Template talk:izh-decl/kärpäin

Declension variants

@Thadh: this declension corresponds to Junus' standard based on Soikkola dialect, but with a difference for NOM:PL (see Konkova "Nominativa, monikko"). To handle this I have two suggestions: 1. indicate -st as an option for NOM:PL; 2. indicate that this declension is based on Soikkola dialect. — This unsigned comment was added by KirillW (talk • contribs).

@KirillW: I believe this is just Junus' standard language's declension, isn't it? I thought we were going for the Grammatika variants as main and giving dialectal inflections separatly. It doesn't seem to always correspond to Soikkola, by the way, compare hepoin and heppoin (Junus doesn't allow gradation in nominals ending in "-in"). By the way, don't forget to sign your comments, otherwise the ping doesn't come through Thadh (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thadh: You're right, let's focus on Junus' standard. But we likely need to give somewhere a visible indication of what kind of Ižoran language it is, to make it clear that it is neither "pure" Soikkola, nor Ala-Laukka dialect. Is there a place to keep these todos like creating "dialect-specific" declension tables?

Thank you for reminder, this is a habit to build --KirillW (talk) 18:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@KirillW:: I'm not sure how to describe that the declension table isn't dialectal (I think that's just a naturally assumed something). We could perhaps give something like "Standard declension of...", but I think it's too wordy. As for to-dos, we could use User:Thadh/Ingrian for that (it's useless now anyhow). Thadh (talk) 20:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thadh: I have an idea: there might be a description similar to WT:AIZH, where it would be explained, what the "standard" language is, and how it is different from the dialects. The main difference from the content in WT:AIZH would be the focus on the explanation of Junus' approach, as opposed to the overview of existing approach. Junus gives quite a lot of background for his decisions in Grammatikka, so it shouldn't be a problem. The declension tables could have a link to this page. One thing that it's not only declensions, but the dictionary form itself might rise questions as Konjkova's and Chernyavskij's Soikkilan forms (like orrava/orraava) are relatively widespread on the Internet. So my question is if you know the "wiktionary-standard" way to provide a link to such explanation in a dictionary entry. --KirillW (talk) 20:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@KirillW: We could do something like the Finnish declension tables (see {{fi-decl-nainen}}), by linking the (in this case) kärpäin or type 1 to that page. Alternatively, we could make a note (like the one about the accusative) saying something like "For more information on Ingrian declensions, see..." or "For more information on Ingrian standardisation, see..." Thadh (talk) 20:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Spelling

@Thadh: I've noticed you had added "-st" ending for partitive. Junus occasionally uses it for plural nominative (which is normal for Soikkola dialect, as I mentioned above), but I don't remember seeing it used for partitive (which would be normal for Ala-Laukka dialect). Anyway this doesn't seem to be in his standard, so I think it shouldn't be in Wikitionary standard as well. The additional forms for essive also look weird and I can't find them in Junus --KirillW (talk) 20:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@KirillW: See p. 39 of Grammatikka: Where he explains the partitive, he gives two forms, kärpäistä and kärpäist. I vaguely remember searching for and finding some uses of partitive ending in -st, but I may have confused the partitive and elative. Anyway, I may misunderstand what he means when he gives extra forms in brackets (it seems he gives the Soikkola form kervehet, too), but since it's widely used in some Soikkola dialects (see both Nirvi's and Chernyavskij's renditions), I found it plausible these where standard and in free variation, like the essive forms. Was I mistaken?

On essive, see p.44: "Essiivan loppu ain ono vokalan pitkittymä + -n, tali -nna, -nnä." It's difficult to search for forms in a specific case, so I can't give a quote just like that, but this seems to point to free variation. Thadh (talk) 20:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thadh: Interesting! Thank you for the pointers, I'll check with Mehmet if has any idea what Junus had meant. On forms with h the idea, I guess, that in Soikkola dialect this is valid (see my example with "lampaan/lampahan" in https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User_talk:Thadh#I%C5%BEoran%2FIngrian_language_project). Might be that in this section he shows some dialectal forms, whereas the section on declension (IV. PAINUTOSTIIPAT) uses only "kirjakeeli" forms.

The same probably applies to essive forms, but I haven't ever seen "long vowel + n" in texts, so I have to ask Mehmet where could this come from. --KirillW (talk) 20:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@KirillW: We'll have to wait then. In any case, removing the forms isn't too difficult, so that's not a problem. See also the other templates User:BengkelBerkah05 and I created ({{izh-decl/patsas}}, {{izh-decl-S/patsas}}, {{izh-decl/kana}} and {{izh-decl/koira}}). Thadh (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thadh: Upon reading about the patsas type I'm know more inclined to think that while Junus mostly gives the "standard" forms, sometimes he includes the dialectal variants, but doesn't explicitly specify what these are. I haven't found patsaan for essive (which you put as an option to the "standard" declension table). Instead I see patsaan (GEN, standard) vs patsahan (GEN, Soikkola) and patsaanna (ESS, standard) vs patsahaan (ESS, Soikkola). In this case we see the "long vowel + n" form specifically for Soikkola dialect. Anyway I'll get back with more details on this on Sunday. --KirillW (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)