User talk:Rua

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives: 2009-2010 · 2011 · 2012
Start a new discussion

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Rollback on poda patti017:19, 24 September 2017
need for help on Module:it-head915:44, 17 September 2017
''Haghel''015:43, 15 September 2017
{{temp|In title}}111:52, 28 August 2017
Your signature318:24, 24 August 2017
Rollback on fagiolo110:25, 24 August 2017
Why so unhelpful?412:56, 23 August 2017
Two things423:46, 20 August 2017
Trinidāda un Tobāgo621:13, 19 August 2017
Deletion and reverted edits121:48, 14 August 2017
prefix template with another template embedded216:47, 22 July 2017
Redskin222:39, 6 July 2017
Category Forests122:08, 28 June 2017
Entry Request: Proto-Indo-European *kʷerp-113:32, 21 June 2017
Reconstruction:Proto-Finnic/porcas418:02, 19 June 2017
Inline translation sections118:21, 14 June 2017
Rollback error219:29, 13 June 2017
redirects016:52, 11 June 2017
1a16 edit1220:22, 6 June 2017
Demonyms612:24, 6 June 2017
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Next page
Next page
Last page
Last page

Hi, regarding this, poda patti doesn't seem like a phrase, hence replaced it with slang, as it is a slang word. The other change was modifying the Malayalam script. Which change out of these two was found questionable by you and reverted ? Thanks, King Prithviraj II (talk) 17:19, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

17:19, 24 September 2017

Hi, CodeCat. I tried to add a function on the module so to have proper nouns, too, but I must have done something wrong. May you check my mistakes? Thanks and sorry in advance ;)

Would you be so kind to reply at least to tell me if you can or not? Please…

Well, thank you anyway. [ˌiˑvã̠n̪ˑˈs̪kr̺ud͡ʒʔˌn̺ovã̠n̪ˑˈt̪ɔ̟t̪ːo] (parla con me) 13:38, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unable to reply, as you know by now. Are you still having trouble with this?

Rua (mew)

14:38, 17 September 2017

Take a look at {{it-proper noun}}. I made it all manually, but is there a way to automatize the whole thing by fixing the function I added to the module?

How is this? diff

Rua (mew)

15:16, 17 September 2017
 
 
 
 
 

''Haghel''

(Voor het gemak zeg ik dit in het Nederlands maar ik heb er geen problemen mee als je het liever in het Engels doet)
In het Vroegmiddelnederlands Woordenboek (1200-1300) komt het woord "haghel" 14 keer voor en is er ook nog eens 10 keer sprake van een prefix haghel-, plus èèn haghael en èèn aghel-. De spelling -gh- komt dus in totaal 26 keer voor in bronnen uit deze eeuw terwijl hagel maar twee keer voorkomt. In de periode 1250-1500 is te zien dat hagel in gebruik toeneemt maar nog steeds gelijkgaat met haghel tot ongeveer de 15e eeuw. Etymologisch Woordenboek van het Nederlands (M. Philippa e.a. 2003-2009) geeft dan ook haghel als de Middelnederlandse vorm (afgeleid van het oudere werkwoord haghelen), evenals Nederlands Etymologisch Woordenboek (J. de Vries 1971) en een paar anderen. Ik denk dat het meer is dan simpelweg een variant. Het kan best wel eens de meest voorkomende vorm uit die tijd zijn, maar het punt is meer dat haghel duidelijk de standaard was van 1200 tot 1300 en daarna slechts geleidelijk populariteit moest afstaan aan hagel. Prinsgezinde (talk) 15:43, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

15:43, 15 September 2017

{{temp|In title}}

Wikipedia has this useful template. Do you think it is worth importing or can we improve on it? (it is non-Lua)

04:49, 28 August 2017

What does it do?

Rua (mew)

11:52, 28 August 2017
 

Your signature

I'm a little confused by your new signature here, and was wondering why you changed it.

22:02, 23 August 2017

I have a pending rename, waiting for usurpation.

Rua (mew)

22:07, 23 August 2017

Oh. That's gonna take some getting used to...

15:07, 24 August 2017

Ruakh sometimes comes to my mind when I'm reading CodeCat's new name.

18:24, 24 August 2017
 
 
 

Why was this done? Plenty of other pages note relevant false cognates.

09:41, 24 August 2017

{{term}} is obsolete, you linked to the page it.

Rua (mew)

10:25, 24 August 2017
 

Why so unhelpful?

Just write a sentence to tell me what was wrong. It says you are a native speaker of English, so take the ten seconds.

?'"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000000-QINU`"'? Knyȝt

11:50, 23 August 2017
  • The things you added to the definition line should go in a usage note, as they have nothing to do with the meaning of the word.
  • Synonyms go before derived terms, per WT:EL.
  • The descendants were not formatted with {{l}} or {{desc}}.
  • Most of the descendants are not actual descendants, but rather descendants of derived terms.
12:01, 23 August 2017

What about now?

?'"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000000-QINU`"'? Knyȝt

12:36, 23 August 2017

Now it's good, thank you.

12:49, 23 August 2017

Alright, thanks.

?'"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000000-QINU`"'? Knyȝt

12:56, 23 August 2017
 
 
 
 

Two things

  1. Why are you reverting my template upgrades; Template:etyl is deprecated. It's possible I could make a mistake and use the wrong one, but the answer is never to go back to Template:etyl
  2. /ɚ/ is not a standard English phoneme; consult w:Help:IPA/English. It belongs in a [phonetic] pronunciation. I am attempting the huge undertaking of standardizing as many entries as I can. If we are going to use IPA we need to do it right.
22:40, 20 August 2017

For the same reason Metaknowledge is currently talking to you. Bad categorisation.

22:41, 20 August 2017

Okay, my apologies on the categorization thing. I do feel I'm right on moving the rhotacized vowels to a phonetic pronunciation. It conforms to standard IPA, it brings the information at other locations in better sync, and it benefits everyone by allowing people to see both a very close phonemic pronunciation and the exact phonetic pronunciation. The former is useful to people learning English, because it's a lot easier to understand a much smaller list of standard English phonemes than to know every IPA symbol under the sun.

23:17, 20 August 2017

I have no issues with the pronunciation, although I have my doubts about the way you place syllable breaks.

23:19, 20 August 2017

I don't recall ever making any guesses about syllabification; they are optional and I try to avoid them altogether unless there's a very clear reason to show them. If I do add them I pull them from Oxford Dictionaries (which unfortunately has a paywall for detailed stuff like syllabification). I'd be happy to check on any you have doubts about.

23:46, 20 August 2017
 
 
 
 
Edited by author.
Last edit: 20:58, 19 August 2017

This isn't error... If can use Template:lv-decl-noun, then please show me, how possible that, when first word (Trinidāda) is declinable, but third word (Tobāgo) is indeclinable. Maybe can with this template Template:lv-decl-AdjN. I try, but cann't get necessary declinable.

20:52, 19 August 2017

As I said, if there is no template that will work, you need to create a new one. You can't put that huge jumble of code into the entry.

20:54, 19 August 2017

Can you show me, how that can do?

20:56, 19 August 2017

First think of a name for the template. Then take the code that you put in the entry, and put it in the template instead. Then, transclude the template in the entry, just like you would do with any other template.

20:59, 19 August 2017

Maybe can something like this.

21:05, 19 August 2017

You could also write "See Trinidāda and Tobāgo".

21:10, 19 August 2017
 
 
 
 
 

Deletion and reverted edits

Hi, CodeCat. Why did you mark for deletion the [[Category:Personal pronouns-table templates by language]] and revert the edits of the templates for this category? What's wrong? I didn't find the explanation there: Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others.

21:44, 14 August 2017

Because we don't categorise templates in such a way. There aren't any other categories like it.

21:48, 14 August 2017
 

prefix template with another template embedded

Hi CodeCat. Why does my etymology in unbeschulbar not display properly. If I use compound instead of prefix then this sort of clever thing works fine.

16:11, 22 July 2017

Sorry - fixed it by coding it properly!

16:14, 22 July 2017

DTHLS's version works too, and is probably recommended. {{confix}} may be deleted in favour of {{affix}} at some future time, since the latter can do everything the former does.

16:47, 22 July 2017
 
 

Hi CC. Regarding this, it is, on the balance of probabilities, unlikely. I've been involved in editing Redskin (slang) and have looked into the etymology there, extensively. The early uses of red/redskin originates as self-identification by Indians in the SE, with no indication that paint was their reason for doing so (although that is a possibility). I'm inclined to believe Shoemaker's suggestion that it comes from an origin story about god making them out of red clay, but that's not confirmed (nor is it confirmable).

Anyway, this is what the OED used to say, which supports your position: "‘Redskin’ is first recorded in the late 17th century and was applied to the Algonquian peoples generally, but specifically to the Delaware (who lived in what is now southern New York state and New York City, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania). Redskin referred not to the natural skin color of the Delaware, but to their use of vermilion face paint and body paint."[1]

They've since changed that, on the back of research by Goddard.[2]

This is what they currently say: "The use of the term redskin is first recorded in the 18th century, translating (via French) a term in the Illinois language meaning literally ‘person with red skin’."[3]

The compound part of you revert is still fair (as that's what peaux rouges literally means), if you want to retain that.

22:33, 6 July 2017

My main objection was that you removed the part which said it was made up of red + skin. Correct information shouldn't be removed, you should have added your information after it instead.

22:34, 6 July 2017

Cool, I'll redo it right then.

22:35, 6 July 2017

Also, if the term was taken from French, you should probably also add in {{calque|en|fr|peau rouge}} or similar after the compound template.

22:38, 6 July 2017
 
 
 

Category Forests

Hi CodeCat,

About your revert... Do you believe that (most) pages in Category:en:Forests are also wrong? Just trying to understand.

22:00, 28 June 2017

It looks like they are also misplaced, yes. We don't currently have a category for listing types of forests. There is discussion of possible solutions at WT:Beer parlour/2017/June#Proposal: Clean up, rename and replace "en:" → "English" in all categories.

22:08, 28 June 2017
 

Entry Request: Proto-Indo-European *kʷerp-

Hallo CodeCat! PIE *kʷerp- (body) does not yet have an entry. I would request you to create it.

Descendants: Albanian kërmë, kurm, krep and shkep, Armenian որովայն, Anct. Gk. πρᾰπίδες (diaphragm), Sanskrit कृप् (beautiful appearance), Middle Persian kirb, Old English hrif, Old High German and Old Frisian href and Avestan 𐬐𐬆𐬵𐬭𐬞𐬀 (kəhrpa) (body) 2405:204:962C:BED7:7585:AAED:ABA4:2C2D 13:26, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

De Vaan gives this root as *ḱrep- instead.

13:31, 21 June 2017
 

Reconstruction:Proto-Finnic/porcas

ETY reconstructs the Proto-Indo-Iranian word differently. It also adds that the Erzya and Moksha words might be Finnic loans, and that the less likely theory is it being directly from PIE.

15:53, 19 June 2017

The PIE form is not disputed, as far as I can tell, there's a clear *o in the first syllable. In Proto-Indo-Iranian, *e and *o both become *a, so you get *párćas. If the Uralic terms all preserve the *o, then this would need to be explained in some way.

17:25, 19 June 2017

To be clear, in the new transcription system, it would be Proto-Indo-Iranian *párĉas.

JohnC5

17:36, 19 June 2017

Hmm. I think I like the old system more. At least ḱ and ć both have the same diacritic.

17:43, 19 June 2017

You should have raised the complaint before they were all moved then. See Wiktionary talk:About Proto-Indo-Iranian.

JohnC5

18:02, 19 June 2017
 
 
 
 

Inline translation sections

If we're going to add a lot of definition anchors, it seems like we want to minimize senseid duplication. Have you thought about putting translations under their respective definition lines?

18:20, 14 June 2017

The idea crossed my mind recently, but it would be a big change. Maybe you could propose it?

18:21, 14 June 2017
 

Rollback error

Justin (koavf)TCM

19:27, 13 June 2017

Your edit was the error, it breaks all kinds of things.

19:28, 13 June 2017

Fixed it before I even saw this message. Thanks/sorry.

Justin (koavf)TCM

19:29, 13 June 2017
 
 

this is a following of [1].--2001:DA8:201:3512:CD84:BF8E:5FA5:70A7 16:52, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Codecat,

Just to request the reason you think the edit needed reverting,

thanks

1a16 (talk) 20:03, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

20:03, 6 June 2017

Nowhere in the entry God does it say that it refers specifically to Christianity.

20:05, 6 June 2017

God is the word used in Christianity, it is the actual word .... Allah is the actual word used in Islam

20:07, 6 June 2017

God is the word used in English, Allah is used in Arabic. When English people speak about the Islamic god, they use "God" too, just like they do for the gods of any other religion.

20:08, 6 June 2017

"Allah" is used very often in English to refer to the Islamic God! What rock have you been under?

20:12, 6 June 2017
 

the transliteration, is Arabic, the translation is of Arabic

the etymologies are different, the two words are of different cultures - Islam isn't Christianity because the two are religions, the original is of Arabic culture, belongs to Arabic culture:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah#Etymology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God#Etymology_and_usage

20:14, 6 June 2017
 

the two words root differently by way of their different etymologies, and accordingly have different meanings which are possessed by the different pronunciations, which stem from the languages they evolved in

20:16, 6 June 2017

Ok, but if you think that "God" can't refer to the god of Islam, then you need to take that matter to WT:TR.

20:17, 6 June 2017
 
 
 

Islam doesn't use the word: God

20:07, 6 June 2017

Take it to WT:TR.

20:10, 6 June 2017
 

please see God#Etymology_and_usage at Wikipedia

20:09, 6 June 2017
 
 

Regarding this: isn't a demonym supposed to be derived from a particular place name? Slav is not from a place name. I know that Category:Nationalities does not fit well either. Nor does Category:Ethnicity. We need a category for ethnic groups like Slavs, Jews or Chechens.

19:01, 4 June 2017

Demo- just means a people, so a denonym is a name for a people. Slavs, Jews and Chechens fit into that just fine.

19:05, 4 June 2017

Not according to Wikipedia's or our definition of demonym. A better term is ethnonym.

19:10, 4 June 2017

Let me say that I find it stupid that the word has that meaning. Are we sure it's not a mistake somehow?

19:12, 4 June 2017

I did not know the exact meaning of the word either, but it appears that it refers exclusively to place-name derivations. See the last review here.

19:25, 4 June 2017

Then maybe we should make a point of renaming it to Ethnonyms? The trouble is that there's substantial overlap and it can also be quite difficult to determine. A person can be German by origin, but have a French passport. They might have even been born in France, and have some ancestors in Germany. We might agree that there are a French people (ethnonym), but were there a Yugoslavian people? Are all people born in Russia also Russians? Native Americans in the US or Canada?

19:33, 4 June 2017
 
 
 
 
 
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Next page
Next page
Last page
Last page