Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Template talk:borrowed. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Template talk:borrowed, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Template talk:borrowed in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Template talk:borrowed you have here. The definition of the word Template talk:borrowed will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTemplate talk:borrowed, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Discussion
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
In reply to msh210, because it seems confusing to have a template where the template name and its category are totally different. Obviously keep the redirect. Plus, loanword isn't always accurate. There are phrases like idée reçue and crème brûlée which are loans but not really loanwords. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)Reply
I've no objection provided you check all transclusions to make sure adding the period doesn't ruin anything (e.g., {{borrowing|sq|foo}} or {{unk.|title=possibly}} {{term|lang=sq|bar}}. or even {{borrowing|sq|foo}}.). Otherwise, yes, I object strongly.—msh210℠ (talk) 18:45, 15 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
There are only 622 transclusions (I think). A bot can list the ones that don't appear at the end of a paragraph, and if that's few then they can be edited manually.—msh210℠ (talk) 07:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
I do object. It's much easier to type a period in the etymology, than it is to add extra code to the template to remove it. —CodeCat19:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
Compare {{term}}, where the positional (unnamed) parameter does the same as {{borrowing}}'s {{{t}}}: shows the word in the parentheses with the other info. I suggest we get rid of {{{4}}} and reinstate it as an alias for {{{t}}}. Thoughts?—msh210℠ (talk) 08:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
New idea
Latest comment: 11 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
From {{der|en|enm|-}} {{term|borwen|lang=enm}}, {{term|borȝien|sc=Latinx|lang=enm}},
from {{der|en|ang|-}} {{term|borgian||to borrow, lend, pledge surety for|lang=ang}},
from {{der|en|gem-pro|-}} {{recons|burgōną||to pledge, take care of|lang=gem-pro}},
from {{der|en|ine-pro|-}} {{recons|bhergh-||to take care|lang=ine-pro}}.
Lets create two new similar templates, {{From}} and {{from}}. It will be much more flexible:
{{From|enm|], ]|sc=Latinx}},
{{from|ang|borgian||to borrow, lend, pledge surety for}},
{{from|gem-pro|*burgōną||to pledge, take care of}},
{{from|ine-pro|*bhergh-||to take care}}.
The two links at the first line and the reconstructed terms can be handled with Lua (compare Template:l/beta, Lua-ized version of {{l}}).
I don't think our current set of templates is ready for that just yet. But I do think it would be good to have different templates for different types of foreign derivation. It's possible to borrow from Latin but the Romance languages also inherited from it, and sometimes there are two words with the same origin, one borrowed and the other inherited. —CodeCat17:51, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
"sometimes there are two words with the same origin, one borrowed and the other inherited" would you give me an example? By the way, what would be the difference here, in categorization I suppose? --Z18:04, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
Oh. So when it is borrowed, the output should be "Borrowing from", otherwise (inherited, derived) "From". It's not cool though when it is repeatedly borrowed: "Borrowing from ..., borrowing from ..., borrowing from ..", we usually use other phrases in the middle, say "itself borrowed from". Since they all have "from" ("borrowing from", "derived from", "from" ), so maybe the output of all of these templates (i.e. {{borrowed from}}, {{derived from}}, {{from}}) should be "from" and the user may add whatever s/he wants before it. I'll start working on the templates and the Lua module if more people comment on this. --Z07:56, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
But wait, I don't think it's a good idea to mention "borrowing" etc. everywhere, unless when we want to emphasize on it (e.g. in the ferro-#Spanish case). --Z16:36, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
What is the purpose of this template?
Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
This template has been recently used in automated edits replacing the sequence of characters:
From {{der|xx|yy|-}} {{term|...|lang=yy}}...
into this:
{{borrowing|xx|...|lang=yy}}
Additional usages of {{etyl}} in the borrowing chain have been left unaffected. Furthermore, if the etymology section diverges in syntax from the supposed usage, e.g.
Borrowed from either {{der|xx|yy|-}} {{term|...|lang=yy}} or {{der|xx|zz|-}} {{term|...|lang=zz}} (i.e. the case with an indeterminate etymology)
..the template becomes inapplicable.
Under the hood it seems to invoke {{term}} by cloning/redirecting its parameters.
If the purpose of this template were to introduce a distinction between loanwords and inherited words, this could've been easily achieved by rewriting {{etyl}} to compare the language donor and the language receiver, and categorize accordingly. Overall, it seems to be a very bad idea to generate by means of templates any kind of multi-word strings to be used in running text. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 09:40, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
The problem is that if it's agreed to do this, then to maintain consistency we'd have to make much larger changes to the category structure. I think this is ok but not everyone might, we have some people here who oppose just about any change. —CodeCat22:02, 14 December 2014 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
It seems that the t parameter isn't evaluated anymore, see diff.
But the documentation still mentions it.
So, should the parameter be there? Maybe it has been deleted accidentally?
--MaEr (talk) 15:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
In April of 2013, they discussed this question, see above (section {{{t}}} and {{{4}}}). But I don't know the result of the discussion.
If someone indeed removed the t parameter, the documentation should be updated. Currently 4= works and t= doesn't. --MaEr (talk) 17:37, 13 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
Borrowed
Latest comment: 7 years ago16 comments5 people in discussion
I think this template should be moved to {{borrowed}} and the default text should be changed to Borrowed from, with the parameter |ger=1 to elect to use the old gerund form. Borrowing from breaks with the grammatical structure of the rest of the etymology, i.e. Possible borrowing from... possibly from.... This change would also conform it to templates {{derived}} and {{inherited}}. --Victar (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
As discussed in User talk:Daniel Carrero/2016#bor with nocap, I think {{bor}} should not display any extra text, to be in line with {{der}} and {{inh}}. That way, you can type "borrowed" any way you like: "Borrowed" with capital "B" if it starts the sentence, otherwise "borrowed", and consider also multi-language phrases like "Borrowed from Spanish X, French Y, English Z" that often appear in Ido and Esperanto entries. The template does have extra parameters like "nocap=1" and "notext=1", but they are a huge hassle in comparison with just typing the text. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 06:07, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
This still has the same problem of being a hassle to remember and type as opposed to just typing "borrowed" whatever you want outside the template. Also, the {{borrowed}}/{{Borrowed}} idea wouldn't work in the case of "Borrowed from Spanish X, French Y, English Z". Note that you must templatize Spanish, French and English somehow, to put them in "borrowed" categories.
I would like to be able to do just this:
Borrowed from {{bor|eo|es|insert here}}, {{bor|eo|fr|insert here}}, {{bor|eo|en|insert here}}.
Currently, we have to do this, with "|notext=1":
{{bor|eo|es|insert here}}, {{bor|eo|fr|insert here|notext=1}}, {{bor|eo|en|insert here|notext=1}}. (and it returns "Borrowing from" at the start", which should be "Borrowed from")
@Daniel Carrero: what we could also do is add the |alts=1 parameter we use in {{desc}} so all you would need to do is add {{bor|eo|es|lemma1|alts=1}} to get Borrowed from lemma1, lemma2, lemma3, assuming you add {{alter|lemma2|lemma3}} to the lemma1 page, which is a good idea, regardless. --Victar (talk) 16:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
I actually don't mind the lead text. In some ways, it's nice because otherwise most people are just going to write from and nothing else. Mark my words. It also promotes its use, instead of just defaulting to {{der}}. That said, I'd have no hard feeling if people all agreed to do away with it. --Victar (talk) 07:13, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
As a first step though, would people agree to my proposal of changing Borrowing from to Borrowed from and adding |ger=1 to all current entries? --Victar (talk) 02:23, 27 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
Now that I think of it, there's also the template {{learned borrowing}} (which I don't find useful, as the distinction between a "borrowing" and a "learned borrowing" appears somewhat blurry to me). --Barytonesis (talk) 23:27, 27 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
@DTLHS: Do you think you could run a bot to add |ger=1 to all existing entries of {{bor}}? I suppose you could exclude entries that have |notext=1, but it doesn't really matter. Thanks for any help. --Victar (talk) 12:23, 7 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
If people accept doing that, it's OK. I oppose the idea simply because personally I prefer removing the "borrowing from" altogether from the template, instead of replacing it by "borrowed from". More importantly, in Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February#Changing the text of Template:bor from "borrowing" to "borrowed", the winning result is "Option 3: Remove text altogether" so far. WT:BOT, our think tank non-policy about bots, requires consensus to do changes like this.
What is the best way to implement that project? I suppose a bot can't do everything, but perhaps it can do at least this:
If the etymology section contains only "{{bor|xx|yy|word}}." (with or without a dot in the end), change it into "Borrowed from {{bor|xx|yy|word|notext=1}}."
Change all other instances of "{{bor|xx|yy|word}}" into "Borrowing from {{bor|xx|yy|pizza|notext=1}}"
Change all instances of "{{bor|xx|yy|word|nocap=1}}" into "borrowing from {{bor|xx|yy|pizza|notext=1}}"
All entries with "borrowing" that can't be edited by bot may have to be edited manually to change it to "borrowed" or whatever makes sense in the entry.
Naturally, don't touch any entries that already have "notext".
After all instances of bor use "notext", the template/module can be edited to remove the default text altogether, and the "notext" can be removed from all instances of {{bor}}.
Feel free to use these categories to navigate the entries.
I am about to leave on vacation, but if nobody has taken care of this in a week or so I can probably work on it. - DaveRoss02:18, 15 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
I would propose doing step 1 first, and then re-evaluating what is left. In particular, I'm not sure if step 2 is necessary. —CodeCat18:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
I have started going on these, feel free to take a look at recent edits and let me know if there is anything amiss. If not I am going to switch it over to the bot soon. - TheDaveRoss13:05, 18 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
I think step 1 can also be done if the immediately following text is , from or , ultimately from. Are there other following texts for which it's safe to do the replacement? —CodeCat13:20, 21 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
I just found another case: abortar. When the first {{bor}} is immediately followed by a comma and another {{bor}}, the latter of which already has notext=1. Or as on Aalborg, with a following {{m}} instead. —CodeCat13:21, 21 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Also, if there are any cases where {{bor}} has nocap=1 and is preceded by the article A or a , then you can safely prepend "borrowing from", because it obviously can't be "a borrowed from". —CodeCat13:45, 21 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
@CodeCat, intermittently. I am travelling a lot at the moment, but when I am around I can do some work. I am not particularly well versed on the usage of these templates, so I am just relying on you guys to give specific cases (as you have been doing). - TheDaveRoss13:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
@TheDaveRoss: All is good, I just have a request: Please don't prepend "a borrowing" in the cases where {{bor}} has nocap=1 and is preceded by the article A or a . (which is one of the things that Rua suggested doing) I'm checking those entries using AWB right now. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 15:42, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Daniel Carrero: at this point I am only modifying etymology sections which begin with a {{bor}}, so the "nocap" usage shouldn't be affected. If I move on to usage of {{bor}} which is preceded by other text I will be sure to clarify the special considerations like you mentioned. - TheDaveRoss17:26, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Maybe I'm just repeating stuff needlessly, but I'm going to make a list of the wikitext changes as proposed by CodeCat / Rua above. (minus the "nocap" thing)
1-A. "{{bor|xx|yy|word}}, from " → "Borrowed from {{bor|xx|yy|word|notext=1}}, from "
1-B. "{{bor|xx|yy|word}}, ultimately from " → "Borrowed from {{bor|xx|yy|word|notext=1}}, ultimately from "
1-C. "{{bor|xx|yy|word}}, {{bor|xx|yy|word|notext=1}} " → "Borrowed from {{bor|xx|yy|word|notext=1}}, {{bor|xx|yy|word|notext=1}} "
1-D. "{{bor|xx|yy|word}}, {{m|xx|word}} " → "Borrowed from {{bor|xx|yy|word|notext=1}}, {{m|xx|word}} "
I suggest also fixing cases like the French etymology of cartilage. I don't know if many etymologies are like this.
1-E. Borrowed from {{der|fr|la|cartilāgō}}. → Borrowed from {{bor|fr|la|cartilāgō}}.
Thus far I have only worked on a very limited set of entries, those which had etymology sections which began with the template and had two languages as well as a term to link to. I can broaden that to include the example mentioned above, but I am not ready to expand to entries which don't begin with the template (since it seems there are lots of iterations of that). If there are specific types of usage which don't begin with the template but do follow a strict pattern I can try and get those going as well. - TheDaveRoss14:05, 6 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
I would support that too, but many entries use the template as part of a larger sentence, and changing the text would break that. —CodeCat17:43, 5 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
We could get rid of the text from the template altogether, and add it manually to the entries instead. Then it would work like {{der}} and {{inh}}, which don't include text either. There's also {{calque}}, which has a similar issue. —CodeCat17:55, 5 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
Should we perhaps avoid templates that include too much predefined text, in the future? You have more freedom if you can specify the text yourself in the entry. —CodeCat22:38, 20 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
More clarification on difference between borrowed and derived
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Can someone kindly clarify the template documentation with regards to when to use borrowed and when to use derived. From the current example given of English and Anglo-Norman French in the 12th century, I've concluded the following:
We should use "borrowed" only when the language taking the word and the language from which the word is taken, both are/were prevalent simultaneously. Otherwise, we should use "derived".
Example: Consequently, since Hindi or English came into being after Sanskrit, there can never be any word in Hindi or English which can use "borrowed" template for words that were taken from Sanskrit. It has to always use "derived" template.
Template incorrectly categorizes the main word as a borrowing when it's used as an intermediary step
Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I was editing trovar and I noticed this template adds such word to the Category:Old Portuguese terms derived from Old Occitan. This is, although, incorrect, since the term in Old Portuguese is trobar, the borrowing happening from Old Occitan to Old Portuguese and then evolving to the final word in Portuguese. The only word that should be in that category is trobar, not trovar, although both are being added (trobar is being added, I suspect, because the template is used in its page and not because its being used in trovar). This is something that doesn't happen with other templates. Can it be fixed or is there any workaround I should be following that I'm not? - Sarilho1 (talk) 10:19, 29 June 2019 (UTC)Reply
It's working exactly the way it's supposed to. Borrowing and inheritance are both ways that a term is derived from earlier terms. Whatever else you can say, the current term is derived (directly or indirectly) from the original term and from every intermediate term. Categories for borrowing and inheritance are trickier: you can't say that the current term is borrowed from anything but the language of the last language in the chain before the current term. Thus Old Galician-Portuguesetrobar was borrowed from Old Occitantrobar, but Portuguesetrovar is only derived from it. Terms can be said to be inherited from any language in the chain that has only inheritance between the term in that language and the current term, so Portuguesetrês is inherited from Proto-Indo-European*tréyes, but Portuguesetrovar is only inherited from Old Galician-Portuguesetrobar, not Vulgar Latin*tropāre.
There have been proposals to have templates specific to inheritance and borrowing further up the chain, but they shouldn't affect the categories in the current entry and having more templates to keep straight complicates things.
Language code xln links to wrong page on English Wikipedia
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I noticed on egész that the link to Alanic generated by the {{bor|hu|xln|…}} template instantiation goes to a page of a clothing brand. The links appear to not be defined under Module:languages/data3/x, and I cannot follow the template definition. Where should I go to fix the link? Nortti0 (talk) 09:24, 24 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
It is working as intended. The macrons are not included in the entry title because they weren't generally used in Latin text; they are added to mentions (like this) and headwords as a pedagogical aid. (The template accordingly knows to display them, but link to the page without them.) - -sche(discuss)20:29, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply