Talk:luud

Declension of luud (type külm, generated alternatives in plurals are false!!!)

Following Estonian declension plurals of luud (ÕS type 22i/külm, d-ø gradation) are problematic and grammatically considered false:

• illative: luuisse
• inessive: luuis
• elative: luuist
• allative: luuile
• adessive: luuil
• ablative: luuilt
• translative: luuiks

None of those plurals exist for the lemma, are considered orthographically incorrect (likely assumed to be mistaken form of the "luu" instead of the "luud").

Noteworthy here, that luisse; luis; luist; luile; luil; luilt; luiks - are correct plural forms for respective declensions of "luu" (typically used and perceived as poetic forms) - making these conflictious/misleading and introduce ambiguity.

This is why I initially had copyed the solution for the declensions from laud (which in turn actually should be type 22u - meaning that there's similar issue with that lemma as well).

As of now, even though declension type (22i) is selected correctly, and by the dictionary, given autogenerated template results propose false forms to whomever is seeking to rely on that table (note that the forms under question aren't present in the sõnaveeb nor in the ÕS either).

Personally at least I'd see suggesting multiple false ortographic forms greater error than providing a false declension type (as a temporary workaround).

Does anyone know, is there a way to override or give more specific instructions to the template, so that given problematic renditions would be removed?

In any case, it's the script that needs to be fixed - otherwise someone simply will come and "fix/upgrade the formatting to the modern standards", not noticing the problems, and reintroducing the issue. 91.129.106.5 12:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Olen nõus, et mall peaks tegelikku kasutust näitama, kuid vale malli ja muuttüübi lisamine ei ole lahendus. Kui käänamismalle toitvat moodulit muuta, siis rakendub see kõikidele selle muuttüübiga sissekannetele. Vastasel juhul peaks hakkama käsitsi kõik läbi käima ja korrektse malli lisama. Joonas07 (talk) 16:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Olen nõus (polnud ettenägelik lihtsalt).

Hetkel ehk lihtsalt vastav eraldiseisev kasutusalane märkus lisada? 91.129.106.5 17:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Eemaldasin prg üldse ära lühikesed mitmused, kui astmevahelduses esineb kadu ja tüvi lõppeb täishäälikuga. Joonas07 (talk) 18:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Ilmselt tuleks sammuti ka "laud" käänded üle vaadata.

--

kiitused "just" tõlgete toimetamisse (ühel puhul ei lasknud lisada; teisel läks endal mõte sassi). 91.129.106.5 17:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)