User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo/2018

gebruiken

Hi, I changed the labels here a bit. Context labels should only indicate the context in which something is used, not the meaning of the word. The definition should still be understandable if the labels are left out, which was not the case before. —Rua (mew) 11:47, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Rua All right. So I suppose {{q}} shouldn't be used for that purpose either? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 11:52, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Probably not. I just use plain brackets. —Rua (mew) 12:06, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

quattrocchi

Hi! You added some details to the quattrocchi lemma: https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=quattrocchi&diff=42738506&oldid=41909593 That ragazzon -- is this short for ragazzone or is it just a typo? --178.1.239.95 20:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Good spotting. It's a typo that I have now fixed. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:58, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, it was indeed a typo. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 11:06, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

The original reading is "ragazzo" by the way. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:31, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Headword exceptions

Hey. So, both headword templates obviously recognise sindikato and similar words as a participles. To fix that, there's an exceptions chart that you can add the words to to fix the problem. Just copy what I did and don't forget the plural form. Here's the Esperanto one too: Module:eo-headword/exceptions. — Algentem (talk) 12:03, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. Is that the usual solution? (I've created a section about this on WT:GP.) ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:05, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Rolled the topic in the Grease Pit back, as it's clearly the regular solution. Thanks again. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:08, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem. Yeah, it's the general solution. I'm not sure if we can make the module detect these in anyway. — Algentem (talk) 13:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Probably not, it is impossible to tell the POS based on the form alone. Maybe an optional POS parameter could force exceptions to the exceptions, but I'm not convinced they are needed. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:55, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Suffix entries for Ido

Hi. I was thinking about the entries for the Ido suffixes, and I dislike having the desinence in the entry. Since every single suffix can derive a multitude of words (adjectives, nouns, etc.) I propose we move all the Ido suffixes to neutral pages without any desinence like -al, -es, -esm, etc. (that's actually how they are written in Ido books like Talmay). I also dislike writing it as -et-, because then it looks like an interfix, which it is not. I propose we start to write etymologies like this instead: {{suffix|io|sana|es|alt2=esar}}. I want your input on this, what do you think? — Algentem (talk) 17:44, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm fine with basing the suffixes on smaller elements, though I think endings could also be included separately, like {{af|io|reda|-es|-ar}}. Changing the way suffixes are dealt with probably calls for a BP discussion though. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 10:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Algentem ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 10:34, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Lingo Bingo Dingo Cool, I can live with separating them. I can start a discussion over at the parlour, if you think it's needed. — Algentem (talk) 15:27, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Algentem Yes, it is probably required to have a BP discussion for this. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 11:55, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

-ij and -esk

Hey. I remember our talk about these two suffixes, and I stumbled upon this interesting article in the first year Progreso, page 573 (page 587 of the PDF). You can find it here. — Algentem (talk) 17:47, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, though I guess they simplified the system in the first decade of Ido? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 10:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Lingo Bingo Dingo Yeah. They merged the two shortly there after. I was thinking, maybe we could incorporate the information from that page on -ijar and sikijar. — Algentem (talk) 15:30, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

I saw you already expanded -ijar and -eskar, I have now also added a usage note. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Grundsow

LBD, I would like to thank you for editing my entry 'Grundsow'. I've been writing in Wikipedia for about a year now, but this was my first Wiktionary entry. Hopefully, I will learn more as I go along. Just one question, why the new category 'Requests for attention concerning Pennsylvania German'? Thanks, again.108.52.91.105 03:27, 3 March 2018 (UTC) Oops! Forgot to log in.Are1718 (talk) 03:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Are1718 Welcome. I added a question with the template {{attention}}, that's what made the new category appear. I wasn't entirely sure if grundsow was attestable in the language in question, but apparently it is. I will remove the template.

You may find this a useful page by the way. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 11:07, 3 March 2018 (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. 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 survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). 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 through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

sound post

Hello, sorry to disturb you but a Dutch translation has been added at sound post. Assuming that is correct, could you add the sense to stapel, please? Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 12:54, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, it is correct (though I didn't know that sense) and  done. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:02, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you :D Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 13:09, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Your Babel

Hi. I'm curious about what made you disagree with that assessment. I'm often tempted to switch to en-3 on my own page, and yet I don't think my English is better than yours; so maybe I'm overestimating myself? :p Per utramque cavernam 21:20, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

It's due to a medical issue. To be honest, I don't think others' evaluations of their language skills should impact yours to any significant degree. Just use the level you think is best. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 06:44, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I think you're both en-3. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 19:29, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

formatting help

Hey, I added the noun form of beding and tried to note the common idiom of "onder geen beding". Is there an established way to do this (formatting and template-wise)? --Azertus (talk) 09:56, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

@Azertus You could either add it as a usage example (you can use {{ux}} for this) or include it in a usage note (typically with the Dutch in italics and the translation in the double quotes under Special characters > Symbols). ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 09:59, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

admin

Hey. Apparently you haven't annoyed anyone here yet. Wannt become an admin? --XY3999 (talk) 11:16, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@XY3999 Thank you for the offer, but I don't intend to accept right now. I currently don't really find a need for them. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:05, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

It's true. I find most admins needless too. --XY3999 (talk) 10:25, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

So that's why you went on that desysopping spree. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 10:57, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Just to keep people on their toes. --XY3999 (talk) 11:21, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

The opposite works too - I was going to nominate this dude as he works reeeeeally hard, but as I know he's really wanting to get adminship I'm not gonna nom him, so he tries even harder. The result, of course, is a greater Wiktionary. --XY3999 (talk) 12:11, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@XY3999 Spoken like a true CEO. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:26, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I like to enforce civility as I go about my business. --XY3999 (talk) 16:51, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Chinese vrijwilliger

Hi. Is this a real thing? Per utramque cavernam 22:05, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, apparently so. I had never heard of it, but it seems that it is a common expression in Belgian Dutch. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 10:58, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Confirming! Pretty common here. --Azertus (talk) 19:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Accents for Middle Dutch

When giving Middle Dutch forms, could you also place accents on long a, e and o? Use ^ when it had a long vowel in Old Dutch (from Proto-Germanic ē, ai and au respectively), and ¯ when it had a short vowel that was lengthened in open syllables. See WT:ADUM and w:Middle Dutch for more. —Rua (mew) 11:11, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Sure. So the accents are also applied to digraphs? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 11:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, because the distinction applies there too: hēeft vs êen. —Rua (mew) 12:14, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

havenen

When a verb is derived from a noun, can you do it like I did, with {{affix|nl|haven|-en|id2=denominative}}? This formation is actually descended from an Old Dutch/Proto-Germanic derivation method. —Rua (mew) 11:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Malay vs Indonesian

Discussion moved to Beer parlour/2018/September.

@Lingo Bingo Dingo Would you mind if I were to move this entire discussion to Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2018/September#Malay as an ISO 639 macrolanguage? I'm thinking of reviving the discussion over there. KevinUp (talk) 15:20, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser All comments have been moved to the beer parlour. KevinUp (talk) 14:17, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Ido suffixes

Hey. I finally came around making it. Maybe you can share your opinion: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2018/September#Ido_suffixes. — Algentem (talk) 05:50, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

vingard

Hiya, you returned the magic dot there that I banished.

I removed it because it was literally the only word of two that had it, and since I'm processing wiktionary programatically I found it more fitting to fix up two entries than to add a workaround in my tools for it.

Would you be so kind and revert the revert?

C0rn3j (talk) 06:57, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

@C0rn3j Do you mean it is currently the only word in Norwegian (Bokmål) that has it? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 07:02, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Bokmål and Nynorsk, yes. C0rn3j (talk) 07:14, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I have reverted it, though I generally don't think adding/removing full stops is a good use of time (outside etymologies or notes). @C0rn3j ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 07:18, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

"First attested" in etymologies

There is already a template {{defdate}} that is used to indicate when something is first attested, but it's used with senses, because different senses can have arisen at different times. The first sense to arise is of course the one for which the word itself was created, or said another way: the word is as old as its oldest sense. This might be something to look into. I'm not sure what the established practice is for senses that were created in Middle Dutch or even earlier, but I suppose it could be used for those too. —Rua (mew) 13:14, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I sometimes use that template, but it's often tedious to weed it out the dates for all the senses, especially if it is a relatively uncommon one. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

You can provide dates where you know them, and leave it out otherwise, can't you? —Rua (mew) 13:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, though in some cases that leaves the oldest sense unclear. And in some cases the oldest sense is going to be a hapax. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:29, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

There's {{rfdate}} that you can use as well. —Rua (mew) 13:30, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

engang

I happened to notice this after doing another quote and had a go at the translation. I am puzzled by the / breaks though. DonnanZ (talk) 12:03, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

@Donnanz Oh, I often use / breaks when adding multiple lines of poetry as a quote. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:13, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't realise it's from a poem (On sleeping in a field). Anyway, I hope the translation makes sense. DonnanZ (talk) 12:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

@Donnanz The translation makes sense to me, and it is more or less how I understood the poem. I will probably add more quotations later in order to coalmine en gang. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:31, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Wonderful. Correct my translation of the title to "On falling asleep in a field". I'm going to do a Bokmål entry for sovne. DonnanZ (talk) 12:39, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

• The Karin Bang quote: it was definitely "lov å gi" and not "lov å gå"? DonnanZ (talk) 14:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

  @Donnanz, yes, definitely "gi". [1] ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 07:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, a little more context helped too.  Done. DonnanZ (talk) 10:26, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@Donnanz You're welcome, and thank you for translating them. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 08:07, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Dutch dialects

Hi, I have just got fascinated with the dialect system that Dutch possesses and hopefully you have the knowledge for what I ponder:

How strong are dialects mainly spoken in the Netherlands? Have you heard someone speaking one that you couldn't or found really hard to understand? Is there any fine line between speaking a dialect and standard Dutch? Do they often mix their pronunciation and vocabulary of their local accent with standard Dutch or switch between the dialect and the standard as if two different languages? More specifically, when referring to a 'Brabantian dialect', do they mean speaking Dutch with that regional tinge or are they talking about a different convention altogether?

Sorry for the exhaustion of questions but I'm really can't get my head over this! Thank you and houdoe! (Or should I say doei!) — ^{oi yeah nah mate} amazingJUSSO ... [ɡəˈdæɪ̯]! 10:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Dialectology isn't exactly my thing, so you would get more information from asking somebody else. Anyway, dialect strength is rather variable, but the major dialect groups and major city dialects don't seem to be going anywhere, but many smaller ones will probably die out soon. Appreciation for one's local dialect is quite variable as well. For most of your other questions, the answer is mostly "it depends". Most speakers will switch to either standard Dutch (usually with a local accent) or a regiolect when talking to people from a different area so you don't encounter a lot of dialectal usage, but I reckon I'd have a hard time understanding somebody talking in Dutch Low German, Limburgish or West Flemish. Most people, certainly linguists, would use "Brabantian dialect" to mean a local Brabantian dialect with a phonology, grammar and some vocabulary of its own or to mean the Brabantian dialect group or some subsection of it, though some people might use it loosely for standard Dutch with a Brabantian accent. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 10:25, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

dinosaurusveer

Hi. Shouldn’t this word have /v/ rather than /f/, i.e. /di.noːˈsɑu̯.rʏsˌveːr/ rather than /di.noːˈsɑu̯.rʏsˌfeːr/, or is the difference really neutralized in this position? I would have thought not. – Krun (talk) 12:15, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@Krun It would undergo progressive devoicing in most if not all dialects. I would actually be surprised if some dialect still had a voiced fricative in this position. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:22, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

The realization is one thing, but since this is phonemic representation (/…/) rather than phonetic ([…]), this -veer should still have the same starting phoneme as veer, even if everyone realizes it as [f], right? Wouldn’t [f] just be a predictable allophone of /v/ in this environment? – Krun (talk) 13:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@Krun Would you also suggest that we transcribe /doːd/ rather than /doːt/? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 14:11, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

I don’t really know. I suppose if it’s universally devoiced it probably should be /f/, now that I think about it. I think it’s something we should think about and set a clear policy on, based on sound scholarship and consistency. I know different models have been proposed by scholars for mapping between morphemes, phonemes and phones, but we just need to make an editorial decision like any other dictionary. Wiktionary:About Dutch doesn’t currently have a very in-depth treatment of pronunciation, though it makes it clear that the phonemic transcription is meant to be supradialectal. Different dialectal realizations could then, I suppose, be generated from this phonemic representation. Presumably, it should also cover historical pronunciation (after 1500), since the ==Dutch== header covers that. I think I actually agree with you on merging phonemes if they are consistently pronounced the same in a certain environment, e.g. word-finally (its main benefit is in my opinion that it simplifies the conversion to phonetic representation somewhat), but in that case I think we need to be sure it is actually consistently so, e.g. across all dialects covered by ==Dutch==, also historically, and independently of preceding or following words. For example, I would be curious to know whether /doː(d~t)/ always pronounced with an unvoiced consonant, even in running speech when followed by a word starting with a vowel or some voiced consonant? Consider e.g. these lines:

De dood is gekomen,

De dood in mijn dromen,

I know this has been a problem with some transcriptions of Icelandic (my mother tongue), where word-final devoicing has been indicated based on pronunciation of the words in isolation, but actually the consonants in question are pronounced voiced in most situations, chiefly being devoiced sentence-finally or utterance-finally. The system I have used for Icelandic transcriptions here on Wiktionary does not indicate this optional/conditional devoicing, and I find this more descriptive and useful. I do know, however, that Dutch and German have a much stronger devoicing rule that seems to me to be complete word-final consonant devoicing (excluding nasals and liquids), but since I have not studied this aspect in depth and have limited knowledge of the languages and hardly know anything about the various dialects I must leave it to those more familiar with them (such as yourself) to figure this out. Perhaps I should bring it up in the Beer Parlor. – Krun (talk) 15:09, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, uninflected <dood> is always pronounced [doːt] before vowels. A good reason to present merges phonemically is that not all consonants are equally affected by progressive devoicing, e.g. /b/ and /d/ undergo final devoicing but hardly ever progressive devoicing, so it is useful to show the distinction in phonemic transcriptions as well.

Final devoicing for plosives and fricatives is indeed very strong, only not fully assimilated loanwords are exempt from it. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 15:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Translations into Dutch

Hello. Do you look at Category:Requests for translations into Dutch? I've added two requests recently (nonfree and thanks in advance), but if nobody is taking care of them that's not much use. Per utramque cavernam 13:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Only very irregularly. I find a lot of the requests in there either too technical or somewhat pointless. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:32, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that's a problem. Thanks for adding the two I mentioned though! Per utramque cavernam 15:16, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

@Per utramque cavernam if you want to know if anybody checks those category, it would be more useful to ask the people who frequently add terms to translation tables. I think DrJos and Mnemosientje do that somewhat often. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

By the way, boondock is a good example of a useless, too technical translation request for verb sense 1. It is a regional term with a hyperspecific meaning, so it is a poor host for a translation table in the first place. The Dutch "translations" for the noun are no great shakes either, they mean "countryside" and "outside". ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 12:45, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

All right, I've shamelessly removed all the requests that seemed pointless to me. (Notifying Rua, Mnemosientje, Lingo Bingo Dingo, Azertus, Alexis Jazz, DrJos): Do you want to have a go at the rest? Per utramque cavernam 19:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Per utramque cavernam I did clickbait (clickbait, also added entry), boot up (opstarten), lovesick (vlinders in je buik, I think that's accurate?) and turn out (ergens op uitlopen, I think that's accurate?). Some confuse me. get dressed, "je aankleden"? Or just aankleden. I don't know. Alexis Jazz (talk) 20:16, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Some of these are idiom and not single words. They wouldn't be in your standard Dutch dictionary. "nonfree" is translated as "betaald" 'paid' of "niet gratis"; "thanks in advace" is tranlated as "bij voorbaat dank". --DrJos (talk) 08:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

keelband

keel gives an etymology showing that Old Dutch had a short vowel here, from an also-short Proto-Germanic vowel. That indicates Middle Dutch ē. —Rua (mew) 21:42, 28 December 2018 (UTC)