Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
Template talk:aii-conj-table. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
Template talk:aii-conj-table, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
Template talk:aii-conj-table in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
Template talk:aii-conj-table you have here. The definition of the word
Template talk:aii-conj-table will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
Template talk:aii-conj-table, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Hi @Fenakhay @ColumbaBush, this new template look unfortunately does not shrink on mobile as it does on desktop. On desktop when you shrank the window with the old table, the table would shrink with it, but this doesn't happen anymore. By extension I think this is what's causing the mobile view to look very wide and large; not very nice to use on mobile. If this can be fixed that would be great ܐܢܐ (talk) 08:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
- @This, that and the other - sharing the feedback about Template:inflection-table-top
- im able to confirm this on the mobile view of my desktop by comparing the old and new tables (notice the en.m in the url)
- ColumbaBush (talk) 17:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
- @ColumbaBush it looks fine to me on Chrome (Android). Maybe an iOS issue? This, that and the other (talk) 21:57, 14 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks for looking into it and for all the work you did in creating this template to streamline things :)
- @ܐܢܐ - i think the reason it isn't shrinking as much as the old one is bc of <td> and <th> horizontal padding which wasn't there before as well as a min-width of 80px (ex. "m" and "f" cells which specify gender) - i like the new one better because of this ColumbaBush (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hi @ColumbaBush I wanted to get your opinion on the following.
In the second section where there are nouns listed (such as the passive participle, agent noun, and instance noun). I am proposing to remove the plural column and making it singular column only.
The reason why is because of the syame issue. Take pages such as ܓܪܫ as an example. Since the second radical is a resh where the syame must be placed on top of regardless of position in word. It should be therefore displaying “ܓܪ̈ܝܼܫܹܐ” and not “ܓܪܝܼܫܹ̈ܐ”; or “ܓܵܪ̈ܘܿܫܝܵܬ݂ܵܐ” and not “ܓܵܪܘܿܫܝ̈ܵܬ݂ܵܐ”.
Don’t get me wrong I would love to keep it if we can find a solution but at the moment I don’t see it feasible. Antonklroberts (talk) 05:05, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
- yeah that's a good call and the timing is good since you did the same for the noun templates - amazing work consolidating them btw
- can you take a look at the approach in https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3Aaii-conj%2FG-strong&diff=85105583&oldid=83951371? you might be able to appropriate it for other plural forms for all the verb templates
- basically i did 3 things
- 1. remove the siyame
- 2. add a conditional following the
2nd radical which evaluates to a siyame if the 2nd radical is rish and an empty string if otherwise
- 3. add a conditional following the
3rd radical which evaluates to a siyame if the 2nd radical is NOT rish and an empty string if otherwise
- @ܐܢܐ ^ ColumbaBush (talk) 15:06, 12 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Okay this could potentially work, although the first radical can also be a rish and I havent quite figured out how to program that either. And what about for quad-roots where either one of four could be resh (considering that there are quad-roots with more than one) Antonklroberts (talk) 05:04, 16 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
- if the rule is "last rish gets the siyame" then you can have conditionals which add a siyame to
- 3rd radical if both 1st/2nd radical are NOT rish
- 2nd radical if the 2nd radical is rish and 3rd radical isn't rish
- 1st radical if the 1st radical is rish and 2nd/3rd radical aren't rish
- this approach can be extended for quads (im confident you can figure it out) ColumbaBush (talk) 14:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
- Hi, ive tried to figure it out but it dosen't seem to be working. I can't seem to find a way to add a first radical to the argument.
- Regards Antonklroberts (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2025 (UTC)Reply