Thanks for letting me talk you into this. You're doing a great job so far. I look forward to lots of Serbian entries. Here's our standard welcome text, in case you'd like to read the official directions someday. --Dvortygirl 07:10, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
I saw you put školati as a term used in Serbian. However, I am not sure if I ever heard that form, and Google test gives only Croatian and Bosnian sites. I made školovati entry, which is the form used in Serbia. Do you know anything more about that? --Dcabrilo 06:37, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
- Hi, you know, I'm really not sure. It sounds correct, but like you said, I have not found anything on that. I understand what you're saying. But if you say, for example: "Moram školati sina.", that would mean "I must put my son through school" (or basically "support my son"), right? But if you say "Moram školovati sina.", that would mean "I must educate my son". Do you see the difference? Maybe I'm wrong. What do you think? I will keep looking into it and thanks for creating the školovati entry. Great job! --Dijan 06:54, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, I'm gonna agree with you here, because it really could be just a colloquial term. So, that's settled :) --Dijan 07:23, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
Would it perhaps be better to create one entry for all three languages, instead of a separate entry for each? Since conjugation and declensions will almost always be the same, it seems like too much work to copy/paste three different entries. The problem is also with ekavica/ijekavica, as Serbian really uses both? What do you think about this? --Dcabrilo 07:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
- I thought of doing that the first time joined Wiktionary and then I changed my mind because of four things. First one is, there is a separate Bosnian Wiktionary and Serbian Wiktionary and I think that since they're already separate ones, we might as well, just keep the entries here separate too. The second one is, since Bosnian "radicals" (I like to call them that), enjoy putting Oriental words (Arabic, Turkish, and Persian) into Bosnian standard language, those will not be found in Serbian. The third is today people consider these as separate languages and I know that to me and I assume you as well, these are the same languages with different "dialects" (ekavian, ijekavian, etc.). Plus, most other wiktionarians here will tell you that these are separate languages and should just be kept separate. The fourth thing that I thought about was that people of different origin (and I refer specifically to Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats) might not agree to put these together. At first, I though we could just put them all together and just call the language "Serbo-Croatian" again, simply because most entries will be the same and declension is almost the same for every word. But then I've been told that the word "Serbo-Croatian" is no longer in use and is therefore improper. To me it's a perfect word for combining the entries, but because of the named reasons above, this creates problems and isn't fun anymore. I really don't mind creating separate entries, just like I don't mind creating Cyrillic and Latin entries. So, if you suggest something different then just tell me, but I do prefer that we just leave it the way it is simply because it will be a strain on us and there are not many Serbian/Bosnian/Croatian wiktionarians here to make it a quick move. By the way, thanks for adding that correction on "auto"! --Dijan 07:23, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
- You are welcome for auto :) It's one of those words, like bol (it can be both ta bol or taj bol). Also, I made a couple of other corrections, like: I moved nepče to nepce. If you think I made a mistake in correcting a mistake, just let me know :)
- As for Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian thing, I see your point, and they are valid. But anyway, just so you know, I don't only make Serbian Latin entries because I am boycotting "other" languages, but just so I can have more time to work on other entries. :) Thanks for adding Bosnian entries! --Dcabrilo 07:30, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
- Oh yes, thanks for nepce. Sometimes online dictionaries are not the best tools because some don't display the č, ć, š, and ž properly. No problem, I enjoy creating entries in both scripts. I just think that without the other script one feels incomplete. But you can do what you do right now, I have no problems with it. I usually go after you and just add the Cyrillic version. If I have any problems with your entries, I will contact you first before making any major edits to them and I hope that you will do the same just like you did with školati. Thanks for that! --Dijan 07:36, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
Hey again, just wanted to ask you something about this entry. I found in my dictionary for this word that there is a hyphen between auto and stop (auto-stop). You think that's a big thing, or should we just leave the entry the way it is? --Dijan 07:49, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
Gender forms of AdjectivesEdit
Hey again. Just wanted to tell you that I made a template that we can use for SR-BS-HR adjectives. Take a look at кинески for example and tell me what you think. I've already started to put it on some adjective entries. I've also made one for the nouns a while ago, but I don't have a lot of time to apply it to all of the nouns. Normally, I hate using templates, but for declension and gender forms, they seem very useful. You can use these if you want and please give me feedback on these. :) --Dijan 05:59, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hey. Oh, it's OK about the color of the template. I don't mind as long as it's showing the concept correctly. About the gender, I started putting only masculine singular forms, and I thought that was the best way, but somehow, some adjectives always sound better in neuter forms or some feminine forms show up as already in there. I'm still trying to do only m. s. forms, but somehow there are a few neuter forms and feminine forms (especially for colors). I think we can just try to do masculine forms, however, if there are neuter of feminine forms, we should include those as well. I don't know, what do you think?
- I also wanted to ask you, how would you prefer to include colors (as nouns)? Do you think we could include them as just "plava", or "plava boja"? If we include it as just "plava" we can also state that it's an adjective. What do you think? --Dijan 19:47, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- OK. That sounds good. Thanks! --Dijan 02:18, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
I like what you made there. I would be happy to help you develop that page more. --Dijan 19:48, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
Personal question reply: I'm in Atlanta. You? --Dijan 19:50, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hi, I see you've been working on an appendix of Serbian grammar.
- I suggested that we should be having these sorts of pages in Wiktionary in the beer parlour yesterday, and it turns out that Wikibooks is the place for it, as they already have a lot of grammatical content there and there is no point in us duplicating their effort. Would you consider moving your material there? (In fact, I've just looked, and there is a page on Serbian_grammar that has headings but no content - the perfect place for your material. — Paul G 10:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I had a question regarding the word "Soviet Union" in SR-BS-HR. What is the correct way of putting this entry into Wiktionary: Sovjetski Savez or Sovjetski savez? I would say that the first one is the correct one, however, I have an encyclopedia that shows it as Sovjetski savez and Google also returns some results with that title (even a few important websites show up using it that way). What do you think? First, second, or maybe both, but saying that they're just alternate spellings? --Dijan 00:03, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Do you know how tko (same for svatko, itko, nitko etc.) is supposed to be pronounced in standard Croatian?
Do you know the difference between orthography and orthoepy?
"Usefulness", such as stated here, is not a valid criteria for inclusion, especially not for newly born standards of ex-communist countries of Yugoslavia where half of population are half-literate mindless sheep. There is a very good reason why dialectalisms, colloquialisms, archaisms and other crap is explicitely marked by means of context labels and not counted in WT:STATS (if it were up to me, it would be kept out of main namespace).
Please do not be insultiveEdit
No, I am not that IP. First of all: please do not insult me, or my contributions to Wiktionary. I'm neither illiterate, nor a sheep, nor I use crappy words. Second of all: while you are entitled to your view of colloquial language, as much as it is anal-retentive, I would like to remind you that Wiktionary is not a prescriptive source of words. Third of all: Although your particular choice of dictionary may avoid mentioning "ko" as a pronoun, that does not mean the word does not exist. I am sorry for the harsh tone, but I am not big enough of a person to use less vulgar choice of words when talking to somebody who believes one "grabbed god by his balls" (uhvatiti boga za muda, that's a nice idiom to add!) simply because one was blessed to be born to speak a nationally-awakened language of the South Slavic linguistics continuum. Peace --Dcabrilo 22:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Your shallow accusations of my "insulting" you are not worth commenting (where I was actually refering to common dialectal diversification of all Slavdom, so that "it's used" cannot possibly be criteria for inclusion).
- Unlike what you would like to believe (wiktionary is not prescriptive), WT:CFI does exists and is proactively applied to lexems ranging from propaganda of corporate puppies ("Nortel") and ungoogleable slang to neologisms and obscure non-dictionary material like assembly instructions and Harry Potter coinages.
Hi Dejane! :)
Thanks for your valuable comments on the vote!
As you can see from the other comments, most of the opposing foreigners are completely unfamiliar with Slavic languages, and simply happen to be heavily politically prejudiced by bits and pieces they happen to pick up on Wikipedia and who-knows-where (for example, I was initially called a "Serbian nationalist" ^_^), so it's always a good thing to see a free-minded native speaker providing a first-hand testimony on the differences among these "languages" :)
Sadly, some people you simply cannot convince :/ --Ivan Štambuk 16:46, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Just letting you know of this surprisingly contentious vote. Input from more Wiktionarians such as yourself would be much appreciated. Thanks. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 12:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)