Open main menu

Wiktionary β

User talk:Per utramque cavernam


Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

  • Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing page for a similar word, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
  • Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary, though it may be a bit technical and longwinded. The most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
  • If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
  • The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
  • A glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
  • If you have anything to ask about or suggest, we have several discussion rooms. Feel free to ask any other editors in person if you have any problems or question, by posting a message on their talk page.

You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! Equinox 19:00, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. @Metaknowledge: I think I've just had the best idea ever: I'm going to create heaps of new socks, until you grow so tired of it that you'll nominate me for adminship just so I can give them the autopatroller status myself :3 --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 02:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
If you aren't careful, I'll block them on sight. That's what you deserve for making me Google that line by Ausonius. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:47, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Haha is this WF? I was proper fooled, so I was. (I also looked up the dirty Latin line.) Equinox 02:52, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
I don't whitelist WF. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
WF? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:34, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Wonderfool. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 01:36, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Who is this a sock of? User:Barytonesis? —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 03:14, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Other than "I don't whitelist WF" this discussion suggested User:Per utramque cavernam could be WF so I mistakenly added it to User:AryamanA/Wonderfool, but "I don't whitelist WF" means this can't be WF and User:suzukaze-c graciously fixed the error.
If this is User:Barytonesis it would be nice if you declare your new socks at User:Barytonesis/Socks and User:Per_utramque_cavernam per User_talk:Barytonesis#Socks since it is especially difficult for "casual editors to recognise your identity" and so that the respectable User:Barytonesis is not misidentified as someone else. Kutchkutch (talk) 03:49, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
@Kutchkutch: Yes check.svg Done --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 13:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
@Kutchkutch: Thanks for making this clear... —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 21:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
I find this "sockage" (socage!) quite confusing and annoying and don't entirely see why it's necessary. But user is good, A++, would co-edit again. Equinox 23:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I also find it very annoying. --Victar (talk) 02:55, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
It appears that you are now the top Google and Bing results for the phrase you used as your username. —suzukaze (tc) 00:21, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
@Suzukaze-c: Man, I've always wanted to be famous! --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Re: French etymsEdit

Hi, I understood that, but the spellings of the two words intelligence and intelligentia are quite different. So I don't see how this can be a case of borrowing. Are you sure of your claim? what are your sources? Drow (talk) 15:03, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@Drow: TLFi, but just because the spellings (it's more than the spellings, mind you) aren't exactly the same doesn't mean it's not a borrowing. Words are adapted to the language into which they are borrowed all the time. kidnapper has taken the usual French ending for verbs, and thus doesn't look exactly like the English kidnap, but that doesn't mean it's not a borrowing.
I don't mean to sound harsh, but if you don't know this you have no business fiddling with etymology sections. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 15:13, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Ok, sorry. Drow (talk) 15:17, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
@Drow: No worries. I hope I haven't deterred you from contributing altogether! --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 15:28, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
No no, there's no problem :) Drow (talk) 15:33, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:French exocentric compoundsEdit

"whose none"? DTLHS (talk) 23:02, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@DTLHS: sorry, I read the description of Category:English dvandva compounds ("words composed of two or more stems whose stems could be connected by an 'and'."), "misparsed" that sentence (the antecedent of "whose" is "words", not "stems", right?), and applied that faulty construction somewhere else. Is this better? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 23:15, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


A projectEdit

I'm starting to think that for taxa like Saltasaurus, referencing the Ancient Greek is almost silly, and we should just have a Translingual suffix at -saurus (after all, the semantics have changed a great deal). But there's not much point to doing that unless someone wants to take on the project of converting all our current -saurus entries. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:42, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: I guess I can do that, but there aren't that many links to the AGr. entry (less than 100), are there? Or am I missing something? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 21:55, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Eh, the main job is deploying it, I guess. I also wanted someone to assess my logic in making the change. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge: Well, I'm happy with whatever proposal might help to unclutter and tidy up CAT:English terms derived from Ancient Greek (not that I think I or anyone else will spend much time in there, but still). So I'd say go ahead. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 22:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Japanese Swadesh ListEdit

Some of the dialects in Korean and Japanese have larger difference than between several Indo-european languages put here. You can see the sources, they are being called 'dialects' because of politics. Effficientvegetarianpc16 (talk) 03:25, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Effficientvegetarianpc16: As I said, I don't know anything about those languages; I don't even know what this is about. All I'm saying is that a Swadesh list is almost certainly not the place for what you're trying to accomplish. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 17:16, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Recent entriesEdit

Uh, etymology and pronunciation are L2 headings, they go before the POS. See diff. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 16:21, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA: I'm aware of that, but I'm starting to find this ordering rather nonsensical; def and POS are the first thing a dictionary user usually looks for. So I've stopped using it when creating new entries. I usually don't change old entries though. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 16:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, then you better get WT:EL changed, cuz User:NadandoBot will reorder all the headings anyways. I kind of agree with you tbh. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान)
@AryamanA: Ah yes, I'd forgotten about that... Well, it would be good to have a vote about it, but seeing that we're quite impermeable to change... --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 16:44, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
It's far easier to make new entries than to fix old ones... —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 17:08, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Etymology is the preliminary for the understanding of the meaning’s extent in multiple ways, for it explains how there can be such a word in such meanings – including by cognates, calques and semantic loans –, thus it comes at the beginning, and the alternative forms come even before it because the etymologies are based on them, as for example حِلْتِيث (ḥiltīṯ),‎ حِلْتِيت (ḥiltīt) which imitates begedkefet and is thus an obvious borrowing. But I agree that the pronunciation headers are annoying when the script or the transcription is clear – I would like the pronunciation being hidden and loaded by some Javascript, though I point out that sometimes adding a pronunciation section gives me more space to add an image in a fine size. Chinese can have its own rules of course. Palaestrator verborum sis loquier 🗣 20:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
@Palaestrator verborum: "alternative forms come even before it because the etymologies are based on them" That's not always true. We sometimes use older, more etymological forms/spellings as lemmas (simply because they're still the most common ones); sometimes, alternative forms/spellings don't really have much to do with etymology.
About the etymology: well, yes; I didn't say it was useless information, just that it's probably not what a regular dictionary user looks for first. A related question is whether we want to order senses by their frequency (obsolete ones last), or by their history (obsolete ones first). I don't think there's a simple answer; different people look for different things. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 22:54, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
@Per utramque cavernam No doubt there are exceptions from what I have outlined, but there is a statistical distribution. And if it generally makes sense, then I am also willing to do it in the not-too-many other cases where nothing is gained by it because the reader expects the information in a certain order. Don’t underween the value of the ability to browse Wiktionary with knowing the order presented beforehand.
See field for how I order by conceptual closeness. Do you like this? I have transcended frequency and history (which does not matter that much either a reader might frequently read specialist books or old books which would be why a word is more likely for him but rare for your abstraction about frequency). Palaestrator verborum sis loquier 🗣 23:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Per utramque cavernam".