User talk:CodeCat

Archives: 2009-2010 · 2011 · 2012
Start a new discussion

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
se templates with module errors220:00, 29 June 2016
Etymology languages' parents120:14, 28 June 2016
Irish verb forms114:56, 28 June 2016
Template fur-noun021:11, 26 June 2016
Proto-Finnic *rr220:31, 26 June 2016
Emmer revert216:17, 24 June 2016
Why did you revert my edit on Dehnu's article?709:14, 23 June 2016
miegen222:44, 22 June 2016
boa1113:33, 20 June 2016
-yéh₁- not in Category:Proto-Indo-European verb-forming suffixes, then -éh₁yeti?615:57, 19 June 2016
suffix vs infix114:28, 19 June 2016
Writing from the mobile113:23, 19 June 2016
[https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/pr%CC%A5s%E1%B8%B1%C3%A9ti&oldid=prev&diff=38855820 pr.sk'éti]113:23, 19 June 2016
Etymology stubs016:28, 18 June 2016
en-verb template023:37, 17 June 2016
Wetten002:05, 17 June 2016
-izo suffix in Latin?601:01, 5 June 2016
{{temp|da-adj}}110:38, 2 June 2016
Translations of a Book-Title720:59, 1 June 2016
Gothic calques -- t:calque does not automatically add to cat:Gothic calques? 923:52, 30 May 2016
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page

se templates with module errors

Since you seem to have nothing else to do ;-), you might want to fix these- they've been in CAT:E for almost a week now. And while you're at it, could you take a look at Template:pl-decl-noun-irreg? The last person who worked on it has no clue about allowing for the template page in the module. Thanks!

Chuck Entz (talk)14:02, 28 June 2016

I haven't forgotten about them, they'll be fixed eventually.

CodeCat14:56, 28 June 2016
 

Done.

CodeCat20:00, 29 June 2016
 

Etymology languages' parents

CodeCat, you edited Module:etymology and said: "Etymology languages' parents are always languages (or another etymology language! See the data module!) but never families"

This edit broke a few entries that were just fine before:

  • Pérgamo -> contains the code "pregrc" (parent: "qfa-sub" = substrate)
  • balsa -> contains the code "und-ibe" (parent: "qfa-sub" as above)
  • zarza -> contains the code "und-ibe"
  • zurrapa -> contains the code "und-ibe"
  • ܚܡܘܪܬܐ -> contains the code "MIr." (parent: "ira" = Iranian family)
  • पुस्तक -> contains the code "MIr."
--Daniel Carrero (talk)19:39, 28 June 2016

Hmm that's quite strange. So apparently these aren't really languages, but they also don't form a subset of another language like etymology languages normally do. They're like half-languages in limbo.

CodeCat20:14, 28 June 2016
 

Irish verb forms

Would MewBot be interested in creating entries for Irish verb forms generated by the Irish verb inflection-table templates?

Aɴɢʀ (talk)14:17, 28 June 2016

Not at the moment.

CodeCat14:56, 28 June 2016
 

Template fur-noun

Hi, I was watching this template "fur-noun" concerning the writing form of Friulian nouns and their plural. There is surely a mistake when this plural form takes the final -s, first because in Italian no final -s is required in the plural, then also because often the plural form in dialectal nouns remains unchanged, or in the feminine gender, takes different endings. Best regards,

Better, see this link: http://www.lucabaradello.it/furlan_ingles.html , where we can see (I'm Emilian and therefore not expert in Friulian language, sorry...) that plural forms can end both in -s, or in -j or in -i. Thank you,
Glo (talk)07:23, 26 June 2016

Proto-Finnic *rr

Your inflection module seems to produce past participles like *surrut for verbs like *sure-, similarly essives like *noorra for nominals like *noori. This is incorrect — *rn > rr was a post-PF analogical generalization (probably mainly based on roots showing the sound changes *ln > *ll and *sn > *ss). Retained forms include e.g. Estonian surnud, older Finnish nuorna, and all cases with *-rn- as a part of the root (such as *kaarna > Fi. kaarna).

Tropylium (talk)18:36, 26 June 2016

Fixed.

CodeCat18:47, 26 June 2016

Thank you!

Tropylium (talk)20:31, 26 June 2016
 
 

Emmer revert

Edited by author.
Last edit: 16:12, 24 June 2016

I think it is obvious, even to an untrained eye, that German Eimer and Dutch emmer are related. There is also Low German Ammel which is also probably related to the afore-mentioned two. And then there is also West Frisian amer.

According to Duden.de, Eimer is derived from Middle High German eim(b)er, einber; from Old High German eimber, eimbar.

I mean, it would be an almost impossible coincidence if all of the above words were not related.

Mountebank1 (talk)16:08, 24 June 2016

They are related, but your use of templates implied that the Dutch term was from German, even if the text in the entry itself didn't say so. You should probably be more careful with the categorisation.

CodeCat16:09, 24 June 2016

Yep, I totally overlooked that. But anyway, I was just taking a break before adding the rest of the Germanic cognates.

Mountebank1 (talk)16:17, 24 June 2016
 
 

Why did you revert my edit on Dehnu's article?

Sanksrit clearly attests that the original word was amphikinetic via preserving its neuter u-declension, so what reason do you have for this?

80.192.8.21314:55, 20 June 2016

Amphikinetic nouns normally have o-grade of the suffix in the nominative, so you'd expect *déh₂now ~ dh₂n̥wés instead.

CodeCat16:41, 20 June 2016

Fair enough, but Dehnu clearly was a noun, so it has to have some form of declension. I'll investigate the Celtic form and see what comes up.

80.192.8.21310:06, 21 June 2016

And can you explain why *peku doesn't have an o-grade despite being amphikinetic?

80.192.8.21312:05, 21 June 2016

I can't.

CodeCat17:45, 21 June 2016

Well, there you go! Now if you don't mind, I'll be putting the inflection table back up, based on both the Celtic and Sanskrit forms.

80.192.8.21320:25, 22 June 2016
 
 
 
 
 

Is miegen via Low Saxon (per the gem-pro etymon) or just via Middle Dutch? How would one tell the difference? Etymologiebank doesn't really indicate it, but then again, it's not a perfect resource.

Kleio (t · c)19:38, 20 June 2016

Dutch has ī > ij, so if a form retains ī it's from some other language. Saxon would be a likely candidate.

CodeCat20:45, 20 June 2016

Alright, I edited the entry. Thanks!

Kleio (t · c)22:44, 22 June 2016
 
 

Why odes the Finnish word "boa" inflect like "kala" although "koira" is specified? It should go like boa-boan-boaa-boaan-boat-boien (boain)-boia-boiin.

Hekaheka (talk)16:01, 31 May 2016

It's treating -oi- as a diphthong, which means it gets -hin in the plural. And there is a rule in the code: "-- If the plural stem ends in a vowel + i, then replace the i with j".

CodeCat18:27, 31 May 2016

The rule is wrong.

Hekaheka (talk)21:21, 31 May 2016

Should I remove it then?

CodeCat22:13, 31 May 2016

Yes. I browsed through the 5400 koira-type nominals we have and did not spot a word to which this rule would apply.

Hekaheka (talk)03:47, 1 June 2016

There's probably only one word with which something like that happens: poika, but it can be handled by assuming ik-j gradation. Also, there are dialects in which e.g. reikä would be inflected like reikä-reijän-reikää-reikään-reijät-reikien-reikiä-reikiin but if needed, also they can be handled using k-j gradation:


Inflection of User talk:CodeCat/boa/reply (5) (Kotus type 10/koira, k-j gradation)
nominative reikä reijät
genitive reijän reikien
partitive reikää reikiä
illative reikään reikiin
singular plural
nominative reikä reijät
accusative nom. reikä reijät
gen. reijän
genitive reijän reikien
reikäinrare
partitive reikää reikiä
inessive reijässä reijissä
elative reijästä reijistä
illative reikään reikiin
adessive reijällä reijillä
ablative reijältä reijiltä
allative reijälle reijille
essive reikänä reikinä
translative reijäksi reijiksi
instructive reijin
abessive reijättä reijittä
comitative reikineen
Hekaheka (talk)03:55, 1 June 2016
 

The difficulty is that I wrote the module so that these rules apply to all declension types. So if I remove it, it will break others as well. I'll set up some tracking to see which other terms currently are affected by the rule, and then make it type-specific.

See Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:tracking/fi-nominals/i-j and Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:tracking/fi-nominals/h.

CodeCat13:05, 1 June 2016
 
 
 
 
 

Reverted because it doesn't form verbs (stricto sensu). If that, then Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/-éh₁yeti shouldn't be cathegorised either in Category:Proto-Indo-European verb-forming suffixes?

Sobreira (talk)14:15, 19 June 2016

But that suffix does form verbs.

CodeCat14:16, 19 June 2016

So -yéh₁- is for declension? And -éh₁yeti for deverbal verbs?

Sobreira (talk)14:20, 19 June 2016

The optative is part of the inflection of verbs, yes, at least by late PIE. There are some indications that it was originally a derivational suffix too, though, but it was integrated into verb paradigms as the optative mood in all languages, so the PIE sitation is not reconstructable in all details.

The -éh₁yeti suffix is basically synonymous with -éh₁ti, it formed stative verbs from roots or (perhaps later?) adjective stems.

CodeCat14:24, 19 June 2016

OK, I simply took it from the definition "of the athematic stative verbal suffix" for -éh₁yeti. Shouldn't be -éh₁yeti better defined then as "1) Creates stative (or durative) thematic verbs from ¿(?perfective¿)? roots. 2) Creates stative (or durative) thematic verbs from nominals." like -éh₁ti, or "Thematic(-producing) variant of -éh₁ti,"?

Sobreira (talk)14:45, 19 June 2016

Perhaps just {{synonym of|-éh₁ti|lang=ine-pro}}?

CodeCat14:46, 19 June 2016
 
 
 
 
 

suffix vs infix

Should both -h₃onh₂- and -yéh₁- either NOT be cathegorised as suffixes but infixes or be represented as -h₃onh₂ and -yéh₁ without "-"?

Sobreira (talk)14:25, 19 June 2016

They are suffixes in the sense that they attach at the end of a stem. Infixes attach inside a stem. The final - just means that the suffix is a stem itself and needs further inflections to form a complete word. By themselves, these suffixes don't form complete words.

CodeCat14:28, 19 June 2016
 

Writing from the mobile

By the way, would it be legit to write straight redirects from alternative notations to created entries v.g. (not real) *aguos- > *agwos- once they are mentioned sourced in the correspondent section? Sobreira

Sobreira (talk)02:26, 19 June 2016

Yes that would be fine.

CodeCat13:23, 19 June 2016
 

[https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/pr%CC%A5s%E1%B8%B1%C3%A9ti&oldid=prev&diff=38855820 pr.sk'éti]

Sorry about the mess. I have just lost control of my mouse cursor and I can't move it and write the PIE diacritics above. I changed the layout for the etym so the template categorises the entry in both pref and suffix. I actually brought it from posco. The display is almost the same but with meanings so, why is that wrong?

Sobreira (talk)01:57, 19 June 2016
  • preḱ- is a root, not a prefix, so it shouldn't be categorised as one. Also, tr= is for transliterations.
CodeCat13:23, 19 June 2016
 

Etymology stubs

I noticed we have an {{etystub}} template. Could I interest you in starting using that instead of {{rfe}} for entries such as pago where you are able to add some reasonable etymology information, and just need verification/sources? This would help a lot in telling actually problematic etymologies apart from regular etymology backlog work (and would, IMO, look neater on the page as well).

Tropylium (talk)16:27, 18 June 2016

en-verb template

Hi. Could I draw your attention to Wiktionary:Grease_pit#en-verb.2C_past_ptc2, since it seems like your area of expertise? Thanks.

Equinox 23:37, 17 June 2016

Why the rollback, the Modern English verb to wetten (nowadays an inchoative form of the verb to wet), by all means, appears to be derived from the Middle English verb weten and the Old English verb wǽtan; wǽtan. However, after much thought, I guess, now I see why the rollback may be justified, because to wetten is just a Modern English inchoative/ergative form derived from the verb to wet.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/w%C4%93tijan%C4%85

Mountebank1 (talk)01:31, 17 June 2016

-izo suffix in Latin?

Hi CodeCat. I'm not totally comfortable with the surface analysis of a Latin -izo suffix for colaphizo, dogmatizo, citharizo, and aromatizo. These are existing Greek words which are used only in Late Latin and after. There may be some exceptions in the broader set, however, which also include: iudaizo, scandalizo, allegorizo, sabbatizo, thesaurizo, organizo, catechizo, evangelizo, anathematizo, prophetizo, and baptizo. Prophetizo is Greek, but it is not `good Greek;' and if I wanted to cast stones I might say organizo and allegorizo are not Greek at all. I wonder if a reasonable touchstone is the -esque suffix in English, which now can be used for non-French stems. -izo does not have this property in Latin. While I can't think of a good reason not directly to link Greek counterparts at a minimum where the latter exist and predate the Latin, I didn't want to edit, because you usually have better reasons than I have.

Isomorphyc (talk)16:12, 3 June 2016

An exception fell out of my note as I was writing it, leaving my first sentence slightly incorrect: citharizo is used by Nepos; I believe it is a very rare example of an -izo verb in Classical Latin.

Isomorphyc (talk)16:14, 3 June 2016

I'm not very familiar with Ancient Greek compared to Latin, so I'll continue to add -izo as a suffix for now. Once I've gone through all the verbs, I'd welcome it if you could check the -izo verbs for any Greek ones they might have been borrowed from. We can see if there are any that are left over.

CodeCat16:24, 3 June 2016

At the same time, I'll add Greek entries where it seems applicable, if I happen to get to this early. Feel free to overwrite if you are working very systematically, and we can sort it out in the end. I suspect the real question will be where an eventual -izo Latin suffix ends being labelled on the spectrum between Late Latin and New Latin, given how defective that spectrum is for this type of question.

Isomorphyc (talk)16:38, 3 June 2016

I'm just going through the Latin verbs in alphabetical order, so I would call that systematic.

CodeCat16:59, 3 June 2016

I noticed. I will probably to do the Greek -izo verbs I can identify today all at once. I really do not mind if you overwrite by accident because they'll all be in a small category anyway.

Isomorphyc (talk)17:20, 3 June 2016
 
 
 
 
 

{{temp|da-adj}}

You reverted my edit on template:da-adj, giving the reason We never abbreviate in headword lines. Is that the only part you disagree with?__

Gamren (talk)06:57, 2 June 2016

Yes.

CodeCat10:38, 2 June 2016
 

Translations of a Book-Title

How would the book-title The Story of a Candy Rabbit be translated into Dutch and a few other languages? I ask, because of Wikidata:

  • Dutch:
  • German:
  • Traditional Chinese:
  • French:
  • Spanish:
Lo Ximiendo (talk)08:03, 1 June 2016

@Lingo Bingo Dingo, would you like to give it a go?

Lo Ximiendo (talk)10:18, 1 June 2016

The book may not be translated into any of those languages. It doesn't seem to be one of the great children's books of all times. If I were asked to propose a Finnish name, I would suggest Karkkikanin tarina. I'm pretty sure that the book has not been translated into Finnish, however. In fact I found nothing from the pseudonym Laura Lee Hope in the Helsinki City Library.

Hekaheka (talk)10:34, 1 June 2016

Why not makeinen? At least a Finnish translation could be nice for whatever is left of the American Finnophone community.

Lo Ximiendo (talk)10:56, 1 June 2016

Because 1) karkkikani has a nice alliteration which is missing in makeiskani and 2) "karkki" is childspeak and "makeinen" as a term suits better in the mouth of a public officer. Another issue for consideration: if you add this to Wikimedia you should clearley indicate that it is a verbatim translation of the book title into Finnish and not the name of the book in Finnish.

Hekaheka (talk)15:23, 1 June 2016

@Hekaheka, you mean Wikidata?

Lo Ximiendo (talk)20:20, 1 June 2016
 
 

Belated reply to @Hekaheka

Lo Ximiendo (talk)10:56, 1 June 2016
 
 
 

Gothic calques -- t:calque does not automatically add to cat:Gothic calques?

Recently I created the lemma 𐌷𐌿𐌽𐌳𐌰𐍆𐌰𐌸𐍃 ‎(hundafaþs) which is used in Wulfila as a calque of the Greek calque of the Latin word centurio. I however noticed that it was not automatically added to a cat:Gothic calques. I did manually add it after creating the category, but was wondering why it didn't happen automatically, because as I understood it the calque template ought to take care of that. Do you know what's up with that?

Kleio (t · c)21:23, 29 May 2016

It's fixed.

CodeCat22:37, 29 May 2016

Thank you, that was quick! Another short question - do you think a potential entry for the second element in that word and a couple of others (listed at *fadiz) should be at 𐍆𐌰𐌸𐍃 ‎(faþs) or at -𐍆𐌰𐌸𐍃 ‎(-faþs)? You added it as -𐍆𐌰𐌸𐍃 to the Pgmc. entry and I've used that in etymologies but then there's 𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃 ‎(waddjus) which seems to be a similar case, which is not added as a suffix but just as a regular old noun.

Kleio (t · c)00:23, 30 May 2016

I think it would be best to show it as a reconstructed term, so with * in front.

CodeCat00:25, 30 May 2016

I went ahead and did just that. Waddjus should probably also be moved to RC now?

Kleio (t · c)00:49, 30 May 2016

BTW the nominative plural for 𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃 claims to have the sequence -ddjj- in it. Is this for real (how would it have been pronounced, for example)? is it attested?

Benwing2 (talk)04:10, 30 May 2016
 
 

Also, just to note, all numbered parameters other than the language code are deprecated for {{calque}}. It's recommended to use the actual morphology template instead, like {{compound}}. That gives you finer control than {{calque}} can.

CodeCat00:29, 30 May 2016
 
 
 
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page
Return to the user page of "CodeCat".