Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Template talk:ca-plural of. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Template talk:ca-plural of, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Template talk:ca-plural of in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Template talk:ca-plural of you have here. The definition of the word Template talk:ca-plural of will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTemplate talk:ca-plural of, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Latest comment: 14 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion
More templatitis, using multiple templates when one, perfectly good one already exists. Seems to be redundant to {{plural of|foo|lang=ca}}. I can understand why {{ca-noun form of}} would be a good idea if Catalan were highly inflected, but with just singular and plural forms, I don't think it can be justified. NB seems to come from the same era that generated lost of since deleted templates like {{fr-noun-f}} and {{fr-noun-m}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:06, 11 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
No input on this one, but I'm wondering if something similar might apply to {{nl-noun-form}}? I've used it quite happily so far, so I'd like to know if this would set a precedent to have that deleted as well. —CodeCat18:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
Not really IMO Codecat, Dutch has more forms than Catalan, at least 4. To EncycloPetey, couldn't we add that to {{plural of}}? That's the sort of thing I have been adding while orphaning {{seeTalk}}, such as {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}||]}}
I recently came across this template, and now that I've been more involved with Catalan, I'd like to say delete. The point that it has a sort= parameter has some merit, but that can easily be added to {{plural of}}. However, I think it's best to use {{infl form}} for that. —CodeCat15:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)Reply
