KoreanQuoter

Archive / 기록 보관소 (記錄 保管所) / Архив

2012-2014

KoreanQuoter's Question Section on Russian

@Atitarev @Stephen G. Brown Perhaps I was abusing other users' talk sections too often. I think asking questions in my talk section would be much better. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:24, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Conjunction-reIated / idiom-related / ETC

независимо от того, что/какой/где

Exactly how do you use this conjunction? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:24, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Not a word, IMO. You could use независимо with examples. Note irregular translit. for "того" and "что". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:08, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

независимо is an adverb, not a conjunction. The phrase независимо от might be worth an entry (or it might be SoP, I’m not sure), but it’s still not a conjunction. независимо от means “without reference to”, “irrespective of”, or “independently of”. —Stephen ^(Talk) 03:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, независимо от may be worth an entry. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

сбродить с ума

@Atitarev I found this link, being sourced as an idiom or something. (like сойти с ума) I think this could be the source of сумасбродить. What is your thought on this? Could сбродить с ума is an idiom? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:01, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

The source says it's Perm dialect. Unlike сумасшедший, the etymology of сумасбродный, etc. is not transparent to me and "сбродить" is not currently used in the sense, which would link it to "сумасбродный". It may as well be from "сбредить", not from "сбродить". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Interesting insight, there. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:36, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

тыща

One question. Is the word тыща both cardinal number AND a noun that denotes the 1000 Ruble banknote? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:17, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, like with most numerals, "тыща" is just a colloquial spelling of "тысяча" for all senses, which can mean 1,000 roubles/dollars, etc or the actual note. Smaller numbers have various colloquial words, like "трояк" or "трёшка" (three roubles), which are less common now, since things are more expensive. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I see. But how about the declension? Would тыща as a colloquial cardinal number decline like a feminine -a noun? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:16, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes. "Он дал мне тыщу/тысячу (рублей)" - He has given me a thousand (roubles). IMO, you shouldn't make separate noun entries for cardinal numbers as in diff, it's just the way it works, the overwhelming majority of cardinal numbers are declined and can be used as nouns. I disagree with ru:wiktionary but the may have a different reason for such an approach. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:39, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I understand. I was thinking putting a separate "usage note". But perhaps later. It's just that I'm not familiar with the colloquial contractions in numbers, it's something that doesn't exist in Korean. (As you know, Korean number system is a different kind of monster for non-speakers.) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:58, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it's complicated but somewhat similar to the Japanese system with the mixture of native and Sinitic numbers and counters like in other Asian languages. Not exactly a new concept to me but I don't have any fluency with Korean numbers. Anyway, when I taught someone Russian, I found that the use of noun cases AFTER numbers was rather complicated (один год, два года ..., пять лет, двадцать один год ...) for learners but not the numbers themselves, which behave like nouns. Also declining long compound numbers may cause difficulties, e.g. "в две тысячи пятнадцатом году" where the first two words don't decline. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

In my personal case, I prefer using Sino-Korean numbers after 20 in most cases because I can say the numbers faster. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Suggesting a new verbal category

There is Category:Russian semelfactive verbs. Maybe Wiktionary should have a category for iterative verb, a class of verbs that "specifically" shows doing something multiple times. And as far as I know, писывать is a classical example of iterative verb. My Russian-Korean dictionary says that this verb is 多回 (doing something "many times"), showing some iterative quality. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:57, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll consider this later. Since this verb is not used in the present tense it needs a separate section in Module:ru-verb as irregular as well. It's OK to leave it like this for now. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 22:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your wise suggestion. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:45, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Suggesting a new verbal category - Part 2 (or something like that)

Vikislovar' has this category that shows adjectives with an additional noun-like meaning (AKA substantivized adjectives). Well, арестованный, старший, умерший, etc... are examples like that. This is a very unique category of Russian adjectives that perhaps needs attention eventually, but it's not urgent at all. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

ru-noun-sib-2 template

It looks like the nominative singular noun form doesn't show any stress mark (see нюхач). --KoreanQuoter (talk) 16:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Fixed the template call. It's documented, just need to provide correct parameters. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:58, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

inflection-table templates for participles

@Atitarev One question: are there any inflection-table templates just for participles? After editing атакующий several times, I feel very uneasy seeing the Category:Russian adjectives at the bottom of the page, since it is not an adjective per se. A lot of the Russian participle entries use the adjective templates in the first place, btw. Maybe 4 basic inflection templates for participles (active present, active past, passive present, and passive past) should be needed, eventually I think. Or maybe I'm thinking beyond my league or maybe this is a wet dream. I like to "clean" the entries but it makes me think something beyond my thoughts. Yeah. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 16:51, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Your question is valid and you have a point there but I'm really not sure because it will take some work and I don't see much harm. Adjective declension templates, such as {{ru-adj3}} used by атакующий has the following line: <includeonly>[[Category:Russian adjectives]]</includeonly>, which adds all entries using these templates to adjective categories. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I understand. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:48, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I made Template:ru-pres-act-part and applied it (as a "blank slate" testing) to воющий. What do you think? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Extra: please observe the bottom categories of the old edit and the new edit. There are some differences. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:14, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Good job! If you make it generic, without definitions, just a link to the lemma verb, potentially participle entries can be generated by a bot. I would delete the prepositional "о/об" parameter to make it even more generic. All Russian present active participles end in -щий, so they can re-use this one template. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:33, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

That would be a very good idea. I'll do it right away. (as well as asking CodeCat to stop bolding the masculine singular inanimate accusative). --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:37, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Done! (As well as solving the issue the masculine singular inanimate accusative in bold text. It was a simple solution.) What should I do next? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:44, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

It's up to you, of course. But if you're keen, you can do the other types of participles as well. Although they have 1. -(н)ный, -тый (past passive) and -мый (one type; (present passive); 2. -вший (past active) (second type), You will only need to reuse two types of adjective patterns. They all have the same declension type and stress pattern. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:58, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Then what about participles with short forms? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, -тый can have short feminine forms with stressed -та́. May need to split into two (?) types. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:49, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Both present passive participles and past passive participles need short forms. Especially the past passive participles are sort of tricky, since the can have irregular short forms AFAIK. I really don't know how regular present passive participles are in terms of short forms, though........ Overall, the present active participles and the past active participles are declined regularly without any short forms. (expect for the designated irregular verbs of motions) So, only these two can be generated by bots easily. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:59, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

{{ru-adj3-sja}} is an inflection-table templates just for participles. —Stephen ^(Talk) 16:18, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that's for reflexive verbs. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 22:57, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I made Template:ru-pres-act-part-sja to make it consistent. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:14, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

And I tested it on учащийся. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev I made all of the basic (just really basic) participle declension templates. You can find them on Category:Russian participle inflection-table templates. I want a native Russian speaker to check them thoroughly. If there's anything I need to do such as fixing mistakes, let me know, please. I'll try to do it ASAP. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:59, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

The templates look good, thanks! I have checked them. You can also do past active participle for reflexive verbs the same way. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I will do it before the end of the week. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:53, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev I finally completed it after delaying for a month. (How embarassing.) Please see Template:ru-past-act-part-sja . --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, checked and fixed the documentation. An example given was incorrect. {{ru-past-act-part-sja|умер|уме́р}} would be for "умершийся", an incorrect form. I've made entry улыбавшийся for this template. Pls note that использовавший used the "present tense", while it's a past tense paticiple. Fixed. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your correction. And man, I feel bad that I forgot to fix the example. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

полезно

@Atitarev I made полезно based on this. I want to completely confirm that whether some predicatives function like adverbs in Russian. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi. How do you completely confirm? Well, according to the Yandex dictionaries it's a predicative and short neuter adjective form from поле́зный (poléznyj), not an adverb. The Russian Wiktionary made it an adverb, a common mistake but it's not always easy to make a distinction between predicatives and adverbs and they sometimes can be both. An adverb would describe verbs but "полезно" doesn't describe verbs, it acts as a predicative (if an example of an adverb usage is found, then adverb PoS can be added). Our entries often don't list all parts of speech. Neither does ru:wikt. E.g. ве́село (véselo) has three PoS - 1. adverb (e.g. весело смеяться), 2. predicative (e.g. мне весело) and 3. adjective form (e.g. оно весело) but our entry lists only two. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I see. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think some predicatives can be declined like short forms of adjectives: like намерен. I learned that predicatives are not systematically learned in Russian grammar classes (at least here in Korea). --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:33, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, predicatives are not systematically learned in Russia either. The reason being that Russians don't have problems in the correct usage and the adverbs, predicatives and adjective forms often coincide or look alike. Yes, намерен and должен have genders and plurality and predicatives are declined like short adjective forms but short forms only have nominative forms, so there is only gender and number. The difference between predicatives e,g, должен and нужно is that in the former the noun/pronoun is in the nominative and the predicative, just like adjectives agree in gender and number but the latter is always a neuter. I have just edited интересно. I tried my best to demonstrate all three PoS usages (normally, I don't supply usage to inflected forms but I made an exception). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 08:52, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Gemination rule

Why is рассказ not geminated? Perhaps it's because it's a consonant cluster? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:55, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

(You'd better ping me, I may miss your questions on this page). I'm not sure why, maybe people don't think about its origin or spelling any more when they pronounce it (BTW, the Ukrainian is "розка́з"). As I said before, there's no 100% rule about the gemination, only guidelines. Prefixes are usually pronounced with the gemination in a consonant cluster, like in the ones I have corrected today, e.g. расста́ться (rasstátʹsja) - [rɐsːˈtat͡sːə]. A previous version of IPA for "рассказ" had a gemination but it was incorrect. Note also that sometimes the gemination in the IPA is a guide. Words can be pronounced both ways but the IPA shows the most common, preferred, recommended or standard way, at least in a slow and careful speech but you can get cases of overcorrection or phonetic pronunciation. It needs to be [rɐsːˈtat͡sːə] in the entry but [rɐsˈtat͡sːə] is not incorrect either. Cf long vowels in Korean, which are commonly shortened. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Btw, I did put gem=y, but it somehow didn't work on several entries. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:01, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the module Module:ru-pron is not perfect but very good. Some failed cases (without parameters, phonetic respelling cases also work but with a different syntax) could be added to Module:ru-pron/testcases but I don't have the skills to fix the module. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 08:07, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Maybe they are temporary errors. Sorry for not putting geminations. (btw, I changed my internet browser, so maybe that affected some problems with my editing here) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:08, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure about рассе́иваться. Can сс (in ссе́) be geminated in this case? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:31, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev So far, I fixed some verbs that start with "расс" and I put gem=y in them, except for the automated ones. I admit that I made more mistakes than I expected and I'm sort of horrified by them (as usual). Other than than, рассчитывать looks awkward since the сч or щ (shch) pronunciation is automatically [ɕː], at least in Wiktionary. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:03, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, рассеиваться is geminated, рассчитывать is geminated as well but [s] is assimilated with the following [ɕː], so it should be [rɐˈɕːitɨvətʲ] or [rɐɕˈɕitɨvətʲ] (just to show morpheme boundaries in the latter example), the module doesn't know how to handle this. [rɐɕˈɕːitɨvətʲ] (triple "щ") or [rɐsˈɕːitɨvətʲ] are both incorrect.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:37, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank goodness that now I understand what went wrong and how to fix them. (btw, I tweaked my browser, so that there wouldn't be any mistakes in the editing). I'll try my best to keep this in mind. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

With рассчитывать you could use "ращи́тывать" as the parameter to {{ru-IPA|ращи́тывать}} to get a correct IPA: IPA^(key): [rɐˈɕːitɨvətʲ] (no need to use "..|phon=" in this case because this reading is regular). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:46, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I cannot judge which is appropriate, but it has a fascinating spelling. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:47, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't expect you to master IPA quickly and to know how to map Russian sounds to IPA symbols as well but if you listen the audio in рассчитывать, you will hear [rɐˈɕːitɨvətʲ], the IPA notation matches the recording, you won't hear any [s] sound and [ɕː] is geminated as usual. It helps to understand some IPA, since you also edit pronunciation sections. :) Audacity software (free) allows you to listen to audio in a slower rate, in cases you wish to listen to sounds more thoroughly. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:56, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm only 100% familiar with English and Korean (+ most of wacky South Korean dialects including North Korean standard) phonology so far. I'm mainly struggling with [ɐ] and [ə] in Russian. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:08, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

[ɐ] happens in pre-tonal positions only, sometimes transcribed as [ʌ]. It's less reduced than [ə], clearer and more open than [ə] but the difference is not great between the two. See also Russian_phonology#Vowel_mergers. More often used by Muscovites. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:48, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Anatoli. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:04, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

By the way, I found that восстанавливать is gemination-approved. Shall I find entries that start with восста and impose gemination on them? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, "восстанавливать" and derivatives are geminated. Approved by who? :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I want to be extra-cautious about it. I keep making mistakes. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

заметнее

@Atitarev If it's ok, can you check the stress for заметнее? It could either be заме́тнее or заметне́е. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Checked. "Only заме́тнее" is correct. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I wasn't sure. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

снаружи

@Atitarev Does снаружи correspond to откуда or где? And how about наружу? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

It's где, sometimes откуда, наружу is куда. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:07, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

аргандова лампа

@Atitarev A silly question. What would the stress in аргандова be? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:44, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

finding articles that need improvement

@Atitarev Come to think of it, is there an easy way to find Russian entries that have {{g|n}} like from this example? I'm fascinated with the idea of cleaning up the Russian entries. Well, sort of like that. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:47, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

User:CodeCat made this - User:Atitarev/ru headword template missing on my request (I moved it to my subpage since) a while ago. Many are done but I haven't maintained the page, it needs cleaning up as well. You may still find many entries needing a fix. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:53, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Fascinating. Thank you very much. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:54, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Also, you can use this.--Cinemantique (talk) 13:58, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Awesome. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:59, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

-либо

@Atitarev I'm confused. Is the IPA for -либо would be [ˌlʲɪbə] or [ˌlʲibə]? Primary stress or secondary stress or not, I think it would be [i] in this case. Or maybe it's a very particular exception. I really don't know. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I got confused as well for a moment and thought of changing it. You've got it right in the end. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I thank reading the Wikipedia article on Russian Phonology hundreds of times this year as well as your wise guidance. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

но-о-о vs. но

@Atitarev I discovered a very strange duplication. но-о-о and но. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:16, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. The Russian headword shouldn't differ so much from the page name. It can only contain stress marks, sometimes links to parts ([ [ ] ]) and punctuation marks (! or ?) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:03, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I understand. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Russian entries needing definition

@Atitarev I didn't know this until now, but this page is full of definition-less entries. Mostly based on the Russian National Corpus. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:00, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Keep making them, they will be fixed if the number is manageable. I am quite busy securing the next contract or perm job and I am currently not the only Russian editor, letting others know as well. @Cinemantique, Wikitiki89, Wanjuscha, Vitalik, Vahagn Petrosyan, Stephen G. Brown: The entries above just need English translations and possibly some checking. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:12, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

@Yurivict. I would also summon Yuri. He's relatively new here. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:08, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

башня

@Cinemantique I don't know how to solve this problem. The plural genitive of башня is ба́шен, not ба́шень. The new template system is still confusing to use. I don't know what to do. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

• Oh yeah, something went wrong with these guys...--Cinemantique (talk) 16:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Wow, the video you linked totally woke me up. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 00:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Russian transliteration

@Atitarev I wonder if you can update the rule based on using the example from this change? It would be quite educational for unexperienced editors focusing on Russian entries. Thank you in advance. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

"ɛ" is currently only used for the irregular readings of "е", never "э". Admittedly, it does create inconsistency but it doesn't cause as much hate outrage towards the Wiktionary Russian transliteration. User:Wikitiki89 suggested reviewing it. See my talk page starting from "I don't mean to argue, but ...". ----Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:14, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

I understand. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:23, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

фонарище

@Atitarev I'm confused. Is the stress фонари́ще or фона́рище? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:08, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Both. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:16, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

наслышан

@Atitarev I'm not sure whether I did this correctly. Please see the hidden comment in the article. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I've fixed it to the best of my knowledge. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:58, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Russian words of Japanese origin

@Atitarev I think I got the gist of the somewhat irregular patterns in stress locations when I add Japanese placenames in Russian. But you're right what you said before: there is no regular pattern of stress in Japanese loanwords in Russia. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:35, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Stress location is chaotic. If you're using Wikipedia's stresses you may get over 90% of them right but there's no guarantee. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:18, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

I guess I need to find order in chaos. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:32, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

вон

@Atitarev A simple question. There is an example sentence Вон та́м‎ ― Von tám ― over there. Is вон stressed or unstressed? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:41, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

It's unstressed but not reduced. You can consider it as a secondary stress or simply, the word doesn't carry a sentence stress but is pronounced [von]. Only short prepositions, particle не and some hyphenated suffixes form a single unit with words they belong to. I hope it helps. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

пикельхельм

@Atitarev Is the stressed 'э́' changed for its Romanization? I'm just not sure, by the way. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:47, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Done. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:34, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

подводить

@Atitarev I'm not sure what "подводи́ть мину́‎" means because "to mine" can mean many things. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

It's a dated, colloquial expression meaning "to cause somebody a big trouble", "to set someone up", "to let someone down" (in a mean way), literally to "to bring a landmine (under someone)". A list of synonyms is here. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Now this sounds very shocking. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:22, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev Is it appropriate to say that "подвести́ мину́‎" also means "to cause somebody a big trouble", "to set someone up", "to let someone down" (in a mean way), literally to "to bring a landmine (under someone)"? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:57, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's derived from the literal meaning. This expression is quite rare and obsolete. "подложить (кому-то) свинью" is more common and modern. It doesn't sound as shocking as it seems. Compare the use of "bomb" in a figurative sense.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:42, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

приглашать кого-то на чашку чая

@Atitarev One question. Does using the imperfective form "приглашать" make any sense? --11:50, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Noun-related

благодетель

@Atitarev I think I made a mistake on the etymology section in благодетель. By the way, I'm organizing the -тель nouns as my short-term priority. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

It's from Old Church Slavonic благодѣтєль (blagodětelĭ), "детель" is not used in Russian separately but it's a cognate of "деятель". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:08, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

роженица

The Vikislovar' version has рожени́ца, but the English version (see below at "Related terms) has ро́женица. Which one is right? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:25, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it up. The term can have all of the three syllable stressed: ро́же́ни́ца (róžéníca). Ru:wikt. marks "ро́женица" as colloquial or regional but "ро́женица" is way too common, though. One female participant here says that dictionaries offer "рожени́ца" and "роже́ница" but she can't bring herself to pronounce that word so. It's the same with me. I have pronounced the word "ро́женица" and heard it so said all my life (including form medical personal and movies) but it turns out to be non-standard, colloquial or regional. In fact, "рожени́ца" sounds awkward to me. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Wow, that was rather unexpected. Thank you for your explanation. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

цифирь

@Atitarev I am sort of confused with цифирь. It looks like it is somewhat related to цифра, but I'm not sure. I know that цифирная школа is the first Russian school system, history-wise, of course. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 16:36, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:11, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

агулы

I'm not sure whether агулы is an animate or inanimate noun. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:35, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it's animate, since they are people. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 22:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I see. Somehow I wasn't sure whether if collective nouns act in a very different way. I want to be as careful as possible. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:41, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

No worries (Australian="no problem") at all. :) There may be cases when humans are not animate, probably pejorative but I can't think of a case right now. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:49, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I think some languages use inanimate objects as pejorative nouns. In Korean (South Korean standard), practical 개 (a dog) or related terms as common pejoratives against people. (historically dogs were treated like pests in Korea, so yeah) I find the differences quite interesting. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:57, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, dogs or other animals are also animate. Interesting that труп is inanimate but мертвец or покойник are animate, although they are dead, also робот, not a living creature, is animate as well. Animacy is tricky in Slavic languages, animals used as food can be both, it's quite common to treat some small animals as inanimate (alternatively), when they are used as food - я ем устрицы/устриц. Plants are inanimate, as they have no "soul". See also муравей, which can be jokingly used as animate, even in the sense of "scooter".--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:06, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Wow. That's a treasure chest of information right there. It makes me more interested in Slavic languages. Your way of explaining Russian (Slavic) grammar and semantics is awesome. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

вода

The Vikislovar' version of вода has two nominal declensions. I wonder why it is like that. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

I have added the obsolete alternative forms in the plural with a note. It has to be manual, since it's an irregular pattern and is combining them in one case. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

So it was an obsolete form. Now I understand. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

In [[вода]] also: "Встречается также устаревший вариант ...". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Now I understand. I was confused at first. Thanks to your effort, I'll be aware of this from now on. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

геймплей

Not sure whether it's masculine or feminine (the Vikislovar' version said it is feminine). And I don't know whether it is declinable or not. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Vikislovar' was wrong, fixed there. I don't know if feminine nouns ending in "й" exist, unless they are female names or some loanword with a feminine sense. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Thought so myself. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

попуститель

@Atitarev Forgive me for disturbing you. I'm not sure about the meaning. Yandex Slovar' has "sufferer" as its definition, but it sounds very strange, since попустить doesn't have the meaning of "to suffer". --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:13, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

There's some legal sense of "sufferer", which I'm not familiar with. "Попуститель" means "condoner", "conniver". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:39, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Wow. Thank you very much. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:40, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

этот

@Atitarev Forgive me with this interruption. I have a very strange thought after looking through этот. Should the Romanization of этот be étot or ɛ́tot? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:22, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

It's "étot" per WT:RU TR, "ɛ" is only used in exceptions for Cyrillic letter "е" as in # 2 of WT:RU TR. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

OK. So is my editing of тире sound? (Just want to be safe) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:30, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it's correct. Thanks. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:41, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I am forever your student, good sir. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:43, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

в береге vs. на берегу

Are both of them considered to be synonyms? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

• "в береге" (rarely "в берегу") means 'inside' (generally about holes, burrows). "на берегу" is used in other meanings (stay, walk).--Cinemantique (talk) 13:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

берет

@Atitarev берет is a loanword, but why is е́ of бере́т not э́? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:43, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Many words are absorbed/Russified better than others or words sound better to Russians if palatalisation is introduced. It's true that "е" can be pronounced as "э" only in loanwords but this is completely unpredictable. One just needs to know if there is a palatalisation or it's lacking. You'll find that loanwords with /k/, /g/ and /l/ are more likely to be palatalised. Loanwords may have both pronunications in different syllables or variants are possible for same syllables. That's why I insisted on keeping manual "ɛ" in transliterations (in entries and translations) to mark those words clearly, even if entries may have IPA info. This is not fully accepted by other editors. For you, not a native speaker, it makes it harder. You have to carefully observe the existing transliterations if they exist, find native pronunciations of words. If you're not sure, just ask, or don't add/change pronunciation. Unfortunately, the information on pronunciation of loanwords is not easily available. The English Wiktionary is probably the best source on this! --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

So, берет is fully absorbed into Russian? I think this is opposite from, for example, 맑스주의 (another word for Marxism in Korean) but it is pronunced as 마르크스주의 in real life practice. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you can say, it's absorbed. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:54, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I see. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:03, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. In these two loanwords in Russian - текст (tekst) and тест (tɛst) the initial /t/ and the vowel are pronounced differently - [tʲekst] and [tɛst] and there is no explanation for it, you just need to know it. :)

I've just created 마르크스주의 (mareukeuseujuui). You can make 맑스주의 (makseujuui), if you wish but I wouldn't know how to force a different pronunciation. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

맑스주의 is both used in North and South Koreas. 맑스주의 is sort of "archaic pre-WWII era" and it's not a non-standard spelling in South Korea, but still common. The pronunciation would be 막스주의 or 마르크스주의 in South Korea, but more often 마르크스주의. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:31, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:37, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

бытие

@Atitarev What is the exact pronunciation of бытие and its alternative form with ё? It's a very unusual word to me. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:32, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

They are pronounced regularly. I've just added the pronunciation sections. I made a mistake in the header of бытиё (bytijó) before, that's probably why you got confused? бытие́ (bytijé), житие́ (žitijé) and (humorous) битие́ (bitijé) are odd words, only used philosophically or religiously, битие́ (bitijé) "beating" is a pun on бытие́ (bytijé), as in "битие определяет сознание" (beating defines the consciousness), instead of "бытие определяет сознание" (existence/life defines the consciousness). The two first words are probably from Old Church Slavonic or Old Russian (Old East Slavic). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

that's probably why you got confused?

Definitely.

The two first words are probably from Old Church Slavonic or Old Russian (Old East Slavic).

Or probably both, influencing each other among the educated clegry and the laypeople. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:37, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

бёдрышко

@Yurivict Hello. I wonder if you can check this new entry, бёдрышко, for mistakes. And anyways, you seem to be new. Ummm.... this might be late to say but, добро пожаловать. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello again! Спасибо за приветствие! I corrected this entry, бедро is thigh, not leg. Leg is нога. -) Yurivict (talk) 02:51, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I always get that confused. I'm still learning Russian. Confusing? Yes, but I need to do my best. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:52, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Хакодате

@Atitarev I'm not sure about its IPA, since it's a Japanese word that is loaned into Russian, I feel need to be more precise about this. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:31, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

It's close enough, although the final unstressed э may not be reduced in some loanwords. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:13, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

мост

@Atitarev Just like you edited the declension of вода, I wonder if you can organize the declension? Which forms are archaic and such. Thank you in advance. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

You can start yourself. I will check. All forms are modern but some are less common, such as мо́ста, мо́сту, etc. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:03, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

I finished it. I think your wise insight is needed. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:30, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

соя

@Atitarev, Wanjuscha, Yurivict Based on the Russian version, I think there is a need to explain why genitive plural and genitive accusative forms are not used. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

IMO all forms are correct and usable as they are now. Russian version has them missing for some unknown reason. Yurivict (talk) 05:00, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Благовещение vs. благовещение

@Atitarev, Wanjuscha, Yurivict I'm confused. The Wiki article on Благовещение always use the capital Б. Or is it better to delete Благовещение (the capitalized one)? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:32, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I'd make lower case the main article and the other as the {{alternative capitalization of}} type entry. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:42, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

тыл

@Atitarev I wonder if it is ok for you to check the translations and the use of stresses in the examples of the article тыл? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:17, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Good job :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:14, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

краса

@Atitarev The Russian version says that the genitive plural form is poorly documented and not used well. Can you confirm it? And while at it making a note would be better. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:29, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

It's a dated word, hardly used in Russian these days and when it's used, the expressions happen to be singular. Otherwise, there is no problem with the plural form. If you edit, pls remove Wanjuscha's excessive links. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:32, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I'll keep in mind. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:40, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

молочный зуб

@Atitarev I wonder if you could check the plural for this? Don't know if it's зубы or зубья. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:25, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

It's "зубы" but you need to also supply the right declension type from the basic entry, it's "e", not "a" (default). Please review your edits if you have done any. The form "зубья" is technical. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:23, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

игрок

@Wanjuscha Just curious. Is there any feminine form of this noun? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Some nouns don't have feminine equivalents. The word "игрок" refers to both men and women but stays a grammatical masculine, e.g. "она хороший игрок" - she is a good player. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:00, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Interesting. Thank you very much, Anatoly. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:02, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome, Taeho. There are too many such words - физик, химик, теоретик, стратег, политик, историк, etc. but native Russian words with no feminine forms are less common. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:17, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

бенто

@Atitarev I'm not sure I made the IPA correct. I think it should be [bɛnˈto]. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:39, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

дез

@Atitarev Based on the Russian National Corpus number 19776 (дез), is this really a noun? I tried to find in in my paper Russian-Korean dictionary, but this word doesn't exist. OTL --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:57, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I think the word doesn't exist - I've checked Google books, there are some abbreviations in all caps. I will check the national corpus later. Words from the bottom of that list may be obscure. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:05, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I couldn't find the word in the Russian National Corpus either. Apparently, the word doesn't exist. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:26, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev It says that this word does exist here (19777). --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:27, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

In Google Books, I find a few uses of it in French names "дез Ами" (= des Amis), "Дез Эссар" (= des Essarts). --WikiTiki89 01:44, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Also, RNC has wrong identification of деза (= colloquial misinformation).--Cinemantique (talk) 19:21, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

спица

@Atitarev Very dumb question: are the words спица and стопка related? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Nope, it should be removed from "related terms".--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

технорук

@Atitarev I just edited it based on Cinematique's edit back in ruwikt. And I think the declension pattern isn't correct. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:12, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

The declension should be a and b, like политрук or военрук. The latter should be fixed as well.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:24, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

@Benwing2, We will also need inflected forms regenerated.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:27, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Done. Benwing2 (talk) 21:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

@Benwing2 военрук is not done. Do you want me to fix the headword and the declension first? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev I fixed it. If it looks right, I'll regenerate. Benwing2 (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, yes. Only "b" is a more common pattern for all three and физрук (PE teacher).--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 22:10, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev I changed all four to list b before a. Do any of them have secondary stress? Benwing2 (talk) 22:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

No.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад)

OK, just regenerated them all. Benwing2 (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

IPA for сердце

@Atitarev Just curious: I don't know whether it is [ˈsʲert͡sə] or [ˈsʲert͡sʲe]. I think I heard at least 2-3 ways of saying this nominal singular form. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

[ˈsʲert͡sə] or [ˈsʲert͡sɛ] in a slow and clear speech, never [ˈsʲert͡sʲe]. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:39, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

I guess affrication is also a factor to this. But what about in fast speech, if there is any difference? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:47, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

[ˈsʲert͡sə] is normal to fast speech. [t͡s] is hardly ever palatal, there is a small number of exceptions in loanwords. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

остров Принца Эдуарда

@Atitarev One question. Is there a reason why it is not Остров (with a capital О) instead of остров? Perhaps there are some other examples in proper nouns. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:24, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

It's just the way it is. Common nouns in proper nouns are usually lower case, unless they are part of the name like Новая Земля.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:47, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

кандолюминесценция

@Atitarev Is there any secondary stress in кандо-? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:06, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, added. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:16, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

счёт

@Atitarev There are two forms of declension in this noun, The plural nominative forms are either счёты or счёта depending on the meaning. I'm sort of confused. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:03, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

The normal plural of "счёт" is "счета́". "счёты" means "abacus"; "reckoning" and "score" (figuratively), as in "to settle a score with someone". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Now it's much clearer. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev One question. Then what is счеты in "сводить/свести счеты с кем-либо‎" a singular genitive form of счёт? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:32, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

It's a plurale tantum, sense #3 of счёты where I added a usage note.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:58, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

политбюро

@Atitarev First of all, happy new year. I found out that there are two articles with the same meaning: Политбюро and политбюро. I'm not sure what to think of this. One of them should be deleted, based on my gut feeling. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:30, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you too. The capitalised form can be made {{alternative capitalisation of|политбюро́|lang=ru}}. The rationale for the capitalisation was it was "THE politburo" (the only one in the USSR). Significant government bodies and events were capitalised to make them more "respectable". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:43, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@Atitarev I made it like this. [1] I don't know how good it is. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:46, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Verb-related

владеть

The English entry владеть shows that it is a transitive verb, but the Vikislovar' version shows that it is an intransitive verb. Now I'm confused. OTL --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Transitive and intransitive are not always clearcut cases. If I make it intransitive, the present passive form "владе́емый" will disappear, which is attestable. In most cases, though, it's intransitive, needs instrumental.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 14:37, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I see. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

хотеть

The English entry хотеть has imperatives (хоти and хотите) in the conjugation template, but the Vikislovar' version doesn't. I'm feeling confused. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:09, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Maybe they it was awkward to say "want!" in the imperative form, it's not common but it exists. My son would say: "Я не хочу есть!" and I would say "А ты хоти!" ("I don't want to eat!" - "(You should) want!"). A phrase from Google books with an imperative: "Не хоти тех, кто тебя не хочет!" "Don't want those who doesn't wants you!" In any case, the Russian Wiktionary is not an authority. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 14:37, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Wow. This makes it even more fascinating. :) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

варёный

I noticed a difference between варёный and ва́ренный from Vikislovar'. I don't know. Correct me if I'm wrong, but past passive participles are only for perfective verbs. But if you look at the conjugation table in варить, it says that there is a past passive participle. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:07, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The difference between "варёный" and "ва́ренный" is that the the former is considered an adjective (although derived from the past passive participle) but the latter is a pure participle. Participle "ва́ренный" is derived from imperfective "варить" but "сва́ренный" is from perfective "сварить". Imperfective verbs may also have past passive participles but they are more common for perfectives and if a past passive participle derived from an imperfective is missing the perfective form can be used instead. E.g. "резанный" is from "резать" (impf) but "порезанный" is from "порезать" (pf). The table for "резать" may contain both "резанный" and "порезанный", same with делать/деланный and сделать/сделанный pairs. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your explanation. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:07, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev Sorry for necromancing this topic. I made a usage notes section on варить. I wonder if you check it. Somehow I feel that this needs more explanation. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

It's correct, the other, older past passive participle is "варённый". Sorry for being less responsive, I'm securing a contract job after my permanent job has "expired" a few weeks ago and my editing style is scattered. I may even go on a Wikibreak for a while. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Don't worry. I will at least try my best contributing here. (Mostly cleaning up the lemmas and non-lemmas) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

накрыть vs. укрыть

@Atitarev Forgive me. Exactly what are the differences between the two "sort-of-similar" verbs? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:01, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

"Накрыть" corresponds to the English "to cover" in most cases, накрыть на стол — to lay the table, also militarily - to hit, (with fire), to trap. "Укрыть" is also to cover - укрыть одеялом - to cover with a blanket (накрыть is also okey here). They are often synonymous and can be interchanged. Укрыть can also be synonymous with скрыть - to conceal. Your definitions are okey. If you don't feel comfortable with nuances, don't overcomplicate the entries.For your own benefit, you can check Yandex dictionaries. Their definitions for these terms are not too bad, IMO. (Using iPad now, sorry for poor punctuation). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I was just curious. But it seems that Yandex occasionally disappoints me. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:08, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

They don't always have usage examples but definitions themselves are mostly okey, no? Their labels may be confusing, they may refer to the source dictionary, hence some duplications. I only have occasional trouble finding neologisms and they don't have swearwords. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 14:32, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Maybe I'm very used to Naver (South Korea's answer to Yandex) dictionary service that has a different way of organizing lemma entries. But I agree with you: Yandex is indeed great. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:54, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

почудачить

@Atitarev I made this a while ago. It's not a common verb, but I think your inspection is welcomed. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:47, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Checked, added imperfective. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

It's an interesting verb. But really, I thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

тосковать

@Atitarev I found out that there is a strange case (or possibly a hilarious case) of editing in this entry. I don't know, but is тосковатьь.ogg a correct name for this ogg file? Or maybe there's something I don't know about. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:49, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

The file name is odd but it's just a file name. Instead of adding a number 1, 2 to the file name they added "ь" to make it different from the existing. Not sure if the entry needs two audio files - one is with a male and one with a female voices. Both seem to be native speakers. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

I understand. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:00, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

спеть

@Atitarev I put a past passive participle (from the Vikislovar' counterpart) of спеть in the conjugation template, and it isn't shown. Ummm..... forgive me for asking this, what happened? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. Too many technical things to remember, apart from the linguistic stuff. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Ouch. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:54, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

длить and its present adverbial participle, для

для has {{obsolete}}, but длить has {{dated}}. I think these need unification. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:17, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree. {{cx|dated}} is probably more common. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:44, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I will change it. Thank you for your insight. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

наносить

I admit that I actually have some troubles with the definition for наносить. I got the general idea of the senses in the Vikislovar' version, but I'm feeling very cautious. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

• наносить perfective means 'to bring a certain quantity of something in several steps'.--Cinemantique (talk) 14:52, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

творить

I know that творить has a meaning of "to knead", but would this be a figurative meaning? And also the Vikislovar' version of затворить has the meaning of "to knead" in "dated form". Now I feel sort of confused. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:42, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Not figurative but it's very rare and special (I personally never used it). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I will apply your input. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

твориться

@Atitarev I'm sort of confused about this verb. How would твориться be used if the subject of the sentence is 2nd person singular or plural pronoun? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:13, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

The first sense is impersonal, so only the 3rd person singular happens - "что творится?" - "what's going on?". The other persons are only needed for completeness of the passive sense. I've checked, forms like "творишься" are attestable but quite rare, as in "you're being created", e.g. "... творишься в материнском лоне" - "you're being created in mother's bosom". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Fascinating. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

ведать

I applied some contents of the Vikislovar' version into ведать. I don't know if I word things correctly or not. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:03, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

The information is correct but too wordy for a dictionary. Translations into English, samples sentences are sufficient, IMO, without the usage notes. Labels - literary, dated, etc, can also be added to the definition line, if missing. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:56, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

ехать

@Atitarev I heard that the colloquial imperatives for ехать could be едь and едьте. I think we need some explanations for why the imperatives for ехать are different (semantic reasons?). --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:31, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I think there must be some explanations on the difference among езжа́й(те), е́хай(те), and едь(те). --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:52, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I've added usage notes. The verb is irregular and some forms are not as they are expected to be. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, good sir. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:31, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome, just call me Anatoli (Анатолий) :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:38, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

One more question because I'm very curious about this particular verb: would езжай(те) be ordinary colloquial imperative forms that have a neutral connotation unlike едь(те) and ехай(те)? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:43, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, only "поезжай" is correct (suppletive) but "езжай" is not frowned upon by everybody. Sort of acceptable.

Хочешь ЕХАТЬ? ПОЕЗЖАЙ!

Но не едь и не езжай.

ЗАЕЗЖАЙ и ПРИЕЗЖАЙ!

Ехай — это просто хай.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I see. So it explains in the Vikislovar' version

вместо них могут использоваться формы поезжа́й(те), съе́зди(те), (не) е́зди(те)

Now it becomes much clearer. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, "съе́зди" and "(не) е́зди" are "borrowed" from "съездить" (perfective, abstract) "ездить" (imperfective, abstract). These are things you do to avoid using incorrectly sounding forms (e.g. not to sound illiterate) but as you know abstract/concrete, imperfective/perfective are used differently and the replacement is not always appropriate. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 14:20, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Thus, just stick to поезжа́й(те) and one wouldn't have much problem. Understood loud and clear, Anatoli. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

проносить

I wonder if you can evaluate проносить. It's a verb of movement, so, I feel sort of cautious about this. Thank you in advance. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

ждать

@Atitarev Please correct me if I'm wrong. The verb ждать has genitive if it means "to expect" and accusative if it means "to wait". And подождать only has "accusative". Why doesn't подождать have a meaning to expect? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Maybe I can help you.

• ждать 1 = to wait — with genitive (with abstract nouns and the plural form of concrete nouns) or accusative (with concrete nouns but not always: Она ждала трамвая. / Я жду машину или автобус.)
• ждать 2 = to expect; to hope — with genitive (Кошка ждёт ещё молока.)
• ждать 3 = to suppose — with genitive (Ждём краха экономики.)
• ждать 4 = about something uncontrolled that sure will happened to somebody or something — with accusative, only 3rd person, often with the inversion (Её ждёт слава. Корабль ждёт погибель.)--Cinemantique (talk) 23:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for a quality piece of insight, Cinemantique. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Accusative in the negative particle не

At what instances do accusatives turn into genitives? I heard that accusative noun doesn't change into genitive when the verb of the sentence is любить. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

обязываться

@Atitarev According to this, there are two conjugations. Can you confirm this?

заплакать

@Atitarev The Russian version says that it is transitive (with a past passive participle заплаканный) and the English version says that it is intransitive. Now this is confusing. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

In the sense "to start crying/weeping" it's intransitive and it is in most cases but you can заплакать лицо, носовой платок, etc. and you get заплаканное лицо, заплаканные щёки, заплаканный (носовой) платок, etc. The Russian wiki is more inclusive in this case but they don't clarify when it can become transitive. It's not always easy to choose, say, you can make ходить transitive as well to allow "хо́женные доро́жки" but most linguists don't consider this verb transitive, cf English "to walk a long way" (transitive usage of an intransitive verb). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Interesting. So it can have two states in terms of "transitive-ness" (I don't think this is even a word). --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll leave it to the broader community to decide but I think there was a discussion in Wiktionary regarding the English transitivity of verbs. To make it less confusing, we can choose the most common transitivity but if we make (mostly) intransitive verbs transitive, then it needs clarifications. A student of Russian will be confused finding ходить among transitive verbs but there are cases when it can be transitive, as above. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:06, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

дожить

@Atitarev This verb's past tense forms (except feminine) have alternative forms based on the Russian version. Or is it just an error? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:33, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

No, it's not an error, до́жил, до́жило and до́жили are actually better than дожи́л, дожи́ло, дожи́ли. Same with прожить, which now needs fixing. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:31, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

If I'm going to fix дожить and прожить, what should I do? Class 16 verbs are kinda scary to approach, at least just me. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:17, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Missed your question, sorry. I have fixed прожить and пожить, could you fix "дожить" the same way? Also, example sentences need stress marks and occasional manual translit (этого, чего), if it's OK - I can only do it at home at the moment. BTW, it's up to you but in you questions (or the topic header), it's better to use [[ ]], that will add the term to "what links here" functionality and it'll make it easier to see where a word was discussed or mentioned. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:42, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:07, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

обзатыливать

@Atitarev I think you are going to hate me for this. OTL I put the meaning of it with the help of Толковый словарь живого великорусского языка by В.И. Даль. It seemed that I was in a time machine or something. I was extra confused with the verbs забривать/забрить. I wonder if the meaning that I put is correct. But I'm 100% sure that I did something wrong or poorly. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:30, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

I have no reason to hate you but I don't know this word. Please give me your link and I'll check if the definitions need any improvement. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

I based it on this picture of a page and this text, along with theh Russian Wiktionary version of this article. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 00:59, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the links, I'll take a look later when I have a better moment for this. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

волочить

@Atitarev There are two conjugations of this verb: 4c and 4b. The 4b variant is the archaic one according to ruwikt. Assuming that there the conjugation template is updated, I'm not sure how to input the 4b conjugation simultaneously. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Done. You can use separate tables in such cases, unless a verb need to always include some other forms, then a module change will be required as with плеска́ть (pleskátʹ). This too, could be split into multiple tables - 1a and 6c. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:36, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Adjective-related

New additions

@Atitarev I need your guidance, please. I made лиственный‎, проповеднический‎, вероятностный‎, непредсказуемый, and растительный‎. Do they all need short forms? Sometimes I feel weary about this whether they need short forms or not. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:55, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Adjectives ending in -ский, -овой, -евой, adjectives, which are: of or related to something, belonging to someone, made of something don't have short forms and comparative/superlative forms. From your list, only "непредсказуемый" has short forms and a comparative/ superlative form. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:20, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Only qualitative adjectives may have short forms but distinguishing them is not always easy. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:21, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll keep that in mind. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:18, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there's no golden rule, so you'll have to do some investigation on each term. I couldn't find anything really useful yet. It's safer to omit short forms, rather than adding to those, which don't have them. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:23, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

So in other words, it's about semantics than "clear-cut" grammar. I see. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:28, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

You can also exclude -ский, -овой, -евой endings as well and there are some irregulars as well (mostly already done here I think) - большой-велик, маленький-мал, радостный-рад, etc.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:34, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

противоположный

@Atitarev I don't know if I wrote the "usage notes" correctly. Can you please take a look? It's only a single sentence. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

недавний

@Atitarev, Cinemantique According to the Vikislovar' version, there is no masculine short form. I'm sort of curious why there is no masculine short form? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

• In fact, all short forms of this word are very rare and not in use now. The problem with the masculine form is in that we don't know what a right form should be – *неда́вен or *неда́внь. The form in that table is just a supposition.--Cinemantique (talk) 04:06, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Oh, thank you very much for the clean-cut answer. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

-цио́нный

@Atitarev I'm reading Zaliznyak's Grammaticheskiy slovar russkogo yazyka. I have a question: Do adjectives with the ending -цио́нный always have short forms 1*a? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

But I think I'm reading it in a wrong way. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

The pattern is correct but adjectives may have no short forms, including this group.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:29, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

You may be reading it correct, but Zaliznyak often lists short forms that are only theoretical. Unfortunately, just because Zaliznyak says there are short forms doesn't mean they always exist. Benwing2 (talk) 05:40, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Russian possessive adjectives

@Benwing2 There is a Category:Russian possessive adjectives from what I know, but can you include it in the template automatically? I don't know if I'm making any sense though, since I'm working in my office right now. I saw адамов and I think it can be automatic in this case. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:55, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

I thought this was already included automatically; I'll fix it. Benwing2 (talk) 05:53, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

радийный

@Atitarev Does this adjective has a short form? It looks like it cannot have a predicative quality. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:18, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

The short and comparative forms are only theoretical and shouldn't be used, IMO. The term can be used in a predicative positions but it should be marked as rare. The definition is "of or related to radio". @Cinemantique Why did you add short and comparative forms on ruwiki? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:38, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

These are just potential forms. I have given an answer here.--Cinemantique (talk) 01:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Ideally, we should mark these forms as theoretical and we have a method for this. Arguably, there may be no value in adding forms, which are never used, especially for rare terms.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:31, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

마음에 들다

Hi,

Would 마음에 듣다 들다 be considered idiomatic? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Also inviting @Wyang, TAKASUGI_Shinji. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:39, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

It's actually 마음에 들다 and it's an idiom. 들다 means "to go inside of something". --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:46, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Be aware that the bottom ㄷ, ㄴ and ㄹ in verb forms can be quite confusing for Korean native speakers like myself in conversations. (guilty as charged) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:47, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Oops, it was a typo :). In our textbooks it's in the sense of "to like", "to catch one's fancy" or similar. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Yep. 마음에 들다 literally means "to go inside one's heart". It can be used for people or objects, and abstract ideas. Very mundane, if you ask. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

It’s the same as 気に入る. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:00, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

As you know, pretty much most of the modern Standard Korean in South Korea is Japanese-influenced middle-class Seoul dialect. So you'll see many Japanese equivalents in the Korean lexicon. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:04, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both. I was going to post my suspicion that it seems like a semantic borrowing from Japanese. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

кому-либо and probably others

Don't forget to start with ==Russian== SemperBlotto (talk) 14:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I got carried away. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:40, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I would still discourage you from creating inflected forms. BTW, we need to find out the exact template for pronoun forms. The inflected forms don't need any related terms, etc. No need to make links in bold, tr= is only required for irregular readings but they all need head=. I didn't take to go through your recent edits, though. As I said, eventually, a bot will create them and existing forms will only interfere. You're getting better with lemma forms, so please continue doing them (with care). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, I'm doing this for my own benefit and I only make non-lemma forms rarely. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

But how do we request bots with a specific kind of task? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

It's a time-consuming task for a bot writer. Requesting it probably won't help. Some editors have made attempts, e.g. Latvian forms were generated by a bot. I'd just wait when something becomes available, which can be tweaked for various languages. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Russian entries

Thanks for the Russian contributions so far. You seem to have improved greatly :). I'm not able to always catch up with your edits, as you are getting more productive - only checking random entries. I hope you'll stay cautious and only add info you're certain about. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I learned a lot from you and I'm still learning from you. Just in case, I recently use two Russian-Korean dictionaries (one online and one in a thick book form) for more certainty of the definition. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Let me second the thanks — we definitely need more Russian lemmas around here! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:39, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

We'll do. Currently at 24,212 total. Most basic vocabulary is already covered but the target is no gaps in the first thousands of most frequent words. Inflected forms can wait. @KoreanQuoter, just don't forget about the crucial things - correct stress, aspect, gender, decl./conj. type. You seem to be forgetful or absent-minded at times (getting better though). :) Best contributors of foreign language entries here are often enthusiasts, not native speakers. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

But the good news is that I find my mistakes much quicker than before. And this is despite I go back and forth on the Korean Wiktionary at times, but this is a poor excuse in my case. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:47, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

It might help to review own edits. Pls add hidden categories in Preferences. You'll see that this revision was immediately added to Category:Russian terms needing accents. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Understood. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:04, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

выпадать/выпасть

Hi,

Would you like to have a go at this a bit non-trivial verb for practice, it doesn't have to cover all the senses, just the main ones? Yandex has info, ru-wikt has conjugation types and tables for reference. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 08:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

With pleasure. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev Looks like I made a problem in the conjugation table in выпасть. (Definitely my mistake, though.) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

The high numbers of conjugation types are often pain in the butt. Fixed now. Thank you! The templates are not documented, so I let you do a difficult task, sorry. Module:ru-verb has function "7a", which takes six(!) mandatory parameters. You can keep practicing, I'll give you some more if you wish. Let me know. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Don't worry. I need to practice from reflecting my own mistakes, errors, mishaps from unfortunate carelessness and laziness, obviously in order to overcome my weak points. Maybe you can request me two verbs per day. And of course, I'm always glad to help you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. You have chosen a tough language. Do you think you can try Appendix:Russian_Frequency_lists/2001-3000 - all the remaining red links starting from number 2,897 (just one side of impf/pf is OK) over the next few days? Only a few is left. A smaller number of entries will be easier for me to check. I'd put grammar as high priority, senses and usage examples are of low priority. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:27, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll try it within 48 hours. But whether it's tough or not, I cannot give up learning Russian. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:35, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Just one simple verb is missing from the list but great job so far! Thanks heaps! --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I think I just finished it. Wait, I did. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:25, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Some more work for you, if you feel like it :) - ругаться, наклониться, превратить, таскать, вставить, застыть, залить, опасаться, удержаться, подослать, потрясти, щёлкнуть, отобрать. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:21, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll try. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:33, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, if you're interested only. They are next on frequency list in need of entries. Let me know if you have any question or trouble. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev Forgive me if I interrupted your work, but I finished the given verbs above. And I'm not really sure that I made the conjugation in подсылать correctly. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll go through your edits later, have to go. Checked "подсылать". Thanks for help! --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:19, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

сосед

Hi, please note that this diff was wrong. It's an irregular noun. I have fixed it. :) Please observe the previous table before changing. :)--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

So it was irregular? Now I feel very concerned that I might made some mistakes in the past. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 09:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I do check your edits but not every single one. I missed this one and it was mentioned here. These cases are rare but when converting to new/better templates (pronunciations, inflections, etc.) it's always important to check and see what the original did. There could be errors in the original versions but you need to know what you're doing. Please don't think I'm telling you off :). I made such mistakes myself in a hurry, like with татарин, which is an exception as well (Vahagn corrected me, if it's any consolation). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll be more careful next time. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I make mistakes in Chinese and other languages but that doesn't discourage me from doing it. We learn from mistakes and you can only get better by doing it. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

If the RuWiktionary article doesn't have an inflection table you can use this source: put the word to the entry line and click Enter.--Cinemantique (talk) 10:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

FYI, you can add {{delete}} to ask for speedy deletion of what is obviously wrong. I added it to обозначаящий; google:"обозначаящий" confirms that the form is not attested by any stretch. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:54, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:56, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

масоги (masogi?)

Hi! Is it Korean word and how to spell it? It means 'sparring in taekwondo'.--Cinemantique (talk) 08:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

맞서기 (matseogi). Phonetic hangeul: 맏써기, IPA: /ma̠t̚s͈ʌ̹ɡi/. Verbal noun from 맞서다 (matseoda). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:22, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Спасибо!--Cinemantique (talk) 10:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Пожалуйста. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Anatoli. (Today's a public holiday and did a day trip, so I didn't notice this discussion) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:35, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm glad I could answer this one. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Your questions

Hi,

Sorry, I haven't been very responsive lately - too much work and stress levels were quite high. I'm working interstate and flying every second weekend to see my family. I noticed sometimes ping didn't work. If you have still have some unanswered questions pls let me know. Pls link words you have questions for with [ [ ] ]. (I have fixed противоположный, the statement wasn't quite right and you made a mistake in "predicative". Dative case is used in any contrasting sentence, it doesn't have to be predicative. :) ) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Don't worry too much about the questions. I also try to figure them out eventually. It's always good to read words of wisdom from a native speaker. But anyways, thanks for the corrections. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

New definitionless entries

Hi,

I have just added two Korean definitionless entries - 못지않다 and 위주. Are you able to add definitions, please? I don't have good dictionaries with me here. They are from Wiktionary:Frequency lists/Korean 5800, seem rather frequent words.

I also have a suggestion, do you think you can add some red-linked entries from Appendix:Frequency dictionary of the modern Russian language (the Russian National Corpus) using {{rfdef|lang=ru}}? It would be very useful, if they're correct grammatically. These can be tracked using Category:Russian entries needing definition. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:47, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

I'll try. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Category:Korean entries needing definition is full of hanja but I have requested a feature to see the newest requests. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:06, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

못지않다 and 위주 are done with good examples. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:21, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I am adding more. I will give you a list if you can't find them. Pls consider adding Russian definitionless entries later, they are more useful than inflected forms, IMHO. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for adding those entries. All checked and fixed where necessary. Could you check 세워지다, 끝내, 워낙, when you have time, please? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:04, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Done, obviously with examples. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:53, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Taeho. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:00, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Inflected form errors

Hi Taeho,

In this list - User:Benwing/ru-unable-to-match there are many inflected forms with manual transliteration copied from some other words. There are some very old edits there. I've started from the bottom of the list. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Wow, I think I saw some of my non-lemma edits in that list. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:42, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I fixed a few today. Yes, not only yours, you have a lot of passion but lacking attention and focus at times, most of your errors are not because of your knowledge but something else. He-he. ;) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 14:51, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd prefer fixing lemmas. Inflected forms should be either accelerated or created by bots. There is already an accelerated method to create Russian comparative forms of adverbs. E.g. I created деше́вле (dešévle) with a single click and then saved with no errors. Additional edits (before saving) would only be required for irregular pronunciations like скучнее, which I made today. Don't waste your youth on inflected forms, challenge yourself. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 15:02, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I think of this as my non-conventional learning process. After all, I think I need to improve my Russian (especially I'm struggling with listening and speaking... OTL). But nowadays I balance myself to create more lemma words and examples, including cleaning the quote template into {{ux|ru}}. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

It could be problematic to fix those entries once the accelerated method arrives, by you or by others. The final structure may be different. You can find other methods, I'm sure. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 15:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you. Slightly off topic-ish: I pretty much clean up many of the noun forms and the verb forms. And my edits on these non-lemma forms are sort of standardized, at least by me. But I think my edits on them are sort of crappy, if you know what I mean. So I think a bot can create them with your ideal inputs. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:30, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I hope I edited -'s correctly. I don't know if I'm doing this right. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 14:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it's fine. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 15:02, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:ru-decl-noun-z

Hi! What do you think about this template? Would it be easier for you using the template? You can get the information about gender, animacy and stress type on Russian Wiktionary or udarenieru.ru.--Cinemantique (talk) 08:25, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev So far, I think it's a good idea. What was your inspiration, if I can politely ask? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:35, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, I found that the old templates are a little hard-to-use for me.--Cinemantique (talk) 08:51, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you. (Я с Вами согласен.) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:53, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

To me, it seems just a lack of interaction. I don't mind User:Wikitiki89's new module and we can add Zaliznyak's some categorisations. I don't find old and newer templates very hard to use and I've used them for years. I don't mean to criticise the effort or discourage but there must me a strong reason and there are many things to do. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:59, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

It's Zaliznyak's categorization that I'm fascinated with. I just learned this today. But I have to say that Cinemantique's proposition is kinda awesome and cool. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:19, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

• I can explain how to get the information of a word on udarenieru.ru. If you find лев there you see Zaliznyak's index – мо 1*b.
  • м is m-in
  • мо is m-an
  • ж is f-in
  • жо is f-an
  • с is n-in
  • со is n-an
• You don't need digits. Latin letter is for stress type. Also, you need an asterisk, it would be in the fourth parameter.--Cinemantique (talk) 09:22, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Secondary stress

Hi Taeho,

While it's true that the secondary stress exists in the prefixes and suffixes you edited, it's just an optional pronunciation. Those words can be pronounced either way, no stress is also quite common. Your change is a bit radical from unstressed to secondary stress. I don't have a solid source for this, I am happy to be proved wrong. The effect of an unstressed "ё" is that it sometimes slides into "е" in fast and uncareless speech (since it's a bit unnatural to have "ё" in unstressed positions): всё равно́ -> всеравно́, трёхме́рный -> трехме́рный.

BTW, please note that the North Korean capital was originally Cyrillised as "Пхёнъя́н" (Pyongyang), German "Röntgen" (surname, X-ray) was "рёнтге́н" but since it is unusual to have an unstressed "ё", the words eventually became "Пхенья́н" and "рентге́н". Another example of a Polish surnames "Piątkowski" and Ciołkowski, or Japanese city "Yokohama". The spellings Пёнтко́вский, Цёлко́вский/Тёлко́вский and Ёкоха́ма/Йокоха́ма didn't survive and they ended up as Пентковский/Пионтковский, Циолковский and Иокогама. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Is it okay if I put two pronunciations for entries with a secondary stress? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, sure. Unfortunately, as you see here "кто́-лѝбо" IPA^(key): [ˈkto ˌlʲibə] isn't currently working but "кто́-нибу̀дь" IPA^(key): [ˈkto nʲɪˌbutʲ] does. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:36, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

наедине

Hi Taeho,

Please note that you have removed the word stress in diff, which is needed in the headwords and the call to {{ru-IPA}}.

@Stephen G. Brown Hi Stephen, why did you remove word stresses in other edits? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 08:13, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I don’t remember doing that. What edits do you mean? —Stephen ^(Talk) 08:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, Stephen, my mistake. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:32, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. This is an error on my side. I don't know why but somehow when I copied it, the stress marker got deleted due to a mistype on my keyboard. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

It's OK, Taeho. Don't forget to review edits after saving. I use Firefox and it's easier to select words compared to IE or Chrome. There's also "character palette" plug-in, which lets me copy/paste symbols and diacritics I frequently used easily. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:32, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I use Maxthon, btw. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:15, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Korean entries needing definition

Hi Taeho,

I've added quite a bunch of definitionless Korean verbs (and adjectives). Sorry, it's a lot. Are you able to help add definitions, please? As they are many, just English translations is fine. If they are not verbs but adjectives, then please replace with:

===Adjective===
{{ko-adjective}}

...
====Conjugation====
{{ko-conj/adj}}

If they need long initial vowels, please add |l=y like this {{ko-IPA|l=y}}, some other changes may be required.

@TAKASUGI Shinji, pls help, if interested. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:36, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll try my best. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 10:33, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev Too many Hanja entries. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for what you've done so far! Don't worry about the hanja entries and not too much about monosyllabic entries - readings of hanja. It's not really clear, which part of speech they belong to and they are seldom on their own, only in combinations. Thousands of Chinese, Japanese and Vietnamese Han character entries also lack definitions. I don't have access to my paper dictionaries at the moment (moving house). Which part of speech is 내지 (naeji)? Could you add a definition? BTW, my source for pronunciations and hanja forms is [2] (e.g. you can get 乃至 and the long vowel reading 내ː지) and my Korean dictionary for learners (it doesn't mark semilong vowels but gives other info on pronunciations, like geminations, etc.). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:59, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Got the 내지 done. The (hilarious but mostly true) rule of thumb in Korean is that if the Korean word looks strange in a sentence, it's usually an adverb. It's very useful for colloquial words. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

возничий

Stop leaving declension templates with module errors: what's the point of even having a declension section if no one can see any of the content? If you weren't aware that you left a module error, that's even worse. You seem to be using some editing shortcuts to save time on editing these definitionless entries, but you're responsible for the end result. If you aren't going to preview your edits, at least check them and fix any errors before you go on to the next one. For that matter, I'm not sure it's a good idea to mass-create definitionless entries in the first place, but some would disagree with me. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, if there's a problem, anyone can delete it. I have no problem with that. I also make very few entries with module errors. Also, the module errors are there because the brand new Russian template for nouns is still incomplete. And lastly, there are Russian-speaking members who are active in filling those definition-less entries as soon as possible, and they are indeed filled quite quickly. Making definition-less entries originally came from a personal request, but I expanded my scope to include many other empty entries (i.e. sources from here and such). Forgive me if I offended you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:36, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

The best solution is to not produce the module error in the first place. If the template doesn't work, use {{rfinfl|ru}} instead. As for the advisability of creating definitionless entries, that was a side point, which isn't that important, and on which there's disagreement. As for being offended: that's not the problem. You're leaving entries in an unacceptable state. Don't do it. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:10, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

At least thank you for giving me a good piece of advice. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

The Russian declension tables are nearing the end of a process of being completely reworked. Declension tables for nouns that decline as adjectives can now be added like this: {{ru-noun-table|возни́чий|+}}. --WikiTiki89 17:59, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the info. I will take note of this from now on. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 00:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Just a side note on Chuck Entz's side note: I'm all for the creation of definitionless entries. I sometimes fill in those definitions in KoreanQuoter's entries as a sort of mental exercise. I'm not very good at all that wikitext and templates stuff, so I would never create those entries myself. But the way that we do it, each one of us does what we know best, and in the end full-fledged entries are produced, and everyone benefits. Isn't this what this whole Wiki-thing is supposed to be all about—collaborating and doing what you know best? that guy 14:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

본

Could you look at this page and fix it up/expand it? Thanks. —suzukaze (t・c) 00:55, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Definitionless entries

Hi Taeho,

How are you? At the moment, there are quite a few Russian entries without definitions in Category:Russian_entries_needing_definition. Many are not so straightforward - rare, regional, professional slang, etc. User:Benwing2 also made some to exemplify/test various types of declensions, @Benwing2, you can continue adding more declension cases, if you wish. They all need to be done eventually but it's a little bit unmanageable at the moment and everybody's kind of preoccupied with the grammar and pronunciation. So, could you please slow down for the moment? I know I asked you to add those entries myself. However, feel free to add, if you're genuinely interested, words you come across when learning/reading, though. Also, you can add as many as you want from the remaining red links in Appendix:Russian Frequency lists/4001-5000 or in Appendix:Frequency_dictionary_of_the_modern_Russian_language_(the_Russian_National_Corpus) between 4,400 to 5,000. I plan to add them, anyway, and having the stubs may help speed it up.

@Wikitiki89, Cinemantique, Wanjuscha Please add missing defintions, if you can. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I mostly make empty entries stated in the Russian National Corpus from the bottom, albeit I'm quite slow. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:08, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Bottom means rarer, less frequent words. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:12, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I see. Then I should make them from the top. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I meant but we should keep the number manageable, perhaps 300 undefined words as a maximum but some may disagree. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:47, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

유 as English "you"

Hi Taeho,

Some time ago I read in a Korean grammar book 유 (yu) is sometimes used in the sense of the English pronoun "you", especially by overseas Koreans. How much truth is there in it? Is it quite common? Is it an attempt to be neutral - neither too formal or too rude? Are they used somewhat like 브라더 (beuradeo, “brother”) and 시스터 (siseuteo, “sister”), generic words without specifying elder/younger distinctions? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

브라더 and 시스터 can be used in 교포 한국어 (oversea style of Korean) and for South Korean entertainment context. 유 is used in a very specialized situations like advertisements or entertainments. But surely most Koreans in South Korea would mix English and Japanese words very often when speaking. Anyways, what you are witnessing is something extremely informal. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Does "유" merit a separate pronoun section? Something like:

===Etymology 3===
From {{etyl|en|ko}} {{m|en|you}}.

===Pronoun===
{{ko-pos|pronoun}}

# {{lb|ko|colloquial}} [[you]]

====Usage notes====
* ????

--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:21, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

More like rare sense would be much more appropriate. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:24, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

There is a similar thing in Japanese: ユー can be understood as “you”. However, it is rather a Japanese transcription of the English word than a true loanword. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:18, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

That would actually be a better way to put it. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:29, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks but I meant "유" used in a Korean sentence, not as a transliteration. "ユー メイク ミー ハッピー" (yū meiku mī happī) can be written in Russian as well - ю мэйк ми хэппи (ju mɛjk mi xɛppi). The grammar didn't give any example just mention that "유" is sometimes used to replace 당신 or 너, which carry more meaning than just the English "you". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:27, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Now I'm getting more and more confused about this. 유 (to denote English second person pronoun) is not used in a colloquial context at least in South Korea but in readily available slogans, catchphrases, and something in the show biz. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:55, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. If this is not used, then I won't make it up. I was confused myself about that statement and I couldn't find any confirmation, so thank you for clarifying. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:05, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Extra note: I also consulted Daum and Naver search engines. And I have never spoted any colloquial usage. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:09, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Some words need fixing

Taeho, if you're interested in making fixing Russian entries with prefix кое- and suffixes -либо, -нибудь, -то better, pls have a go at some. I have done some but there are too many related terms, see also, etc. The pattern is the same:

1. кое- always carry a secondary stress.
2. -либо, -нибудь can be unstressed or carry a secondary stress.
3. -то is always unstressed.
4. the main stress mark should always be added
5. что is always što, except for "не́что" - "néčto"
6. manual transliteration still need stress marks on both Cyrillic and transliterations.
7. use "phon=" with irregular pronunications
8. genitive (sometimes accusative) -его/-ого need manual transliterations with "//" in the declension table.

I don't agree with some usage notes regarding -либо, -нибудь, -то but I don't want to address them now. [[кое-что]] can be used as a model or for copy/paste. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:22, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

I will do it when I come back home. I'll try my best. And please fix the usage notes. I tried my best addressing some concerns about stresses. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:31, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I'll get to those but I just need more analysis and checking some resources, perhaps a discussion. Not sure, if "sense of certainty" statements are correct. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:40, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

All I know is that many examples of sentences are needed in order to clarify the meanings. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:43, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Atitarev Relating to this issue, I also edited что, кое-, and -либо. Neatly organized. I think I need your evaluation. Anyways, I just want to make them friendly to readers. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:49, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Случайность

Тэхо, я случайно отменил твою правку, толстые пальцы, извини :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:09, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

И я улучшил эту статью. :) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

武夷岩茶

@Suzukaze-c Looks like I accidentally blew the zh-pron template in 武夷岩茶. I don't know which character is simplified or not. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:01, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Wrong conjugation

Hi Taeho,

Sorry but you seem to be absent-minded. Both грезить and окрошить had/have wrong conjugations, just the two I checked. Where did you get the conjugation for окрошить, anyway? You can't leave entries in this state, pls use {{rfinfl|lang=ru}}, if you're not sure. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:08, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that. And I found окрошить from [3]. It's a very obscure reference. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev Would there be a possibility that the feb-web.ru reference could be wrong? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:06, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I think it's wrong, at least for the modern conjugation but I can't say for sure. окрошить is an obscure verb, doesn't even appear in Russian National Corpus and doesn't appear in Google books as a modern Russian term. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:17, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Definitionless Korean entries

@Atitarev Are there any definition-less Korean entries that you need help with? I think I neglected the Korean entries for so long. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:34, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Just 아무렇다 from memory. If you go to Category:Korean entries needing definition and click on the first hangeul letter on the top, you should skip the hanja entries. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:48, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I am interested in filling Wiktionary:Frequency lists/Korean 5800 - from 2,000 to 3,000 as the next task. There are some SoP's and Sino-Korean words with multiple etymologies. Monosyllabic words are also difficult - multiple etymologies and possible multiple pronunciations but some are everyday, very common words. If in doubt as for long vowels and other irregularities, Naver is usually good but not always, e.g. 원룸 is suggested as [원룸] (phonetic hangeul) but should be [원눔], according to Shinji. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:58, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

To be honest, 원룸 can have both pronunciation. I've heard both varieties in real life. True story. My mother says [원눔] while my sister says [원룸]. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:02, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I can't comment much on this. Perhaps [원눔] is considered standard or more common? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:37, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

But the word 원룸 is a neologism, but yes, [원눔] would be more natural thus more common. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:48, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

It would be good to be able to force alternative pronunciations, though. I won't be able to do it but we can ask. User:Wyang seems to busy in the real life. @TAKASUGI Shinji Would you agree that 원룸 should have an alternative pronunciation - according to Naver and the native speaker here - Taeho? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

원눔 is the standard pronunciation because the sequence of /ㄴㄹ/ must be changed to /ㄴㄴ/ if there is a morpheme boundary (향신료) or /ㄹㄹ/ otherwise (논리) according to Article 20 of the Pronunciation Standard. Pronouncing /ㄹ/ after /ㄴ/ is a modern phenomenon among young people. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:27, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Possibly influenced by decades of English (read: American English) education in South Korea. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:29, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation request

@TAKASUGI Shinji While I try to make more Russian entries of Japanese cities and prefectures, I found that some Japanese entries of cities lack IPA pronunciation. For example: 札幌, 名古屋, 青森, etc. I don't know much about Japanese templates. I wonder if you can improve some pronunciation sections of Japanese entries. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:27, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I put the pronunciation in 那覇. I need your inspection. Thank you. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:43, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Shinji is not that active in the English Wiktionary. I doubt he will go through your edits, especially if it's a few but I wouldn't add pitch accent, unless you are certain or have a source, like you did in 那覇. How do you know it's Atamadaka type of accent? You can request but you can't use guesses. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:53, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I cross-referenced it to the Russian transliteration of Naha (На́ха) to conclude that it's an Atamadaka type of accent. And I learned that the Japanese city names with two morae (not syllables) are almost always Atamadaka unless if they're outside of Japan. But I can always delete it, to make it safe. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:00, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

It IS atamadaka. I have just checked with NHK pronunciation dictionary but I may not have time to check your other Japanese edits. Russian syllable stresses have little to do with the Japanese pitch accent. Japanese city place names are usually pronounced the way Russians feel natural or think they sound Japanese. To be on the safe side, you can just use {{ja-pron|KANA}} without "acc=", if you don't have references. Don't play with your reputation, no "guesses". :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

By the way, that edit from 那覇 is my first and likely the last pronunciation edit. I only put Descendants in the Japanese entries when I'm only sure of that Russian word has a well-confirmed stress mark in the Russian Wikipedia.

And I also confirmed atamadaka of 那覇 from my paper Japanese-Korean dictionary as well. Used for the first time in 4 years! Wow, my Japanese is extremely rusty. Anyways, thank you for the extra tip. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Two-mora proper nouns are usually atamadaka, and two-mora given names are always so even if they are derived from a non-atamadaka two-mora common noun, such as はな, うめ, とら. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:54, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Off topic here. What is the usual rule of thumb for genders of Japanese place names in Russian? All I see is that any place names that ends with -a is feminine, stressed -o is neuter, and everything else is masculine. This is my first and obviously inaccurate impression. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 12:58, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Please be careful

I've noticed many entries where you created noun forms with incorrect form codes in them. E.g. for букв (bukv), you changed it from unformatted genitive plural of буква (bukva) (which was correct, if improperly formatted) to formatted {{inflection of|буква||gen|s|lang=ru}}, which is incorrect (it's plural not singular). Another example is блага (blaga), which you created saying it's the dative singular of благо (blago) when it's actually genitive singular. There are various other entries with similar errors in them I've found -- probably 4 or 5 so far just in the а's and б's. Please be careful to ensure that the form codes are correct when you create or update an entry, thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 06:21, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Another example in the в's ... in вещи you changed existing inflection-of form codes from nom|p and acc|p (which were correct) to nom|s and acc|s (incorrect). Benwing2 (talk) 06:26, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to automate the verb and noun forms? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:27, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Of course there is a way but existing entries need to be fixed. Remember I told you not to waste your life on inflected forms? You should better bear with my grumpiness and do something serious, slow and careful, checking each edit. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Good thing I have been ignoring the inflected or conjugated forms for quite some time. Now I'm editing Japanese placenames in Russian with a help of the book, Словарь географических названий зарубежных стран. :) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:56, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm working on a script to automate creating noun forms. It's almost ready. I've already created most verb forms this way. This is how I found your errors -- the bot tries to insert a new entry for the proper inflection in the same section as the error rather than doing nothing, and I went through all cases where this happens and found the errors. Currently the bot is only working on gen sg, nom pl and gen pl, so errors that don't involve these three forms won't be caught this way. Benwing2 (talk) 22:51, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

short forms of adjectives

When you add a new adjective, check if it has short forms -- look at ruwikt, and it will often show them. You don't need to enter all the short forms any more, but just the appropriate code, e.g. a for то́рсовый or a* for форма́нтный (although they may be somewhat theoretical in the last case at least); it is specified near the top of the ruwikt definition. Benwing2 (talk) 07:03, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, but the Russian adjectives in ruwikt often have all the short forms being shown. I was too cautious whether I put the short forms or not with the latest adjective template. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 08:17, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean "often have all the short forms being shown"? Do you mean they display the short forms in full and you're not sure of the code to use, or they display theoretical short forms that don't really exist? In the latter case, just follow ruwiki (who in turn follows Zaliznyak) and we'll sort it out later. Benwing2 (talk) 10:49, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Until last year ruwikt showed theoretical short forms that don't really exist. So I was very freaked out of making mistakes, thus I avoided putting short forms in the adjective. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 11:56, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

OK. Maybe they still do ... e.g. I'm not a native speaker but it seems odd to me to have short forms for a relative adjective like форма́нтный. (@Atitarev Comments?) Cinemantique and Anatoli went through the most common 1,100 or so of the total 1700-1800 adjectives in enwikt with short forms and identified the ones where the short forms aren't really present. At some point we'll go through the rest of them and at some point I'll fix up the declensions to identify the forms as theoretical. Benwing2 (talk) 22:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

формантный doesn't have short forms in Russian. You can see that "формантен" is only used in Bulgarian in Google books. There's probably no fool-proof test for short forms. Yes, relative adjectives normally don't have short forms but they may acquire qualitative sense. Qualitative adjectives can be used with words "very", relative don't but "беременная" has short forms, even if one can't be "very pregnant" or "more pregnant than ...", go figure. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Some Korean lemmas

Hi Taeho,

Are you able to add a few red-linked from Wiktionary:Frequency lists/Korean 5800 between 2001 and 3000, please? (only includables, meeting CFI) I don't have access to my good dictionary at the moment. You can use {{ko-new}} for a fast creation (and check Naver for any pronunciation questions). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:55, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Sure thing. And please ping me often if I don't make any Korean lemma entries. Don't worry about me. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:56, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. What do you mean by "Don't worry about me"? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:00, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I might be suddenly not interested in making Korean lemmas. OTL --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:03, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

OK, there are only a few left - 개국, 미처, 가치관, 무려, 실태, 어머, 정성, 하긴, don't know why 환경오염 is there. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:10, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

환경오염 is definitely SoP even for a native Korean speaker like myself. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:12, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev By the way, 환경오염 can definitely be a legal term in this case. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

environmental pollution or 環境汚染／环境汚染 or 환경오염 (hwan'gyeong'oyeom) are not a dictionary-worthy terms, IMO. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:29, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Touche. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:34, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev Finished half of the requested entries here in this discussion. Any more by any chance? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 06:38, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Only those, thank you! I couldn't get good definitions for them. More will come for sure. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I will also try to put examples in those entries eventually. Mostly because the words are rather unfamiliar to non-Korean speakers. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:52, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Information on secondary stresses

Your guess on информбюро (инфо̀рмбюро́) was correct. This word appears indicated as such in Zaliznyak and Avanesov. You can find Avanesov here: [4] I can send you Zaliznyak if you want. Benwing2 (talk) 18:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Please do. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:09, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

We have no agreement yet on the use of secondary stress marks in the headword but they are required in the pronunciation section (if there is a secondary stress). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:14, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Long series of edits

Can you try to do things like this in one or two edits rather than 14? --WikiTiki89 16:48, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I'll try. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 16:53, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. --WikiTiki89 18:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Wikitiki89 While I'm not a big fan of long lists of derivations and related terms, there is no rule or convention on how many edits is "right". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:47, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev: It's not about what's rules. It's about trying not to pollute the edit history. And I emphasize trying, because I know that it is impossible to plan ahead perfectly. And I do think that this is an established convention. --WikiTiki89 21:00, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I disagree. There is no convention, even if multiple edits "pollute" edit history, watchlists, recent changes, etc. When there was a vote for my adminship years ago, someone raised the same question about my edits. The answer was, by Ruakh, that we don't have any rule or convention on this. There are various reasons for people editing in several goes. They shouldn't be afraid to do it, if that's the way they work because someone tells them off for this. Feel free to create a discussion or a vote, if you feel strongly about it.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:10, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev: Think of this as a personal request from me to KoreanQuoter. If he doesn't want to comply with it, I won't press it any further. I don't have to create a discussion or a vote for that. Now back to the hypotheticals, it's all about priorities: once an editor knows that there is some desire out there for shorter edit histories, he will likely prioritize his reasons for editing that way, and some of the reasons might have a higher priority than complying with this desire and will remain, while other reasons might have a lower priority and will be overcome. I suggest that you think of it that way as well. --WikiTiki89 21:29, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Wikitiki89: Is there a good idea of not showing series of edits? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:03, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't think I understand the question. --WikiTiki89 15:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

How about simply striking out the edits in the user's history? Mods can do that from what I know. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 16:11, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh you mean afterwards. Well striking them out does not help, since they are still listed, just stricken out. It's not really a big enough problem to do anything like that. All I'm asking is that if it is convenient for you, then please try to consolidate your edits. Maybe the developers will someday release a grouping feature that would allow edits by the same user to be grouped in histories. --WikiTiki89 16:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Maybe the developers will someday release a grouping feature that would allow edits by the same user to be grouped in histories.

I really like this idea. I think I'll propose this in Grease Pit. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:41, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@Wikitiki89 So, if I only have a minute free, I shouldn't edit because I think, I'll need to come back to this entry and edit it again and I will get into trouble because I promised to reduce the number of edits? Everyone has different priorities and patterns. We are volunteers here. I don't think it's even helpful at all to ask someone what they did in 14 edits to try to do the same in one edit. It just won't happen. Edit histories don't matter, the final result does. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 08:15, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev: If you have a minute free, you can consider that a high priority reason. Of course everyone has different priorities. That is why I'm not prioritizing for you. I'm just giving your more information to take into account in the prioritization. That information might not have any value to you, or might have some value to you, all that matters is you have the information. The whole point of it not being a requirement is that if it's not convenient for you, then you don't have consolidate your edits, but if it happens to be convenient, it is better to do so. --WikiTiki89 15:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I have never had any difficulty with long edit histories. Most of the time when I’m looking for something in the edit history, I have a particular section in mind, or a particular language, or a particular date, and it’s actually much easier to find what I want if edits are broken into separate edits. I remember about ten years ago, when I edited w:Bulgarian language on Wikipedia, and I made a great many corrections and stylistic changes, all in one single edit. The next day the admins were all over me, chewing me out for making global edits. They insisted that I must make my edits in small, distinct increments, so that they can easily be checked by others. When I do big global edits, the checkers go blind and have nervous breakdowns. Since that time I have tried to keep my edits reasonably small, but I still tend to include too much in a single edit. —Stephen ^(Talk) 09:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

In this particular case, the edits were all in the same section. I agree that when you are editing in different sections, or even if you are doing different tasks in the same section, it might actually be beneficial to break up the edits. --WikiTiki89 15:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I second that plea. As Wikitiki say, this is not about "rules" but about what is better and preferable. Furthermore, edit histories matter a lot, contrary to what was said above by someone else. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:25, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

I consider the above "pleas" a sort of mild bullying. Unfortunately, you can't do much about that. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:24, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I honestly don't see how it's any different from you and Benwing's request below for KoreanQuoter to work on more common terms first. Is it bullying just because you disagree with it? --WikiTiki89 15:08, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Guys, let's not make this into a complicated matter. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:39, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Careful with short forms

Careful with short forms ... forms in -ный aren't necessarily a*. You should look them up in ruwikt. I corrected гнусный (c'* not a*) and действенный (a*,a(1) rather than no forms); in both these cases they are in ruwikt. Also keep in mind that not all adjectives have short forms. E.g. I removed the short forms from дальневосточный. Sometimes ruwikt lists short forms that don't really exist; usually adjectives with short forms can be modified with "very", and attributive adjectives such as дальневосточный don't have short forms. If you're not sure, ping e.g. Anatoli; also try looking up the plural short form in Google Books, e.g. дальневосточны. Benwing2 (talk) 07:29, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, I'm improving, at least. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 07:39, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

You are and I really appreciate it. Thanks for adding those words from the frequency list. Benwing2 (talk) 08:04, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

I second the request to work with the common terms first, not rare or obscure, words that may improve your Russian (when you come across some words). As you see, native speakers may also struggle defining some rare words and they may not be terribly useful. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:22, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

By the way, I literally take random words out of context. You can say that I was sort of like a "free sprited" contributor in an extreme way. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

All requests should be meaningful and sincere, otherwise the value of them seems doubtful. Now the page for new Chinese entries is flooded with casual requests, copied from some wordlists. The more the requests are filled, the more are coming in, making the effort to fill them seem futile. Do you see what I mean? The wanted entries is now full of katakana transliterations of foreign words. Such a waste too.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Oh. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:47, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

short forms of participles

You created разветвлённый with both participle and adjective having short form type a(1). All participles in -ённый are actually of short form type b(2), while all participles in unstressed -анный and -енный have short form type a(2). When these participles turn into pure adjectives, they usually change short form to a(1). разветвлённый is such an example. Zaliznyak indicates this; it will say for example "1*a①, §8" meaning it's type a(1) as an adjective, and b(2) as a participle; or it will say "1*a①, §9" which means a(1) as an adjective, a(2) as a participle. Benwing2 (talk) 04:47, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Translate this?

Hi. I see you speak Korean and English. Could you please do me a huge favor and translate this YouTube comment for me from ko to en?

"썰매 안타도 괜찮나요?? 즈네스에서는 타야 플레이를 할 수 있는데 GBA판은 즈네스랑은 완전 다르네요 맵은 똑같지만 말입니다........ㅠ,.ㅠ"

In the context of this video. Philmonte101 (talk) 03:56, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Is it okay not to ride on the sled? You need to ride on it in Jeunesu (a video game stage?), although the GameBoy Advanced version of this is completely different from this; and the map (from both of the versions) is the same....... (face showing some futile situations).

(The Korean grammar looks rather horrible.) --KoreanQuoter (talk) 04:01, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Oh and I think Jeunesu might be some horrid attempt at a transcription of "SNES". Philmonte101 (talk) 05:09, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Found it. It's a Korean slang for the ZSNES emulator. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 05:24, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Translation request (again)

Hi. Could you please translate this passage for me from en->ko?

"Hi. I am an 18-year-old bisexual girl looking for a sweet, older girl to talk to. I do not speak Korean, but I'd like to learn the language. I am from the United States."

(I wouldn't ask what this is for though lol) Philmonte101 (talk) 19:57, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

"안녕하세요. 저는 나이가 좀 많은 여자와 대화하고 싶은 18살 양성애자 여자입니다. 한국어를 못하지만 배우고 싶습니다. 저는 미국에서 왔습니다." Kinda risky..... --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 22:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Korean surnames

KoreanQuoter, the Korean surname Jang can be written in Hangeul or four different Hanja. If one Korean person comes from a clan surnamed 張 and another comes from a clan surnamed 蔣, would they regard themselves having the same surname or different surnames? —Stephen ^(Talk) 01:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Different surnames. But be aware that Koreans with the surname 張 is divided into 10 clans of various origins. My surname of Korean origin is 김/金, but one of +20 clans with the surname 김/金. I have to say that in someway or another, Korean surname resembles the Scottish clan system a bit. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks. —Stephen ^(Talk) 01:52, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

shake

Hiya,

Are you able to check/add Korean translations for shake (verb), please, especially the first sense. I have some doubts about my own edit now and I hope it won't take so much time for you. No rush, though. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:20, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Seems ok without any problems. The only thing I want to inform is that 흔들리다 is transitive and 흔들다 is intransitive. But they are all literally "shake" in direct translation. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 01:15, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

So the current translation 흔들다 needs to be moved from the gloss "transitive: to cause to move" into "intransitive: to move from side to side" gloss but otherwise OK? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

"transitive: to cause to move back and forth" would be a better way to put it and everything else is ok. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Comments on your recent entries

1. I would recommend you not create any more adjective entries for awhile, because you don't seem to understand when short forms exist and when they don't. You can't rely on what Zaliznyak says in this regard, you have to look them up in Google Books. I tried to explain this to you in a previous comment but it may need more explaining. Attributive adjectives, for example, rarely have short forms, yet you added them to саманный and контрабандный. Simply leaving them out isn't necessarily any better.
2. I would also recommend that you try to avoid creating entries for really obscure words. Where, for example, did you get the words подтупить, сполоть, створять? сполоть is so obscure that it's only found in a couple of Russian-only online dictionaries, and I can't quite figure out what it means.

Thanks!

@Atitarev, Wikitiki89 Benwing2 (talk) 04:09, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Also, you need to be more careful with verbs as well. You created невзвидеть, for example, with a past passive participle невзви́денный that doesn't exist. Per Zaliznyak, there is no past passive participle (that's what the X inside of a square means), and the imperative is "затрудный", which basically means it doesn't exist either. If you're using Zaliznyak for verb reference, you should learn what all the symbols and notations mean so you don't continue to make mistakes. Benwing2 (talk) 04:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. Simplicity is the key. The less I know a language, the simpler and more verifiable my edits are in that language and it gives more certainty in what I'm doing. That's why I suggested to add more frequent words, if they are missing. If I add a term, which I don't understand or not so sure about, then I'd have to rely on others to check it and run the risk of making mistakes. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

At least the good news is that I'm making less mistakes. I'm more into making links in quote templates nowadays. I know that I suck at making new empty entries, so, yeah. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, as long as you're aware of this ... perhaps then you shouldn't create new blank entries? I'm having to go through and clean up all the mistakes you've made; I'd rather not have mistaken entries in the first place. Also, there are too many entries in Category:Requests for definitions in Russian entries -- 365 currently. Benwing2 (talk) 02:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Well, I think I should keep on cleaning the usage quotes, something that I can do the best. Forgive me that I made a huge fiasco in the first place. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 02:44, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. Benwing2 (talk) 01:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)