User talk:Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV/Archive3

Wait! Before you create too many more - what about plurals! Genders! Don't we need {{lij-noun}}? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:24, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I’d rather not risk adding plurals and genders for a language I’m not very familiar with, but both appear to be similar to Italian. Do we need {{lij-noun}}? Not really. I’ll create it anyway though. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:29, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Well, the reason I suggested lij-noun is so that you can acceleratedly create plurals, but if you're not comfortable with that, that's OK. However, I don't think there's any chance that a noun like (deprecated template usage) ægoa is not feminine, for example. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:34, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I created Category:Translation requests (Ligurian). --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Please do add a request to any term you think needs a translation and I’ll take a look... eventually. I should be working on my research right now, but Wiktionary is too addictive! — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:01, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Just curious — what are you researching? (I should be reading a marine ecology textbook, myself.) —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Maximum flow problem in fuzzy flow networks. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

The relationship of latitudinal zonation and energy flow in an ecosystem has suddenly ceased to seem complex, at least in comparison. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:14, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'll let you go; how long should you do your research? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 21:33, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

All I need to do is translate the article now, so I should be finished today. I still have enough college stuff to keep me busy for several weeks, but when I ran across some material explaining Ligurian phonology, every issue of a Ligurian magazine in PDF form, and knowing that Wiktionary hadn’t any word of this major language, I just couldn’t resist. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:43, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I added Ligurian translations to Liguria and Monaco — can you check those please? Thanks —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:15, 15 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Liguria is Ligùria, and Monaco I couldn’t find (but it’s probably Mónego) in the orthography I’m familiar with (Académia Lingùstica do Brénno’s, which applies to Genovese Ligurian). But don’t panic, there are dozens of Ligurian orthographies, so your might be right. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 05:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hmm. Well, if you feel like fixing those (and those the etymology sections for Liguria, Monaco, et cetera), I would be much obliged. (By the way, it feels a bit late to say this, but I didn't realize Ligurian orthography was so decentralised. Perhaps we should have categorised the Genovese ones, or at least marked them?) —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:40, 15 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Luckily, since there weren’t any Ligurian words when I started adding them, I think it’s safe to assume all entries are in ALB’s orthography. What do you think the tag should display? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 06:00, 15 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

In a perfect world? {{a|Genovese}} before every pronunciation (or whatever is accurate), and {{ALB orthography}} as a context for every def (it would be a context template with a helpful link). But I think that's too much fixing to ask for, and inconsistency annoys me, so I suppose you don't have to worry that much about it. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:06, 15 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Is there an n in maciâ? Just a guess judging by the IPA.

P.S. While I've got you here, I noticed you added a few Mirandese translations a while back. What source(s) did you use? I'm looking for good resources in Mirandese if you have them. Ultimateria (talk) 18:54, 25 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

There is no nasal in the pronunciation. I must have had Portuguese manchar in my mind when I added it... stupid me.

Here are the best Mirandese resources I use:

• (for definitions) Portuguese-Mirandese dictionary from the website of one of the towns where Mirandese is spoken. Feel free to ask me if you need any clarification for a definition.
• (for pronunciation) [1]
• (for durable citations) there is a rock band, Picä Tumilho, which sings in Mirandese. I just checked their website and unfortunately it appears they have removed all lyrics, so I’ll have to find them elsewhere.
• (for usage examples) [2]

— Ungoliant ^(Falai) 19:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Wow, thanks! These will be very helpful. :) Ultimateria (talk) 19:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I am convinced your reversion was in error. You have given almost no arguments (except a block and another block for calling a pseudonymous admin a pseudonymous coward). If you do have arguments why Srebrenica#Dutch would mean the same as Srebrenica#English (even though most English-speakers couldn't find Srebrenica on a map if their life depended on it; and events at Srebrenica caused a Dutch government to resign) I would like to hear your arguments, I might even agree with them. OTOH, blocking is like bombing the Libyan TV (raw violence against opposing views). --129.125.102.126 18:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hurray, more appeals to emotion and ad hominems! Sorry for bombing the Libyan TV dude, I’m getting too evil for this. Here’s my argument: the word Srebrenica is the same in English and in Dutch because... wait for it... it’s the name of the same Bosnian town! But I wonder what English-speakers’ geographical knowledge has to do with lexicography.

For the record, I support the addition of a new definition such as “(by extension) a major massacre” (compare the definition I added to Roswell) and expanding the town definition to include mention of the massacre. But it appears to me that your purpose is not having an accurate, useful definition, but trying to convince people that its the Netherland’s fault. As evidence of that, I present the fact that you never mentioned that it was the Republika Srpska army that committed the massacre. You only ever added that it was overseen/assisted by the Dutch. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:52, 7 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

For the Dutch meaning, it isn't very relevant which Balkan faction committed the massmurder, for the Serbocroatian meaning it doesn't matter a lot which NATO member helped to separate the victims from the women/children/elderly. The victims were muslims, the perpetrators were Xians (like the Dutch), but though I think the distinction is important, I didn't add it, since it isn't common (yet) in Dutch.

In Dutch, the primary meaning of Srebrenica isn't a town in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the primary meaning is the massacre. For example, employees of the Dutch who were refused shelter at Potočari are called "slachtoffers van Srebrenica" too.

About the "Serbocroatian meaning", it might become a shibboleth (somewhat like хлеб/kruh). --129.125.102.126 14:03, 9 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

There's really no reason to provide a reason for reverting or blocking. It's such an blindingly obviously valid revert that a trained chipmunk could see it's correct. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:18, 9 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello, pseudonymous coward. --129.125.102.126 14:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Here are a few tips for you:

• Insulting us won’t convince us of your arguments. And don’t say garbage like “telling pseudonymous cowards that using a pseudonym is a sign of cowardice isn't a personal attack”; User:Mglovesfun’s name is listed in his userpage, so you are just insulting him for the sake of insulting;
• Having cancer doesn’t make your arguments more true;
• People have a right to privacy, and if you don’t like that it’s your problem, not ours.
• Your PoV pushing won’t be tolerated here no matter what. So either give up or try to think of a non-biased definition, with lexicographical value, that is in accordance to our criteria. You have plenty of time to come up with one now.

— Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:17, 9 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Here are a few tips for you:

• Blocking me won't convince me, arguments might. Mglovesfun is pseudonymous. When three are attacking one, joining the three isn't exactly courageous.
• Personal attacks like "trained chipmunk" or "trying to convince people that its the Netherland’s fault" aren't good arguments, I don't need to convince people: a government of the Netherland resigned over Srebrenica. When the cancer kills me, I can't refute your attacks anymore, but it wouldn't mean that your personal attacks suddenly turn into valid arguments.
• Don't you think that the "right to privacy" includes not being attacked from open proxies on email addresses I gave only to wikipedia.org (and wikimedia.org)?
• I have given an (IMHO) unbiased definition, I have assembled examples of usages not covered by the current definition. You, -sche and CodeCat have blocked.

--129.125.102.126 12:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

We didn’t block you to convince you, we blocked you because you are obsessed with insulting “pseudonyms” (and I use scare quotes because, as you’ve made clear, you make sure people remain pseudonyms by not even bothering to check their userpages).

Three versus one not courageous? This is not a battlefield, and therefore courage is of little relevance. Bias, on the other hand, is relevant, and your edits are biased.

I find it funny that you consider “trying to convince people that its the Netherland’s fault” to be an insult, but “coward” and “NATO propagandist” not. Nope, not cutting it.

So what that a government of the Netherlands resigned? Governments resign over all sorts of not-lexicographically-important shit. One of my country’s president resigned and committed suicide over the shooting of his friend in Tonelero street, but that’s no excuse to create an entry saying “a street in Rio de Janeiro, where the evillest shooting since World War II occurred and was secretly ordered and overseen by the United States.” Might as well add a note about extraterrestrials to the definition of pyramid.

Stop bringing up your cancer. Your medical condition is irrelevant to the lexicographical status of the word Srebrenica. I hope you get better, but bringing it up so frequently will not convince me to be more lenient towards your biased edits. And yes, they are biased; but feel free to add a non-biased definition of the massacre, based on the references you’ve assembled. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:13, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

You blocked me quoting your "Disruptive edits: POV pushing at Srebrenica". You claimed "This is not a place for activism", even though blocking is far more active than writing on talk pages. --129.125.102.126 00:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

It's a battle of arguements and even with three "other" pseudonymous (4 vs. 1) you didn't bring much arguements. --129.125.102.126 00:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I find it sad that pseudonyms can keep wiktionary inaccurate (by omitting meanings). --129.125.102.126 00:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

The resignation (of a government, not just the prime minister) shows that I don't need to convince people that the Dutch (not necessarily only or even mostly the Dutch troops) were to blame for the massacre.

Tsk, w:pt:Carlos Lacerda and w:pt:Getúlio Vargas weren't friends, Vargas committed suicide because his crimes were exposed. When English speakers would use w:en:Rua Tonelero for the assassination attempt (without quotes as in w:en:Getúlio Vargas#Death), it would be nice if en.wiktionary would make such uses understandable. --129.125.102.126 00:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'm not paid by you, I suggest buying a dog if you want to give commands. I'll bring up the use of the email addresses I gave to wiki[mp]edia.org from compromosed machines as long as you don't admit that it is a graver attack on my right to privacy than my "exposure" of "Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV", "Mglovesfun" and so on as pseudonyms. I might also bring it up as long as you pseudonyms don't bring arguements, but only blocks (because for me blocks are quite threatening). --129.125.102.126 00:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

To repeat myself: I have given an (IMHO unbiased) definition, I have assembled examples of usages not covered by the current definition. I admit that "oversaw" isn't the beat choice of words, "assisted" (perhaps even "were forced to assist") might be better. On the other hand, the parallel of the German doctors at the ramp of Birkenau and the UNPROFOR troops is striking. --129.125.102.126 00:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am still unconvinced by your arguments and conspiracy theories, and am unlikely to be convinced. If you really want to add your biased edits to Srebrenica, try Talk:Srebrenica or WT:TR, where other users are more likely comment. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:45, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am unconvinced by your blocks (or your moving of my comments). --129.125.102.126 02:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

You might distance yourself from the proxy threats (and retract "conspiracy theories"). --129.125.102.126 06:31, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

What is the purpose of that comment? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 06:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I hoped the purpose was obvious. I'm inviting you to distance yourself from the proxy threats, to stop bringing up your "right to privacy" (which I didn't violate, while my "right to privacy" is violated by the proxy threats) and to start categorizing my examples as "town" and/or "genocide". --129.125.102.126 19:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

What proxy threats? I am simply reminding you of the rules: if you insult people you will be blocked; if you continue adding biased nonsense, you will be blocked. Nope, you are not violating my right to privacy, only insulting it.

How could I "insult" a right? You have the right that I don't tell your mom/dad/partner/family/friends about your pseudonym (that's your privacy), that I don't talk here about things you do outside wiktionary, but you are using a pseudonym and I may note that. --129.125.102.126 23:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Bad wording, I meant you were insulting people for making use of their right to privacy. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Oops, a bit late. Proxy threats like "Die from cancer", "We know where you live" or "How would he (that is my father) swing?". --129.125.102.126 02:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I redacted some personal information from the comment above. - -sche (discuss) 02:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Why would I need to distance myself from those threats? I don’t have anything to do with them. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 02:23, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

If you are talking about the four quotes you listed at Talk:Srebrenica, my Dutch is not very good, but from what I can understand, the last two are “massacre”, the first is ambiguous (but probably “massacre”) and the second one I can’t understand. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I've provided translations. —CodeCat 20:36, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

The occurrences of Srebrenica in the Dutch citations at Citations:Srebrenica are, as I see them: massacre, city, city, city. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately those weren't my counterexamples. --129.125.102.126 23:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

We don't have any access to information that would give us the connection between an IP editing at Wiktionary and a Wikipedia account. To find out the IP that belongs to any Wikimedia account requires CheckUser privileges, which are very strictly regulated, and which none of us has. However you ended up getting whatever communications you say you've received, I don't see how any of us is involved. I do find it ironic that you repeatedly call people cowards because they use pseudonyms, while not even registering a Wiktionary account. I don't think you have much credibility in that respect, Mr.? Ms.? 129.125.102.126. Or should I call you 129.125 for short? As for your reverted edits: this is a dictionary. We define things, we don't discuss their context in the events of the past decades. Yes, people did unspeakable things at Srebrenica, and other people didn't do what they should have to prevent it. That doesn't mean that this information should be added to the definition in a dictionary. However important that information may be, a dictionary is the wrong place for it. You may also notice this information is missing from soup labels and washing-machine repair manuals- not to mention the telephone directory. Get over it. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

The meaning of "We" is important at this point, perhaps Chuck Entz (and/or the voices in his head) can't access the information for some reason, but -sche could easily deduce that I am Erik Warmelink. They blocked me for that. Mr. flits102-126 will do, flits102-126 is better, but I prefer Erik (not Eric). Erik W., Erik Warmelink, Meisters Erik, or Meisters Hendrik are fine when disambiguation is needed. --129.125.102.126 21:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps you (whether Chuck Entz or the admins at wiktionary) "define" meanings, but I would rather try to describe the meanings which a word has acquired in actual use. In Dutch Srebrenica means more than just the town or the genocide. --129.125.102.126 21:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

To clarify, I'm not saying there is no argument in favor of this definition of Srebrenica, merely that Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV's revert was correct at the time he made it. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'll celebrate New Year in Bremen, Germany. Other possibilities might mention the restricted "rules of engagement" which made it hard to fight for the Dutch troops. See you in a week or so. --129.125.102.126 11:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

This is just getting weird. You posted an address above because you've been getting threats that people know where you live? (Where have you been getting such threats? I haven't seen them on Wiktionary.) (By the way, my powers of deduction are overstated; I didn't deduce that you were Erik, you said you were, after which I looked at the discussions on en.WP and de.WP and elsewhere that preceded Erik's being indef-blocked on those places, and concluded that you were indeed Erik.) Ungoliant, I've just blocked the user for a couple of months as a POV-pushing SPA; I trust you don't mind. I'm also going to hide the revision in which the address was just revealed. - -sche (discuss) 02:27, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Not at all. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 02:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

No, I posted the address (Esdoornlaan 226 B, 9741 KJ Groningen, the Netherlands) to show that such "threats" only exist in the minds of pseudonyms (like "-sche" and "Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV"). I don't mind telling where I live, I just did it again. Out of the two of us, you are more paranoiac. --80.114.178.7 23:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am getting those "threats" at the so-called "secret" addresses I gave to wiki[mp]edia.org, from open proxies. These addresses are guessable, but the timing of the threats make it probable, IMHO, that wiki[mp]edians had access to the list of "secret addresses". --80.114.178.7 23:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

SMFH....I don't even fucking know where to begin to say anything about this...Anon, are you going to do anything (useful) here other than beat a dead horse in continuing this discussion..? If not, just stop, really. Lest you be blocked again. User: PalkiaX50 ^{talk to meh} 23:26, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am not an anon, I am Erik Warmelink. You are the anon PalkiaX50. You have no arguements, just the possibility to block. --80.114.178.7 23:38, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that (your name) but chose to ignore it. My argument, would be that this discussion is rather pointless, or at least continuing it beyond this point is. Also, you're arguably a hypocrite for bashing the choice to use pseudonymy or (pseudo-)anonymity, for while you seem to willingly reveal your name, if you're so goddamn anti-anonymity, then would you not be better off having a freaking account named after your own name, rather than being identified by an IP? Or do you have some other stupid issue that you're trying to push here? User: PalkiaX50 ^{talk to meh} 01:12, 26 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I already have an account named after my own name. And I told you (PalkiaX50) that on 6 May 2013 on my talkpage, almost three weeks before you asked it again. --80.114.178.7 13:49, 27 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

In hindsight, since I was partially disinterested in this whole affair due to the ridiculousness of it all, I failed to notice the comments about you being banned on other projects...well in that case, I guess my last question is irrelevant but nonetheless, you're really beating a dead horse here....I know you said you have cancer, but seriously, have you nothing fucking better to do with your life than this...? User: PalkiaX50 ^{talk to meh} 13:22, 26 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

This guy is nuts. There is little use in arguing with him. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 13:57, 26 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yea, screw it...I blocked the IP for 3 months, mentioning his previous IP in the block log, so that people can see what went on before. User: PalkiaX50 ^{talk to meh} 15:33, 26 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Please see remember to use {{also}} when entries with the same characters but differing diacritics exist. Maybe you can work this into the script? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 19:27, 14 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

This should be work for bots. In any case, I just had an idea to do this semi-automatically. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 19:30, 14 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, people keep telling me to chill and let bots do stuff, but nobody with botting time and ability ever volunteers, so here I am manually adding also's and inflected forms. Thanks! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 19:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Never mind. My idea would be impracticable. Maybe I’ll learn how to write bots this summer. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 19:51, 14 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'm glad to see someone has (evidently) found some resources on Mòcheno. It's such a interesting but obscure lect. If you can find the translations of "woman", "man" and "iron", could you add them? Those seem to be, along with "water", our Most-Translated Entries. - -sche (discuss) 04:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Done. Baib, mònn/mènsch, aisn. — Ungoliant ^(Falai)

Thanks! - -sche (discuss) 05:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Is there a way to auto-protect all the FWOTDs of the coming year? Also, I really ought to generate a list so I can add it to my raw watchlist, and I recommend you do the same (if you're less lazy than me, I'll just steal your list). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:09, 23 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

• Cascade-protect the month archive pages.
• Here you go (copy the source, not the parsed content!).

— Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:55, 23 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

• Ahá. I'll do that.

  Done, thanks. Why would I need to copy the source? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:02, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

MW removes single newlines. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:12, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

But it doesn't matter. The raw watchlist will normalise it no matter how you input it. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:46, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Learn something every day! — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:52, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Was that an imperative? Sure! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:53, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yes. You better learn something every day for the rest of your life, or else. You do know I am a giant, evil spider, right? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 05:09, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Of course. Only naturally, I already know that I know about your namesake. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:59, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I just realized - Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/2013/January 7 will need an image. Can you add that in, please? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I’m afraid I don’t have a font for that script. It’s showing up as boxes for me. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 17:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Bloody. Guess I'd better go searching for a font. At least we have a few days (more if you add some FWOTDs). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

May I ask what the fuck went wrong here? Also, you might want to check up on ET#Portuguese, which you added, and which I tried, semi-successfully, to format. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 22:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Phew! You scared the shit out of me MK! I edited the Portuguese templates to display gerund instead of present participle just yesterday, and then you show me an entry with the gerund messed up, making me think I broke Wiktionary. I shall send you an invoice for the cleaning of my pants :-P

What went wrong was that the parameter of {{gerund of}} was lang=Portuguese, instead of lang=pt; but now I changed it to {{pt-verb form}}.

Concerning ET, to be honest I still don’t know how we deal with abbreviations. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:22, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I thought that was it, but I figured that considering that the entry looked pretty substandard and that you know Portuguese templates so well, I might as well hand it over. I assume you do check when you edit a widely transcluded template, right? Anyway, have you seen User:Ruakh/Tbot.js? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Oh, and is {{pt-adj}} supposed to avoid commas? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:32, 29 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yes. I don’t like it, but can’t be bothered to start a discussion to change it. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 17:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

How is a language name a common noun (in any language)? A proper noun "refers to a unique entity" whereas a common noun "refers to a class of entities ... or non-unique instances of a certain class" (defs from Wikipedia because I liked them better than Merriam-Webster's). To me "Maltese" could only fit under the definition of a proper noun, but I'm open to your reasoning. Ultimateria (talk) 05:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

If so, then how come one might say in English The Maltese he speaks sounds so much like Arabic to me that I think he does not in fact speak Maltese at all if the first use of Maltese is illegal according to your understanding of English? Or am I misunderstanding what a proper noun is? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:15, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Portuguese grammarians decided (I don’t know when) that language names are common nouns. A stupid decision, if you ask me. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 05:26, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

@ Metaknowledge: "The France I visited in 1930 is not the France of today." Does this make France a common noun? This is a general feature in English; proper nouns can be used in a form that resembles a common noun when a particular aspect or portion of that proper noun is meant. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:33, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

@Ungoliant: The grammarians decided they were common nouns, decided not to capitalize them, or decided they were substantive adjectives? Even in English, capitalization and proper nouny-ness do not always go hand in hand. Personally, I've always assumed that the non-capitalization of language names in Romance langauges was a historical artefact resulting from their Latin heritage. Latin originally expressed language using adverbs, and later with adjectives. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:33, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

That they are common nouns. The lack of capitalisation is a result of being a common noun, as capitalisation and proper nouny-ness do go hand in hand in Portuguese. Even common nouns derived from people’s names are uncapitalised. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 05:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

And what makes them common nouns in Portuguese? Someone's arbitrary decision, or some defined particulars? Note that Portuguese capitalizes Volta à França, even though it's a countable noun, and therefore cannot (in the strictest sense) be a proper noun. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

@EP: Come to think of, now I really don't get how proper nouns work. Why is (deprecated template usage) Englishes a word? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Distinguishing proper nouns from common nouns is still a ripe field for doctoral research work, IMHO. The best (accessible) discussions I've seen on the issue were written by John Locke (the philosopher, not the character from Lost) and John Stuart Mill. You'd be hard pressed to find a modern grammarian whose given the issue its due consideration. I once started a local coverage of the topic for English, but got bogged down in it and haven't yet gotten around to completing the work. You can still get a fair idea of the theoretical side of it by reading what I did write at User:EncycloPetey/English proper nouns. The unfinished sections have some outline notes and/or examples, so you can also get a fair idea of where the unfinished parts were going (though I do also have notes that never made it in). The moral of the article is: "the line between common and proper is fuzzier than most people think," and I believe there's more of a messy continuum between the two, even if most words tend to lie towards the extremes of that continuum. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Here’s a quote from Moderna Gramática Portuguesa. It might be of interest for your research:

“Substantivo comum é o que se aplica a um ou mais objetos particulares que reúnem características inerentes a dada classe: homem, mesa, livro, cachorro, lua, sol, fevereiro, segunda-feira, papa.

“Os cinco últimos exemplos patenteiam que há substantivos comuns que são nomes individualizados, não como os nomes próprios, mas pelo contexto extralinguístico e pelo nosso saber que nos diz que, no contexto “natural” nosso só há uma lua, um sol, um mês fevereiro, e um só dia da semana segunda-feira, e, no contexto “cultural”, só há um papa. Se forem escritos com maiúscula, deve-se o fato à pura convenção ortográfica, e não porque são nomes próprios.”

“Common noun is what applies to one or more specific objects that contain inherent characteristics of a given class: man, table, book, dog, moon, sun, February, Monday, pope.

“The last five examples show that there are common nouns which are names individualised by, unlike proper nouns, extralinguistic context and by what our knowledge tells us, in the “natural” context there is only one Moon, one Sun, one month of February and only one weekday Monday, and, in the “cultural” context, there is only one pope. If they are to be written with upper case, that is only due to orthographic convention, and not because they are proper nouns.”

— Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:15, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ah, thank you for setting the German week! I'll try not to let it get that close again, but real life interfered. I noticed, however, that your creation of the FWOTDs didn't show up on my watchlist. Shouldn't they have? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

They should. Edit your raw watchlist and make sure all the FWOTD entries are in different lines. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 07:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I suspect it never actually saved last time, because I got a different message. Looks good, I think. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 07:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

What have the Romans ever done for us? Well, besides having a fucking awesome language... —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

It’s safe to edit entries at night now. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

But you might get awwested by a Woman centuwion. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I’m out of witty Monty Python references, so I’ll just ask you a question: were they wrong in calling domum locative? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Well, it's not... but it's hard to explain. On the face of it, Latin has 5 cases (nom, gen, dat, acc, abl). Occasionally words with distinguish the vocative and locative, the former only in the 2nd declension and the latter only dependably for cities, towns, and small islands. The problem is that Latin, like other Classical languages, can really be said to have even more than seven cases, but they are usually considered to be adverbs by lexicographers. These include such oddities as the "second ablative", which uses the ablative from the next declension (e.g. latīnē, noctu). In this case, domum is really an "allative", but it can be considered a bare non-objective accusative or an adverb ("homeward") depending on how you prefer to view it. A truly locative sense would not be applicable, because it would mean "at home" (in this case, domi). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Historically, the accusative also functions as an allative. This was inherited from Indo-European and is still used that way with prepositions in Slavic and some Germanic languages. I think that domi may actually be a demnant of the original IE locative, but I'm not sure. —CodeCat 02:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the explanation. I’m still struggling with case, both in Latin and in German. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 02:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Casus naturam functionemque verborum monstrent etiam ut verba aliarum linguarum desint. I know this sounds mad, but I maintain you have to give cases character, like a synesthete, for them to be able to be used with facility. For Latin, the accusative is straightforward, the ablative is sneaky. In German, the dative can be downright sinister. I honestly believe that grammar is half memorisation of forms and paradigms, half animation into a coherent whole. (That said, I still haven't been able to use that system to succeed in such ventures as Mandarin word order, which still boggles me. But I believe in it nonetheless.) —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

@CC: The PIE page in question would suggest that, but I can't tell, and domus is just plain weird, a very supple but very irregular noun. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Re userpage: The reason you're not improving your English is that it's already damn good. Honestly, I think you're en-4. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, but I still find myself using Portuguese constructs when writing English, like “more clear” instead of “clearer.” — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Native English speakers often use excessive constructs like that, sometimes for emphasis or rhetorical purposes. It would be worse if you tried to add -er to every adjective. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hmmm interesting, but I wasn’t trying to emphasise it, I just forgot to use the synthetic comparative. While we’re at it, is it OK using multiple genitives in a row, like “each path’s capacity’s membership is verified”? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

It's generally favored to switch between the Saxon genitive and the of-form for comprehension: "the membership of each path’s capacity is verified" but either is grammatically accurate. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Som todos os substantivos no português do caso acusativo? Saludos, --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:31, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Linguistically, the bare form can be used as a nominative, accusative and vocative. Genitive, ablative and dative are formed using prepositions. Some words are only used as vocative (like manhê, def. 2 of bicho and nouns formed with def. 1.2 of -ão.) The Extremaduran and Fala (a sister language of Portuguese) languages have a vocative form.

Etymologically, the vast majority of Latin-origin nouns come from the Latin accusative, but there are a few exceptions: some given names ending in S (Carlos and Marcos for sure) and unadapted loanwords like campus, médium, tórax come from the nominative. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 15:23, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Not at all surprising, given that the accusative is by far the most commonly-used case in Latin. I vaguely remember that some Romance languages developed the singulars from the accusative plurals by dropping the s. Is that the case (no pun intended) with Portuguese? I notice more singulars ending in m rather than a vowel. My apologies to Æ&Œ if I'm highjacking his discussion. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

No idea, but it could be. Word-final M indicates a nasalised vowel. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck: Is there any evidence for that? Also, is the accusative really the most used in Latin? I've never thought about it, but it feels like the major cases are pretty well apportioned in any given text. Definitely not something I really notice while reading, however. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I was a bit sloppy there. What I had in mind, mostly, was Spanish, which very consistently has vowel endings in both singular and plural that are consistently found in Latin in the accusative plural, but not consistently in the accusative singular. The theory is that the plural endings were generalized to the singular because the plural had fewer exceptions and was thus easier to remember.

As for which cases are more common in Latin, it depends on how you look at it. It's true that sentences with intransitive verbs don't have nouns in the accusative case, and every sentence has a subject- which more often than not includes a noun in the nominative case. In that respect, the total number of occurrences of nouns in the accusative case isn't going to exceed that of the nominative. This overlooks the fact that a relatively small subset of nouns accounts for most of the occurrences of the nominative: most commonly words for people, less commonly words for animals, and much less commonly words for inanimate objects. It's also true that there's much more variety among the words for animals and for inanimate objects than among those for people. Thus, if you're looking at the most common case used for most nouns, I think you'll find it's the accusative, even though there are hugely prolific examples among the ones that use mostly the nominative. That's why most nouns in the modern Romance languages derive from Latin accusative forms. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:38, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I thought it was just that, in the second and fourth declensions, unstressed <u> tended toward <o>, and in the others it doesn't make a difference. It seems like the singular accusative paradigmatic assumptions were often extended to the plural, given such oddities as (deprecated template usage) corpos. Anyway, you've made a testable hypothesis, so it's up to somebody with more technical ability than me to parse some Cicero and assess the validity of your statement (we'd need a concordance of a longish text ordered by commonness, which could then be scanned fairly quickly by anyone who knows enough Latin to instantly recognise noun forms). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

There are some singular nouns from plurals. We have asset and pea, though some languages have pene, French uses -se, from -ses (-sis), and there exists more I think. --Æ&Œ (talk) 00:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don't get your Romance examples... isn't pene just regularly derived from the accusative singular? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

See penes#Latin, if it pleases you. --Æ&Œ (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand. I know of no Romance descendants of the preposition; the plural noun of course left various descendants, but exempli gratia Italian pene is regularly derived from the accusative, along the path [ˈpe.nem]^(la) to [ˈpe.nẽ]^(vul) to [ˈpe.ne]^(it). Am I missing something, good sir? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:32, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I probably di’n’t select a good example then. I am not sure what else to say. --Æ&Œ (talk) 02:48, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the change. I knew it needed that, but it is torture for me to get the logic right. As I understand it, omitting nomul= or nomul=0 leaves template behavior unchanged and "nomul=1" leads to the "missing" categorization. Right? DCDuring TALK 02:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

nomul= with any value (even 0) adds the “missing” categories. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 02:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I updated the documentation as if only "1" worked. "nomul=" reverts to the original behavior. Take a look. DCDuring TALK 00:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

I reworded it a little, but feel free to revert or change more. I don’t think there is anything wrong with telling people to use =1, because even though any value can be used it’s better to have a standard one. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:52, 1 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Parabéns pelo trabalho realizado ños nomes dos Concelhos Portugueses e por comprovar que "devagar se vai ao longe". Parabéns e obrigado.

Depois de ver algumas das suas introduções lembrei-me de deixar a sugestão para também colocar o som nas palavras homófonas (chaves, guarda, monção, nordeste, etc.) que certamente conhece e que creio que assinalou todas. Para além do interwiki para estes concelhos, com estas edições podem até surgir eventuais correcções em termos de IPA. Fica a ideia.

Txus, FilipeFalcão (talk) 17:49, 30 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Farei. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:01, 30 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Olá. Tenho me notificado que as palavras com -ction no inglês e no francês possuíam equivalentes como este no português. Exemplos se incluíam abjecção (já moderno?), addicção, adjecção, adjuncção, advecção, afecção (já moderno?), affecção, aflicção, afflicção &c. Sim, se parece que a ortografia do português era conservadora como seu irmã francês. ☺
Si o queres, posso ir encontrar mais exemplos. Saludos, --Æ&Œ (talk) 21:09, 7 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Saudações Æ&Œ. Realmente, antes de 1911 a ortografia portuguesa baseava-se quase totalmente na etimologia. Por exemplo, pronto escrevia-se prompto (do latim promptus), apesar da pronúncia ter sido /ˈpɾõto/ ~ /ˈpɾõtu/ há uma dúzia de séculos. Infelizmente os responsáveis pelas reformas ortográficas vem removendo os resquícios etimológicos da ortografia. Ainda existem algumas palavras com -cção (porque suas pronúncias terminam em /ksɐ̃w̃/), como fricção, facção, dicção, detecção, convicção, convecção. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:35, 7 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Ungo. Newcomer Asenoner (talk • contribs) may want some help in creating entries in the mother language of Ladin, and possibly templates such as {{lld-noun}} or {{lld-verb}} or {{lld-adj}}. Are you up to the challenge? (Asenoner gave me a link: http://db2.pixxdb.net/voc_gh/deu/index.html) --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 09:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

OK. I’ll do some research first. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:58, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Embryomystic, how about you? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 08:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

{{lld-noun}} and {{lld-adj}} done. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 19:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Needs more words... —CodeCat 15:05, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

More words as in more nominations or more {{FWOTD}}s? In any case, I’ll work on both. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:59, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I hope you haven't forgotten this, as you only have 3.5 more hours to fix it... —CodeCat 20:25, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Don’t worry. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:32, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Mind talking to this guy? He's causing a mess, doesn't seem to understand the difference between obsolete forms and misspellings, and I suspect it will be hard for anyone to get through to him who doesn't know Portuguese. Also, I considered collecting epithets like you just did, but I'm much worse than a NATO propagandist. According to LW, I'm a "motherfucking cunt". Beat that. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:13, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Well, I just realized that one of your epithets was from Pedro (how stupid of me). Evidently he does have more English than his edits seemed to suggest. So I guess you do know about him. But he still needs somebody to explain stuff to him, given what he's been doing. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Oh, and he's also been editing as an IP, so Special:Contributions/131.174.244.31 is the same deal. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I’ll talk to him, but I doubt it will be of any good. The 1990 reform was only beneficial to Brazil and very detrimental to Portugal, so many Portuguese feel strongly about it (and detrimental to the Portuguese language as a whole, IMO.) Most of his edits will have to be undone as inaccurate (like tagging words with silent C as European Portuguese when in fact they are/were used everywhere at some point). — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Já tu temes um súper‐dúper correio electrónico especial? Saudações, --Æ&Œ (talk) 20:11, 12 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Verifico meu e-mail muito infrequentemente. Logo o abrirei. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:21, 12 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Does por partes have the same meaning in Portuguese? Also, I came across the phrase como diria Jack o Estripador, vamos por partes, which looks a lot like a pun. Is it worth keeping as an idiomatic expression? --Three littlish birds (talk) 11:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yes and yes. The pun is that while “vamos por parte” usually means “let’s do it step by step”, Jack the Ripper is referring to bodyparts. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 03:27, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

`

Sorry, about that.[3] The default font is too small and Watchlist links too dense for a touch interface. I have hit the wrong link on it a few times now, but this is the first time I changed a page without realizing it. —Michael Z. 2013-03-11 20:16 z

Don’t worry about it. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ungoliant Could you look here, please.Thanks and regardsGeorge^Animal. 12:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi, would you please add pronunciation for lua? Thanks in advance. --Z 15:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

 Done. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 15:54, 29 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Both Portuguese Wiktionary and Logos show this as a normal -er verb. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC) p.s. Logos gives a very irregular present tense for prazer.Reply

The Logos conjugator doesn’t show a normal -er verb. Note how some forms have a prouv- root while others have praz-, which is correct, though it’s not showing that most forms are defective. The Portuguese Wiktionary has tons of incorrect conjugations. Here are two more links showing the irregular conjugation: [4], [5].

Only one of them shows that most forms are defective. Maybe I’m wrong about that. I will do more research and delete the incorrect forms when I have time. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 14:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. This word is in your list of frequently found Portuguese words. I have added it as a form of the verb fossar, but I wouldn't have thought it was common. To me, it looks like it ought to be a subjunctive form of the verb "to be" (very similar such words exist in Italian). Does that make any sort of sense? SemperBlotto (talk) 16:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Sorry, just figured it out. It's a misspelling (alternative form?) of fôssemos. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • No need to apologise. Better asking something unnecessarily than lacking important content. Regarding fossemos: nowadays it’s a misspelling of fôssemos, but it’s also an obsolete form (I’m not sure how to represent this situation is a way that looks nice; I’ll give it a shot). It’s also a correctly spelled form of fossar, but I had never encountered that verb before today. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:27, 26 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Default plural for Portuguese is -s, so changing to {{pt-noun|m|s}} changes the plural from turus to turus. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Defaulting to -s was a horrible decision that leads to many incorrect plurals being displayed. You’re the one who brought that up. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:27, 27 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

If you make a table of regular correspondences between singular and plural endings, besides the -s ones, I can try to make a module of it and have {{pt-noun}} invoke it. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:51, 27 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

-ão: {{attention|needs plural}}

vowel: word + -s (carro → carros)

-r, -z: word + -es (mar → mares, luz → luzes)

-il and ´ or ^ somewhere: word - -il + -eis (míssil → mísseis)

-il else: word -l + -s (canil → canis)

-el and no ´ nor ^: word - -el + -éis (papel → papéis)

-l: word - -l + -is (sal → sais)

-m: word - -m + -ns (bom → bons)

-n, -x: {{attention|needs plural}}

-s and the letter preceding it has ´ or ^: word + -es, and the preceding character loses the accent. (inglês → ingleses, ananás → ananases)

-s else: word (lápis → lápis)

else: {{attention|needs plural}}

— Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:19, 27 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Looks hard, but I'll see what I can do. But aren't there more, like -ção → - ções? The more words we can cover, the better. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:28, 27 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

-ção → - ções if there’s no ´ nor ^. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Oh, and extremely important: if there is a space or a hyphen in the word → {{attention|needs plural, and if you’re not a native speaker, check a dictionary}}. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:51, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I’m working on it: Module:pt-plural. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I've been far too busy to attend to this. My plan was to get the substrings by invoking a module but have all the logic be in a #switch in a template. Will this be faster? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:12, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don’t know if it’s faster, but because the logic requires more than just the substrings, and because it can be used by both nouns and adjectives, it’s better to keep it all in a single module. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Necessito‐te. Como utiliza‐se gostar ?

« Gosto de autos »?

« Gosto os autos »?

« Gosto dos autos »?

Se há alguns problemas em esta mensagem, diz‐me, por favor. --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:22, 30 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Olá Æ&Œ, bom vê-lo novamente. A primeira e a terceira estão corretas. A primeira significa que gostas de autos em geral, e a terceira que gostas de um grupo específico de autos.

O verbo necessitar também geralmente usa a preposição de, portanto necessito de ti seria mais apropriado, apesar de necessito-te existir em linguagem poética. Em esta deve obrigatoriamente contrair-se em nesta. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 09:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Obrigado. Não estou certo se o objecto deve estar antes do verbo ou não.

(Também é muito japonês que dizem « obrigado » e não « obligado »). --Æ&Œ (talk) 15:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Quer saber se “de autos gosto” / “dos autos gosto” são válidos? São sim. Porém, nestes casos a ênfase está na palavra “autos”. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there.

Good news - most of the entries in your Portuguese list are now blue-linked (I'll leave the rest to you). Bad news - many are blue-linked because they contain Spanish (or Italian) entries, but No Portuguese ones. I'll try to find and fix them.

Cheers. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

• See User:SemperBlotto/not Portuguese - I have made a start on ones beginning with "a", but it is boring and I am going to do something else for a while. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:19, 1 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Great! I’ve been working on that list for a while, but I also expand existing entries, so it will take a while for me to reach the lower levels. I’ve already finished the first 200. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 19:51, 1 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I keep coming across this (as a plural of "magnet"), but we have ímãs. Are we wrong, or is it an alternative form? (pt.wiktionary does not specify a plural) SemperBlotto (talk) 14:15, 4 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ímãs is correct. imãs is the plural of imã (“Muslim imam”), and perhaps a common misspelling of ímãs (because ´ is uncommon in words ending in ã). — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Gosto‐te; és uma boa pessoa. --Æ&Œ (talk) 16:48, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Valeu. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. I am glad to see that not all of these bad plurals are my fault. It would be a good idea to move the bad plurals to the correct form rather than deleting them. My bot doesn't look at old entries, so otherwise, will never generate the correct ones. Cheers. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:39, 5 May 2013 (UTC) (and p.s. thank you for not giving me a bollocking about the errors that I do make (it wasn't the same on Latin and German!))Reply

• p.p.s. If you want my bot to generate plurals etc, you can always add a list at User:SemperBlottoBot/feedme

Ok, I’ll start moving them. I thought your bot would look again, which is why I’ve been deleting most incorrect verb and noun forms. Actually I’m so happy that someone else started helping with Portuguese that I’m not at all bothered by the few mistakes :-)

In a related note, I’m working on Module:pt-noun, which will generate correct plurals for some cases, and request it when it’s impossible to guess from the spelling. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 17:48, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Re PS: Sorry about the bollocking now and then. I do appreciate it all the same —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

É « viva a França » uma má tradução? --Æ&Œ (talk) 03:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Não. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 03:51, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Obrigado para os livros. Minha madre há comentada que teu nome soa‐se alemão. É isso o caso? --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sou meio alemão, um quarto italiano e um quarto português. A maioria das pessoas no sul do Brasil tem sangue alemão e/ou italiano. (para os → pelos; madre → mãe; há comentada → comentou (no equivalent to the English present perfect in Portuguese!); soa-se → soa; É isso → É esse). — Ungoliant ^(Falai)

While we're on the topic of Portuguese grammar, I notice in many places on this talk page that Æ&Œ addresses you with the tu form. When I took one semester of Brazilian Portuguese at university 23 years ago, we were taught that tu is used "only in the bedroom" and that você is the usual form of address, even for close friends who would probably use the T-forms with each other in other languages like Spanish, French, and German. Is that right? Or is it normal to use tu with friends? —Angr 09:01, 24 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Umm…I’m not gay. --Æ&Œ (talk) 10:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'm not saying you are. I don't even know what genders you and Ungoliant are. I'm just wondering whether tu is really as intimate as I was taught. To judge from the usage note at tu#Portuguese (which I've only read since writing the above) it seems it depends a lot on where in Brazil you're from, and that usage in Rio de Janeiro (where my teacher learned his Portuguese) has changed over the past 20 years, so what was true when I learned pt in 1990 may no longer be true in 2013. —Angr 10:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Usage of tu in Brazil is complicated:

• Only the form tu has fallen into disuse. The coordinate forms te and teu are still widely used, and to a lesser extent ti and contigo.
• “only used in the bedroom” is not true today, as far as I know. People either always use tu or always você for informal second-person pronoun, unless they are in context where they want to avoid using regional constructs. The formal second-person pronoun nowadays is o senhor, but it should only be used for people much older than you, because some people take offence as it implies that you are old.
• tu is used in religious writing and speech everywhere, more commonly than English uses thou.
• tu is used by some in the city of Rio de Janeiro, and in the Northeast region. I don’t know what’s the extent, but it might be limited to some neighbourhoods.
• tu is used by most people in Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Catarina and western Paraná. However, here it behaves like você, taking third-person conjugation.

— Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks! I remember in the song Leãozinho, Caetano Veloso addresses the "little lion" as both te and você: "Gosto muito de te ver, leãozinho, caminhando sob o sol ... gosto muito de você, leãozinho." As for o senhor and a senhora, what we were taught in my class is that it's mostly used between salespeople and customers in shops, and it's a bit like calling someone sir or ma'am in English. —Angr 17:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Have I defined this correctly? I would have thought that only plural forms were possible, but singular forms seem to be common. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:36, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

You’ve defined it correctly. I investigated the Google Books hits for the singular forms and found what seem to be three more senses of this verb. The current meaning is not inherently plural, because it can be used with singular nouns that represent multiple people (“o grupo (group) se entreolhou,” “o casal (couple) se entreolha,” etc.), but it is inherently reciprocal, so I’m moving it to entreolhar-se. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 15:37, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Como diz‐se «you are the best editor»? --Æ&Œ (talk) 18:45, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

“(Tu) és o melhor editor” or “(Você) é o melhor editor.” — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 22:57, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

You could also use “ótimo” instead of “melhor,” but this is archaic and poetic, and no one would understand you. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Como dizem‐se? --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:00, 31 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ativável. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:03, 31 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sempre pronuncia‐se s como /ʃ/ a Portugal? --Æ&Œ (talk) 00:43, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Apenas no final das sílabas, e não em todas regiões (se não me engano, no sul de Portugal é /s/). — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:54, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

«Almost always on the last syllables, and not in every region (if I remember correctly, not only in Portugual is it /s/»? --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:19, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Only at the end of syllables, and not in every region (if I remember correctly, in the south of Portugal it is /s/). — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Whoops! Glad you caught that. It was a mistake. My apologies. AmericanDad86 (talk) 10:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Don’t worry about it. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:42, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. I keep coming across this type of verb form, and am sure that we need some sort of entry for them. Is this a reasonable format? SemperBlotto (talk) 16:26, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Coincidentally, I am writing the template for them as we speak. See Wiktionary:T:APT#Enclitics and mesoclitics for a consensusless discussion. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:28, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

OK. Interesting. I have voted, but won't add any more of them until a consensus is reached. Cheers. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:38, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Note that most of these forms are also eye dialects representing Brazilian Portuguese, since we drop the r from verb forms ending in /ar/, /er/, /ɛr/ and /ir/; in the case of pô it’s eye dialect for a dialect that drops every word-final r. — Ungoliant ^(Falai)

While a bit old, I found Helbling, Gewehr, Jedan, and Von Schmidt's First-Year German from 1979 to be a very well constructed textbook, allowing for effective self-study. While sick for a couple weeks in high school, I just plowed through the book and jumped from German 1 to German 4. I just found it on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/First-Year-German-Robert-E-Helbling/dp/003045171X/. It's written for English speakers, but then I missed that you weren't a native Englisher :) until I looked at your user page.

Viel Glück, -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:00, 3 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a lot! I had been using Colloquial German, which was fine at first but eventually began to disappoint me. I’ll certainly give this a try. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:04, 3 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Compreendo porque quisestes remover uns dos livros! Houve cobrar as pinturas feíssimas com uma caixinha! Ugh! --Æ&Œ (talk) 02:40, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Desculpe. Não entendi. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 03:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Some of those pictures in some of the books are fugly, so I had to cover them with a tissue box (not a literal translation). --Æ&Œ (talk) 03:44, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Alguns dos livros eu comprei num sebo pouco antes de enviar-lhos, pois a quantidade que eu encontrei na casa dos meus pais foi menor do que eu esperava. Realmente, algumas figuras dos que comprei são lazarentas de feias. Muito malfeitas e caseiras. (remover → livrar-se de; houve cobrar → tive que cobrir; pinturas → figuras (pinturas is paintings)). — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 04:00, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

sebo: sebum‽ E que é «lazarenta»? --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:11, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sebo: used media shop (books, vinyls, CDs, magazines, etc., but not clothes, home appliances); lazarento(a)(s) de: motherfuckingly. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 04:16, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hahahahahaha! obrigadinho pra o riso. É a tua família pobre? Sei que minha assim é sempre. --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Classe média. Mas eu sou, agora que saí da casa dos meus pais :-( (pra o → pelo (which is por + o); Sei que a minha sempre foi assim.) — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 04:35, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

De acordo. O vou tentar: compraram de figuradas pelo meu livro, mas as figuradas são construídas da diarreia de pombos, que livravam‐se dos seus olhos,metiam os seus olhos às figuradas. Tinha cobrir do livro com uma caixinha. É isto compreensível? --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:03, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Não muito. They bought pictures made of the diarrhoea of pigeons, who got rid of their eyes and stuck them on the pictures? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 07:17, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Os pombos; são masoquistas. --Æ&Œ (talk) 20:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

As a participant in an associated discussion, you are invited to contribute to the list of terms and criteria at Appendix:Terms considered difficult or impossible to translate into English. Cheers,   — C M B J   10:46, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I’ll think of some words. I suggest a different approach to listing the terms: instead of a huge table, I recommend using sections with bullet lists for each language, for example:

==Portuguese==
* (qualifier) term: definition
* (qualifier) term: definition
* etc.

Or at least just split into language sections, even if you continue using tables. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 11:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I was originally going to do that, but some of the words exist in two or more languages but not in English, so it's a thinker. On an unrelated note, let's take the warning notice back off until this appendix has had a few days to develop, because I think that we're all pretty much on the same page about inclusion criteria. Being able to work freely tends to be pretty effective for brainstorming and I think that's most important at this stage. I also saw several red links turn blue just over the past hour or so, so we may gain some entries while we're at it.   — C M B J   14:14, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Fine… but I’ll warn you: once the appendix becomes full of made-up or unverifiable words, I’ll RFD it. Concerning the other point: I think we should split language sections even when words have the same meaning in multiple languages; it’s the Wiktionary way. I’m not going to mess with it, since you’re the one taking care of the project, it’s just a suggestion. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 14:20, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

There's no reason to think about going in that direction just because we allow a grace period -- questionable terms should just be moved to the talk page and preserved for discussion's sake when the time comes. On formatting, I saw a fair share of appendices that had both styles and I actually copied this all-in-a-table style from one of them, though that doesn't necessarily speak to whether those with such tables were being maintained properly. It's fine either way in any event and I'm just excited to see where this goes.   — C M B J   14:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

It’s not the tables that are the problem, but the merging of multiple languages. You could merge the Meaning column using rowspan=, but still link to the term in each language that has that meaning. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 14:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Also I added your draft editnotice to the talk page.   — C M B J   14:30, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Como diz‐se? --Æ&Œ (talk) 22:37, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Custe o que custar (roughly: let it cost whatever it may cost). — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 22:38, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

No, actually the usage is not quite the same. Custe o que custar is used as a clause after the sentence. For example: conseguirei o que quero, custe o que custar.

If you need something equal in usage to whatever it takes, you can use o que for necessário. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 22:42, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Não recebes‐te meu correio ou não sabes qual coisa dizer? --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:53, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Fala do eletrônico ou físico? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 04:55, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Falo do electrónico. --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I’ll check. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 04:59, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Porquê é «faço‐lo» incorrecto? Pensava que «‐lo» deveria existir pela eufonia. --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

O português arcaico perdeu o /l/ intervocálico não geminado. Portanto, o que seria faço-lo tornou-se faço-o (assim como o latim volare virou voar, solus virou soo (só em português moderno), etc.); o /l/ do pronome clítico sobreviveu onde era precedido por uma consoante, mas com uma evolução posterior, /s/, /ɾ/ e /d͡z/ seguidos de /l/ desapareceram:

• per + lo → pelo
• contar + lo → contá-lo
• eis + lo → ei-lo
• fiz + lo → fi-lo

— Ungoliant ^(Falai) 05:30, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

É essa locução substantiva valida? --Æ&Œ (talk) 06:41, 9 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

É válida, mas para que quer usá-la? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 12:10, 9 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Como uma tradução de succès de librairie. --Æ&Œ (talk) 19:26, 9 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

A tradução é “bookstore success,” mas não sei a que se refere essa expressão. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 19:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

bestseller. --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:22, 11 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Usamos ser (um) sucesso nas bancas para livros, ser (um) sucesso de vendas para qualquer coisa, ou bestseller, que pode ser específico para livros, ou pode ser para qualquer coisa. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:29, 11 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hm. Essa se parece ser uma locução verbal e não substantiva. --Æ&Œ (talk) 02:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, they mean “to be a bestseller.” But on second though “sucesso nas bancas” and “sucesso de vendas” do occur without ser. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 11:00, 11 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I can't find any more authoritative statement of this practice, but EncycloPetey once said (tangentially, midway through this thread) that "the '.' is not normally used when a stress marker appears in the location of the syllable break, as the stress marker necessarily implies a syllable break." (I personally have no preference for or against combining dots with stress markers.) - -sche (discuss) 00:47, 16 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I’ve been using it for ages and no one ever complained. In any case, while it’s true that a stress marker doubling as a syllable separator is unambiguous, it causes the IPA to look weird (particularly in words with three or more syllables.) It’s pretty much like saying “I can open this can with an axe so I won’t use the can opener.” You open the can, but your kitchen will look like a mess. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:04, 16 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don't get it. How is "sexual intercourse" an interjection? Ultimateria (talk) 18:22, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

It’s an interjection to imply the occurrence of sex without mentioning it directly. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I still don't understand the situation you would use it in. Can you give me an example? Ultimateria (talk) 18:50, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

O prisioneiro derrubou o sabão e creu.

The inmate dropped the soap and creu.

— Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Huh, interesting. I'm not sure how you would translate the "creu" in that sentence into the English one. Maybe just "The inmate dropped the soap and...you know." I can't think of any English words that are used this way, especially for sex only. Ultimateria (talk) 19:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I almost forgot to tell you -- your Babel is wrong. You should be at least en-4! Ultimateria (talk) 22:36, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I wished! I still commit many mistakes that a near-native speaker would never commit, like confusing in, on and at. And my pronunciation is rubbish. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 22:42, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

*I wish. If I didn't know you, it would honestly take me a while to realize that English isn't your native language. And as a native English speaker, let me tell you that we make quite a few mistakes ourselves! And pronunciation isn't the big deal that everyone makes it out to be. Just don't speak too fast if your accent isn't great. That's one of the most important things I learned in Spain. My slurred words make sense in English, but my lazy tongue produces some awful Spanish.

If you ever have a question regarding prepositions, I'm glad to help. But it may help to know that in some cases they're interchangeable, (or the difference is very subtle) so try not to get hung up on getting them right. Ultimateria (talk) 00:07, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Do you mind if i revert this edit of yours? On wikipedia there was a consensus for this spelling and i've seen similar preferences on Shia forums. Pass a Method (talk) 06:09, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, no. Even if one term is preferred, from a linguistic and orthographic point of view, Shia is not an alternative spelling of Shi'ite, it’s a synonym. Shia, Shi'a and Shiah are alternative spellings of each other, as Shiite and Shi'ite are alt. spellings of each other. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 15:51, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I know it's kind of a lot to ask... but I was wondering if you could, along the lines of Portuguese. Thanks so much as always —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sure. It should be much simpler for Spanish anyway. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yay! The only ones I don't really understand how to encode are cases like examen or régimen. Oh, and when switching over the templates we'll have some problems with borrowings because normally -r → -res regularly, but borrowings like bóxer or gangster currently just say {{es-noun|m}} even though they are the exceptions. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:27, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

There is already Module:ca-headword which you can use as a base for this. It does plurals as well as feminine forms of adjectives. —CodeCat 16:37, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Exceptions will have to be entered manually, instead of calling Module:es-plural. This is how Module:pt-noun works: if there is a plural parameter, it uses that (though the parameter can be s or es and it will append that to the pagename), if there isn’t, it invokes Module:pt-plural. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:47, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

It seems to me that it would be more useful to make -r default to -res and require -rs to be manually overridden. So then gangster would need an extra parameter. —CodeCat 16:51, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Of course. The problem is, how do we have the template call the module by default and yet not have those entries break? I think that a bot or someone with AWB may need to change them to have (for example) pl=gangsters, which will have no effect currently but will ensure compatibility. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:02, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

This sort of shit is why I insist in adding parameters even when it’s the default. — Ungoliant ^(Falai)

We can add temporary code into the module that compares the default specified by the module (new rules) and the default that the template applies, and add a category if they do not match. That should catch gangster because the module's default will be "gangsteres" which does not match the "gangsters" generated by the template. This is how I did it with Catalan and it worked well. —CodeCat 17:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Wouldn't you have to detect where the last syllable is to remove the accent? Or is that still going to be manual? DTLHS (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Accents are only removed for final-stressed nouns ending in -s or -n aren't they? The module can handle that quite easily (like the Catalan one does). —CodeCat 17:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Any consonant really. They also must be added in some cases. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 17:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

But accents are not normally placed on the final syllable except before -s or -n, right? Because the default is final stress then anyway according to the spelling rules. And in what cases does an accent need to be added? —CodeCat 17:18, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

You’re right. Non-final stress, such as resumen, resúmenes. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 17:20, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Those nouns are fairly rare I imagine, so we can just rely on the parameter for those. I think Catalan does too (abdomen). The default rules don't have to be so complicated that they cater to every exception. —CodeCat 17:33, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Also, words ending in -s (or only -is?) and non-final stress have invariable plural (síntesis, tenis). — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 17:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

CodeCat, are you interested in doing this? You’re a much better Lua programmer than I am. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 17:33, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I can try to make a start, but I don't know much about Spanish so I can't go into all the details. For example, Catalan doesn't make a difference between nouns ending in -o or nouns ending in a consonant or -e, they have merged together as a class. So I would need someone to provide a list of rules for forming the plural, as detailed as they can be. The module can remove accents from words, so that is not a problem for words ending in -ón or -és or similar, but putting them back in is harder. —CodeCat 17:42, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

• ending in unstressed vowel: add -s
• ending in consonant including y: add -es
• ending in stressed vowel (not é): add -es
• ending in é: add -s
• ending in unstressed vowel followed by s: plural is identical to singular
• ending in unstressed vowel followed by n: add accent to vowel earlier in the word to maintain correct stress
• ending in stressed vowel followed by s or n: remove accent and add -es
• ending in z: -zes becomes -ces
• loan words: plural of original language

DTLHS (talk) 17:51, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

It might be better to default those ending in -á to a request for plural, as there are many exceptions. And I don’t know about Spanish, but the greatest source of incorrect Portuguese plurals in Wiktionary is words containing spaces or hyphens. If that’s the case with Spanish as well, it might be better to default those to a request. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:07, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I agree on that (plurals and hyphens). I don't think it should even be able to handle something like chaleco salvavidas. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:17, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ok, not all of these rules can be done in a module but many can:

• ending in unstressed vowel: add -s [can be done]
• ending in consonant including y: add -es [can be done]
• ending in stressed vowel (not é): add -es [can be done provided stressed final vowels are always one of áíóú]
• ending in é: add -s [can be done]
• ending in unstressed vowel followed by s: plural is identical to singular [can be done provided this just means any ending in -as -es -is -os -us]
• ending in unstressed vowel followed by n: add accent to vowel earlier in the word to maintain correct stress [can't be done easily, will need overriding]
• ending in stressed vowel followed by s or n: remove accent and add -es [can be done]
• ending in z: -zes becomes -ces [can be done, I assume this means ending in -z in singular? Also what about the other five "changing" consonants (-c, -g etc)?]
• loan words: plural of original language [cannot be done as the module does not know when a word is a loanword]
• Do not generate a default if the word contains space or "-" [can be done, but Category:Spanish nouns needing inflection needs to be created for these cases]

I noticed that {{es-noun}} also allows the special value "es" which adds -es. Assuming that the module can follow all of the above rules, is this special value still necessary or do the rules suffice to add -es whenever it is needed? I made a start on the module: Module:es-headword. It only does nouns and proper nouns for now. —CodeCat 18:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

For the “ending in unstressed vowel followed by n”, add a ´ to the penultimate vowel. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Words ending in -c and -g, it might be better to default to a request, as they’re likely a loanword. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

About your first point: But what if another vowel is already stressed? And is it really always the second vowel (that is, one of a e i o u) counting from the end? Even if the word ends in -io or -ua something like that? In Catalan, a word ending in -ia without any accents is stressed on the i, but I'm not sure if it's the same in Spanish.

Second point: there are really no words ending in -c, -g at all? Catalan has quite a few of them, like amic. —CodeCat 18:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yes, i and u as penultimate vowels immediately followed by another vowels do not take the stress unless explicitly marked with an accent. I can't think of any examples where that would interfere in this case, however.

All loanwords, usually from native languages or English. As you may know, Catalan underwent different development from VL as compared to Spanish's relatively conservative approach; cf. amigo. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:52, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Last vowel from the penultimate vowel cluster then. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 19:06, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Are there any cases where a word ends in three or more vowels (like -aia or something similar)? Or in a diphthong (-ai)? —CodeCat 19:31, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

samurai, hai, Sarai, cachai, uruk-hai DTLHS (talk) 19:43, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

The real answer to CodeCat's question is no. As far as I know, everything on DTLHS's list is nonstandard or bogus except Sarai, which doesn't have a plural anyway. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

All Spanish nouns ending in 3 vowels: User:DTLHS/es three vowels DTLHS (talk) 20:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Do any of the words on the list actually have three vowel sounds when spoken besides paranoia? The rest are just orthographic. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

They all pluralise regularly anyway. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:31, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have cleaned out most of Category:es-noun redundant parameters but some still remain. Most of the remaining entries contain a head= parameter, which the bot is not able to parse properly: it can't tell when the next | ends the parameter, or whether it is part of a link that happens to be inside the head=. Could you help out by converting the various plural parameters to use the 2nd positional parameter, and by removing any #Spanish or {{l}} from head=? (That last point is because it is now possible to make modules automatically add section links to all links in a text, so putting them in the entries is redundant) —CodeCat 15:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Why are you removing all the head= parameters altogether? Those are still needed. Well, probably anyway... I didn't intend for those to be removed. —CodeCat 18:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Damn. I misunderstood what you said. But... why are they needed? The module can link each word automatically. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 18:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

It can, yes, but that hasn't been implemented yet. And in some cases, you actually want to link more than one word as a whole, because a phrase might be made out of a smaller phrase. (Think of "give up the ghost", where give up is a single term) —CodeCat 18:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

If you are interested, see Template_talk:mul-proper_noun. DCDuring TALK 00:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Why can't {{l}} be used anymore? What was wrong with my additions? —CodeCat 23:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I didn’t notice your additions. I had this revision in mind when I said {{l}} couldn’t be used anymore, because it messed up the transliterations. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

The transliterations are still messed up with your changes, so I rereverted back to my version for now. {{l}} causes an automatic transliteration to appear in addition to the parameter transliteration, and it’s bold. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:47, 7 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I've tried to merge our two changes. The head2= parameter is back but it doesn't use {{l}} anymore. —CodeCat 00:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Cool. Everything is working correctly now. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 00:09, 8 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Are you sure that Marchand actually means something in Portugese? I went ahead and added in the definition you suggested by translating art dealer, but I checked even the Portuguese wikitionary, and I did not find a Portugese definition. If you say that you are sure, I will believe you. BTW thank you for defending art dealer for me. Воображение

I’m sure. The Portuguese Wiktionary is still very small and lacking many words. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I notice that you created it by substituting a language code template. Did you use a bot or some kind of script to create the page? —CodeCat 21:24, 9 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have a script that generates wikitext from abbreviations: User:Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV/Entry creator. I know the language codes are going to be deleted, but I’ll worry about it later. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:27, 9 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I just made this entry, and it apparently is also a word in Portuguese. Could you add the Portuguese entry to it for me please? Thanks, Razorflame 02:28, 12 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

 Done. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 02:35, 12 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :) Razorflame 02:38, 12 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I've responded to your ad on the Brewpage. Qaplah! -Sativen Kuni (talk) 02:11, 13 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Where are you finding these regional forms? Ultimateria (talk) 03:59, 13 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

This dictionary lists them. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 04:00, 13 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

This is amazing. Hideously designed, but amazing. How did you find this? Ultimateria (talk) 04:05, 13 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

No idea, this has been in my “library” for some time. Whenever I find a linguistic resource I’m likely to use in the future I save the link (or download, if possible.) — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 04:10, 13 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. I see that you have recently created the three Ladin auxiliary verbs, and wondered what your source was. Details of the conjugation do not quite agree with [6] that I have been using. I am getting very confused about Ladin verb forms - reality does not conform with my sources. As an example:- 3rd person singular present tense of the first group of regular verbs should be -a or -eia according to the above document. But this official document seems to use -ea (e.g. "la adatea i prinzips y la metodes de si legislazion ai bujëns dl'autonomia y dl dezentramënt.")

I would be grateful for any online resource that you think we can actually trust. Cheers. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

p.s. See, as an example, adatèr for my first attempt at a conjugation table.

2000, Heinrich Schmid, Criteri per la formazione di una lingua scritta comune della Ladinia Dolomitica, Istitut Cultural Ladin “Majon di Fascegn”

Ladin is far from being a unified language, and it’s very likely that different towns have different conjugations. In fact, the Criteri list several different regional forms for the conjugations, I just listed the ones the author considers standard. For example, the 2nd-person plural present indicative of ester: seis or sëis (Marebbe, Badia and Val Gardena), sês (Badia), sei (Livinallongo), se (Vale d’Ampezzo), sié (Cole Santa Lucia) and siede (Val di Fassa).

In any case, SPELL’s grammar (your first link) looks more authoritative. I won’t mind if you replace my tables with its conjugation. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 10:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there! Can you confirm that this word means veganism, when my research has indicated that it is actually veganismo? Thanks, Razorflame 20:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

It’s the practice of eating only vegetables, according to my dictionary (never encountered the term myself.) I’m not familiar with veganism, but all they eat is vegetables then yes, though veganismo is the most common translation of veganism. There is also an unrelated architecture sense. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:38, 20 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

So what is the Portuguese for (deprecated template usage) vegetarianism? SemperBlotto (talk) 20:46, 20 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

vegetalismo. Vegans don't eat anything that comes from any animal. Razorflame 20:47, 20 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

No, that's the Portuguese for veganism. Anyway, I found the answer by looking at the translation table for "vegetarianism". SemperBlotto (talk)?

Vegetarianismo. That doesn’t fit the description, as some forms of vegetarianism include milk, eggs; some even fish. On the other hand, my dictionary also claims that vegetarianismo is the practice of only eating vegetables. Clearly something is amiss, I’ll investigate further. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 20:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have expanded the entry. By the way, I also encountered a sense not listed by the other dictionaries I checked. Take that, competitors! — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 21:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there again. this reference (from p 63) lists the conjugations of the Ladin modal verbs podei, aussei, messei, cognei, dovei and volei. Now some Italian equivalents are fairly obvious (podei = potere, dovei = dovere, volei = volere) but I can't think what the other ones mean. Cognei must be conoscere, but that isn't really a modal verb in Italian. Messei could be mettere, I suppose (ditto). I'm totally stumped by aussei. Any ideas? SemperBlotto (talk) 09:00, 21 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

p.s. Page 87 of the same document has the following irregular verbs :- dé, dì, fé and jì. I think these must be equivalent to Italian dare, dire, fare and andare - do you agree? SemperBlotto (talk) 11:21, 21 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Aussei is probably equivalent to osare.

Cognei you have already added: cogner.

Messei might mean “must”, as it’s from German müssen.

Agree about dè, etc. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:05, 21 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Roger that. Except that I am now thinking that "aussei" is adusare. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:47, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

You’re right. I found the meaning here, defined as “gebrauchen, benützen, gewöhnen.” — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 07:58, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Could you add the entry for this term please? I've already added it to the translations for derailment. Thanks, Razorflame 01:05, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

 Done — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :) Did I get the gender right? Since it ended in -o, I figured it was masculine. Razorflame 01:19, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Be careful though, as many words ending in -ão (especially -ção) are feminine. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I knew that there were some kind of exceptions to the rule :) Thanks for the heads-up, though I do not plan on making entries in Portuguese anytime soon ;) Razorflame 01:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Why not? Just be careful, don’t add things you’re not sure about and use {{attention}} when necessary. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Because of my history. Razorflame 01:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ah, that was you. But if you’re ever interested in contributing Portuguese, send me a message and I’ll officially oversee all the Portuguese content you add. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 01:34, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Very well. Thanks for the opportunity :) Razorflame 01:39, 22 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. When you created the {{lld-adj}} template, you allowed for an automatic inflection system. This system is entirely unused - not a single case. Would you have any objection to my removing it, and retaining just the manual inflection system? The reason is that I am about to create a bot system to add the inflected forms, and the programming would be much simpler with only the manual system to consider. Cheers SemperBlotto (talk) 08:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

It wasn’t used because you chose not to use it. I have fixed some parameters and it can now be used for a lot more cases, like -f (sportif), -l (provinziel) and -o (medemo.) It could also have been used for at least -t (privat) and -bl (nviulabl.) — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 10:06, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

OK, it makes sense to use it in order to minimize errors (I've found a few). There is a small problem with -er in that the masculine plural gives -ers, but in the case of -ber, -der, -fer, -gher, -per, -ter and -ver it should give -bri (etc). I shall have to use the pl= override in these cases. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:15, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Not anymore. I created the er2 and gher parameters for these. Can you add an example of both to the documentation? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 11:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Doesn't this just fall under High German? —CodeCat 11:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don’t know. I’ve yet to find a decent resource on Suevic, but it left some loanwords in Iberian languages, especially placenames. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 11:24, 26 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I nominated it for deletion now, giving some reasons. I hope you contribute? —CodeCat 21:02, 27 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Should the first translation be saltire? (Saint depends on the colour) SemperBlotto (talk) 11:12, 27 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

No, because aspa is not only used in heraldry, while saltire is. In fact, the actual cross on which Saint Andrew was crucified can be called an aspa. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 11:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough. This is from "The De Soto Chronicles":- An aspa is an instrument of torture made in the form of an X or, in this case, the somewhat more horizontal St. Andrew's Cross, rather than the standard cross suggested by Robertson's unannotated translation of the word as simple "cross". (He is talking about the Portuguese word) SemperBlotto (talk) 14:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I split the senses. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:17, 27 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

See val - script error - should be 3rd person singular present of valer? SemperBlotto (talk) 09:50, 5 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

p.s. Also valhais, valham and valhamos. p.p.s. Many forms of prever and rever (See Category:Pages with script errors).

You didn’t read the documentation! These have irregularities that prevent the automatic form recognition from working. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 17:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'm a bit confused as to how you worked this word. Why not just copy the pexieren cite over to pekzieren and then just use pekzieren for the FWOTD? This saves the trouble of tagging pekzieren with {{was fwotd}} when it actually isn't, and the confusion of being redirected to a word which is not actually the word listed. Plus it's not immediately obvious that the cite is actually located at pexieren. I've added a {{was fwotd}} to pexieren, but I'm not really sure how this should be categorised. Hyarmendacil (talk) 00:21, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

The cite uses pexieren, but the content is at pekzieren so the link leads to that. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 02:08, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

But why not just move the pexieren cite to the pekzieren citations page, saving all the trouble? I though it was allowable to use minor alternative forms to cite the main entry, e.g. Citations:chimæræ. Hyarmendacil (talk) 08:41, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

True, but is pexieren a minor form? — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 09:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ok, well, you know much more German than I so I won't argue. It just seems a bit cumbersome, that's all. Hyarmendacil (talk) 09:47, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

I think you may have these English words confused, given your Portuguese translation to the later that is cognate to the former. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

It’s both. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 04:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Could you check this entry please? It was added by a user that does not know Portuguese according to his babel page, and I want to make sure it's right. Thanks, Razorflame 23:02, 13 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

It’s fine. I made some minor formatting changes. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

All right. Thanks, Razorflame 03:58, 15 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Olá! Qual é o significado do verbo 'milhar'? Você adicionou esta seção à página 'milho'. Eu não sou falante nativo do português, mas não encontrei este verbo no internet e nos otros Wikcionários. Taliandr (talk) 22:30, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

O significado é “dar milho aos animais.” Hoje em dia, pelo que sei, só é usado no sul do Brasil, e mesmo aqui é raro. Os outros Wikcionários não são muito completos, nem mesmo o português. O verbo é encontrado nesse dicionário online (que, aliás, é de longe o mais completo que conheço). — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 22:33, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Could you add it, please? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 22:35, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

 Done — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 22:48, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Obrigado! Então, em Inglês vai ser "feed (someone) maize"? — This unsigned comment was added by Taliandr (talk • contribs).

Eu não diria “someone”, pois todas citações que encontrei referem-se a dar milho a animais. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 22:47, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Acho que é sujeita a interpretação e visão de mundo, mas não é tão importante. :) Taliandr (talk) 23:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

O quê significa nesta frase? "Parece que dá para você jogar, mas não dá." É dum jogo que já tenho jogado em inglês e creio que foi traduzido "It looks like you can play with it, but you can't."

Haha sorry if my Portuguese is awful. I didn't even claim to know the language until I had played a few chapters of this game without using my dictionary. The last time I spoke Portuguese* I was absolutely horrible. I was on a plane and I thought that this woman with a very calm baby was Spanish, so I told her, "Es increíble que no llorara." She informed me that she was Portuguese and didn't understand, so I panicked and said, "É increíbel [sic] que no [sic] ... " and motioned tears streaming down my face. It was so painful for both of us. XD Ultimateria (talk) 22:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

A major oversight of mine. I’ve added the relevant sense. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 23:18, 19 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! I was so confused. One little thing: I don't really understand the second example sentence (in Portuguese or English). What does it mean, exactly? Ultimateria (talk) 05:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

I think it's an adjective (an informal/nonstandard form of "crystal clear"). The adverb (if it exists) would be "crystal clearly". SemperBlotto (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

It is citable as an adverb too. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder whether Wiktionary is really a force for good. This seems quite non-standard. Every time we add such an outlier, I think we are increasing the chance that some translator or compiler of an FL-English dictionary will propagate the term. I would hope that Wiktionary can be more than a cabinet of curiosities. DCDuring TALK 02:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

The often-suggested idea of emphasising primary senses would solve this. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 03:04, 23 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps generally, but not in this case, AFAICT. If it is indeed even a CFI-meeting entry, how many senses would it have? Would any of them meet minimal standards of correctness? DCDuring TALK 03:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Add {{cx|nonstandard|lang=en}} if you think it’s nonstandard. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 03:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

So I'm actually taking a Portuguese class now. Yesterday, the professor asked us our majors and wrote them on the board in Portuguese. One girl is a psych major, so he wrote "psicologia" on the board but pronounced it /piskoloˈʒiɐ/. Twice. That can't be right. Is this standard? Ultimateria (talk) 02:15, 28 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

No. At least I’ve never heard it. However, a common phenomenon in Brazilian Portuguese is for it to be /pi.si.ko-/ (and also things like advogado as /a.d͡ʒi.vo-/, pneu as /pi.ˈnew/, eczema as /e.ki.ˈze-/, etc.) Maybe this is what she said. It’s not really standard, but it’s becoming increasingly acceptable, even in formal speech. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 02:22, 28 August 2013 (UTC)Reply