For use as the tag-line under the header of a Latin noun. The current five oparameters are as listed below. It would be ideal to reduce this to four parameters (see below), and if this change is made, this section will need revision or replacement. --EncycloPetey 04:33, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
{{{1}}} = dictionary header form with macrons; note that the page name may not include these.
{{{2}}} = genitive (singular) form, without macrons, to link to the entry page for that form
{{{3}}} = genitive (singular) form, with macrons, to show the dictionary form
{{{4}}} = gender of the noun, usually m, f, or n
{{{5}}} = Latin declension of the noun, which will identify the pattern of declension and link to a page of forms (eg "first", "second", etc)
I've been giving a lot of thought as to what this template should do and look like. I don't have the skill to write the template myself, so for la-noun I'm writing up the specifications. Please put comments below the sections of specifications, rather than among them. --EncycloPetey 04:20, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
There should ideally be four parameters instead of the current five. See B through D below under "needs of the template".
Here are some same inputs and outputs, including the most common genitive form endings so that whoever writes the code will know how to handle them. The first key point is that if parameter (2) is not one of the standard set, the code should assume that (2) is the full genitive form. The second key is that the display form and link form of the genitive are different. Standard dictionary and textbook forms contain macrons, but we have chose to have the names of entry pages lack such macrons, since written Latin does not actually include these markings. Each genitive must therefore be dealt with in two forms, and I'd rather not have to enter a form with and a form without macrons. Macrons occur only over vowels, as: ā, ē, ī, ō, ū and over y (both in capital and lowwer case.
Some Latin entries in Wiktionary use breves (eg ă). These are not standard in most Latin dictionaries, and are not currently found in the Latin/Roman section of the edit tool. We may choose to not use them in Latin, but the tool should be able to handle these without going haywire.
Below are examples of what I would like the input and corresponding output to look like for this template. All of these examples are standard constructions of common regular forms. The template (3) information follows what a standard Latin dictionary would give, so having it as the accepted input will be intuitive for those familiar with Latin.
One additional feature that won't be obvious unless you look at the markup up the text below is that #Latin is used to link the genitive. While many, or even most of these words will appear only in Latin, there are Latin words which occur in derivative languages like Spanish, Italian, and French. It would be nice to be certain that the link goes to the appropriate language instead of simply linking to the right page.
There is really just one way that the first declension genitive is formed, and two for the second declension. There is a wide variety in the third declension.
{{la-noun|lacūna|ae|f|first}}
{{la-noun|equus|ī|m|second}}
{{la-noun|oleum|ī|n|second}}
{{la-noun|expīlātor|ōris|m|third}}
{{la-noun|stercus|oris|n|third}}
{{la-noun|dēbilitās|ātis|f|third}}
{{la-noun|cōnsitiō|ōnis|f|third}}
{{la-noun|cīvis|is|c|third}}
{{la-noun|strāgēs|is|f|third}}
{{la-noun|partus|ūs|n|fourth}}
These are examples of odd and irregular entries. They should be easy to handle; the length of the list makes it look harder than it will probably be. I simply wanted to include a sufficient number of test examples.
{{la-noun|stīpes|stīpitis|m|third}}
{{la-noun|īnsīgne|īnsīgnis|n|third}}
{{la-noun|strēnuitās|strēnuitātis|f|third}}
{{la-noun|iūdex|iūdicis|c|third}}
{{la-noun|sūs|suis|c|third}}
I would also like the template to work when the person entering the word is uncertain of the declension and leaves that parameter out, as:
{{la-noun|lībāmenta|ōrum|n}}
And also to handle nouns that are indeclinable:
{{la-noun|nihil|-|n}}
As well as nouns that are exclusively singular (eg aurum), or exclusively plural (eg nūptiae). The key difference here is that if the template normally spouts genitive or singular genitive, it needs to have the option to note that the given genitive is plural because there is no singular.
{{la-noun|nūptiae|nūptiārum|f|first|plural}}
There are also words like filius that have more than one genitive form. The input is less certain here, but the output is.
{{la-noun|filius|filiī|f|first|g2=filī}} (the exact form for the input is not fixed)
There are also some Latin words that consist of two parts, as in English. The template should have a means for handling these.
It would be nice to have an optional parameter (5) that would identify the sub-type of declension. But that can wait.
First of all, I'd like to notice that I appreciate the work on the template. Latin could use some work on the Wiktionary, especially with various conflicting forms of words provided, not to mention entries like TAVRVS which I've encountered (and fixed, or at least some of them, I hope).
However, I'd like to present an alternative view on the template - based on the "dictionary form" of Latin, that is, rather than using the form (genitive something), the genitive form could be listed after a comma, thus:
mater, matris f (third declension)
Alternatively, the genitive could actually link to the declension.
mater, matris f
I don't see much point in creating separate entries for genitives, as you could as well create them for nominative plurals or any of the other cases.
The above form also allows for a shortening in regular cases, e.g.
porta, -ae f
Of course, that's just my subjective view at the whole thing (but that form more closely resembles forms provided in traditional scholastic materials and Latin dictionaries). Some thoughts would be nice to hear.
Second of all, are there any plans for changing the template according to this talk page? Because I have actually introduced this template to several entries, and I guess I should refrain from doing so if in the near future, the number of arguments is going to change, for example. The above was posted by User:Filip on 28 August 2006