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

This page is for collecting feedback from Wiktionary readers. It should be cleaned out on a three-month basis, as new comments are constantly being added. Feel free to reply to and discuss comments here, though bear in mind that the people who leave the feedback may never come back to read replies. By convention, the feedback is not archived.

Links: Wiki Javascript (for adding to your WMF Wiki.)
Frequently asked questions
Do you have general questions about the Wiktionary? See Help:FAQ.

  • Q. I see messages about Lua memory errors in some entries. Can’t they be fixed?
  • A. This is a problem that has existed for a long time, and which does not have a solution yet. See “Wiktionary:Lua memory errors”.
  • Q. Why don’t you provide audio files giving the pronunciations of all entries?
  • A. The recording of audio files requires volunteer editors who have the right equipment and software, and who know how to upload these files to the Wikimedia Commons. All this is somewhat time-consuming, and it seems that at the moment we simply don’t have editors who are able to do this for us regularly. We suggest that you learn how to read the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) transcriptions of pronunciations. For English entries, you can visit Appendix:English pronunciation, which you can also reach by clicking on the “(key)” link next to the word IPA on entry pages.

For questions about the Word of the Day, see Wiktionary:Word of the day/FAQ.

February 2022[edit]


i like corintians and i like wikictionary me is happy


This is the best :D 13:55, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I always use the site "Wiktionary" to perfect my English vocabulary. Thanks a lot.


I don't know how to edit pages or I'd fix it for you. The picture on this article is the wrong species: not a Mantis religiosa (European mantis), but a Tenodera sinensis (Chinese mantis). Below I will include links to several images of a Mantis religiosa from around the Internet that I believe have open license to use (at least for Wiktionary's purpose).

I hope this helps! 16:42, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The taxonomic name Mantis religiosa is not the same as the common name mantis religiosa. One is taxonomic Latin and the other is Spanish. The question is whether mantis religiosa can only refer to the European insect in Spanish. In English, praying mantis can refer to any insect in the order Mantodea. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:01, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • For a bonus quiz round - apart from the aforementioned, what other species have the same taxonomic (Latin name) as they have the common name (in the local language - any language will do) Notusbutthem (talk) 19:20, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


The entry for buccal, in the sense of the side of a tooth facing outward, toward the cheeks or lips, gives genal as a synonym, which is correct -- but also lists lingual, which is the side of a tooth facing inward, toward the tongue. I suggest that lingual be removed as a synonym of buccal (in reference to a tooth), because in this sense it's really the opposite. I understand that the entire inside of the mouth is the buccal cavity, but this is a separate concept. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that Milkunderwood is absolutely correct about the above. See e.g. this diagram. 05:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the chart. I think I'll just make the deletion myself, and see if anyone objects. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, hell; I got a formatting error. Somebody else who understands Wikt formatting better than I do can fix it. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:33, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Got it -- in place of lingual I substituted facial, which needed to be added anyway. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Facial" is not a direct synonym I think. "Facial" is a hypernym (?) of "buccal", since "buccal" tends to refer to a specific surface of the back teeth only, and we also have the term "labial" to refer to the equivalent surface on the front teeth (although some freely use "buccal" to refer to the front teeth also)


I am not sure, but I think this can sometimes be used as a mass noun (uncountable)?

Please wash three potatoes. (countable) I am growing potato this year. (uncountable)


this wiki/dictionary is amazing --Yahoot7 (talk) 14:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


isn't it ijō-stem?


I just want to say thank you for making Wiktionary part of my academic daily life. I would not know probably 70% of what I know if it were not for Wiktionary along with Wikipedia. This website enables me to better understand the complexity and nuances of the language I study and want to specialize in, in my future career. For now, I'm just a student though, and in no small part it's thanks to Wiktionary (and Wikipedia's linguistic articles such as the article on Old Chinese) that I can say I'm top of my class at university, and know so much more not only about modern Chinese, but old Chinese, Classical Chinese, and the nuances and processes that characters and words undergo. Etymologies, glyph origins, tonal shifts that indicate meaning, there are so many things I've learned from this website, and I hope it never disappears. I will donate sometime soon to the Wikimedia Foundation. Thank you.

Christopher, Oxford 06:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you find the site helpful! — SGconlaw (talk) 18:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(((: 04:15, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Two things: 11:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you guest, I made corrections as in el.wiktionary el:κλαρινογαμπρός, -although I do not know this slang word. And, yes, μπαρ (bar) is indeclinable. ‑‑Sarri.greek  | 13:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing other languages living by learning of these kinds of current words is pleasing 04:07, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Can the wiktinoray have kamojis plz

March 2022[edit]


подбери к данным прилагательным подходящие по смыслу существительные.

Match / select (with? using?) given adjectives suitable (according to meaning) nouns.

I read this line in my textbook, but the usage of the preposition к + dative does not seem to be covered in the article к.

I am not sure of the best translation, I have provided a literal translation only. Спасибо заранее и мир всему миру. 11:07, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


You have Satan capitalized but not the word God--God needs to be capitalized also--thank you


I noticed that the declension box said that the singular dative and accusative singulars are Junge. In fact, both are Jungen. I can’t seem to edit this. —⁠This unsigned comment was added by (talk) at 21:15, 6 March 2022‎.

Thanks, I've fixed it. — Fytcha T | L | C 〉 08:10, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


The Hawaiian alphabet, which only has 13 letters does not have the letter S. So the plural of Lei is still Lei. this goes for all plural words in Hawai‘i. Luau plural, Pupu, plural. Keiki (child or children) plural.

The alphabet contains 12 letters: 5 vowels (a, e,i, o, u) and 7 consonants (h, k, l, m, n, p, w) plus the ‘okina, a letter which represents the glottal stop. 06:46, 7 March 2022 (UTC)”. Thanks! -->[reply]

What you say is true for Hawaiian, but English is not Hawaiian. Just as we say "Hawaiian" instead of "ʻōlelo Hawai‘i", we use English grammar in English sentences, regardless of where the words came from. I wouldn't expect Hawaiians to use English grammatical endings on every word of English origin, nor would I expect you to use endings for cases such as the ablative for words of Latin origin, so you shouldn't expect English speakers to follow Hawaiian grammatical rules for words simply because they came originally from Hawaiian. Chuck Entz (talk) 09:20, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


it is good thanks —⁠This unsigned comment was added by (talk).



manjen should get a note

See also[edit]

and vice versa

--Rasmusklump (talk) 08:38, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


What Fifty Boys Did to Get Themselves Fired (Literary Digest, July 19, 1919):

He gave short weights to customers that he might have an overplus of ice to sell to others on his own account as a rake-off. Any rake-off, no matter what nor how obtained, is rank dishonesty, and I could not keep a thief in my employ.

Makes it sound like it could be embezzlement too. 04:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! This is also a Russian word it seems, according to the Russian Wiktionary, being a synonym of "closer" (ближе). Спасибо заранее! 11:22, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Added. Tetromino (talk) 13:44, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! 07:50, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


love u wiktionary <3 —⁠This unsigned comment was added by (talk) at 03:18, 15 March 2022‎.

luv u 2 , anon VealSociedad (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]



In armenian we have three different glyph shapes of the Armenian capital letter ho or (H), why is not possible to have the 2 others ?

Thanks for your feed back —⁠This unsigned comment was added by (talk) at 20:39, 15 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

There are probably more than that, but they're all at the same Unicode code point, U+0540. The shape of the glyph for any given codepoint is determined by the combination of the font and the software on your system, not by anything we can reliably control on our end. Pinging @Vahagn Petrosyan, who knows a lot more than I do about Armenian, and @Mahagaja who created the image on the page for Հ that seems to have prompted your question. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:15, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are many shapes, as shown in the Armenian Soviet Encyclopedia [1]. But as Chuck said, they are all under the same Unicode point. We can't show the different shapes other than by making a picture, which Mahagaja already did for the most common glyph forms. --Vahag (talk) 14:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


my googling is ending up very often in the Wiktionary, and I'm overall having a very good experience, nothing bad at all. Now I ended up in a wiktionary rabbit hole like the wikipedia rabbit hole, and I'm confused, as navigating here seems a little bit different. 20:34, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sigogglin Sigoggled,[edit]

adjective describing something that is sideways or out of normal position, or angular from plumb or horizontal. —⁠This unsigned comment was added by (talk) at 14:57, 19 March 2022‎.

RSS Feed not working. Word of the day: tooth fairy[edit]

The RSS feed is not working! It's stuck at 11th March. 2603:8000:7F03:865A:9DAD:4BE1:A603:C725 05:41, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I'm not sure what we can do about that. Does anyone know who maintains the RSS feed? — SGconlaw (talk) 06:54, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
https://en.wiktionary.org/w/api.php?action=featuredfeed&feed=wotd? It looks like it's updating. —Fish bowl (talk) 07:12, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


мен (and) in Kazakh changes to пен or бен depending on the previous consonant --Nubian Cloud (talk) 20:44, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


The Russian translation is "думать на ходу" thank you


Under the section in other languages, I saw the note to leave a note, so I took a chance to show you how it appears on top of its section. Screenshot --Mahmudmasri (talk) 02:01, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


This is a great Wikipedia! 04:54, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I want to add a remark but cannot find the button for "New section." Please therefore place this where it belongs:

This article, by far the first of any length and depth on the word, clears away much misunderstanding about its genesis and later history:

Gold, David L. 2011. “After at least 138 years of discussion, the etymological puzzle is possibly solved: the originally British English Informalism kibosh, as in “put the kibosh on [something]” could come from the clogmakers' term kybosh 'iron bar which, when hot, is used to soften and smooth leather' (with possible reinforcement from Western Ashkenazic British English khay bash 'eighteen pence').” Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses. No. 24. Pp. 73-129 [2].S. Valkemirer (talk) 16:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done - excarnateSojourner (talk | contrib) 19:26, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022[edit]


I'm pleased to confirm my understanding of this usage of this word here, however, I was hoping for information on origin of this usage, even though I've never seen a frowning grinny.

I added {{rfe}} to the page, hopefully someone will come along soon and give an etymology Notusbutthem (talk) 23:51, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


=I’ve been playing the piano for two years. =Я играю на пианино уже два года.

This usage of the word уже is very common in Russian I think, but the article does not seem to mention it. I think it would be good to add it, thank you. —⁠This unsigned comment was added by (talk).

In the example you gave, the Russian word уже means "already" ("I have already been playing the piano for two years"). The English preposition "for" in the sense of "for a specific length of time" corresponds not to уже, but to putting the length-of-time noun phrase in the accusative case in Russian. In your specific example, that might be hard for you to see because for the word два, the inanimate accusative happens to coincide with the nominative; but consider a different example, e.g. я играю уже неделю, "I have already been playing for a week", where the accusative is obvious. Tetromino (talk) 15:12, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for response. I think we do not have any choice but to put the time phrase in accusative in such sentences? Also have a look at this example from the text:
Он не спал уже́ втору́ю ночь. It's the second night he didn't sleep./He didn't sleep two nights in a row.
Here we have accusative but no "for" preposition in the translations.
Also I would point out that if we put "Уже" into a website like reverso context to get many hundreds of examples of usage in context, I have noted the following with regards this type of sentence:
1. while frequently "already" is included in the english translation, it also is often absent
2. in the English translations, "for" seems frequently present in sentences whether "already" is present or absent.
3. if we use translation software, typing such a "present perfect continuous" + "for" renders a translation with "уже". We did not write "already" in the English sentence, and yet we get "уже" reliably in such situations (or sometimes в течение). Therefore, how can we still say that "уже means already" in such sentences? Compare with "present perfect continuous" + "since" which renders "с(о)" in translations. Many thanks 20:41, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. Let me try to address your points.
First of all, you are right that English allows you to drop the "for" in time intervals in perfect continuous expressions, especially in informal speech (e.g. search for "have been waiting for two years").
Second, "already" is used less often in English than уже is used in Russian because Russian has only three tenses - past, present, and future, while English has many, including the past/present/future perfect continuous, which by itself have a very similar meaning as "already". This makes "already" unnecessary in many situations (i.e. "already" may be read as adding extra emphasis).
Third, machine translation tools are based on a blind application of brute-force linear algebra to text corpuses. The machine sees that уже is used often, "already" more rarely, and "for" somewhat more frequently than "already", and then misidentifies уже as "for" (if a human never verifies the tool's output). But that does not imply that уже should translated as "for"; instead, it implies that in some situations, the word уже could be dropped entirely when translating to a perfect continuous English expression - and then Russian accusative case in the same sentence would be translated as "for" in English (and/or also dropped, depending on stylistic register and rhythm).
I think that the solution here is to make a non-gloss note in уже that it can carry the sense of the English perfect continuous tenses. Tetromino (talk) 18:50, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, yes agree. Adding a "usage note" or something would be good I think. Otherwise people may try to always add "already" if they look this word up on wiktionary and want to translate it into English. Or vice versa, they may have difficulty translating some English sentences with present perfect continuous + "for" into Russian... they will not know it is common to use "уже" in such situations. Regards, M 07:24, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Swag comes from AAVE of the 60s and 70s. It's a clipping of the word swagger and originally refers to the way a person walks or 'swaggers' down the street in a calm, collected, unconcerned manner. Later, the term took on a general meaning of cleanly dressed, well put together, and without worries of daily life. The term developed akin to cool and there is major overlap in meaning.

Our etymologies at swag and swagger agree, though they do not give some of these details. - excarnateSojourner (talk | contrib) 19:33, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


good and great p.s. please reply back from dazzleunicorn


I'm googling "Wiktionary" and looking for a definition of the word "notor", but I can't seem to get any results. Do you have a suggestion? Thanks, ciao for now and be well. "umpieman"

We have notor, but only as a word in Latin and Swedish. If you know it to be a word in English (and can support this with citations), you can add it. - excarnateSojourner (talk | contrib) 22:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I believe there is another meaning of stirk, which is cow dung. The expression "stuck in the stirk" uses this meaning.


This word is also a russian word, первый, in certain declension forms. Thank you —⁠This unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Added the adjective form. (For whatever reason, Russian adjective forms, unlike Russian noun forms, don't get automatically created by bots, so we have to add them manually upon request.) Tetromino (talk) 18:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I was also surprised and confused to see that this concrete / abstract was placed on this page. When verbs of motion are prefixed they no long have 3 aspectual pairs like the unique group of verbs of motion, they are reduced to only 2 aspectual pairs like the vast majority of other Russian verbs (only exception по I think).

(There may be a mistake in this page, thank you) https://www.alphadictionary.com/rusgrammar/vom.html "The verbs denoting motion are a special case in Russian. Instead of the usual aspectual pair of forms, verbs of motion have three aspectual forms: perfective, progressive imperfective, and iterative imperfective. "

"Verbs of motion have three forms only when they are used without prefixes. When they are prefixed, they behave normally, exhibiting only two aspectual forms."

I think it is a mistake, because all the other prefixed VOM I can see on wiktionary are not marked as concrete / abstract.

see прийти́ , вы́йти for example —⁠This unsigned comment was added by (talk) at 20:51, 18 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Furthermore, this is a quote from the english wikipedia article on russian grammar:

"Motion verbs combine with prefixes to form new aspectual pairs, which lose the distinction of directionality, but gain spatial or temporal meanings."

Since it seems someone already removed the description in question, I guess this matter is solved.

Therefore I can with 99% certainty say that to describe prefixed verbs of motion as concrete / abstract is an error. @Atitarev:


The following meaning no. 3 in Etymology 2:

Verb بَلَّغَ

2. to report (عَن‎ (ʿan) on)

is incorrect. The verb cannot be used in this meaning. This meaning can be expressed using another verb, أبلغ.

--FSabah (talk) 18:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign word of the day: spuit elf[edit]

Elf doesn't mean "11" in this case. "Een elf" = "a fairy". —⁠This unsigned comment was added by 2a02:a03f:8a2d:3800:7c67:c773:3228:eee7 (talk).

The Spuit elf geeft (ook nog) modder article in the Dutch Wikipedia suggests that elf here really does mean "number 11", and that the term might originate from water hose numbers in early 20th century firefighting. Tetromino (talk) 19:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All etymological sources agree on the meaning of the second element as "eleven (numeral)", although the actual history behind the combination of the two is unclear. The interpretation as "fairy" or "elf" is entirely secondary. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 14:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


по#Preposition_4 по ссылке -- I think this translates to "via/through the link". it is по + dative case. I do not think the wiki page currently covers this sense of the preposition. See also comment made a few months ago about Russian preposition к. Thank you.


I disagree. It is not the same as "in sight". The latter just means "visible" or "not far off". The former is more about a target, possibly which is to be attacked.

May 2022[edit]


You guys are doing well, thanks for making Wiktionary a very informative place, and we can learn a lot of things here.


It can also refer to a period of weather. Dry spell / cold spell / warm spell

That would be the noun sense under etymology 3. — Sgconlaw (talk) 11:17, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the Hán Nôm[edit]

Can you do more Vietnamese words?

more 大 on Chinese[edit]

Can you investigate more Chinese letters


can you add bao Bo means bob(name)please.

latin translations[edit]

ok so i do latin in school and sometimes i just want to quickly google the translation of a word so today i wanted to look up the translation of 'deprendere' and this is what this website gives me: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/deprendere#:~:text=second%2Dperson%20singular%20present%20passive%20indicative%20of%20d%C4%93pr%C4%93nd%C5%8D it's useless like wtf latin is a dead language nobody speaks and this website expects me to magically now the translation? like come on the least you can do is put a translation there now im gonna have to add an extension to chrome that filters this site so i never have to see it again cuz this is annoying pls fix

Often on the internet, when there is a blue word, you can click that blue word and it will take you elsewhere on the internet. In this case it takes you to the place where the word you are looking for is defined. The old men who made up Latin (in the 1700s in England if I recall) did a dumb thing where they made lots of versions of the same word, and you have to choose the right one based on the other words around it. I think this was done to annoy students and make it easier to grade tests. Wikipedia would have more information, but sadly you have to be able to follow a link to use that site so you are out of luck. - TheDaveRoss 16:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Face-grin.svgSgconlaw (talk) 17:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well out of the 40+ blue words on the page, none of them brought me to a new page with a translation for the word. I had to first click a specific one of the 40+ blue buttons and then I had to click another specific blue word out of another 40+ blue words, just to get to the translation. It would be much easier if the possible translations were on the first page. You can say that I'm stupid for not being able to navigate a website as much as you want, but this site just has bad design. 2A02:1810:3E00:1F00:4D1:AEB4:6898:118D 20:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure which page you looked at, but if you were at deprendere you would have seen that that word is an "inflection of dēprēndō". Clicking on dēprēndō would have indicated that it is an "Alternative form of dēprehendō", and finally clicking on dēprehendō you would have found all the definitions of that word. Latin words are highly inflected, so we don't list definitions at entries of inflected forms (like deprendere) as the same definitions would then have to be repeated for all the inflections. The definitions are only placed at the lemma (main entry). — Sgconlaw (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your complaint reminds me of something I heard someone say about Windows back in the nineties. He dismissed complaints about having to reinstall Windows in order to fix something, saying that reinstalling Windows "puts hair on your chest". —⁠ 17:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The confusingness of the current design has been discussed previously. 23:34, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I'm a Caudill so why is there almost no info


I appreciate and respect the decision to treat all languages equally. With that said, it would be immensely useful to me as a user if I could specify a default set of languages that my searches would query. There are times when I search for a term and get lemmas in *many* languages, of which only one is of interest -- usually Latin, as that's the language I'm working on the most at present. If I could limit my search to that language and perhaps a few closely related ones (e.g., Latin, plus French, Italian, and Spanish), that would help. Thanks for all your work on the Wiktionary, which I think is the best Wiki I've used. 3charles3 (talk) 11:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


This word can also be seemed to be from PIE *bheros , owing to its heaviness or load-bearing capacity/strength


Θα ήταν υπέροχο εάν προσθέτατε και την κλίση του ρήματος. Σας ευχαριστώ πολύ!!!

-- 14:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]