User talk:Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV

Annotated texts for Portuguese learnersEdit

@Romanophile, Jberkel, Angr, Andrew Sheedy, I’d like to announce the publication of the first prototype of a new project designed for people learning Portuguese. This project involves getting short public-domain texts and:

  • adding the translation for each phrase, as a tooltip;
  • adding superscript notes for potentially confusing stuff;
  • linking each word to the individual sense being used;
  • improving the entry of each word used.

I’d like to get some feedback on it. My plan is to try to convince the folks over at Wikibooks to host them once I have a bunch done. It took a lot of effort, so I won’t bother if it’s not particularly useful. — Ungoliant (falai) 04:08, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Wow, that's great! The footnotes at the bottom are very helpful, and I really like how you can see the translation of the sentence as a whole as well as the translations of the individual words.
I started learning French (well, I learned the basics first) by reading The Hobbit and looking up more or less every word I didn't know in a French-English dictionary. I would have loved to be able to just hover over the words to see what they meant! It looks like a tedious job for you, but it could be a fantastic resource with a bit more material added. It's especially helpful for Portuguese, as there's less material out there compared to, say, French or Spanish.
One suggestion I have is that you put notes of some sort indicating usage that is specifically European or Brazilian usage. As I am focusing on Brazilian Portuguese in my learning, I'm afraid that I'll end up speaking some strange mix of the two if I learn from resources using the former.... Andrew Sheedy (talk) 05:55, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
I’ll keep that in mind. But you shouldn’t worry too much about mixing standard Brazilian and European grammar as they are very similar (the grammar of the colloquial lects and the vocabulary as a whole are a different story). In fact, I think I wouldn’t be able to say for sure that this text was European if it was shown to me without the name of the author or book. — Ungoliant (falai) 14:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Good to know. I've been led to believe that there was a significant (though not huge) difference between them. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 03:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
  • This is good stuff. If there were enough of it, it'd make me want to learn Portuguese (but I understand it's quite labour-intensive). Incidentally, if you feel like working on your Latin, has a similar service (but it's automated, so no phrase-level translation or handy notes, although I would be happy to answer any questions that I'm capable of fielding). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:01, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
    Thanks! I’m focusing on Dutch now, but it’s a matter of time before Latin pulls me back. — Ungoliant (falai) 14:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Fixe! Do you have the text linking part scripted, or is it all done manually? Let me know if you need any coding help. Some quick feedback: not your fault, but design-wise it's hard to read and looks ugly, lots of blue / underlined text. Maybe it should be reversed if possible (highlight non-linked parts?). Also, since it's an old text, the vocabulary (while interesting) might not be very useful for learners of modern Portuguese. One of my learning goals for example is to be able to read Portuguese newspapers without having to look up too many words, which requires a completely different set of words. But it's just a question of adding more texts for different topics I guess. – Jberkel (talk) 09:48, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
It has to be manual, because each word has to be analysed individually and humanly for the sense to be determined.
I have also noticed the ugliness. Links don’t work very well with tooltips and getting them to be displayed is a bit of a challenge. I was thinking of maybe using a hiding system similar to what we use for quotations. The two points I want to keep are: translations shouldn’t be visible immediately (so learners have the opportunity to try to understand the phrase by themselves), and translations should be next to the translated text (and not, say, the entire translation at the bottom of the page).
Indeed, I want to add texts with a different style. Copyright is a problem, which is why I chose an older text for the prototype. I was thinking of using a pt.wikinews article for the next one, but if you (or anyone else) have another suggestion, feel free to request it.
Ungoliant (falai) 14:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Follow-up: Portuguese Wikinews is out of question. I went through several articles and not one of them was properly written. — Ungoliant (falai) 22:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Another idea for the presentation are interlinear texts. Latin used to be taught with this method, which consists of the target language source text mixed with a rough translation (word-by-word), set between the lines in a smaller font. For a modern example, there's a company called Interlinear books which publishes whole books in this format. I think this would work well for the short texts, but the layout might be tricky to recreate in a wiki context. However it should also be possible to convert the annotated mediawiki source to less constrained formats. A wiki is great for the production of these annotations, since they can be worked on collaboratively, not so much for the consumption. Jberkel (talk) 11:28, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm personally not a fan of interlinear translations. Once I have some level of proficiency in reading a foreign language, I don't want to be forced to see the English unless I decide to look at it. This is why side-by-side translations are so much better than interlinear. Interlinear is basically for people who want to read the language without actually learning it. --WikiTiki89 15:54, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
That’s why I want to keep the translations hidden, but everything I can think of, other than tooltips, requires adding stuff to the .js and .css files. — Ungoliant (falai) 16:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Side-by-side does not require that. But anyway, I think the tooltips are fine. --WikiTiki89 16:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Re interlinear, if the text for the English translation is set in a small font you usually don't read it, unless maybe accidentally. I only look at it if I don't know the word. Maybe something in between would work, foldable annotations, by default hidden? I find side-by-side is awkward, since you have to switch your focus to another place. Tooltip or open in a new tab is not much better. Jberkel (talk) 00:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Since English is my native language, I cannot avoid reading it if it is in my field of view. Just like I cannot avoid reading English subtitles when watching a movie in English. --WikiTiki89 00:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
For another approach, see {{ja-r}}. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:56, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. However, I think the issue of word-by-word translation is handled well enough by the wikilinks with senseids; it’s the sentence-level translations that I think should be changed instead.
For now, I’ll put the sentences and translations inside templates so that any future change to the layout is easy to deploy. — Ungoliant (falai) 03:29, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Tsunâmi is not rareEdit

Tsunâmi is not rare - it is the ONLY accepted form that figures in both the best-selling Brazilian dictionary (Aurélio) and the best-selling Portuguese dictionary (Porto Editora: ). Please don't revert. —This unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Bullshit on several counts:
  • The second link also lists the spelling tsunami (I don’t know where to check for Aurélio, but given your past and current tendency to lie I wouldn’t be surprised if you made this claim up too).
  • It doesn’t matter what dictionaries say. Wiktionary follows usage, not prescription, and tsunami is about 200 times more common than tsunâmi in Portuguese.
  • Even if it did, many other big dictionaries include tsunami, and some don’t include tsunâmi at all.
Please stop using Wiktionary to promote adapted spellings. Start a blog or something. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:09, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't know who you are (and I don't want to). You don't know who I am. I don't need to prove anything to you. If you can't even get your hands on a good dictionary, just stop annoying. And thankfully you do not own this, you are not entitled to anything more than I am, and I will revert your edits. Please stop stalking me, or I will have to fill a formal request for blocking you - for stalking, for having called me an "idiot" and for removing verified and correct content. 02:16, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Please read WT:CFI carefully before you continue editing. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:24, 20 December 2015 (UTC) since we go on evidence here, can you provide evidence that tsunâmi is not rare? Inclusion in a dictionary merely shows existence (or presumed existence, dictionaries do make mistakes) so simply quoting dictionaries won't help. Renard Migrant (talk) 12:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
  • This is the same guy, I'm guessing? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:36, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
    Now I know what the Chinese editors felt when that guy who pushed accentless Pinyin definitions was around. — Ungoliant (falai) 15:34, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
    Maybe. But I think you have to suffer more to claim that. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:48, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
    Well, this guy has been at it for several months now. Since around June, if I remember correctly. — Ungoliant (falai) 20:06, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
    BTW, thanks for giving me the heads-ups. I appreciate it. — Ungoliant (falai) 20:13, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
    Is there a better place to leave this than your talk-page? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:15, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
    Here’s all right. Thanks. — Ungoliant (falai) 13:37, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


The only transclusion of {{l/en}} is now... User:Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV! Are you ok to delete unused l subtemplates? I can name a few if so. Renard Migrant (talk) 12:52, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

I’m OK with it. — Ungoliant (falai) 14:29, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


Hey. Just made the Spanish pernambucano. Can you add some Portuguese? --Stubborn Pen (talk) 15:37, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, WF. May your main pages remain deleted forevermore. — Ungoliant (falai) 15:42, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry ChristmasEdit

I wish to you and all users of the Wiktionary Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Leonard Joseph Raymond (talk) 08:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks man. You too. — Ungoliant (falai) 14:37, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
  • And a merry Christmas to you as well, Ungoliant. I'd wish you that in Yiddish but I'm honestly not even sure if there's an idiomatic way to say it. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! A merry Christmas to you too. — Ungoliant (falai) 16:41, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New YearEdit

hello I am a newbie Wikipedia editor and I was wondering if you could provide me some additional information concerning the etymology of fubar. thank you and Happy New Year.Ccie w3c icann (talk) 21:37, 1 January 2016 (UTC) 🇺🇸

@Ccie w3c icann, a happy new year to you too. This Wikipedia page has a very detailed section on the etymology of fubar.
Keep in mind that the etymology is unknown. All of the theories are not much more than guesses. — Ungoliant (falai) 21:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

translation statisticsEdit

Do you have a feel for what proportion of English lemmas have a translation section? And what proportion of those have a single language in the table? SemperBlotto (talk) 17:24, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

My project of going through Category:English lemmas to add Portuguese translations gave me a relatively good idea of the proportion. I’d say some 3 to 5% of English lemmas have translation sections. Most translation tables (maybe 70-90%) have more than one language. Of those that have only one, Finnish, Italian and Portuguese are the most common. — Ungoliant (falai) 17:34, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm mostly in French mode at the moment, so I'll try to add a few more. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:35, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Try out my translation-adding script. Copy the entire add_translation_tables() function from User:Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV/monobook.js into your js. — Ungoliant (falai) 17:42, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Done. It works well, but I shall have to modify it to change Portuguese to French (and maybe Italian as well). SemperBlotto (talk) 17:59, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Ah, so you admit itEdit

You've been WikiHounding me, most likely in an attempt to piss me enough that I'd leave voluntarily. Of course, I've known that for months, but glad you admitted it. Purplebackpack89 05:20, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

And I’ll continue to do it for as long as you make shit edits that need to be fixed. — Ungoliant (falai) 15:23, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

gramática portuguesaEdit

Olá Ungoliant, qual é a sua gramática portuguesa preferida, em português (livro ou ebook) ? Procuro uma que tem muitos exemplos, trata as variantes do Brasil e de Portugal, e que também explica a língua falada / usada e não só a língua "culta". obrigado. Jberkel (talk) 00:38, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Eu uso a Moderna Gramática Portuguesa de Evanildo Bechara. Não é perfeita, mas dá para o gasto. Infelizmente, acho que não atende aos seus requisitos. Vou dar uma procurada. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:57, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@Jberkel I was unable to find a grammar that meets your requirements. They all focus on either the formal or the colloquial languages, and on either the European or the Brazilian standard. Maybe you’ll need to use more than one grammar. — Ungoliant (falai) 15:29, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Tá bem, thanks anyway. Seems like I'm looking for the eierlegende Wollmilchsau of grammars. Jberkel (talk) 01:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

"Doric" in InterlinguaEdit

Hello. I've just fixed the Ido translation in the article Doric, which contained a translation for the meaning "Doric Greek" that was taken from the Italian word. The same spelling is given for Interlingua and Interlingue. A quick check on the Interlingua Wikipedia gave one attestation for "dorico" and a few for "doric", but those included the Scots dialect and references to the arts. Would you mind checking the Interlingua translation, as you're of the very few active users who are listed as Interlingua users? 14:28, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi anon. The only instance of either word I was able to find in durably archived sources was doric listed as a translation of Swedish dorisk (in the musical sense). Neither word is present in IALA’s online dictionary nor in Gode’s original dictionary.
Despite this, I have no reason to believe the translation is wrong. Keep in mind that the word formation process of Interlingua is based on adapting from source languages, not on suffixation like Ido and Esperanto. Another thing to be noted is that Interlingua usually uses -ic for adjectives and -ico for nouns. — Ungoliant (falai) 15:24, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your work! It better remain in place then. 15:41, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

IP address removalEdit

Dear Ungoliant could you please help me hide my IP address for this word: - Adjutor101 (talk) 13:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. — Ungoliant (falai) 14:00, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much !!! Adjutor101 (talk) 17:02, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Ungoliant, I'll answer...Edit

... I hope with some colleagues, in this page. Best regards, --Gloria sah (talk) 20:19, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

No problem.Edit

Yes, for some reason Angr tries to assert that /ɛɹ/ and /ɛɚ/ are the same pronunciation, even though in reality that is just his merry, Mary, marry merger talking. Tharthan (talk) 02:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

The merry-Mary-marry merger causes that distinction? I thought it only affected the vowel. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:16, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
I once talked to him about how if "square" were pronounced how he alleged it to be (/ɛɹ/), it would sound like squehhr (ehh being the vowel of "bet") which is nonstandard at best (I have never heard such a pronunciation of the word in my life, but to demonstrate the issue to Angr, I uploaded an audio file depicting such a pronunciation). The real sound of square lies between /ɛɚ/ and/eɚ/. I have heard both.

The thing with the merry, Mary, marry merger is that it has an influence upon a speaker's perception of /ɛɹ/, /ɛɚ/ and /æɹ/ as a whole, so in the case of /ɛɚ/, a speaker with the merry, Mary, marry merger might assume that the transcription "/ɛɹ/" would be sufficient, even though "/ɛɹ/" doesn't end any word in the English language. Hence why it is a bad transcription. Tharthan (talk) 02:23, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

About your addition of Bolognese term "galèna" to the page "galàna"Edit

Thank you for your recent addition, but I don't know, in this moment (my first edits here :-> ), how we can create this Bolognese page, since I haven't yet seen one similar. For exemple, the header should be ==Bolognese==?, and the language abbreviation will be also "egl"? What category below? Thank you in advance, --Glo (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh, as a latin dictionary on line, we (me and my daughters) usually use this one. Soon, --Glo (talk) 20:26, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
@Gloria sah, The way we treat dialects is to use the name of the language in the heading and the name of the dialect in a label.
You can see an example in our entry for duto. Some dialects have special templates (for example, see fiord); I can create one for Bolognese if you want. — Ungoliant (falai) 21:25, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Oh, so I sould be grateful if you do it. Then I'll be able to play with this new toy ;-P , --Glo (talk) 21:40, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
@Gloria sah, done. See galèna. — Ungoliant (falai) 22:06, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Oh oh, thank you very much, I'll take it as example in the next future! Bye ;-)) , --Glo (talk) 22:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


I finally managed to install AWB on OSX and would like to try it out, but looks like I need special permissions. Would it be possible to add me to the list? obrigado. – Jberkel (talk) 16:09, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Done. — Ungoliant (falai) 16:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm not that impressed with, and it was obviously built with Wikipedia in mind. Still might be useful for some tasks. Jberkel (talk) 22:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV".