maps he used as basis for his descriptions, revealed that in fact his was not the earliest use of the word. See this article 近代中国人对澳洲的认识与中澳早期交往 in 《中山大学学报》. The name that Wei had used was first used by Xu Jiyu (徐繼畬) in his 1848 book A Short Account of the Maritime Circuit (《瀛寰志略》). The description was as follows:


Thus it is clear that the name for Australia in Chinese was from Dutch Australië. The phonetics (
) matches better than English Australia (
) too, especially the syllable . Hope it helps. Wyang (talk) 01:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Half the pages on this wiki have no Mindong. pls ur only user who nos Mindong.[edit]

Help me Wyang, you're my only hope. Johnny Shiz (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

I shall endeavour. Wyang (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

粵語高降調 (High-falling tones in Cantonese)[edit]

請問粵語高降高平之分何來? (I would like to ask, where does the distinction between high-falling tones and high-level tones in Cantonese come form?)--kc_kennylau (talk) 04:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

這篇文可能有幫助(結語在最後一頁)。大概地講,起先廣州話陰平調為高降調值,高平調為變調,有特定詞類容易變調。後來兩者分野越來越模糊。Wyang (talk) 04:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)


Do Min Dong and other Min varieties use 食 for "to drink"? I only know it's used in Min Nan (both Hokkien and Teochew). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Fuzhou dialect does use 食 /sieʔ˥/ for "to drink", e.g. ~薰(抽煙)、~水(喝水), although it also uses /ʦʰuɔʔ˨˧/: 水~蜀嘴(喝口水)、藥~裡去(藥喝了吧). Same situation in Min Bei (Jian'ou dialect): /iɛ˦˩/ (eat, drink) and /ʦʰyɛ˨˦/ (drink). Wyang (talk) 06:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Gentle reminder[edit]

Please check CAT:E after you edit a widely-transcluded module such as Module:zh-pron

Thanks, gently fixed. Wyang (talk) 23:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
There's still something strange going on. There are now 3 Chinese entries with out-of-memory errors. To save you some time (and out of curiosity), I edited and previewed the different sections to see what was using the memory. Here's what I found:

As you can see, just about everything in the Chinese sections uses lots of memory, which isn't surprising, given the huge amounts of data the modules are working with. Still, something must have changed recently: at , for instance, the Chinese section takes all but a MB and a half, and we weren't seeing any module errors like this a couple of days ago.

I hope this helps. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 03:00, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if it has anything to do with my recent edits to the Hakka module. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:04, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
I changed the require in Module:zh-pron to loadData, and it fixed the module errors on 死 and 無. That is about as much as I can do using my Lua knowledge, unfortunately. Something else needs to be fixed to fix the errors on 水. Wyang (talk) 05:32, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
I wonder if splitting Module:zh into specialized smaller modules would help. It seems like the compound section alone calls on the Mandarin PRC/Taiwan pronunciation difference data as well as homophone data, although it's totally unnecessary. —suzukaze (tc) 22:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Thai transliteration[edit]


"ว" as ending consonant[edit]


In general, "ว", when ending a syllable, is transliterated as or as part of the vowel (sometimes represented by "a", sometimes by "o", sometimes by "u", etc.) Examples: กิ่ว (gìu), เกอว (gəəo), แต๋ว (dtɛ̌o), น้าว (náao), สั่ว (sùua), เหี่ยว (hìao), เอี่ยว (ìao).

But there are cases that "ว" serves as an independent ending consonant. And this is still not supported by the transliteration module. For example, หมั่นโถว (respelled as หฺมั่น-โถว) is now automatically transliterated as "màn-twǒo", but it should be "màn-tǒow".

So I am here to beg you to fix it. Thanks a million!

--YURi (talk) 18:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello! I have fixed the issue at màn-tǒow. Fixing the latter would require fixing the linking template. @kc kennylau could you please take a look and fix the second case if you can? Thank you, Wyang (talk) 01:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

"ๆ" the repetition marker[edit]

The module transliterates a term with the repetition marker (, called yá-mók) incorrectly, despite the term having been defined. An example is on the page ตุ๊กตุ๊ก, where the term ตุ๊ก ๆ is transliterated as "dtúk yá-mók", but the correct transliteration should be "dtúk dtúk". --YURi (talk) 18:58, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I could say that ยะ-มก reading must be removed from ๆ because ตุ๊ก ๆ is linked from there. By the way, the mark has no pronunciation by itself; we just call it like that. (I already remove it.) --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

並存 or 併存?[edit]

Do you know which one is "correct" (or more common if both are used): 並存 or 併存? AFAIK, in Cantonese, it's most commonly pronounced bing6 cyun4, so 並存 should be the correct one. 並存 is also supported by Guoyu Cidian and Chinese Linguipedia, both of which do not have 併存. Semantically, 並 seems to make more sense, as it means "together; simultaneous", as opposed to 併 "to combine". However, 併存 is given an entry in CantoDict with bing3 cyun4, but I'm quite doubtful of it. What do you think? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:02, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree with you Justin - 並存 seems to be the more correct/common form. Wyang (talk) 01:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I moved the info from 併存 to 並存, but took away bing3 cyun4 for now. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


Could you check if the senses for 徛 are also used in Min dialects? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

It is used in most Min dialects and is treated as the same as () by some. This page has detailed info about the use of various senses in Chinese dialects. Wyang (talk) 03:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the resource! I've edited the page accordingly. Could you check the Fuzhou pronunciation I added? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
No prob; seems good. Wyang (talk) 08:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


diff; I'm not sure it's entirely "proper" to use fonts technically designated as Chinese for Korean. For example, the Adobe/Google font Source Han Sans specifically has a Korea variant for things like this. —suzukaze (tc) 04:43, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

You are probably right, although I don't know what the proper (and good-looking) fonts to use are. The edit was to revert to the previous version before I moved the order of the Hani fonts, as the new prioritised font for Hani made Korean Hanja look uglier. Wyang (talk) 04:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Dotum and Gulim are standard fonts for Korean on old Windows systems (but they're sort of ugly). I think since Windows 8, Malgun Gothic has hanja. On Macs, there's Apple SD Gothic Neo. Of course there's the Source Han Sans / Noto fonts. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:03, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Based on Justinrleung's list (and including a few non-Korean fonts as fallbacks) I suppose it should be
:lang(ko).Hani {
	font-family: Gulim, Dotum, Malgun Gothic, Apple SD Gothic Neo, Source Han Sans KR, Noto Sans CJK KR, MS PGothic, Arial Unicode MS, sans-serif;
then. —suzukaze (tc) 09:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for this! Edited. Wyang (talk) 09:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
BTW, for Arial Unicode MS, if we turn on the salt (Stylistic Alternates) OpenType feature, it's also Korean. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:29, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Etyms at 무리[edit]

I find the notes at Etym 2 a bit odd, having never before encountered mention of an ancient word *mol for “sun”. Is there other evidence for this, or is Seo pulling something out of the air?

FWIW, there's an apparently parallel cluster of terms in JA that have a similar ⟨mVrV⟩ invalid IPA characters (VV) consonant structure, and which all have to do with roundness and grouping:

  • ⟨marV⟩ invalid IPA characters (V):
    • (maru, older maro, circle, noun)
    • (mari, ball, possibly obsolete; might be derivable as the 連用形 or “continuous or stem form” of hypothetical verb *maru “to be round”)
  • ⟨murV⟩ invalid IPA characters (V):
    • (mura, village, possibly derivable as the 未然形 or “incomplete form” of muru, indicating something in an ongoing state of grouping-together-ness; then again, terms with /a/ tend to have an emphasis on “outside / outward / external appearance”)
    • 群る (muru, to form a group, to bunch together, typically said of animals; superseded by modern 群れる, mureru)
    • (muro, room, chamber, terms with /o/ tend to have an emphasis on “inside / inward / inherent quality”)
  • ⟨morV⟩ invalid IPA characters (V):
    • (mori, forest, appears to be semantically related to the idea of “group; bunch”; might be derivable as the 連用形 or “continuous or stem form” of moru below)
    • 盛る (moru, to pile up, to be a lot in one place)
    • (moro, lots of something, all of something, both of something)

This cluster in JA makes me wonder if the etyms listed at 무리 might be closer to cognate than Seo seems to suggest. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:01, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

I agree with you. I find the *mol root for "sun" a bit shaky. I haven't got Seo at hand (to see if other languages are cited), and the other Korean etymological books I have do not propose an etymology for muri beyond Middle Korean. But interestingly, Starostin reconstructed Proto-Altaic *múra for this and hence connecting it with possibly many of the terms above. Wyang (talk) 09:09, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


Any idea why the simp conversion for the example sentences is not showing here? ---> Tooironic (talk) 10:06, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

The template was told that the text was Classical Chinese: [2]suzukaze (tc) 10:08, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Looking at the page history it seems to be fine; I don't see any conversion problems... —suzukaze (tc) 10:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not understanding the question either... Wyang (talk) 10:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Seems OK now. Cheers. ---> Tooironic (talk) 10:20, 10 May 2016 (UTC)


How to fix the pinyin in the second etymology? ---> Tooironic (talk) 16:28, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

They require different glosses in their Hanzi boxes, so it is perhaps easier to achieve this that way. Wyang (talk) 22:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)


Could you check the literary definitions for 北面? I'm not very sure about them. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:28, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Looks good - I don't have any further suggestions. Wyang (talk) 01:35, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
OK, thanks! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:36, 16 May 2016 (UTC)


Could you help me fix the formatting here? 餡兒餅 is not a typical erhua form as the er is placed in the middle of the word. ---> Tooironic (talk) 08:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

No problem, I added a |word= parameter in {{cmn-erhua form of}} and it's fixed now. Wyang (talk) 08:50, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Cheers! ---> Tooironic (talk) 11:38, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

failed Thai transliteration[edit]

Hello! There is a failed Thai transliteration in this entry, สยึ๋มกึ๋ย (sà-yʉ̌m-gʉ̌i). Could you please fix it? Thank you very much! --หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 05:13, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I added the final. Is the displayed transliteration correct now? Thanks! Wyang (talk) 05:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for a very late reply T_T
It is correct now. Thanks a million!
--หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Taoyuan Hakka[edit]

Hi, in the dialectal data, there's Taoyuan Hakka. Do you know if that's Sixian, Hailu or even Si-Hai? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:05, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. It seems to be close to Dabu (大埔) dialect. The data was taken from 《現代漢語方言音庫 字庫》. Wyang (talk) 05:23, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
That sort of makes sense, but the tones are all Sixian (e.g. 55 instead of 53, 24 instead of 33), which makes me think it's Hailu-influenced Sixian. Anyway, I was just asking because I wanted to add more Hakka dialectal differences in the zh-dial boxes. I'll probably add Miaoli (Northern Sixian), Hsinchu (Hailu), Dongshi/Taichung (Dabu), Zhuolan? (Raoping) and Yunlin (Zhao'an). What do you think? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:52, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Sounds good. Please go ahead! Wyang (talk) 06:01, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


Could you update script data I posted on Module talk:scripts/data please? (Thai, Laoo, Lana, Mymr) --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:53, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Sure, all done. (No change for Lana) Wyang (talk) 05:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:14, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Jin erhua[edit]

Our transcription for Jin currently doesn't take care of erhua. How are we going to deal with it? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:23, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

We have to add them to the list of rhymes at Module:cjy-pron. I tried to find resources listing all possible erhua rhymes in the Taiyuan dialect, but to no avail. If no complete list exists, I guess we'll have to add them individually when they come up. Wyang (talk) 05:33, 26 May 2016 (UTC)


I wasn't quite ready yet to block him myself, but edit-warring with admins over bad edits is as good a reason as any.

He's gotten better about some things, so I gave him a chance, but I warned him back in April: "If you don't want to get permanently blocked again, you need to stop editing things you know nothing about. Given your long history of bad edits under your other accounts, you need to be on your best behavior to keep from having your current ones meet the same fate."

By the way, he's been using another account: À la 雞 (talkcontribsglobal account infodeleted contribsnukeedit filter logpage movesblockblock logactive blocks). Chuck Entz (talk) 01:04, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. Blocked the other account too. Wyang (talk) 01:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Thai transliteration - old problems come back[edit]

Some old problems regarding Thai transliteration have returned:

  1. Terms are transliterated incorrectly, despite being defined. An example is in the etymology of พลเรือน, where พล is transliterated as pol (correctly, it should be pon).
  2. Automatically generated transliteration (AGT) used to override manual transliteration in the Translations section. But now, AGT does not show in this section anymore, as in the entries butterfly pea and waterspout.

Would you please look into the problems and fix them? Thank you so much! --iudexvivorum (talk) 07:45, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks for bringing it to my attention. This was due to some recent edits to Module:links [3]. Fixed now. Wyang (talk) 07:56, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I think both the above-said problems now come back again. --YURi (talk) 18:00, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I just saw that your edit at Module:links has been reverted. So, let me invite @CodeCat here. --YURi (talk) 18:04, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
See the discussion below at User talk:Wyang#Module:links. --WikiTiki89 18:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, so sorry about having to make you guys ask about this every now and then! The fact that useful codes are removed intermittently is precisely the reason that there are recurring problems with the Thai links. I will try my best to make sure it is the last time that this happens. Wyang (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Question on why you removed the multiple character pronunciation part on Module:zh/data[edit]

Hi! So is there a new module for this now? Thanks.--Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:13, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Yes, it is at Module:zh/data/cmn-tag. Wyang (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

About Min Nan pronunciation here in Wiktionary[edit]

So Min Nan has basically three kinds of pronunciation, the Xiamen, Quanzhou, and Zhangzhou. However, given the current reality, it seems that we can only input the Taiwan pronunciation and Zhangzhou pronunciation. Is there any way to make it possible to input all kinds? -Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

There was a discussion a while back about this, but nothing was really done about it. Currently, I put all the pronunciations in and put a note (using mn_note) about the dialectal variation. (See 紅毛塗 for an example.) This is all we can do until add more functionality to the module. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:29, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
What Justin has done for Hakka is fantastic and is the way to go for Min Nan (Hokkien and Teochew) here. I'm not very confident with handling the interdialectal differences of Min Nan, but ideally this should be handled on a per-dialect basis or pan-dialect basis (e.g. using "Lîn" to generate "jîn/lîn" for ). Wyang (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
For me the problem with the current functionality is that it automatically gives Taiwanese and Zhangzhou pronunciations, taking into account of just sound correspondences. This is a problem because 1.) some differences can't be accounted by sound correspondence alone, and 2.) some word entries cannot be found in the Taiwanese lexicon and are specific to maybe Quanzhou, or Zhangzhou, or Xiamen, or Taiwan, or a combination of them. So, I think if we can do a module where you only need to input one pronunciation, and it would automatically take into account of all the sound correspondences in the other dialects, but would leave the editor the option of excluding one dialect or retaining only one (if the word entry is exclusive to one dialect), or modifying the pronunciation of one specific dialect that would otherwise be automatically generated through sound correspondences but has specific pronunciations that cannot be accounted for by sound correspondences alone. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:54, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


What's this about? What does it improve over the standard transliteration interface for Thai? --WikiTiki89 18:32, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

@Wikitiki89: I think your question will be answered if you look three sections above. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:02, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't understand it either. Why do those edits change the transliterations, even though none is given in the entry? —CodeCat 20:49, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Even after looking at the section above, I don't see what this edit does. In fact, it seems like it would break cases that have alt forms. --WikiTiki89 14:29, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
I've undone it until we can establish how the special treatment actually changes anything. —CodeCat 14:35, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
It looks like it, somehow, for some reason, changes the transliteration of พล (pon) between "pol" and "pon". But I have no idea why. I think the problem is with the Thai transliteration module here, not Module:links. —CodeCat 14:37, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
I think I fixed the problem with these edits. --WikiTiki89 18:57, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
The Thai script is not very phonetic and spellings cannot be reliably used to predict the pronunciations of words. Module:th-translit is reserved for transliterating a Thai word as if the spelling is a "phonetic respelling" and reliably reflects the pronunciation (That's what "translit" modules do), whereas the function getTranslit in Module:th obtains the phonetic respelling from the actual entry and feeds it into Module:th-translit to transliterate it. The reason Module:th-translit has to be bypassed after Module:links is because feeding a non-phonetic respelling into the transliteration will generate erroneous results (User:CodeCat), and the reason I made Module:links feed into Module:th rather than Module:th-translit is because the reverse would result in misnomers (User:Wikitiki89; i.e. the "translit" module Module:th-translit used for non-translit purposes; which is why Module:zh-translit does not exist). The processes are as follows:
interprets the Title linked to (Module:links) → feeds Title into getTranslit to extract the actual "Phonetic respelling" (Module:th) → feeds actual "Phonetic respelling" into the translit module (Module:th-translit) → produces the Paiboon transcription of "Phonetic respelling" (Module:th-pron) ✔ (User:Wyang)
interprets the title linked to (Module:links) → feeds Title into the translit module (Module:th-translit)produces the Paiboon transcription of Title (Module:th-pron) ✘ (User:CodeCat)
interprets the title linked to (Module:links) → feeds Title into translit module to extract the actual "Phonetic respelling" (Module:th-translit)feeds actual "Phonetic respelling" into the translit module (Module:th)produces the Paiboon transcription of "Phonetic respelling" (Module:th-pron) ✘ (User:Wikitiki89)
I am a bit annoyed by the repetitive editing that has to be done about this simply because someone keeps reverting functional versions to dysfunctional ones. If you don't know why the code is there, investigate further or ask around until you find the answer; don't touch it, break it and ask others to explain why your edit broke things. I hate to see so much time being wasted on futile discussions like this. Wyang (talk) 23:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
I still think all this logic is completely unnecessary. If it's possible for your custom code to generate a correct transliteration, why can't that code be used in Module:th-translit? Clearly, if the transliteration module is generating bad transliteration, then that is where the problem lies and that's what needs to be fixed. There is no need for your workaround and until you make it clear why it is, it's not going back in. Fix the Thai modules, don't expect generic modules to cater to the bad module code of one language. —CodeCat 01:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
What the hell are you talking about? "Fix" what?? The transliteration caters perfectly well to phonetically respelled words. Do you any idea that there are languages that use non-phonetic scripts at all? Fix your Module:links so that it takes care of languages which require an additional level of phonetic respelling extraction. And in the meantime, go away and stop breaking things. Wyang (talk) 01:11, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
The transliteration module should transliterate all words. That's the whole point. If there are some words that it cannot transliterate, then it needs to be fixed so that it can. The fact that, with your edit to Module:links, it is possible to get the correct transliteration, proves that it is technically possible for the transliteration module to get the transliteration correct without that edit. So it will continue to be contested, and I suggest fixing the transliteration module to transliterate these words properly. —CodeCat 02:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
The transliteration module should transliterate all words, if the words in the language are transliterable. For languages where the majority of words have differing transliteration and pronunciation outcomes, there should be additional modules that help automatically generate the transliterations and this should be taken into consideration in the generic link-generating modules. It is not the responsibility of the transliteration module to generate the correct transliteration when frankly, there is not much the transliteration module could do. Putting codes into the transliteration module which actually parse through the entry Wikitext and extract certain parts of the text is not transliterating the term, and treating it as if it actually is or ought to do whatever it can to provide the upstream master modules the transliterations is setting it up for disaster in the future. The reason for this is transliteration and pronunciation are two very different things. For one, imagine developing a Wiktionary gadget or an external interface that functions to only transliterate non-Latin script in any language to the Latin alphabet. Then among all the transliteration modules on Wiktionary, the Thai "transliteration" module would fail the expectations and return nonsensical results. The lack for support for such languages on the linking template interface has had a long history and has resulted in a number of custom-made linking templates, namely {{zh-l}}, {{ko-l}}, {{ja-l}}, {{vi-l}} and {{th-l}}, when most of the special features of these templates could have been addressed if the designers of the core linking templates had borne in mind that there are numerous languages which have other (non-alphabetic) characteristics desired in their linking templates and had consequently attempted to accommodate non-European languages. In the absence of this centralised support the best one could do is redirect the central linking template to the custom-made one, or relay the part of the linking template that needs to be customised, which is what I was trying to do. This is only a fraction of the language-specific linking problem (the actual problem that needs attention), as in all the other cases the language-specific linking template (e.g. {{ko-l|...}}) and the central linking template (e.g. {{l|ko|...}}) are still two separate systems. Wyang (talk) 07:46, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
You still don't understand. If the code that has been added to Module:links is capable of generating the correct transliteration, then similar code added to Module:th-translit is capable of this as well. So please change this so that special-case code is no longer needed in a generic language-indifferent module. If you are not able to do this, then I see no other option than to disable automatic transliteration for Thai entirely, until someone fixes the transliteration module so it generates correct transliterations. —CodeCat 12:07, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge, Wikitiki89 Can you do this? —CodeCat 12:08, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
I just spent 20 minutes explaining the rationale of it above, and yet you are still asking me to "fix" (sigh) the transliteration module. Despite what I wrote in bold above. There is not much I can help if you choose to consciously ignore my comments or are genuinely unable to comprehend. I feel like I'm playing the zither to a cow. This is ridiculously frustrating and insulting. Wyang (talk) 12:37, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
You're ignoring me as well. I know that what I'm asking is possible, because your custom code in Module:links is doing just that. If custom code in Module:links is capable of generating a proper transliteration, then that same or similar custom code, placed in Module:th-translit, can do it too. So please do so. —CodeCat 12:44, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Ignoring you? You asked why not put the code in Module:th-translit instead, which I responded with the rationale in detail above, explaining why that is utterly inappropriate. Did you care to read it at all? You seem not, because all you said was asking me to again put the code in Module:th-translit so that the module is "fixed"! Where is your response to my comments?? Wyang (talk) 12:50, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
It is very appropriate to put the code there. Much more than it is to put it in Module:links! After all, it is code to provide a transliteration when other modules such as Module:links request one. Currently, it's not providing the right transliteration, but instead of remedying that, you instead added workaround code to Module:links. That workaround code is now being removed, but you don't want to change Module:th-translit to compensate. So I see no other option but to disable automatic transliteration for Thai entirely, until this is fixed. —CodeCat 12:54, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Again I failed to see your response to my points above (I will copy it here for you – see below). I have explained the reasoning ad nauseum, which you never cared to respond to.

Putting codes into the transliteration module which actually parse through the entry Wikitext and extract certain parts of the text is not transliterating the term, and treating it as if it actually is or ought to do whatever it can to provide the upstream master modules the transliterations is setting it up for disaster in the future. The reason for this is transliteration and pronunciation are two very different things.

Again and again, your comments are nothing but falsehoods. Let me break it down sentence-by-sentence to demonstrate why it is making me feel so insulted:
  1. "After all, it is code to provide a transliteration when other modules such as Module:links request one." – Did you see this boldified sentence in my comment, at all? "Putting codes into the transliteration module which actually parse through the entry Wikitext and extract certain parts of the text is not transliterating the term".
  2. Currently, it's not providing the right transliteration. – Are you seriously kidding me? This was what I wrote before: "The transliteration caters perfectly well to phonetically respelled words." You've got to be kidding.
Why you choose to respond in such a way I can only speculate. Most probably this is due to (1) arrogance; (2) ignorance and (3) mindlessness. I'm not sure which is the primary reason. But the threatening at the end of your last comment is making me lean towards option 1. Wyang (talk) 13:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

vi-link & vi-l[edit]

Template:vi-link and Template:vi-l seem to be redundant. Please consider to merge these into one template. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, these two should be merged. Please help if you can! Wyang (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

suggestion re the hanzi box[edit]

I have a suggestion regarding the hanzi box. Would it be possible to have a way to include alternative forms in the hanzi box? At the moment we have trad. and simp. - could we have a third category - variant? At the moment all we can do is add a separate header for "alternative forms" at the top which isn't a very elegant solution. ---> Tooironic (talk) 11:30, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree with you - the "Alternative forms" header is definitely non-ideal. If we incorporate a "variant" row underneath the main table, it would have to be done without the column-to-column character correspondence as is the case with simp/trad (as the nth character in a variant form is often not a variant character of the nth character in the trad form, e.g. 垃圾). So this functionality might be added in the form of a new row with merged cells, similar to the |lit= parameter (吃醋); and the content could be displayed by default, or collapsed (like homophones in กัน). What do you think? Wyang (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Agreed. Something like the lit parameter would be ideal, since it makes it clear that it's not merely a simp or trad form but a variant that could itself have its own simp and trad forms. I think it's OK to display it as default and not as a collapsable box, since its on the right and there should be plenty of room for it to display. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Ok cool! I wrote some codes at Module:zh-forms for this, using "|alt=" argument with multiple alt forms separated by commas. "-" following the alt form can be used for writing qualifiers. For effects see 吉他, 現在, , 蘿蔔 (only the first five shown). Let me know your thoughts on this. If anyone has any suggestions on anything about the box, especially regarding formatting and colours (which I'm terrible at), let me know or just try it out. Thanks! Wyang (talk) 11:21, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Looks good to me! I'll begin to use it in future edits now. Great work. ---> Tooironic (talk) 13:10, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Wiktionary:About Proto-Sino-Tibetan#Written Tibetan[edit]

Is the cell for "dby-" supposed to contain the text "FOO" in it? —suzukaze (tc) 02:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Nein: diff. It is the regular sound change from Old Tibetan dby-: dbj- > dβʲ- > ˀβʷʲ- > ɸʷ- > ɸʷv̩- > fv̩ː- > fuː-. Wyang (talk) 02:27, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I (formerly) had AWB set to insert 'foo' after j/ on pages I examined with AWB so I would spot it when reviewing the "show changes (before saving)" diff and could evaluate whether or not it was appropriate (in most pages I edit, it's the result of a non-IPA transcription of ɪ/). A search suggests there aren't any other pages where I neglected to take it out, fortunately. - -sche (discuss) 03:19, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


Wasn't sure how to fix this. Currently we list 鯿魚 as a homophone of 便於, but 鯿魚 is pronounced biānyú not biànyú. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Ah, thanks, this seems to be my mistake. Fixed now. Wyang (talk) 09:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Link to create new dialectic synonyms.[edit]

For example, for 警察, you would link to here. Would you consider linking to this in 警察, or would users need to find the page called Mod:zh/data/dial-syn every time? I would put it in T:zh-pron. --kc_kennylau (talk) 07:23, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

At the moment using the template {{zh-dial}} while the destination Module:zh/data/dial-syn subpage is uncreated will generate a button which will take you to the preloaded page. This may be too obscure... {{zh-pron}} could be a place to put it, although it may be unsuppressable once there is a {{zh-dial}} template on a dialectal word's page. Wyang (talk) 07:36, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:36, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
No problem, be cautious that the link on a dialectal word's page A is not to the intended page B, but rather it is to Mod:zh/data/dial-syn/A. I couldn't get the preloading in Template:zh-dial/uncreated to incorporate Wiki arguments. Wyang (talk) 12:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
I changed that already. --kc_kennylau (talk) 14:00, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Fantastic - well done! Wyang (talk) 09:59, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


So I see that you moved you moved the character etymology of "魚" from the Translingual section to the Chinese section... Twice... I guess that you have you're reasons... – VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 18:12, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

@VulpesVulpes42 See #Glyph_origin_for_Han_characterssuzukaze (tc) 21:34, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
@suzukaze-c Okay thanks. I guess that makes sense. – VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 09:53, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
... Yes, the reasons are listed in that discussion. Thanks 涼風(?)さん for the reply. Wyang (talk) 10:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Module:zh/data/ltc-pron/, Module:zh/data/ltc-pron/, and Module:zh/data/ltc-pron/[edit]

Are these supposed to be Private Use characters? —suzukaze (tc) 15:50, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Looks like they are PUA characters, but they should have these corresponding Unicode characters:
 = 𠂇
 = 䙡
 = 䱷
— justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:09, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Good pickup (no pun). I've deleted these. Let me know if there is more. Wyang (talk) 21:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Wyang: Module:zh/data/och-pron-ZS/? —suzukaze (tc) 07:31, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Module:zh/data/och-pron-ZS/𢦏? —suzukaze (tc) 07:33, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Module:zh/data/och-pron-ZS/? —suzukaze (tc) 07:35, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! All corrected. Wyang (talk) 07:59, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

@Wyang: Module:zh/data/och-pron-ZS/? —suzukaze (tc) 08:00, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, moved. Wyang (talk) 08:05, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Three requests[edit]

I have three requests, if I may.

1) Would it be possible to disable definitions for individual characters in the hanzi box if a literal explanation is already given, e.g. at 小朋友? I think this would look neater and more presentable for users. We already do this for phonetic entries like 堪培拉.

2) Would it be possible to categorise all entries that have classifiers? E.g. the entries 汽車, 摩托車 and 公交車 could be put in a category like "Chinese nouns which take the classifier 輛/辆". I think this would be immensely useful.

3) Would it be possible to make the classifier tag automatically convert trad into simp forms? This would make editing much easier. Automatic pinyin would be a bonus too.

Cheers! ---> Tooironic (talk) 16:48, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

No problem mate.

For (1), I think the info in Etymology duplicates the info in the hanzi-box and should be merged there; the glosses should be taken by the hanzi box too, if they are sufficiently different from the auto-generated ones and there is benefit in manually specifying the glosses. And the literal meaning will be displayed below in the box.

For (2,3), this is a good idea and I have added code to make articles categorise to "Category:Chinese nouns classified by .../...". Trad-to-simp is in place too, but I'm not sure if I should add Pinyin since the template also includes other dialects without romanisations.

I also added {{zh-classifier}} and {{zh-classifier-cat}}, for use on the classifier page () and category page (Category:Chinese nouns classified by 棵) respectively.

Cheers, Wyang (talk) 23:28, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Brilliant work. I was also unsure about adding pinyin to the classifier info - the fangyan issue aside, it would make the definitions look cluttered. Thanks very much. ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)


Cat:E is full of nan-pron problems right now. —suzukaze (tc) 00:22, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Fixed it. Doing null edits to articles in that category now. Wyang (talk) 00:40, 18 June 2016 (UTC)


Just created this. Would appreciate your input. ---> Tooironic (talk) 06:37, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for creating this. It looks great. I only added some minor specification (“firmness”) to the sense. Wyang (talk) 07:05, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Attention: edit summary[edit]

Wyang, thank you for your contributions, which are large in number as well as importance and significance. I would like to ask if you could kindly add an edit summary. For example, your recent revision to deleted content referring to Baxter-Sagart (2014) and whether that was your contribution or otherwise, I believe it would be great for all of our understanding and very consistent with the collaborative spirit here if your edit summary indicated the reason for removal, or other nontrivial modification, to the content in general. Thank you. Hongthay (talk) 14:42, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I will try to add summaries in the future. For , the newly added Old Chinese pronunciations in {{Han compound}} make the Baxter-Sagart (2014) pronunciations redundant. Thanks, Wyang (talk) 22:12, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

My List of Contributions[edit]

I told Tooironic, that a file can be made of the Chinese simplified forms for future creation of entries. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 04:14, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry I am confused. A file can be made of the Chinese simplified forms (where?) for future creation of entries (where?). Wyang (talk) 04:53, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
A Microsoft Office Word file listing Chinese simplified forms for the purpose of creating the Traditional form entries. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 05:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Lo Ximiendo seems to have made a handful of simplified Chinese entries (zh-see) without a corresponding full traditional entry. —suzukaze (tc) 05:17, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm still confused as to whether there is anything that Lo Ximiendo would like me to do. Those entries need to be taken care of before they are forgotten, as they are not tracked into a category. Wyang (talk) 05:23, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I added the traditional forms, most of them in need of definitions. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:52, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
That's fine, but are these entries lacking definitions put in a category so we can find them? E.g. 紅葉? If so I can't find it. ---> Tooironic (talk) 16:13, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
[4]. —suzukaze (tc) 20:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Bug in Module:ja-pron[edit]

As you can see at 鴛鴦#Etymology_3, えんおう is producing [e̞n.o̞ː] instead of the expected [ẽ̞ɴo̞ː]. I had a quick scan through the code, but I'm unfamiliar with it and I don't have a lot of time today. I'd appreciate it greatly if you could take a look. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:44, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Eirikr, not a problem. I fixed the nasalisation. For 'ɴ', should it be 'n'? I thought 'ɴ' is only found at the end of a word. Cheers, Wyang (talk) 02:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you! And re: [ɴ], I think this also appears where occurs between vowels, as in en'ō or kan'yō or han'ei. More at Japanese phonology#The moraic nasal /ɴ/. The description there is broadly accurate, except that some speakers do clearly pronounce a uvular nasal, and not just a nasalized vowel. At any rate, the in these words is definitely not an [n] -- pronouncing it with an [n] sounds very un-Japanese. :)   ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh I see. Changed to /ɴ/ now. :) Wyang (talk) 03:51, 23 June 2016 (UTC)


Any idea why this lua error is coming up? ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:58, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

The jyutping used 'y' instead of 'j' for /j/. —suzukaze (tc) 01:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

User_talk:Aormor7777#Etymology at Korean 구두[edit]

I'd be interested if you have any insight. :)   ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:52, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

I still have sight. Insight, hmm... Wyang (talk) 06:39, 28 June 2016 (UTC)


I think the edits of Special:Contributions/ might need reviewing... —suzukaze (tc) 10:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

They seem satisfactory at first glance (need to be wikified of course). I will try to improve the articles touched by the anon when I have (ample) time. Wyang (talk) 10:38, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

A retroactive module error[edit]

See Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2014#English to Mandarin / Shanghainese, where some recent change has broken the template usage there. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 03:20, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Retrospectively fixed it. Wyang (talk) 05:23, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Etymology of 옳다[edit]

Do you have any idea? I think the ㅎ might be formed in the same way as 않다, i.e. from contraction of 하다 (by the way, 어떻다?). --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:34, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

That's probably right. I added a bit more on the etymology there. Wyang (talk) 22:38, 7 July 2016 (UTC)


Could you please clear up this page, with reference to its corresponding page on zh.wikt and the example sentence which I just added? It seems to have two meanings stemming from two etymologies, as zh.wikt suggests. Thanks a lot. --kc_kennylau (talk) 20:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

No worries, I cleaned it up. It's got multiple etymologies, not just two. [I really dislike the formatting here - very unclear] Wyang (talk) 00:48, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. --kc_kennylau (talk) 02:33, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

하나님 vs 하느님[edit]

I added the sentence "Perhaps modeled from 하느님 (haneunim, “god, heaven”)" which you deleted. What I mean is, maybe when the Protestants came across the word 하느님 (haneunim), they didn't like it and changed a vowel to make it 하나님 (hananim). --kc_kennylau (talk) 03:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

I see what you mean Kenny. I was incorrect with the comment, and after doing a bit of research it seems more complicated than this. 하느님 was 하ᄂᆞ님(蘆溪 3:3)>하나님(敎本時調 1792)>하느님 (note the already happened simplification of -ln- > -n-), and the Middle Korean form contained the obsolete vowel (Yale: o) which may become modern ᅳ (u) or ᅡ (a). Indeed dialectally 하늘 (hanul) is 하날 (hanal) in much of South Korea - including 慶北, 慶南, 全北, 全南. It may be the dialectal development of 하ᄂᆞ님 > 하나님 which is later adopted by the Protestants to unify the appellation, partly because it already exists as a dialectal form and partly because of the association with 하나. Some Korean references are here and here. Wyang (talk) 07:49, 17 July 2016 (UTC)


Which form of 창조하다 (changjohada) is 창조하시니라 (changjohasinira)? --kc_kennylau (talk) 03:29, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

—시니라 is very commonly found in the Bible. —— is the honorific suffix, and —니라 an old-styled declarative ending carrying a didactic tone. It's not included in the template though unfortunately. The Korean conjugation template doesn't aim to be exhaustive as that would be impossible. Wyang (talk) 07:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
I see, thank you for teaching. --kc_kennylau (talk) 08:18, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
唔使咁客氣. Wyang (talk) 08:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)


The transliteration of 유방-이 produce yubang--i as can be seen in 유방 (yubang). --kc_kennylau (talk) 05:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I modified Module:ko-translit to take care of this. Wyang (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Something similar happens at .—suzukaze (tc) 08:11, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Fixed. @kc kennylau The ko-x template handles hanja in the form of 혼돈(混沌) in the first parameter. Adding links is probably too much work than is necessary - I would suggest using a module to add link to all Korean strings and redirecting them to the appropriate lemma form, and automating the '-'. Wyang (talk) 08:20, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Personally I find 混沌<br/>혼돈 to be neater than 혼돈(混沌) though... --kc_kennylau (talk) 08:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Automating links and hyphens is arguably impossible. Firstly, you have to distinguish between "-i" which is the subject marker, and "i" which is the adverb maker. --kc_kennylau (talk) 08:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Ah that is fair enough. :) One algorithm would be: if the -i form exists, it is treated as a single word if the no -i form does not exist unless there is manual correction '-'; if the -i form does not exist it is treated as a subject marker. If both forms exist, it is marked as requiring human attention. Wyang (talk) 08:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Lyrics of 오나라 (Daejanggeum)[edit]

Here is the lyrics. I beseech your insight on the grammatical analysis and vocabulary analysis of the lyrics. In particular:

  1. What does 나라 in 오나라 mean?
  2. What does 아주 mean?
  3. What does 오나 mean?
  4. What does 다라 in 가다라 mean? Is it the same with 나라?
  5. There are still many doubts on the following lyrics, but I would understand it if you would only reply to a portion of the questions I posed.

Thanks in advance. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Haha, I can imagine an alternative 空耳 interpretation of this song in Japanese.
The lyrics of Daejanggeum are in obsolete Korean, so it has to be translated (like 文言文). Here is a translation by music composer Im Sehyeon.
나라 is an old-styled ending equivalent to modern —너라. Hence 오나라 = 오너라, one of the imperative forms of 오—.
아주 is 'truly, really'.
is a familiar style interrogative suffix; 오나 means 'will you come'.
It's probably the same as 나라. I'm not sure either. Wyang (talk) 01:13, 18 July 2016 (UTC)