WORD BY LETTER : English CROSSWORD SOLVER and others things ...
Words starting with : 
Words ending  with : 
Ledger Nano S - The secure hardware wallet
Find a definition : 

definition of the word User_talk:Vahagn_Petrosyan

by the Wiktionnary

IC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> User talk:Vahagn Petrosyan - Wiktionary

User talk:Vahagn Petrosyan

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive: 1 2 3


Hello Vahagn Petrosyan -- You were correct. A savvy call. -- Ghost of WikiPedant (formerly User:WikiPedant) 18:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I had no idea that penis-enlargement pills had precognition as a side-effect. --Ivan Štambuk 19:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I also knew Jackofclubs was Wonderfool from the beginning but I was too late to accuse him; he came out of closet. For what it's worth, I think User:Internoob is the next WF. PS My big penis is all-natural, you asshole :) --Vahag 19:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

հասկանալի? -able only lists -ելի so I'm not sure how these are made. But I did but up a {{trreq}}. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 20:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

You take the verb in infinitive and add  (-i) to it: հասկանալ (haskanal, to understand) -> հասկանալի (haskanali, understandable), ուտել (utel, to eat) -> ուտելի (uteli, eatable). --Vahag 20:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Awesome... thanks :) — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 20:56, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

This is just a short message to let you know that we're replacing IE with Indo-European and PIE with Proto-Indo-European. It's part of our "plain English campaign" - that is using English words, not abbreviations. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I've noticed. I agree with the campaign. --Vahag 11:56, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how to clean up this edit (two spans and two classes). Shouldn't those font suggestions be put in MediaWiki:Common.css anyways? Cheers. --Bequw τ 17:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I moved those suggestions to Common.css. Thanks. --Vahag 17:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The source is Turkish Language Association. -- 23:36, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

The Association doesn't have detailed etymological dictionary, but they indicate if it is a loan word. Nişanyan says for the word "örnek", it seemed in Chagatai language on the "En erken Türkçe örnek" (The earliest Turkish sample) section. Chagatai was a Turkic language which was spoken in Central Asia. There can't be direct relation with Armenian and Chagatai. So, it's probably a Turkic word, later lended to Armenian. -- 12:37, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
You left out the part where Nişanyan says "~? Erm ōrinag ōrinak model, nümune, göstermelik" [1]. And Armenian օրինակ (ōrinak), being attested in the 5th century AD, can't be a Turkic loan. I realize the Armenian origin of Turkish örnek is not 100% sure, but I have two sources claiming so. You can add the alternative theory of native Turkic origin, but please do not remove sourced information. --Vahag 15:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

On the vote about place names, you commented "To the barricades, placename lovers. This time we must win!". I've just noticed that we don't have an entry for to the barricades, neither an appropriate sense at barricade that would render the three-word term sum of parts. As I've so far failed to come up with a good definition of the term, you might want to have a go. If you don't or equally can't get a good definition, then I think the tearoom would be a good next step. Thryduulf (talk) 11:37, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I too can't think of a good definition. English is only my third language. --Vahag 11:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Ok, see WT:TR#to the barricades if you're interested. Thryduulf (talk) 14:17, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Привет, Вааг, исправь пожалуйста предложный падеж на -е. --Anatoli 01:07, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Ты не прав :) Посмотри гений и викарий у Зализняка:
  • http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/morph.cgi?word=[gjenij]
  • http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/morph.cgi?word=[vikarij]
Ну и Гугл выдаёт 79,900 ссылок для о гении и 1,730 о гение. --Vahag 10:19, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Oops, shame on me :) --Anatoli 01:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Привет, Вааг. Посмотри какую откровенную пристрастность пытается привнести в статью Косово участник Дмол. По моему разумению понадобится защитить статью после еще одного вмешательства с его стороны. Как кажется тебе это? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 13:24, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Привет, Богорм. Я оставил Дмолу заметку: если хочет, пусть несёт Косово в RfV. Я не столько возражаю против его определения "Kosovo", сколько тому, что он делает вид будто прежняя RfV-дискуссия что-то решила.--Vahag 15:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Спасибо, что исправил, Вааг. И та и другая форма в сети встречаются очень редко - Թայբէյ и Տայբեյ. Мой источник - Geonames. Можно рассматривать первую как вариант или ты следуешь какому-то стандарту транслитерации? --Anatoli 01:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Я следую специальному словарю географических названий на армянском (есть только печатная версия), а они следуют официальному стандарту транслитераций. Вообще Гугл очень ненадёжный источник для армянского: spelling *Թայբէյ (T’aybēy) не может существовать в армянском, է (ē) не может находиться в середина слова, только вначале. Используй лучше Eastern Armenian National Corpus — это отксанированная база реальных армянских текстов. У них есть Տայբեյ и Թայբեյ. --Vahag 09:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Vahag. Behold this edit by the IP. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 21:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for catching the miscreant. --Vahag 22:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
There has been another instance of insolence lately. Some people are obviously not aware of the purpose of the References section. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 12:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Pesky Georgians... --Vahag 15:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

lol, praise the heavens for guys like you here ;) 10:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, nice IP. --Vahag 18:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Պրիվետ Վահա՛գն May I ask you a favour? My friend's going to get a tattoo and he asked me of which language he should have it. Can you please tell me what "she exists as long as her presence is felt" means in Armenian and Russian? I don't want it to sound stupid since he'll have it forever; so if you have a better idea to translate with a similar meaning, I'd appreciate that :) Thank you so much in advance :) Sinek 16:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Privet! In Armenian you can say նա կա, քանի դեռ զգացվում է իր ներկայությունը (na ka, k’ani deṙ zgac’vum ē ir nerkayut’yunë). There is no 'she' and 'her' in Armenian, though. We use նա (na) for 'he/she/that'. In Russian it would be она есть, пока чувствуется её присутствие. --Vahag 18:33, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Մերսիիի :) That really helped! Sinek 10:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Not sure exactly what to do about this IP who keeps changing Georgian transliterations... Special:Contributions/ I've blocked them for a day, but... not sure if they'll come back. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I left him a message and unblocked him. I have a feeling he is not evil. --Vahag 08:57, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Maybe not evil, but I keep finding people who are natives of some language... and when you disagree with them on some minor issue, like transliteration, they start insulting your knowledge of the language and getting up in arms. Since it's an IP, I figured I'd block and pass the problem off to you, since you actually know something about Georgian :) — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 13:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey man I'm in Yerevan for a couple of days as of about 6am this morning if you wanna meet up. — hippietrail 16:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure, let's meet, I emailed you my number. I can't say I know my country very well tourist-guide-wise, but I can show you were to find the best Armenian prostitutes, the cleanest in the region :) --Vahag 18:20, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry man didn't wake up till twelve due to hitchhiking-lag. Will have a լահմաջո and a shower and call you in an hour or two... — 07:36, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
It's OK, I was sleeping anyway... :) --Vahag 08:16, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Vahag - I have been looking at the structure of {{el-decl-adj}} and playing with it at {{el-test}}. What I have done seems to work - I have put a test display at λευκός#Greek - it is working via User:Saltmarsh/template the possible replacement for {{el-a-ός-ή-ό-Creg}}. Please could you have a look my syntax in el-test. Thanks —Saltmarshαπάντηση 08:38, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up this 'mess' - there are other templates in other languages with the same problem (if only we had infinite time and patience). Mglovesfun (talk) 10:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm only too happy to fix these. It's just some people are very protective of their templates... --Vahag 10:58, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Saltmarsh. I made only this change to your syntax and switched all the tables with comparison degrees to the new format. There is another thing that bothers me: the transliteration of plurals as in άλογο. Don't you find the sequence of parentheses annoying? Do you mind if I disable the transliteration of plurals in {{el-noun}}? If I were you, I wouldn't show plurals in the inflection line at all, we have a declension table for that. Besides, why is the nominative plural special? Why not the singular genitive or the plural accusative? The fashion of showing the plural in the inflection line is spread by English, but that's because the nom. plural is the only inflected form in it. --Vahag 11:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
That was very smartly done - thanks. I should perhaps say now that this attention is very welcome - it is sometimes difficult to get others (busy elsewhere) interested in this little part of the project - please continue if there are any other points that attract your attention. Much of the inflection line work was done before declension tables were dreamt of. As ideas develop can be difficult to implement them - particularly with my perhaps poorly constructed templates. You raise a number of points:
1. The noun plural transliteration always bothered me it looked untidy (I have often left it out, after all the user has the singular transliteraion and it saves time with entries) - I've removed it.
2. I think the plural itself should stay until most nouns have a full declension displayed (this may be some time!) users will appreciate its inclusion. The nominative plural is important because it helps users with declensions, eg masculine nouns in -ας can be -ες or -αδες in the plural, once known the appropriate declension is more easily chosen.
I hope I have explained that need clearly. The same applies to the display of adjectival feminine and neuter forms; and the past form of verbs - these are a standard in good dictionaries, but will not be essential ... eventually. —Saltmarshαπάντηση 18:25, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I want to nag you about one more thing: glosses for {{l}} should be handled like this. I would not include translations for ==See also== section at all, come to that, because they are one click away, and we are all too thinly spread to provide such luxury. --Vahag 18:40, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I will try to make sure I get the syntax right in future - I was probably perpetuating an error I picked up somewhere else. It takes time to enter such terms, but it helps my Greek vocabulary and maintains interest. —Saltmarshαπάντηση 18:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Category:Neapolitan conjugation templates should really use a master template like {{nap-conj}}... which doesn't exist. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Which is why you should create one... :) Not interested in Italian dialects, sorry. --Vahag 13:09, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up the 'dzud' entry. I am not good with templates an the general formatting of wiktionary.  I was hoping i could add something and a more experienced editor would help me out, and before i knew it, you had helped me! Thanks a bunch.

I added the mongolian definition to the зуд entry, but i'm not sure if it's the right style. Also i feel i should link to the 'dzud' latinization of the word, but i'm not sure how to format that.... could you assist me there as well?

Again, thanks, and cheers! -Fudoreaper 07:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

No worries. --Vahag 07:43, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Not going to shout at you for changing the colour of {{fi-decl}}, but whatever it ends up at, please change {{fi-conj}} to match. Thanks!

Personally, I thought blue was generally the order of the day at Wiktionary, but I think that question's above my pay grade; the green's nice too. Whatever, it's most important that all such collapsible inflection tables should match. --KJBracey 11:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Mind you, I find the combination of pale green for borders and pale blue for the table a bit garish. I'd prefer to not have more than one hue in use. Either change that blue to a matching pale green, or to grey. --KJBracey 12:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
And the centre alignment's a really bad idea for an inflection table. It obscures stem+ending patterns. You really don't want the stem/ending boundary shifting left and right in a table. You can sort of get away with it for the declension, where all the forms don't differ too much in length, but it'll be worse for conjugation.
And the darkness of your edges don't make any logical sense. Again, not too painful for declension, but conjugation's more complicated, and the intensity represents levels of subheading. Whereas your darkness scheme seems kind of random.
And a table title needs a capital letter.
So, having said, I don't mind the green, I don't like anything else you've done... --KJBracey 12:43, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
The format of {{hu-decl}} was a compromise we reached with EncycloPetey after a long discussion. I don't look at Finnish tables often enough to have another fight over this, so I reverted myself. --Vahag 14:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Привет, Вааг. Ты бы не помог мне разобраться в слове курсиха из следующего предложения (В. В. Розанов):

И едят, бедные, селедочку, запивая водочкой, ночуя с « курсихой », и завтра надеясь проснуться в заре торжествующего социализма.

(Речь идет о революционерах) Что оно значит? В словарях найти не могу, гугл выдает совсем немного результатов. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 19:50, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Привет, Богорм. Просмотрев редкие цитаты с этим словом, думаю, что курсиха то же, что курсистка, а именно — её нестандартная и грамматически неуклюжая форма (поэтому в кавычках) --Vahag 21:22, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Понял. Спасибо. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 21:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Привет, Вааг. Ты мог бы проверить ударение в недавно созданной статье мещанинишка? Далее, какие в принципе кавычки надо употреблять в русских цитатах - «…» или „…“ ? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 07:39, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Возник и еще один вопрос - я намерен добавить цитату, содержащую слово брачущихся < брачущийся. Однако, брачущийся никак нельзя вывести из глагола брачиться по правилам образования причастий. Как тебе кажется, ему полагается отдельная статья брачущийся, куда надо и девать цитату, или нет? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 07:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Привет. Ударение правильное. Русские, впрочем, как и армяне, предпочитают «...», но если в печатном оригинале другие кавычки, лучше использовать их.
Касательно второго вопроса, брачущихся < брачущиеся архаичная фоссилизированная форма; она должна быть отдельной статьёй (как у Ушакова) и цитаты нужно пихать туда. --Vahag 09:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
А насчет статьи здравие я не могу определить какой тэг подходящее всего - dated или archaic ? Там все в порядке? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 08:43, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Всё в порядке, молодец. А тэг лучше archaic, хотя почему так — ясно объяснить не могу. --Vahag 09:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

The contents of this section have been archived to Talk:qyamancha. —RuakhTALK 22:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi there Vahag. Recently, I have been adding Russian citations of words which raised my attention. Whilst translating them into English from scratch would prove to be an onerous endeavour, in the case of Pobedonoscev's citations it may be facilitated by the fact that there is one extant translation by Robert Crozier Long (deceased 72 years ago, ergo no copyright). You can see how the citations page looks like on, e. g., Citations:лицедейство. Do you find the format acceptable or needful of improvement? Do you have an alternative proposal concerning the structure of the Citations page (use of italics, paragraphs and so on)? The input of other Russian contributors (Stephen, Anatoli, Wanjuscha, AKA MBG) would be very much appreciated, before I set about adding more of these. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 13:08, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Privet. We only need to agree on the format of attributing the translator; it's not addressed in Wiktionary:Quotations. I prefer this format. Because that citation is used to attest the Russian word лицедейство in a Russian text and not some English word from Long's translation, the details of the translation are superfluous, IMO. --Vahag 15:01, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
It looks fine to me. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 16:22, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Привет, Вааг. Я попытался добавить транслитерацию в Citations:доколе, только я не уверен где стоит ударение в слово ложны (lóžny или ložný). Кроме того, слово мировоззрение действительно могло значить astronomy, как переводит его Long? Это архаичное значение? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 08:48, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Привет! Правильное ударение — ло́жны. А мировоззрение значение astronomy не имеет и точно не имело. Просто, так как далее речь идёт об астрономических мировоззрениях, переводчик допустил вольность. --Vahag 13:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Спасибо за исправления. Я сейчас, читая Каткова, знакомлюсь с такими изысканными, обворожительными словами (ковы, доколе, неразумие, зиждительный, разноверный, пустоцвет), которые я доселе не знал. Я кину большинство из них на Wiktionary:Requested entries:Russian. По этому поводу также спасибо за исчерпывающие статьи, а я со своей стороны примусь за цитаты. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 14:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Кидай, без проблем. --Vahag 14:26, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Vahagn,

Sorry, but I've rolled back your changes to {{prefix}}: that sort of change to a widely-used template needs to be discussed before being implemented.

To be honest, I don't quite see the purpose of that change; I could understand the usefulness of, say, {{prefix|un|re|made|lang=en}} producing un- + re- + made, with appropriate categories, but with the change that you made, it would produce the same result as {{prefix|un|re|lang=en}} + {{term|made|lang=en}}, which could just as easily be done in the entry itself. The latter functionality would not be so bad, except that it completely removes any possibility of the former. But that's just my opinion. A discussion at Wiktionary:Beer parlour or Template talk:prefix might well turn up support for the change.

RuakhTALK 17:50, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I guess you're right. --Vahag 17:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Vahag. Is there a way to insert the meaning of the root word when using that template? Here I would prefer

мнить ("deem")

, since the entry мнить does not exist yet. This issue concerns also заключение and заключать and belike numerous other cases. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 07:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Sure, do it like this. Sorry for not fulfilling verb requests. I will start doing them after I write automated Russian conjugation templates (that's in my mid-term to-do list; I just bought Zaliznyak's dictionary which discusses conjugation paradigms). --Vahag 13:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
I did not mean this to sound as an admonition. Interestingly, for some words like злоумышлять or горнило (though the latter is a noun) there is hardly any single-word English equivalent, so I am looking forward to your solution, whilst they bide their time (not to speak about плодотворить, where providing it with 2nd and third quotation would be quite an endeavour). The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 17:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Why the etymology change? You've given a verb as source for a noun (which has a totally different form). Doesn't make much sense.. Ƿidsiþ 13:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I was following major dictionaries. Only Collins derives peristalsis from peri- + στάλσις, the rest say its from περιστέλλω, via adjective περισταλτικός, which admittedly I omitted. Περισταλτικός δύναμις was used by Galen for “peristalsis”; see LSJ. --Vahag 14:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

No, the OED also says it (and they are probably the only two that bother to research it). What really happened is that we already had the word peristaltic, and peristalsis was formed as a kind of back-formation or analogy by using an existing prefix and an existing Greek word. (στάλσις is attested in ancient Greek but *περιστάλσις is not -- only περισταλτικός.) Ƿidsiþ 14:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't have an opinion on this matter, I just did a lemming test. Change the ety to what you find justified. Determining the precise route of adaptation of Graeco-Latin words into English seems to me arbitrary, anyway. --Vahag 14:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Это недоразумение коренится в копировании содержания строки отрядить. Я таким образом не обновил перевод и промахнулся. А затем я был отважным и создал статью отряжать. Надеюсь, что там все в порядке. Какой шаблон лучше всего применять - {{ru-verb-1}} или {{ru-conj}}? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 15:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Лучше {{ru-verb-1}}, он пободробнее, но и ресурсов (людских) жрёт побольше.--Vahag 15:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that was supposed to be ironic, but anyway, I got a question 'bout Russian. I was wondering if there's any place where the genitive ending -го is actually pronounced -go and not -vo? — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 04:43, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Lol. No, I can't think of any case where it is not pronounced as -vo. --Vahag 10:37, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Alright thanks, just wanted to be sure :D — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 15:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey man, у меня ещё один вопрос. Is -ческий a suffix in its own right, or just a form of -ский that results from palatalization of к? — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 17:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Tricky question, now that I think about it. In words like грамматический the suffix is -еский, an alternative form of -ский. The part грамматич- is palatalized from грамматика. Most words with -ческий result from palatalization of к or ц, but not all of them: words like мировоззренческий, наслажденческий, поведенческий, просвещенческий, языковедческий are composed from a genuine, independent suffix -ческий. So, the answer to your question is “it depends”. --Vahag 18:40, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Awesome lol... I love complicated stuff. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 19:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Ok so those red links bother my eyes. Are my assumptions correct?: поведенческий - behavioural, мировоззренческий - ideological; philosophical, языковедческий - linguistic, наслажденческий - ???, просвещенчески -??? lol — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Redlinks gone, you can sleep tight :) --Vahag 15:54, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

'Nother question :D Which of these is right: «я люблю свою подругу», или «я люблю мою подругу»? I ask because in Lithuanian, it would have to be reflexive but in some languages it wouldn't. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 07:45, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

«Я люблю свою подругу» is correct; the second one, though, is not unbearably ungrammatical either. --Vahag 15:54, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for helpin me out, bud :D — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 15:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Right on, homie. --Vahag 17:01, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Do you think this could be considered a suffix of its own in Russian, etymologically derived from the French/English -al (experimental, musical) with added Russianness? — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 06:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm wavering here. We can treat words with -альный as Latin borrowings, e.g. экспериментальный < Medieval Latin experimentalis + Russian suffix -ный, or we cans say it's from эксперимент + -альный. The second one is easier. --Vahag 14:38, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm thinking it's likely Russian picked up -al from French and added -ный. It seems pretty common for -альный to form adjectives of Latinate stuff like that. So like... it could be a suffix that's only for Latinate words or something. It does make the second one way easier :D — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 15:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

In gramota, I keep seeing definitions like "к Анатомия" (for анатомический) and "к Астрономия и Астроном" (for астрономический). In this sense, does к have some other use than what we have at к? I mean, they're still in nominative and everything... is that a dictionary thing, or are there actually cases outside dictionaries where к uses nominatives? — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 03:37, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The formula "к Анатомия" for анатомический means "[прилагательное] к [слову] астрономия", i.e. adjective corresponding to the noun 'astronomy'. You can't use к with nominative, it's just the dictionaries want to give the lemma form of the nouns, hence that slightly awkward formula. The same way in etymologies you would say "из анатомия", without declining. --Vahag 07:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Got another question, this one about short forms of -ский adjectives. I've noticed that not one entry I've seen on wiktionary lists forms like астрономическ or анатомическа, but this morphological dictionary lists them with asterisks and for some words those forms do get google hits. 'Sup wit' dat? — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 04:51, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks for your Russian contributions. Adjectives, which are not "qualitative" (качественные), don't get the short forms. Full and short form of adjectives (in Russian). A girl can be "very" beautiful but a house can't be very "made of stone". Эта девушка красива. Этот дом - каменный. --Anatoli 05:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
It would be awkward to make short adjectives from -ский adjectives, even if they can be considered qualitative. You can make short ones from -чный (= -чен) but I can't think of any with -ский. --Anatoli 05:06, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Tolik is right, you can't make short forms with -ский adjectives. The Google hits you get are abbreviations of Russian (астрономическ.) or are in other languages. As for Zaliznyak's dictionary, it lists awkward/non-existent forms with an asterisk. It does the same for the plural forms of uncountable nouns. --Vahag 07:21, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Alrighty, thanks guys :D — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 16:50, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Additionally, I suppose that плоский/плосок and веский/весок are no exceptions from that rule, since -ск- (in веский only  ?) belongs to the root, does it not? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 20:43, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Oh, how I love a good grammatically challenging language ^_^ — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 22:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Right, веский is from вес + -кий, cf. вар-кий, гром-кий, лип-кий. The -ск- in плоский is part of the root, inherited from PIE. --Vahag 07:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Russian is at least described well (methink). It's challenging but you can find all the info. Unlike Arabic, the grammar is reflected in the spelling, so you can see the grammar used in the context without having to guess the pronunciation of endings. With some vocabulary behind your belt, you can just read Russian texts and build on your grammar. --Anatoli 00:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Is the pronunciation [tʰɑkʰɑˈvoɾ] an irregularity, then? a Western Armenian pronunciation that by chance got taken up in Eastern too? I hope I'm not wrong to think that in general in Eastern, գ means /g/. 4pq1injbok 03:45, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's an irregularity. In Eastern Armenian /գ/ is almost always [g], but not in this word. For such irregularities compare also ձիգ, ձագ ,կարգ, դադար, վարագույր. I'm not sure whether this is the influence of Western Armenian or some regular change in certain Eastern Armenian dialects. Most often it happens when /գ/ is at the end of the word or between vowels. --Vahag 08:32, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay. I just guessed that someone had been careless. It would save the next instance of me this confusion if there were a note on the pronunciations to this effect, if that sort of thing's allowed by WT:PRON. 4pq1injbok 14:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Introducing such notes is conceivable, but not now. Now I'm concentrating on Old Armenian. --Vahag 14:37, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I think we shouldn't leave one code, but use one code in etymological derivations. Ottoman Turkish is a language that was used as the administrative language of Ottoman Empire. So, the "nation" didn't use it; that's why I wanna see one code there. Of course that doensn't mean we should delete everything about it. The words of this language can be entries with original spellings for Wiktionary; but that's it. We shouldn't do it like in Azeri, because nobody uses the Ottoman (Perso-Arabic) script today, while the Azerbaijani one(s) is used. Also, as I can see, most of the words are the same as transcription; but some of them have a little differences like in نماز and namaz. --OG 11:32, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I too think we should use one code in etymologies, namely {{tr}}, and use the Latin alphabet, not the Perso-Arabic, even if the word was borrowed in the Ottoman period. --Vahag 12:00, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Definition from Wiktionary
Content avaible with GNU Free Documentation License

Powered by php Powered by MySQL Optimized for Firefox