Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Wiktionary - Recent changes [en]: User talk:Metaknowledge

Wiktionary - Recent changes [en]
Track the most recent changes to the wiki in this feed. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
User talk:Metaknowledge
Aug 30th 2012, 03:06

Line 486: Line 486:
 

Which part of the etymology you didn't like? The "powerful eternity" bit? Number 3 and star have additional meanings in East Asia. The info is confirmed by Wikipedia. I have removed {{l|ko|그룹}} (group) from the etymology. <tt>alt</tt> doesn't work on {{temp|l}}. --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli]] <sup>([[User talk:Atitarev|обсудить]]</sup>/<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Atitarev|вклад]])</sup> 02:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

 

Which part of the etymology you didn't like? The "powerful eternity" bit? Number 3 and star have additional meanings in East Asia. The info is confirmed by Wikipedia. I have removed {{l|ko|그룹}} (group) from the etymology. <tt>alt</tt> doesn't work on {{temp|l}}. --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli]] <sup>([[User talk:Atitarev|обсудить]]</sup>/<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Atitarev|вклад]])</sup> 02:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

 

:My mistake with alt=. No, it's just that I can't find "삼성" meaning just the Buddha (usually it appears to be a [[triad]]). The company is officially called 삼성그룹, but I don't know how much that carries over into real Korean texts. (By the way, I got a textbook to keep &mdash; Hànyǔ Book 1. It should be sufficient as beginner material, I think.) --[[User:Metaknowledge|Μετάknowledge]]<small><sup>''[[User talk:Metaknowledge|discuss]]/[[Special:Contributions/Metaknowledge|deeds]]''</sup></small> 02:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

 

:My mistake with alt=. No, it's just that I can't find "삼성" meaning just the Buddha (usually it appears to be a [[triad]]). The company is officially called 삼성그룹, but I don't know how much that carries over into real Korean texts. (By the way, I got a textbook to keep &mdash; Hànyǔ Book 1. It should be sufficient as beginner material, I think.) --[[User:Metaknowledge|Μετάknowledge]]<small><sup>''[[User talk:Metaknowledge|discuss]]/[[Special:Contributions/Metaknowledge|deeds]]''</sup></small> 02:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

  +
  +

::You can see SOME meanings of {{l|ko|삼성}} in the entry. I have removed the "Buddha" part. IMO, the word "group" is better left out. The entry is more about the word itself, not the company as such.

  +
  +

:Hmm, I don't know, which book it is. There are so many book with similar names! Is it "Hanyu for Beginning Students: Student Book" by Peter Chang, etc.?--[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli]] <sup>([[User talk:Atitarev|обсудить]]</sup>/<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Atitarev|вклад]])</sup> 03:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


Latest revision as of 03:06, 30 August 2012

Villainc.svg

Archive
Archives
  1. Jan-Jun 2012

Contents

Why the rollback? —RuakhTALK 00:14, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, even if it's really important to you for some reason that the template contain #* and #*:, you still need to include #* in the entries themselves. —RuakhTALK 00:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I realized it was rather rude to do a rollback after I did it; I guess I should explain. I am unable to see why I should type a couple more characters in, because in every instance the template is transcluded, it accompanies those characters. Thus, I decided that those characters ought to be part of the template. If I have overlooked something, please let me know.
(after ec) Sorry; I don't understand. Why do I need to put #* in the entries? For example, skai has it but bosim doesn't, and I don't see a difference.--Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:19, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Because of Wiktionary:Grease pit#Dump analysis request and Index:Tok Pisin and every other situation in which a dump analysis is helpful. Consistent formatting makes it possible to extract information from Wiktionary. —RuakhTALK 00:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Hmm. I didn't think of that. Thanks for explaining. This template is now transcluded in quite a few places, I'm afraid. I'm sorry to make you clean up after my mess, but is that possible? I don't know nearly enough programming to make the job faster. (Note: I undid my revert.) --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:32, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg DoneRuakhTALK 00:55, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Looks good. Again, sorry and thanks. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:56, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Online dictionaries

I just found three dictionaries of Vanuatuan languages:

All of them are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License. The only problem is that they do not appear to be durably archived. Any ideas? --BB12 (talk) 05:19, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Um, I've never dabbled in native Vanuatuan languages, just Bislama, so I don't know them and won't be adding terms from them. I can't think of any solution except the cutthroat method, which suggests that you put them on a public Google Group so that they become durably archived. I'm honestly not sure if that's legit. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, that is the one fear I had, that people would do something like that, undercutting a good-faith policy. I'll sleep on this, but this would probably require contacting the site owner.
Separate from that issue is a gold mine at Series List. Click on, for example, series six, then the first sub-series, SIKUSA. This has one inventory item. Click on image (shortcut), where you will find six pages of Kusage words, under the CC license and durably archived. The enlarge button makes the text readable. (I'm not sure which language Kusage is.) --BB12 (talk) 05:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Are you sure that counts as durable? It's physical, but not published. I honestly rather doubt it. Sorry to crush your hopes so quickly. Maybe you can try asking around? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:32, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Being published isn't required, AFAIK. [4] says, "We have established a framework for accessioning, cataloguing and digitising audio, text and visual material, and preserving digital copies. The primary focus of this initial stage is safe preservation of material that would otherwise be lost, especially field tapes from the 1950s and 1960s." That looks golden to me, no? --BB12 (talk) 05:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
The phrase "material that would otherwise be lost" seems to undermine the CFI's requirement that physical papers and audio must be stored "durably". Again, I think you should ask somebody really knowledgeable or raise the issue in the BP and wait for consensus (or the usual lack thereof). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Okay, posted! --BB12 (talk) 05:55, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Nobody responded on durability, so I'm going to consider them good. I need to get to the Welcome issue and then think about contacting them about the copyrights. --BB12 (talk) 05:23, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

This still worries me a little, but I'll roll with it. As a side note, User:BD2412 is a lawyer with copyright experience, so you can ask him if you come up with legal questions in relation to the project. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
39 (Japanese for thank you) --BB12 (talk) 05:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Hahahaha! That's really witty! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:38, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I didn't make it up, but I am trying to make it Net lingo. Pass it on!! --BB12 (talk) 05:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately, there aren't many people like me who don't know Japanese, but remember enough basic vocabulary to get the joke. But I'll try! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:48, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Portals

I think I want to form a proposal for language portals. They've been discussed before but no action ever taken.

In addition to providing basic background information on the language, including the ISO and links to Wikipedia, the Ethnologue and Multi-Tree, they can be the collection point of various pages like the About and template pages.

Any thoughts before I bring this to the BP? --BB12 (talk) 20:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea of this. Note: I am not Metaknowledge, just a nosy fucker. Equinox 21:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
LMAO! --BB12 (talk) 21:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
It might be good. Note that they already exist on French Wiktionary, where they don't actually help very much. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:30, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Now you're thinking with Portals! :) I would support a vote to introduce them. —CodeCat 00:44, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Why do you think they don't help much on the French Wiktionary? I'm no good at French so going there isn't going to help me. (Another feature: a link to the page that lists contributors with that language in their Babel box.) --BB12 (talk) 01:20, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure you can infer from Italian. Theoretically, fr:Portail:Français should be the best portal they have. However, the links and resources seem worse than what English has now at WT:AEN and Category:English language. (Combining the two would be messy, for technical reasons.) I would want concrete lists of features that show how we could use Portals, and do a better job than the cheese-eating surrender monkeys did. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
You're right: It's not that hard. And yes, I want a list of features. Any ideas (you, MK, or the nosy, err, eavesdroppers?) --BB12 (talk) 01:30, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

i added the spanish translations, should i create an entry for "poner en juego" the third verb meaning of stake (i.e. to be at stake) or is there a way to link to poner and should i add an "en juego" variation to that verb's entry? poner en juego is the only way to express this sort of stake in spanish verbly.Lucifer (talk) 21:18, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I mean, poner en juego seems idiomatic to me, but hell, find somebody who knows Spanish. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:08, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I rewrote {{FWOTD}}. Can you help me testing it? Just try crazy parameters and if it doesn't work, tell me. — Ungoliant (Falai) 06:05, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

It's not flexible enough, although your edits are great. For Gothic terms, for example, we can't have boxes appearing on the main page. It'll need to be able to display an image from Commons instead (a zoomed-in screenshot from a user who can view it correctly). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:59, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
There is a parameter for images now. — Ungoliant (Falai) 03:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! For some reason, I never knew you're so good at this! The multiple audios raise a question, though. In the Latin example on the doc subpage, you have the Classical and Ecclesiastical pronunciations ("dialects"). Should those be marked as such? Also, should there be a place to put IPA? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:14, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Could be. I'm against putting IPA. Every now and then there are complaints in WT:FB about IPA being too complicated, so if we put it in the FWOTD those who don't know IPA (probably a significant amount our readers) will be upset. Those who know IPA can just check the entry. — Ungoliant (Falai) 15:57, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
There are parameters for audio description now. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Wonderful! I'm OK with not having IPA, although I would rather it. More questions: what do you think about having the word itself (and the image, where applicable) be larger than they are now? Also, should there be a title= parameter for a title at the top (maybe for focus weeks?). Thanks --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:19, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
  • (larger words): it would look better. On the other hand, it would be nice if {{FWOTD}} looked the same as {{WOTD}}. No strong opinion here, if you insist I can easily make it larger.
  • (title=): how would this be displayed? I can't think of a way that doesn't cause clutter.
There are two more things that WOTD has and FWOTD doesn't: part of speech and date. Do you think they are necessary? — Ungoliant (Falai) 18:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Got it. I already thought about those two. No date is necessary, but POS would be good when all senses that we show have the same POS. Maybe it should be a named param.
I played around with previews, but it made the top section seem too big - I thought perhaps you could figure it out. If not, that's OK. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:28, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
I added a parameter for the focus week and PoS. Is there anything else that needs doing? If not, I better move on to the other templates we'll use and see how they work. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
You're great! All we need is to clean up {{was fwotd}}, to match {{was wotd}}. {{fwotd-nom}} needs better links, but it's good as a template. As for the mechanism of having it on the main page, we can just do it the same way the English WOTD does, with magic words. I'll create the archive now. You can see how the FWOTD looks aesthetically at User:Metaknowledge/Main page. Thanks! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:28, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
The infrastructure seems to be working now. Can we announce this project already? Before we draft the vote we'll have to address Liliana's concerns about reconstructed terms, Chuck Entz's concerns about a FWOTD being political in nature, and any other concern that may be raised. — Ungoliant (Falai) 01:03, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Do you want me to make the announcement, or do you? Also, do you think this will necessarily require a vote? Note: Liliana seemed somewhat on the fence, and Chuck can be appeased by telling him that we'll check entries first (of course we will, it would be madness not to) and he is welcome to do so himself. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:02, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
I'd prefer if you wrote it, since you are a native speaker of English. It may or may not require a vote; depends on the result of the BP discussion, but my guess is that it will. — Ungoliant (Falai) 02:23, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
You're way better with English than some native speakers I know. Before I get it out, is there anyhting specific you want me to say or link to that I might forget? (If you don't respond soon, I'll just post it.) Thanks --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:58, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Link to User:Metaknowledge/Main page, {{FWOTD}} and previous discussions. — Ungoliant (Falai) 03:07, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Got it. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:10, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Posted --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] nonmetal

metaloido seems to be correct. c.f. Krause, Erich-Dieter: Großes Wörterbuch Esperanto — Deutsch. Buske Verlag, Hamburg 1999, ISBN 3875481933. --Yoursmile (talk) 09:16, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

The authors of that book were linguists, not chemists. Very simply, I find it very hard to be believe that Esperanto metaloido is not equivalent to English metalloid. Metalloids and nonmetals overlap, but cover different groups of elements. In fact, the infix -oid- carries the meaning of "similar to", not "different from". --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 14:23, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for your kind message. Yes, regretfully, I've decided to withdraw from the Wiktionary project. I might make an occasional edit if I see vandalism or something broken, but I don't intend to be an active contributor as I have been, hence my reason for wishing to return to a redlink state (if you or another admin would delete my talk page and archive, I'd greatly appreciate it). Astral (talk) 20:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I just redeleted your talkpage, but Equinox had left you a message. If you didn't see it, I can post it here for you.
Astral, I hope you didn't leave because of something that somebody did here. In any case, I hope you gained from your time here, and that you have good luck in the future, whatever your exploits may be. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
I've had issues with some of Wiktionary's policies for a while. In particular, the "durably archived" provision of WT:CFI, and how it's interpreted to mean the only acceptable cites are print media and Usenet. (Briefly: it seems illogical to me for a wiki, an inherently changeable, eternal work-in-progress, to privilege paper over pixels, and denies the changing realities of the digital age, in which many things once released in a physical format are now being released digitally instead).
I've tried to work within this framework because, simply put, I love words, but I've finally reached the conclusion that Wiktionary's rigidity isn't only embodied in its policies, but in the general attitude held by many of its members. Things had reached a point where I was gunshy about participating in community discussions, because my thinking doesn't always align with that of the majority.
On the whole, people on Wiktionary are knowledgable and friendly, and I've had few disagreements, but those which I have had have taken a heavy toll. Yesterday, there was an incident on RfD that was kind of the final straw. I always attempt to be as civil in the way I communicate as possible, but bluntness seems to be ingrained in Wiktionary's culture. I've tried to stay objective and keep in mind that what looks like incivility to me might simply be someone having an off day, as well as the fact that this is a global project, and that not everyone is going to hail from a cultural setting/background with a conception of civility identical to my own. Sometimes, though, it's not just a matter of my own subjective reaction, and the other party really has done or said something out of line.
I don't want to butt heads with people. I don't like conflict — especially not when it interferes with my ability to be productive. But at the same time I don't want to bear feeling that I've got to keep my head down, lest I bump my head into the generally low ceiling of this wiki's tolerance.
Thanks for re-deleting my talk page. Unfortunately, I didn't get to see Equinox's message, so if you could copy it here, that'd be great. Astral (talk) 00:52, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Then I guess Equinox's message might be relevant. He said:
Sorry to recreate your talk page; I was gonna e-mail you, but you don't have it set up. I am no doubt one of the "clique" you dislike, but that's really only because I'm impatient with people who refuse to read the documentation, and because I am traditional about what a dictionary should include. It is not an actual spirit of cliquishness, and I don't act how I do in order to be like others; it is just a consensus and a bad temper. I hope you'll continue editing at some point. Everyone leaves at least once :) Equinox 22:15, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
I agree with you about durability, but I think it functions to provide another limitation (like 3 cites) so that not any word ever used can be included. To be blunt, I know that we're blunt. Many of us probably have Asperger's, or are borderline (like me). That doesn't excuse incivility, though, nor intolerance. I suppose at this point, there's not much I can do for you, but if there is, just ask. It really hurts me to see this happen. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:00, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge — I definitely think there needs to be some type of standard establishing what constitutes an acceptable citation, but I think other aspects of CFI in place already do the job of preventing the addition of any old word (the one-year usage span criterion, for instance), and that precluding the usage of all web-based sources except Usenet ultimately only serves to make the task of citing things unnecessarily difficult. Not to mention that it's going to become progressively more difficult to cite new terms, as Usenet usage has been steadily in decline for the last decade. I've thought that something like two "durable" (i.e. print or Usenet) citations and one non-Usenet web citation might be a workable alternative to the current attestation standard (and the non-Usenet web citation should preferably be an article/story on a notable site like the the Huffington Post, GameSpot, etc. rather than someone's random WordPress blog or LiveJournal).
If many people around here have Asperger's, I should fit right in (formally diagnosed), but there's probably a lot of truth to observations that we find it hardest to interact with the people most like ourselves. The reason I make a concerted effort to maintain a civil tone is because social skills aren't exactly my natural forte.
@ Equinox — In retrospect, "cliquish" was probably the wrong choice of word. But Wiktionary does seem very set in its ways to me. Obviously, a wiki needs to have a reasonable level of stability in order to be a useful resource, but too much resistance toward change within its ranks will ultimately just stifle growth and discourage new users from joining.
Thank you both for your kind words. I don't know. Maybe the unpleasant taste I've been left with will wear off with time, and I'll once again feel motivated to contribute regularly. After all, it's become hard for me not to collect potential words to add; I'll read something interesting in an article and wonder if Wiktionary already has it. Astral (talk) 04:04, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
I would support that idea myself, although that would make us very susceptible to linkrot. If you ever feel like going through the bureaucracy and proposing a vote to that effect, I would help write it and develop it. The people that I hang out with in real life and the ones I avoid the most are very similar to me; I'm quite used to that by now.
The choice remains yours, and I can accept it either way, but I still hope you, at some point, choose to stay around or at least return. Vedder you do or don't, thank you. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
I would hasten to add that there will be a vote to change that policy in the near future. See Wiktionary:BP#Durability_and_online_archives. If this isn't taken up by someone else, I eventually will do it. --BB12 (talk) 04:55, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

I have added this translation. Although ฉัน (chăn) is originally female, it's colloquial and applies to both sexes, unlike ดิฉัน (dìchăn) f. or ผม (pŏm) m.. Just a demo on grammar, like a few other Asian languages, all depends on the level of formality, gender and the social status, it's cumbersome to add all forms for each translations, so I used a generic form, which is also used in some textbooks or phrasebooks. Also, ไม่เป็น (mâi bpen) expresses "can't", "unable to do" but there are other ways to say it. --Anatoli (обсудить) 02:14, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

What I can tell you is that I struggle to read Thai, I make stupid mistakes with tones, and I have never seriously studied Thai grammar, but I have spent a fair amount of time in the country (I just came back from Thailand a few weeks ago). If you want to deal with gender, either split it (like the Hindi on that page) or just leave it out altogether. Thais never begin a sentence with "I" in colloquial speech, unless they're thinking about it (or in certain regionalisms). In my experience, phut thai mai dai (RTGS) would be the form most likely to be heard on the street. (As a side note, a lot of Thai language learning materials, like Pimsleur and Rosetta Stone, teach a higher class level than most Thais use, and do not match what I've heard.) --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:51, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Your phrase is พูดไทยไม่ได้ (pôot tai mâi dâai). Will you be happy if I convert the translation the way I did the Thai translation for I'm hungry and a few others? With male/female/generic pronouns + polite endings? I can also remove the pronoun altogether if it confuses you or you dislike it. Do you want it with the polite gender-specific endings - ครับ (kráp) / ค่ะ (kâ) to mark the gender? The phrase พูดไทยไม่เป็น (pôot tai mâi bpen) is quite common and to me it's identical to yours. As I said, both ไม่ได้ (mâi dâai) and ไม่เป็น (mâi bpen) are used to express inability to do something.
My Thai skills are not great and I'm currently not learning it but I've got a few resources handy, which I can share with if you're interested. I'll try to confirm a few things with a Thai person I know next time when I have a chance. --Anatoli (обсудить) 12:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, one more edit. Please take a look at my translation of I don't speak English (format) to get an idea what I was talking about. --Anatoli (обсудить) 12:12, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Again, a class thing: in colloquial Thai, the polite endings are mostly reserved for requests of another person or set phrases like ni khrap/kha ("here you go") or sawatdi khrap/kha ("hello"). Personal pronouns are only used when otherwise the meaning would be ambiguous, or on formal occasions.
Please, though, don't take my suggestions at the expense of your own. I would much rather have a native speaker write it, and I will accept whatever they say. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Funny, do you think only native speakers can add translations or add entries? I was asking your confirmation, not because I don't know the usage of Thai particles or pronouns. Not a very productive discussion, indeed. Personal pronouns are optional, that's true but they ARE used, especially in sample sentences and phrasebook phrases are such examples. Have you seen Thai phrasebooks, textbooks? Polite endings, unlike Japanese or Korean are not mandatory for each sentence. It's sufficient to add them occasionally but they can be added to any phrase to make your speech more polite. Have you heard how TV announcers speak? They add ครับ (kráp) / ค่ะ (kâ) quite often, not just after "hello". I will change the entry as I see fit. Don't put your alert messages unless a native speaker does it. I have already confirmed my sentences with a native speaker. --Anatoli (обсудить) 22:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't mean my comments that way. I hope you have not taken any offense.
I simply asked for a native speaker because I disagreed with you, and I would not argue with somebody who grew up speaking Thai. If they have approved your sentence, I accept it. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
It's OK. You disagreed but you haven't suggested something more concrete. I will remove the pronoun making it gender-neutral in this particular case but in some phrases it's better to show it, like "my name is". --Anatoli (обсудить) 23:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Choosing FWOTDs

Since Foreign Word of the Day will be a "diarchy", I propose the following system to prevent conflict: for one week you choose the week's focus and I choose the FWOTDs; then the next week I choose the focus and you choose the FWOTDs, and so on. One may only choose a focus for which there are at least seven valid nominations, but if that is impossible a focusless week may be chosen. What do you think? — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:36, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I suppose it's doable, but it seems too rigid. I also think we ought to get the hang of it before we start with focus weeks, although that may not be necessary. I'm a lax sort of person, so I was just thinking that we'd choose focus weeks when somebody gets a really good idea, and choose and improve any interesting entries that look like they would work. I don't expect conflict, so I'm not trying too hard to prevent it. If you feel like I'm choosing too many, for example - just tell me, and I'll slow down.
I'd rather our diarchy be shared power instead of a kind of rotating monarchy. If we ever have a problem, I feel like we can just discuss it, and not start a civil war. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:04, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Sounds OK. BTW let's move the draft to WT:Votes? No start date yet; just to encourage people to comment. Unfortunately the BP discussion was drowned too quickly. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:30, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Alright. I'll set the start date a week from now, so if nothing important happens that makes us want to postpone it, it will just run. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Should I re-announce it in the BP, perhaps, as a stub with a link to the vote? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
There could be a separate queue for focus weeks. We could then ask people to suggest a focus, along with the seven terms that they believe should appear in that week. It's then up to you to decide when to have a focus week, and you can just take the next one from the top of the queue. That would reduce the burden on the two of you without overly complicating things. —CodeCat 23:01, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
That's not a bad idea, and maybe somebody would like to fill up the options presented at Wiktionary talk:Foreign Word of the Day/Nominations. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Which options do you mean? —CodeCat 00:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, to be specific, the focus week options presented by BB and Ungoliant at Wiktionary talk:Foreign Word of the Day/Nominations#Focus weeks. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:41, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Old English versus Anglo-Saxon

Is there a reason you reverted GlakitGowk's use of "Anglo-Saxon" back to "Old English" ([5])? My understanding is that specialists prefer "Anglo-Saxon." --BB12 (talk) 08:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

My experience is that linguists prefer the opposite. —CodeCat 10:54, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Moreover, we are not only a community of linguists, but a community of linguists with strict rules. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
When I took an OE class, Anglo-Saxon was what I recall being told it is generally called by specialists. As a linguist, I generally refer to it as OE/Old English, but I'm not a specialist.
But what I really want to get to is that discussing it with the user would have probably been better than changing it, which sends the message, "I'm an established user and hereby overrule you. If you don't like it, eat my shorts." Even with the kind boilerplate thrown in on the change line, it can still come across as a slap in the face. --BB12 (talk) 19:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
I know that's true, and it is one of the reasons we scare away newbies, but that just takes too much time. We get a lot of vandalism, idiocy, and other contributions that need to be reverted or rewritten. I put in the effort to add that line to my .js file (slightly modified from the original by Ruakh). It's just too much, though, to ask me to put in the effort to write a message to every user each time I revert. I can only hope that if they notice and care, they raise the topic here (as the boilerplate suggests, and as has happened successfully). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:58, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Edit: I just noticed that I did give a message about my change to GlaikitGowk (talkcontribs) along with the welcome message. (S)He did not respond to it. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:00, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Mea culpa, then. In this case, it was an about page with clearly good intention, which is what you saw and why you sent the message :) --BB12 (talk) 20:11, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
By the way, are you interested in a vote to make this boilerplate the default for the revert summary? As of now, one must add it in manually, and most administrators/rollbackers don't. 20:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes. --BB12 (talk) 20:25, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
OK. I'll draft something at User:Metaknowledge/Rollback edit summary. Remember the extinct vote needs to be dealt with, and I'm thinking about an emoticon vote as well. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

^ー^

^u^

[edit] Special:Log?page=only_nixon_could_go_to_china

FYI: Special:Log?page=only_nixon_could_go_to_chinaRuakhTALK 20:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks for the heads-up. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] reversing my edits

if you take offense with my updated, good faith edits, then take it up with me instead of reversing them without any explanation. if you explained your reasoning behind deleting my edit, then it would be different. —This comment was unsigned.

Please understand that more than 20% of edits made by anonymous editors must be reversed or rewritten. Naturally, I am suspicious. In any case, I disagree with you about the definition and its use as such, but (again) if you bring it up at WT:TR, the community can have a discussion about it. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

When you add a Latin term to Semper's bot list, please be suree all the macrons are added. Cleaning up macrons later takes far more work than inserting them before the bot does its thing. I'm guessing that you're using one of the sources that deliberately omits macrons from all the suffixes on the (faulty) assumption that users will know they belong there. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a stupid error. I personally know where the macra go, but I'm not used to writing them (and no primary sources except maybe some modern textbooks even print them). Thanks for noticing and fixing it! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:04, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia template

First off, I love wikis but with work and school (which I should be doing homework right now) I don't have the time to become an expert, so thanks for the help. I mostly just know how to make broad brushstroke changes that experts can tidy up.

After saving the change I figured there's probably a better way to do it and was trying to figure out how to use a template to link to Wikipedia when you made the change.

I found http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Template:PL:pedia and was trying to figure out how they used it to make the Wikipedia globe appear on the cloud link. I can view the HTML, but that's no good (I want to see wiki language, not <a href=... html. I can't view the wiki for the template by clicking "Edit" and then canceling changes because the template is locked. "View Source" is no good because I can't see the cloud link. From the "View Source" page I noticed the [[w: usage and was trying to figure out how to make that work, but I keep getting links that have "w:" in the link (show up as blue, underlined text). How do I use the template properly? Am I confusing templates?

I have another question. I know if you leave an entry on my talk page, I'm notified about it by the system. But if I reply to your entry, are you notified to check it and reply? If I leave my messages on your talk page and you leave your messages on mine, the conversation is disjointed and confusing to us, let alone to anyone else who tries to read it and learn from previous discussions. Do wikis have some sort of chat function that continues to notify everyone involved in the discussion so it can continue?

Thanks, --Yoda of Borg (talk) 07:16, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, I don't know what you're talking about with cloud links. 'View source' shows you everything there is to see. w: is not a template (templates are called with double curly brackets). All you have to do is write w:Foo, which formats a link to the Wikipedia article on 'Foo'. Even better, hide it by writing [[w:Foo|Foo]], which makes the same link but just looks like Foo. Don't use {{PL:pedia}}, if you're on a certain page here and notice that Wikipedia has a page about the same thing there, just put {{wikipedia}} in. I watchlisted your page by clicking the star just to the left of the search bar, so I can just click on 'My watchlist' at the top and see your reply. Feel free to move this conversation back to your talkpage if you prefer. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 14:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] pioner

I see it now. At pioneer there's a sense (no longer the most common) of a military sapper or digger. So in that sense, Shakespeare's pioner is the same thing. Equinox 23:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

thank you.Lucifer (talk) 23:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I didn't do it for you - but you're welcome. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:52, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] GanimalBot

Hi Metalknowledge!
I am ready to run my bot.Best regards--GeorgeAnimal. 18:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Unblocked. Tell me if it gets re-blocked. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:59, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Metaknowledge!
You can re-block the bot.Bot's edits.Thanks--GeorgeAnimal. 16:56, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Reblocked. Thanks so much for your dedication to Kurdish! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the input. About scisne and enclitics...

Hi. You recently posted to my talk page on how we don't add entries which are just terms plus enclitics when I created a page for scīs + ne. This definitely makes sense to me, and I would ordinarily not have posted something like this, since you could just add an enclitic to any Latin word which would make for a lot of unnecessary entries.

However, I created the page out of interest of the word scin, which currently lacks a Wiktionary page. It's hard to find a lot of information for the word online, but it seems to be a contraction of scīsne. It's found on the Latin Wikipedia homepage, under the section "SCIN TV...?," so I figured it might be important to add an entry for the contraction and the word it was contracted from.

Do you think it's important to add a page for scīn, a contraction that may not be obvious to Latin beginners? There's even a category, albeit small, for Latin contractions on Wiktionary. I can see that a separate page for scīsne is unnecessary regardless, but what about a page for its contracted form?

Thanks.

--Maxisaninja (talk) 05:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your follow-up. I'm surprised that we don't have scīn - you should definitely add it under the 'Contraction' header. We don't just cater to beginners, but try to add every term in Latin (under certain restrictions). We don't need scisne to have scin - just put in the etymology section scīs (from scīo) + -ne ("do you?"). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Scīn now has a page. I tried to get the basic info but might have missed some stuff, so it may need a little cleaning up. Thanks for all the help! --Maxisaninja (talk) 06:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Looks great! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] But if SOP redirects are pointless,

then why are Spanish language and Portuguese language and French language and Italian language and Hebrew language and Arabic language and German language and Dutch language and Danish language and Russian language and Polish language and Greek language and Urdu language and Turkish language and Chinese language and Japanese language and... -- all redirects? That looks to me like accepted practice. Or should we delete all of them? And what is an SOP redirect, by the way? (NB: WT:REDIR is unofficial -- it says so in its first sentence.) --Pereru (talk) 06:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Because some bugger created them? I dunno. If you want, you can raise the issue elsewhere (BP?). I personally would delete all of them (after checking WhatLinksHere first, of course). By "SOP redirect", I mean a redirect from an SOP to a non-SOP version of the same thing. I know that WT:REDIR is unofficial, but most of our rules are. I just linked to it because it makes the point that the community generally doesn't like mainspace redirects. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
I see. I suppose I should raise the issue, since either these redirects should be deleted, or then similar ones should be allowed -- or else, my sense of harmony feels hurt... But what does SOP stand for? I only know it as the acronym of 'standard operating procedure', but here it seems to have a different meaning. --Pereru (talk) 08:58, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I'm sorry. It means "sum of parts" - i.e., not deserving an entry of its own. (We tend to use jargon, but something like WT:Glossary might help; I think one of those pages has a list of our standard slang.) It comes up a lot at WT:RFD, which is a good place to get used to that kind of terminology. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

For dialect-determining tokens, check this out:[6]. Nosily yours, --BB12 (talk) 04:01, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to be harsh, but that quiz was kind of crappy. Most of it seemed to be about the w:cot-caught merger, and it concluded that my dialect is (wait for it): Neutral. That's right. They have no clue. The quiz then postulates that I moved around a lot when growing up (I've never moved more than a mile away from where I now live) or that I come from the ancestral home of w:General American, in the Des Moines-Peoria area. Dead wrong. I've never even been there. Try again. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
That doesn't mean the quiz was crappy! It means that it didn't work for you. Unlike other quizzes I've tried, this one worked for me.
But I'm curious: Although I've lived only in Seattle and the Bay Area I generally consider the West Coast to be pretty homogenous, so I'm surprised it didn't get yours correct. I wonder what it was picking up on. Also, what does "neutral" mean for the cot-caught merger? I have the merger, though I know some people from California do not.
BTW, one difference is the use of "the" for highway names. From just a couple of samples, I think use of "the" kicks in about Los Angeles going southward. --BB12 (talk) 05:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Whoops. You're saying your dialect is neutral. That's my understanding for West Coasters. When I've gotten feedback on my accent from people in other English-speaking countries, I've gotten that word, too. --BB12 (talk) 05:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Except that there's a Californian accent, theoretically, that ought to be distinguishable from an Iowan. I don't have the merger, needless to say. In the quiz's defense, I was taking it for my 'Wiktionary accent', in which I am most precise. I talk to my friends in a noticeably different lect that includes more tone and emphasis for semantic meaning, as well as a different vocabulary — but most vowels are still realized the same way. I still say that you ought to find a better quiz (or make one). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
AFAIK, nobody has postulated a Californian dialect, just a Western one. I think it's safe to say there's also a general West Coast one, but perhaps it's difficult to tease that out of the Western dialect. I have the merger and had guessed that all younger Californians have it as well, so that's interesting. Do you know if your peers have it? I'd love a better quiz, but it's hard to figure out what's good and bad except based on whether your own dialect is diagnosed correctly. --BB12 (talk) 05:55, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
None of them do in careful speech. I only hear the merger in speech with generally shortened vowel length (which leads to nonstandard schwas and all sorts of context-driven lectal differences). Even local L2 English speakers don't (judging based on Cantonese, Mandarin, Thai, and Hebrew). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
If that's the case, there's probably a split then on the West Coast. It's not in Seattle, but there is now such a huge influx of population here that it might be a contender to become established. It may be I missed the lack of the merger in SF because I didn't hang around with enough locals, though it is extremely hard for me to catch, a real drawback when I took Korean. --BB12 (talk) 06:23, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm not even going to guess how you managed to live in a city and studiously avoid its locals. I do suppose that having a vowel merger might desensitize you to the inherent differences between such sounds. Off topic: you know all that voice recognition software? Could that stuff transcribe speech into IPA? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:07, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
LOL. Most of my friends were also transplants, drawn to the area for various reasons. Not having the merger in English is even worse than many cases: the difference is common on TV but because it didn't exist in my environment, I grew up learning to ignore the difference. I bet people have tried to get voice recognition to do IPA, but there are surely problems with that (such as broad versus narrow, allophones versus phonemes) as well. --BB12 (talk) 17:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Strange. Then again, the first pronunciation at Olympic#Pronunciation is how newscasters tend to say it, and the second is how I say it. Language development is a careful process of ignoring how others say things :) And allophones can't be as bad as English orthography! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:49, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Challenge

So, er, question 1: How do you pronounce the name of your town? :) Equinox 10:54, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

/hoʊm/. Not bad, not bad at all...--Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:01, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
You pronounce a five-word sentence with a single syllable! :-O — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] The template to add nominations for FWOTD

Would it be easier if the template assumed that the entry needed citations and pronunciation, and that you had to specify 1 to say "yes, this entry does have citations"? That way, people unfamiliar with templates would be able to leave out those parameters altogether. —CodeCat 16:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it would. Feel free to change it, as long as you do these two things as well: fix WT:FW to reflect your changes (in the 2012 section, of course), and update the documentation, which really needs some work. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:59, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
What's with the new distinction between pronunciations that need checking and those that need adding? Can't we assume that they're right (and check them if they seem off)? Also, you've made the template fail on the doc page and at FW, in case you didn't notice. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Something can either be there, or not/badly, or it still needs to be checked (by you or someone else) whether it is there or not. The idea behind this is that whoever nominates entries doesn't have to be aware of all those details. If you don't think that is a useful distinction I can remove it again. —CodeCat 17:53, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
We'll be checking entries anyway. Also, the gram= parameter doesn't seem to be useful to me, because (again) we're obviously not going to have entries in French without gender, or in Latin without inflection. Many languages (like Rapa Nui) almost never have any of these things, and there will no reason to "check". Some, like Mbabaram, may be hard to find info on, and those may be showcased without necessary grammatical information simply because we don't have access to it.
Anyway, you can talk to Ungoliant if you disagree with me, and then he gets the final word. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:58, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
But what about languages where you are not sure if there is grammar information missing? For example, would you know to check a Gothic entry for a conjugation table? —CodeCat 18:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I would check. I've brought up a similar issue for another nominee, at Talk:oilam. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
So I should remove the grammar check and the 'needs to be checked' status? —CodeCat 18:58, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Please do. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:00, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I put that there because I am a Catholic who uses the Hebrew text (and, in the case of the New Testament, a Hebrew translation) for my holy texts. Tharthan (talk) 19:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I removed the declension of "lento" as it was in the Spanish section. But, I don't think it should be in the Finnish section either, at least not in the adverb section, because as an adverb it is never inflected. In rare occasions, "lento" might be used as a noun to denote a section of a piece of music which is played slowly. I have seen some similar music terms used that way, at least forte and allegro, but never lento. Of course my experience alone does not prove a thing, and I tried to find usage in Google but couldn't find any. Therefore I think that adding a noun section for music term lento would require attestation. --Hekaheka (talk) 18:59, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

OK. I was just trusting Jyril's judgment, but I don't know much about Finnish grammar. It sounds reasonable to me to leave it out until a cited noun sense is added. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Um, so by this edit, I assume you mean that Tok Pisin only uses pes as anatomical jargon. So what is the "everyday" word for "face" then in Tok Pisin? --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:24, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

No, I've just been doing that because some other editor started it. If you disagree with that style of context labeling, I would be much indebted to you if you removed it from every member of Category:tpi:Anatomy and replaced it with a link to the category at the bottom of the language section. The same goes for most of the categories in Category:tpi:All topics. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Context is not for the purpose of categorization; it's for the purpose of marking restrictions on usage. If there are many such entries, this might be better handled by a bot. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] rollback

Hi, you rollbacked my edit in the article "grann". The translation of the Swedish example sentence "se vad vår gran är grann, det är det grannaste granen i stan" was "see how fine our Christmas tree is, it's the finest tree in town" where I changed the expression "the finest tree" to "the finest spruce" because the meaning of "granen" is "the spruce" (a tree species) while "the finest tree" (any tree plant not defined by species) would be translated "det grannaste trädet" in Swedish. Why to rollback? By the way, I see, there is something to be fixed in the original Swedish sentence, also, but I'll leave that for the next time :) --193.167.207.18 09:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't speak Swedish. We get a lot of people subtly changing our example sentences for some strange or promotional reason of their own, and it seemed suspicious. I will rollback my rollback :) By the way, if you register an account, this sort of thing is less likely to happen (for better or for worse, anonymous contributions are looked at more closely). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 14:56, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Bashkir requests

Hey MK, User:Borovi4ok has some questions about making templates for Bashkir. Can you help? They're also asking about generating English WT pages based on other language pages. I think there's a bot that does that for Chinese but I don't know anything about it. --BB12 (talk) 09:56, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll be glad to help with templates. I'm not sure what you mean with that second part. (By the way, I was messaging with a friend and I managed to have a really basic conversation in Chinese, with Wiktionary's help. I still got some word order stuff wrong, but I am getting somewhere.) --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:01, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Glad to hear that's working out. While I'm waiting for the next Pimsleur Italian CDs, I'm redoing the current ones, which turns out to be a good idea. I think I need to do each set twice, partly because I'm in the car when I'm doing them and partly due to cranial atrophy! --BB12 (talk) 19:19, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Actually, can you explain why in a statement like 我们敏的人 ("our smart person") belongs in that placement? Or am I totally getting it wrong? (My internal grammar suggests that de ought to precede min3, if I have that all correct.) --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:38, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't know any Mandarin, but that's used for possession. I would read it as "person of smart" or "smart's person" inside my head as an easy way to gloss it. You probably know all that. As to not being placed after "we," I did a search on 我们母親 and got a lot of hits, so it may be that pronoun-type words don't take 的. --BB12 (talk) 23:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
But...but... you have cmn-1! (And please use simp., trad. is evil IMO.) Pronouns do take 的, but it looks like particle-repitition is cut down on in general and I think that adjectival use is more important than contextual possession. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
LOL. Did I put that there? Well that's because I'm not zero. My 漢字 are actually a mix. I don't know Chinese well enough to do input with any speed, so in the string above, I copied the first two and typed 母親 in Japanese. I highly recommend learning both. Taiwan hasn't switched, it's not clear what will happen in Hong Kong, Korea uses the traditional and Japanese uses simplified that are not as simplified as Mainland Chinese. Your analysis seems reasonable and this is something that will become obvious probably fairly quickly. Just for reference, 我的母親 gets twice as many hits without 的 as with, but both are still in the millions, so it may be a semi-optional thing (influenced as you say by subsequent adjective use and other factors). --BB12 (talk) 00:41, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Then put 0.5 or something. I input Chinese using 拼音 (I don't get 仓颉 at all, and I don't know stroke order). Anyway, Taiwan is stupid and will eventually realize that simplified/Hanyu Pinyin is the way of the future, not traditional/Wade-Giles/bopomofo (regardless of old-style 国民党 anti-communist rhetoric). 한국 will back away from 한자 as they have been for decades. Japanese kanji already match up with simplified characters much more often than they don't, and in any case it's of limited use until I learn hiragana (and katakana too, for that matter). So I hope you aren't offended if I don't want to pursue traditional (well, right now). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:07, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Inputting with pinyin is fine, but I don't know the pronunciation in Chinese. I'm not sure why you would say Taiwan is stupid, but given the move toward computerization in phones and everything else, it seems likely Taiwan will never worry about converting. Why should they when it takes no more time to type in either system? I seriously doubt that Korea will give up their hanja. They are too important for homophones. And it is not the case that Japanese characters line up with simplified characters more often than they do not. --BB12 (talk) 02:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I think that Taiwan is stupid because they are resistant to the changes in the written standard of their language. The mainland population is so comparatively massive that to do so is unlikely to be a good plan in a long-term sense. Linguistic divergence would have economic repercussions. I was talking to some young Koreans who had a large chest-of-drawers, with a hanja on each drawer. I asked if they could read them. None of them could read them all; only one of them felt sure that he could read most of them correctly. There were a few people doing hanja calligraphy on the street and in the subway, but they were all over the age of 50. I will trust you on the Japanese. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:31, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, you can say the UK is stupid as well for being resistant to the changes the Americans made to their language. (It is true that they now accept US spelling in schools, but that is very recent.) Also, linguistic divergence will happen no matter what they do in Taiwan. Your Korean example doesn't change my opinion one bit. My favorite example is a Korean document I saw with 常温 and 上温. The first means steady temperature, the second rising temperature, but they are pronounced identically in Korean (and Japanese). Also, there are lots of words English speakers cannot pronounce; that does not mean those words are on their way out. To be clear: I'm not saying that hanja are suddenly going to be used everywhere, but I do not believe they are going to disappear, either. They occupy a minor, but important part of Korean, and while that status may shift, I don't think character use will go away. --BB12 (talk) 05:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Er, the UK isn't anywhere near resistant. The national authority for British chemistry decided that it ought to be sulfur, not sulphur. Oxford now promotes -ize over -ise. I see a national giving-in (Bill Bryson has talked about this, as has Mario Pei if I remember correctly). Why won't the same thing occur in Taiwan, where Standard Mandarin (fa'a 北京, to be exact) is taught across the country and indigenous languages are dying out at worrying rates? I'm not saying that hanja will miraculously disappear, but I am saying that they will become more correlated with education level and thus less important to Korean as a language. Korean is creating more homophones as vowel length disappears, but that doesn't seem to be a problem (and languages like Hawaiian and Japanese seem to survive with even more ridiculous undistinguished homophones that rely on context, respect level, and standard expressions). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:52, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

And it took the UK a long time to get there. That was a lot of "resistance." Of course, the changes originated outside of the home of English in the US. My understanding is that "Standard Mandarin" already differs between Taiwan and the Mainland, not surprising given that a couple of generations have now passed. But trying to change all those textbooks and force all those teachers to change is a mammoth undertaking, something best done under a dictatorship or when there is a huge social reason to do so (such as the adoption of hangul during the Japanese colonization). And yet another reason to _not_ change: Keeping the traditional characters differentiates Taiwan from its Communist neighbor (who still claims sovereignty over Taiwan), giving them a source of pride for being different and, I suspect, for maintaining characters in what can be labelled their pure form. Since the widespread adoption of hangul, my understanding is that hanja have always played a minor part, but as the technical words I cited show, it is extremely difficult to get rid of them when they carry important semantic meaning. Additionally, hanja are a sign of education, a distinguishing mark that makes it difficult to eradicate them. --BB12 (talk) 06:04, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Hard to say if it's really a long time; American world economic dominance is really only about 60 years old. Will Taiwanese pride preside over the benefits of switching? Quite possibly, although I would be surprised not to see any relent. I don't think the Taiwanese care about purity, though, if the past and present popularity of POJ and bopomofo are anything to go by (romanization and bastardized characters). Finally, French and Latin were the old standards of education (not that old; my mother was taught them as required classes). Parlez vous français? Loquine latine potes? I don't think so. (BTW, thanks for moving the thread over to the left!) --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:24, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Society always defies predictions, but as long as Mainland China remains communist, I doubt that Taiwan will change. A change like this requires tremendous pressure. (The UK educational system buckled because the kids read American books.) Taiwan is in a geopolitically precarious position, and pride is important. Regardless of the bopomofo, they are the standard-bearers of two millennia of Chinese writing. And since they have computers and smartphones, the incentive to change is not great. --BB12 (talk) 06:33, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
So American books can do it, but mainland media can't? Are movies subbed in traditional as well as simplified? I find that hard to believe. I think they're using to computers and smartphones to check the premier sources of information in Chinese on the web, like 摆渡 (hope I spelled that right, I'm trying for 'Baidu'), which are written in simplified. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
As long as Taiwan and China are ideological opponents, I don't think mainland media can. I don't know the situation with subtitles, but if the movie is in Mandarin, there is no need for them. In any case, I think my overall point is that it's not stupidity, but complex sociolinguistic factors (including inertia) that are behind the continued split. --BB12 (talk) 07:11, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
But most successful media worldwide is from the US, Japan, or Europe, and I'm guessing the companies try to reduce costs by only producing one Chinese sub. (Or maybe they dub them. The dubbed anime in Thailand was really awful, but that appeared to be all they have.) How about this: I'll concede that it's due to a complex mix of sociolinguistic factors that look like stupidity and reflect short-term thinking, pride, and inertia. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 08:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I see. I was thinking media from Hong Kong and China. I'm sure there is a mix, where some gets just one set of subtitles, and others get two. There's no doubt that you have to learn both; My information is old, but when I last heard, they continued to teach the traditional forms in Mainland China.
Well, this thread seems to have come to a satisfactory close. お休みなさい. —This unsigned comment was added by BenjaminBarrett12 (talkcontribs).
Ah, another pointless, fascinating argument about language! Noctem bonam habe quoque. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 09:22, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Ordering coffee in Mandarin: [7]. --BB12 (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't like coffee — but a study tool is a study tool! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:23, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Latin pronunciation

Hello. I have the following question: is there a standard regarding IPA-transcription of Latin words? In my edits here I usually use as a guide the Wikipedia article which bases its IPA map of Latin vowels on Vox Latina. I have come across several inconsistencies among Wikt. entries: confer: cuius, huius. So are we to use ʊ or u (in cui and hui)?, and j, ɪj or jj (in cuius and huius)? --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

In hoc studio pronuntiationis latinae, non expertus sum, propter magistrum meum qui dictione pseudoclassicali me instruxit. Si me rogare vis, optio optima in hoc casu /u/ et /j/ esse videtur, respective. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:19, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Many instances of /ʊ/ that you find in Latin pronunciations are relics from when I started editing here. They should be corrected to /u/. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] bensin

Hi Metaknowledge, do you have a specific reason to assume that Tok Pisin borrowed bensin from Dutch benzine, but not from Benzin? --129.125.102.126 21:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but it's uncertain. U.MI 1979 says that it's from German Benzin, but Crowley 1990 says that the German etymology isn't necessarily correct. I am suspicious of U.MI, which was not written by Tok Pisin experts as far as I know. Crowley, however, cites Clark 1987, who notes that because of Pijin and Bislama cognates, such a word would have to be pre-c. 1885. The Germans colonized New Guinea in 1884; most Germans who came before that were on Dutch trading vessels, presumably speaking Dutch to their shipmates. So I'll put the two as alternatives in the etymology. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
But then, how are you sure it isn't Low German/Low Saxon/Platt (from e.g. Hanover, or the eastern Netherlands)? Germany (as a unified country) didn't exist until 1870. In general, why would one assume that an unknown western Germanic language would have to be Hollands, High German or English? It's somewhat anachronistic, IMHO. --129.125.102.126 00:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
I can't be sure. Out of the possible languages, I see this as the most likely. If you want to hunt down better scholarly opinions, or to write a more explanatory etymology, I will be appreciative. Muhlhauser, who's usually a good source, doesn't seem to say anything on the subject, so it won't be easy. As it is, Tok Pisin etymologies are often on the edge of being lost to time. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:19, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Low German would actually make more sense than High German. Most Dutch sailors came from the coast, because they lived close to it. Presumably the same applied to the Germans. And of course there is the Hanseatic league... —CodeCat 01:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Wrong time frame. The last executive meeting of the Hansa was in 1669. Anyway, Low German is likely enough, but I don't know enough about the linguistic breakdown of 19th-c. German principalities to feel more sure, and sources on Tok Pisin don't distinguish. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:37, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
I know... I just thought that it was a good example of the Low Germans being seafarers and traders in the past. They had the experience. :) —CodeCat 10:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Low German 1: Remember that defunct trading league we established that collapsed hundreds of years ago and that failed to protect us in every Swedish invasion? Low German 2: Ummm... Low German 1: So let's use our forgotten naval abilities to help some random Dutch joint-stock companies grow rich and influence an obscure creole halfway around the world! Low German 2: Ummm... Sure. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 14:50, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
You should add that to WT:BJAODN :P —CodeCat 15:21, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
The demise of a trading league doesn't mean that its former member cities aren't harbours anymore. See e.g. w:de:Johan Cesar VI. Godeffroy#Ausweitung des Handels "Der Blick der Seehandels-Gesellschaft fiel beim aufkommenden Welthandel auf die Südsee. Erste Stationen wurden auf Tuamotu, Tahiti und Samoa eingerichtet. Auf Samoas Hauptinsel Upolu wurden 1865 große Gebiete gekauft und erste eigene Plantagen eingerichtet, um in den beginnenden Koprahandel einzusteigen. Godeffroy organisierte Expeditionen ins Landesinnere, bei denen Ureinwohner verschleppt wurden, um diese auf den Plantagen als Zwangsarbeiter einzusetzen. Es erfolgte eine Ausweitung des Interessengebietes auf andere Gebiete in Ozeanien, Mikronesien und Melanesien. Stationen entstanden auf den Karolinen (Yap), den Tonga-Inseln, Fotuna, Uvea und den Neuen Hebriden. Godeffroy beauftragte den aus Wilster stammenden Hamburger Kapitän Alfred Tetens in den 1860er Jahren mit einer Handels-Expedition und stellte ihm dafür das Schiff „VESTA" zur Verfügung. 1869 wurde der erste permanente Sitz des Hamburger Handelshauses Godeffroy unter Leitung von Alfred Tetens auf Yap errichtet. 1873 wurden dann die Marshallinseln mit eingebunden, bis 1875 auch das Bismarck-Archipel und Neupommern.", which makes objections that the word entered Polynesian creoles "pre-c. 1885" and your "most Germans who came before that were on Dutch trading vessels" somewhat exaggerated. --129.125.102.126 23:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Basically, there's a lack of evidence, so I wrote a suitably vague etymology. Also, you seem not to know much about Tok Pisin; it's not a Polynesian creole, and none of those records you have copy-pasted here mention any location in New Guinea from what I can tell from a brief read of it. I don't think my claims are exaggerated. The former claim is backed by scholarly research cited above, and the latter claim has not been refuted. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
On Polynesian vs. Melanesian: you're right.
Excluding Low German as a possible source for bensin seems somewhat premature when German and Dutch are considered possible sources: Low German isn't a part of German; like Dutch, it mostly didn't take part in the High German consonant shift (only 'th' → 'd').
w:de:Neupommern (w:en:New Britain) and the other islands of the w:de:Bismarck-Archipel (w:en:Bismarck Archipelago) are part of Papua New Guinea and close enough to the main island to not need Dutch ships. --129.125.102.126 03:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Again, I won't argue, because I don't have conclusive evidence, linguistic or historical. If you want to add Low German as another possibility, I don't have a problem with it. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Bot test edits

It seems WT:BOT say a maximum of 100 edits, though that part of the page isn't protected, so it could be modified if we wanted to, for some reason. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

That's way too much. Can we agree on a number between 10 and 50? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:11, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Certainly for interwiki bots it's too many as the only have one function, bots which have many functions then again I think 50 is enough. I would just change it as since the page isn't protected, any editor can undo it if they choose to. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm confused by your position, on WT:RFV#Haifa you say I'd be ridiculous to allow mentions in the language other than the one being cited, but you've voted support on Wiktionary:Votes/2012-08/Extinct Languages - Criteria for Inclusion. Have you simply changed your mind? Or is it one of those things where if it's ridiculous but legal you can still do it regardless of how ridiculous it is. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:49, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm confused by your confusion. I see my position in the two discussions to be pretty similar. I gave any example of the kind of citation I would accept for such word in Tatar, and that example was very similar to many of the citations that Roman literature provides us for Dacian and Vandalic. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:41, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I've amassed a list of words in my time away, and the compulsion to add them is too strong for me to resist. :) If you want to reach me, it's probably best to do so on my talk page, as I might easily miss a message for me if it's posted to an entry's talk page. If it's possible, you could undelete my talk page history (preferably to the last version before my three-paragraph spiel >_<), or otherwise just re-create the talk page the next time you or someone else wants to leave me a message.

I'm accustomed to leaving edit summaries, however brief, as a matter of good wiki practice. I certainly won't mind saving myself a few keystrokes from now on, but I'm a little curious about why it's preferable to leave the edit summary blank when creating new entries here. Astral (talk) 04:51, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I was going to use your talkpage, but then I thought that it would be rude to recreate it. I'll undelete it as you suggest.
The software automatically produces a more useful edit summary, as I tried to explain. Create a page without writing an edit summary, and the look at the history, and you'll see what I mean. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
By the way, I hadn't noticed that jeremiad before. It's an engrossing and highly important topic, but I get the feeling that you might not want to talk about it :) --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
The talk page restoration looks good. Thanks! And yes, there's still some things about the way this site operates that I'd like to see change, but it's probably best to let my grievances related to the interpersonal hiccups I've experienced go, as pursuing them won't solve anything. Astral (talk) 09:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
If there's anything specific, I can help. I proposed a vote with newbie-ism in mind, and it's gotten wide support (and the change is effective, as you will notice from reading this page). So a good vote in that vein would pass, if you have ideas. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The term is not widely found in published text as it is highly colloquial, but it is explicitly cited in Victor and Dalzell's Concise New Partridge Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English (Routledge, 2008) as going back to the early 1980s and it has plenty of Google hits up to the present day. Please revert the deletion of this page, and I would ask that in future you please refrain from deleting pages so rapidly; you deleted it even before I had finished my own edit to include the published sources for the word. Unilateral and hasty deletions such as this are not conducive to encouraging new and inexperienced editors. Thefamouseccles (talk) 05:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I apologize if you found the deletion rude. Please see WT:ATTEST. We require words in English to have at least 3 durably recorded uses. Dictionaries are mentions, not uses, and Google hits are not durable (although Google Books and Google Groups are). Thanks --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
No worries. Well, since you seem to have admin privileges, would you restore the page if I can offer three book citations? I have them available but as a mere newbie I don't know how a deleted page gets revived from the ether. Cheers. Thefamouseccles (talk) 05:24, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Sure. First add your three book citations to Citations:cazh. Follow the formatting guidelines at WT:". If they look valid, I'll undelete it. Thanks! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Not a problem! The citations are now done. Thanks for being understanding, and my apologies if I seemed curt in my turn. I actually abandoned Wikipedia after some years of editing because of clashes over anal-retentive reversions so it's nice to come across someone who's willing to explain things. Cheers. Thefamouseccles (talk) 05:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Excellent! I undeleted the entry and formatted it (please see my changes). BTW, I'm trying to get better at being patient. Feel free to ask questions, and I'll do my best. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:57, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] revert of "whole cloth" changes

This change was intentional. You seem to have reverted my change semi-automatically (by bot?), with no explanation, so I put it back. See also User Talk:Ruakh, who seems to operate an identical bot. Benwing (talk) 07:15, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, it seems that Ruakh has more than adequately explained our reasoning there. By the way, these aren't bot edits — they're deliberate. But if somebody undoes your edits, it's probably better to talk with them before re-adding. Thanks --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 13:40, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] vandal whacking stick

I hereby award you this vandal whacking stick, so you won't wear out your wrist on your recent changes patrols.
Thank you! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] About:Egyptian

I have begun an about page for Ancient Egyptian, which can be found here: Wiktionary:About Egyptian. I invite/encourage/need comments and criticism. Furius (talk) 02:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Obviously, it still needs work, but what you've written and compiled is excellent. I do quibble with your transliteration system of preference. Why are we using a messy mix of systems? Either we go all-out and use a good system like European (which is what Allen uses), or commit to a more input-friendly system like Budge. You also need to give examples from existing entries on which templates to use and how to use them, about general entry structure, more about the fact that we have transliteration entries and entries in original script (Unicode). Mostly, what I see looks good, and I laud your efforts! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese self-study

Hi,

I'm learning Chinese on my own, although I was also enrolled in formal and conversational classes. I've got HSK Basic with a good score and Certificate IV (Australia) in Mandarin. I have added my comments on Tooironic's page. There are many great books for beginners. I'm also teaching my son with a series of Chinese books for children (I don't have a title ready). All depends on your level, ability and interests. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! The only reason that I didn't ask you is that I can clearly see that you're much better at language learning than I am :) If you can provide websites, that would be the best, but book recommendations are welcome as well! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't think I have great talents in languages just strong and ongoing interest. I have been learning Chinese for many years and would have been fluent if I were consistent in my studies. I get distracted by learning or dabbling other languages I have started Japanese before I started Chinese. Will send your resources when I get hold of them. Also, recommend to join www.chinese-forums.com for more questions regarding Chinese. They answer pretty quickly and the forum itself is full of resources too - podcasts, movie/drama transcripts, textbooks/ website or reading recommendations, etc. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
<start of text moved from User talk:Tooironic#Starting with Chinese>
I possess Integrated Chinese but New Practical Chinese Reader (very similar in approach, structure, etc.) is much better. This was voted on www.chinese-forums.com. The latter is used in Universities more often. I have stopped enjoying it (that much) after volume 4 but at this level you can use any other textbook. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Self-study is possible, of course. Graded Chinese readers is a good start after finishing some decent textbooks. "New Practical Chinese Reader" - (3 volumes, at least, with audio). From Graded readers, I recommend "Chinese Breeze" and "Graded Chinese Readers". They come with pinyin and audio making it easier for complete beginners. You need to have some vocabulary and grammar. 100 characters is too few. You need about 800-1000 to start reading Graded Readers. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:34, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
<end of moved text>
I am forcing all my Chinese friends to help me with my pronunciation, but I still am unable to hold a basic conversation at requisite speed. Do you think that any textbook would be sufficient for the most basic level (Int. Chin. is very available, whereas I would have to buy any of the others)? I will definitely join chinese-forums. Thanks for the tip. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:33, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Int. Chinese would also do, if you study thoroughly. I did a lot of "shadowing" - reading out loud each sentence after the speaker, so that I gained some confidence in saying the words/phrases I already knew. In order to learn to speak you have to start speaking. Don't worry about mistakes. It can be frustrating if your Chinese friends switch to English. It won't happen if you continue your conversation in Chinese and show that you can speak it. Learning Chinese is different form other languages, you can't learn it on the fly, just by getting a bit of exposure. Even reading simple stories requires efforts in finding how to read those characters. I have been using pinyinised books (hanzi + pinyin) for a long time before moving on to character stories but I uses electronic look up/mouse over dictionaries, which make looking up process much faster. Don't use "just pinyin" material. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I have to get more vocab down first, though. My friends also speak so fast that I have trouble processing what they say when they talk in Chinese. I'll start in with the textbook, and try to get in a fair amount per week. I have a lot of work, but I think this is a worthy diversion. So far, I find the character database plus common Mandain words that we have to be sufficient; do you think I will need to use a better dictionary? Also, where do you find pinyinised books? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Serious language learners always buy book dictionaries. I've got "Oxford Chinese Dictionary" among others. Electronically, I also use w:Wenlin, NJStar Chinese Word Processor would do if you can't afford or get a crack of Wenlin. [8] is my favourite but not the only online dictionary. [www.perapera.org peraperakun] is a must-have Firefox plug-in (with mouse-over dictionary). Pinyinised books are those I have already recommended - "Chinese Breeze", "Graded Chinese Reader" but there are many others. These two are particularly good because they come with audio. The audio quality is excellent, slow and clear. Read my review of 汉语分级阅读1 (Graded Chinese Reader 1) - I got the first volume as a promotion gift and have now read three volumes. "Chinese Breeze" is easier, so start with this, not graded! [9] is a good website to order Chinese textbooks. They also ran the promotion on Chinese-forums. Me and Tooironic are both part of that forum. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
That review is 4 years old, I wrote it when I only finished the first two stories of volume one. "Chinese Breeze" has levels, so start with level 1 but not before you finish your textbook! I recently read its "The Third Eye" (第三只眼睛), level 3 as a refresher. Tooironic will probably laugh that I still read such simple books :) I'm currently reading Harry Potter in Japanese and Chinese. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:58, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, nciku looks very good. They also have a lot of example sentences (I like those, because they help me internalize the structure and make my own sentences). I will look into the other recommendations, but some of them will be more useful further down the line, I think. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I highly recommend Pimsleur CDs. Of all the classes and books I've taken, this is by far the best. [10]. Libraries often carry them and they have a rental program. --BB12 (talk) 03:42, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, yes, I've tried Pimsleur, but it felt like I had no control over my learning process, and there were also some other annoyances (on the l~r continuum, for example, they chose speakers that seemed to have opposite preferences). I do think that Pimsleur has merits, but I just don't see it as being good for long-term gain with character recognition. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Pimsleur can be good in gaining confidence in pronunciation and some really common phrases. Its vocabulary is extremely low, though. You spend weeks just to learn a few hundred words but some people just need this confidence booster. It doesn't teach you writing at all. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Ach, chinese-forums won't let me register! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I have contacted someone about you. What error message did you get? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:20, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I've got a response. The main admin - Roddy is on leave and he doesn't want to be overwhelmed with new registrations when he gets back. The other admin - Imron kindly agreed to help. Please email me your preferred login name and your email address, I'll pass it on and he will create an account for you manually! --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. Thanks! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
It's good to know what people dislike about Pimsleur, thank you! For the vocab, I don't care because I'm more interested in the grammar and I supplement with other lessons. --BB12 (talk) 04:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't think you can learn much grammar from Pimsleur. Just very basics, to be able to link some words. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
BTW, does your objection to Pimsleur apply to any CD program? --BB12 (talk) 18:08, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
No. I see a lot of benefits of CD programs, especially for listening comprehension and practising pronunciation. I always use textbooks with CD's. They may be hard to use without prior familiarisation with texts, though. I am 100% negative about Pimsleur either. Some people never find time to sit down and read textbooks but they are happy to listen when they drive or catch train. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Request and question

Would you mind taking a look at this discussion if you've got an opportunity? It's kind of reached an impasse, and I think a third perspective might help move it in a constructive direction.

I've also got a question. When I created the entry linea nigra, I added the Icelandic equivalent sorturák to its translations table although I don't know Icelandic, as the sorturák entry turned up in the search results when I checked to see if there was already an entry for linea nigra, and since it was created by an admin (User:BiT) who's an Icelandic native speaker, so it seemed reliable. Is it okay to do this? Astral (talk) 07:12, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the discussion mentioned above, I'm currently thinking it might be a misunderstanding caused by misreading each other's comments. So mediation/additional opinions may not be necessary. Thanks. :) Astral (talk) 10:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, I disapprove of EP's style of delivering his comments, but I think he's essentially right. I didn't look too closely into it, though, after you said mediation was unneeded. I'm not a very good person to choose as mediator, either :)
It's definitely OK to add translations when you are fully certain that the information is wholly correct and that you know the language's conventions (i.e., Latin translations need to have gender where appropriate, be in specific lemma forms, and display macra but not have them in the actual link). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:55, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Regarding EP, I gave the benefit of the doubt that I had completely misread his comments, and that he had done the same with mine because I hadn't laid out my argument clearly. But in his last post, made after I pointed out that we might both be badly misinterpreting each other's words, he conflated two different things I'd said, which finally lead me to conclude that the issue may not simply be due to misinterpretation on both sides, but also one party's apparent willful disinclination toward fully absorbing what has actually been said. And being told that I "don't seem foggiest notion of what science is" when I was trying to point out that cryptozoology is a pseudoscience was just too much.
I've decided it's not worth pursuing. EP is a bureaucrat. That, to me, indicates that Wiktionary's civility deficit extends all the way to the top. That isn't something I can deal with right now. Another Wikibreak is probably the only solution.
Thanks for clearing up my question regarding translations. :) Astral (talk) 05:35, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
EP is a 'crat, but that's more a reflection of how much he's done here than of his civility. There's not much of a power structure here, if you haven't noticed. It's also not impenetrable, and it's not a cabal (I hope). Do remember that I only joined Wiktionary this year. Take a look at my archives. EP reprimanded me back then in a rather newbie-unfriendly way (or at least I didn't take it very well at the time), but I somehow ended up as a veteran (member of the mostly nonexistent clique, you might say). Wiktionarians cycle through, and newbies are the life of the project just as much as old-timers keep it running. Anyway, that's my take on it. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Say, Astral, glad to see you're back! Did you see Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations_from_WebCite? It's far from a certain thing, but I hope you'll vote! BTW, I totally empathize with you. --BB12 (talk) 05:53, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
@Meta - There's no question the oldbies are knowledgeable, dedicated, and invaluable to the project. But, at the same time, they can't realistically maintain everything on their own. If they're unnecessarily harsh in their approach to dealing with newbies/midbies/everyone in general, they're going to drive those users away, and ultimately just leave themselves with even more tasks to juggle. One or two isolated incidents of incivility can be put down to someone having an off day, but when there's multiple instances with different users, I think it's indicative of a greater issue with community's general mindset. Some users, who've been working together long enough to come to know each other, may develop enough of a rapport to get along fine when they communicate very frankly. But the blunt approach doesn't work with everyone — quite the opposite, in fact — and I really wish certain Wiktionarians could learn that it's ultimately to the project's benefit to moderate their approach sometimes.
@BB12 - Thanks. :) And yes, that proposal looks like a good idea, so it's definitely got my vote. :)
We've had users who were undeniably offensive in general, and we continue to have users that hate each others' guts with a vengeance nowhere near "rapport". I don't have any clue how that continues to work, but it does. I don't think our general mindset is thus, however. AFAIK, EP is a teacher, and this is around the first week of school, which is always a stressful time. I'm not being an apologist, but I do think that could very well be a factor. But the main problem is that I can't force somebody to be polite. I can do a little, like forcing them to take special effort to avoid having a more polite rollback summary, for example (that's a current vote), but there's still nothing stopping them from being rude to newbies. Is a culture as moveable as it is tangible? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 13:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

Which part of the etymology you didn't like? The "powerful eternity" bit? Number 3 and star have additional meanings in East Asia. The info is confirmed by Wikipedia. I have removed 그룹 (group) from the etymology. alt doesn't work on {{l}}. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

My mistake with alt=. No, it's just that I can't find "삼성" meaning just the Buddha (usually it appears to be a triad). The company is officially called 삼성그룹, but I don't know how much that carries over into real Korean texts. (By the way, I got a textbook to keep — Hànyǔ Book 1. It should be sufficient as beginner material, I think.) --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
You can see SOME meanings of 삼성 in the entry. I have removed the "Buddha" part. IMO, the word "group" is better left out. The entry is more about the word itself, not the company as such.
Hmm, I don't know, which book it is. There are so many book with similar names! Is it "Hanyu for Beginning Students: Student Book" by Peter Chang, etc.?--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions